Ok - so I got the conema at home as good as I can without spending money - I think.

I have my anamorphic DVDs and am squishing them in the projector electronics.

Strikes me an anamorphic lens has got to be significantly better as the squishing will be after the ccd so all the pixels get used.

The only projector lenses I can find that are anamorphic are insanely priced things for pro cinema projectors.

Anyone heard of a cheap source - or know of a botch that works ?

I think someone's got the home cinema bug!

Need to get this staight in my head. My idea of a anamorphic 16:9 (as least in terms of DVDs) is that all pixels are used, but have a different pixel aspect ratio. So the pixels get strecthed out more than they would by 4:3. In that case, you don't have MORE pixels, you just don't have less (otherwise you'd get the same effect by having some pixels at the top and bottom displaying black bars).

I assume your projector is hooked up to a DVD player. So the DVD feeds a 16:9 aspect ratio, this then gets passed to the projector, which upscales the video resolution. So, with an anamorpic lens, you would need to pass the projector a signal which hasn't been 'stretched' back out, and then let the lens stretch this out? Not sure you would gain much would you? Assuming your projector upscales from 720x576 to 1024x(something), and then adds borders, you could end up with something messy if the right in an out signal aren't sent, wouldn't you?

__________________
video editing guides - my videos - wedding guides




follow us on twitter.com/videoforums
become a fan on facebook

Well aspect ratios / pixel ratios and stuff do my head in but I think it works this way....

An anamorphic DVD is actually a 16:9 streatched vertically. This means that no data is empty as black bars. The projector ( or tv ) coreects this aspect ratio by suashing the picture so it 16:9 for projection.

Howver if you project the vertically stretched anamorphic version and then compress back to 16:9 AFTER the CCD, at the lens, then the 16: 9 image will contain all the pixels for more vert res.

I think.

And yes I sure do have the bug. It's a great gagdet thing - so much to obsess over - lols. But seriously my motivation is more than nerdy - it's just such a great way to watch films and is way better than I tht it would be.

For example - you see so much more - there is a bit in blade runner where three urban ' dwarfes' pull bits off his parked hover car, on the projector i can see thier faces and expresions and one is seen to be wearing purple shades.

On a TV you see the salient action on the projector you see it all, even some of the smoke and wires.

It appears that this is only a common trick on high end stuff. The only anamorphic convertos I can find for projectors are £ 4000 up for cinema projectors.

My bulb fund is now also my 16 9 higher res projector fund - but I also have to say that I still think 4 3 is a much under rated aspect ratio and I still prefer it for many things.

A two shot in 4 3 looks much better to me. Much. Wide for long / med shots and 4 3 intimacy. I may be brave and make something in both to try this thought out for real.