Author Topic: HVX200 Opteka 0.3x vig solution?  (Read 835 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

swan pablo murphy

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 41
  • Rep: -5
HVX200 Opteka 0.3x vig solution?
« on: March 27, 2023, 09:08:22 PM »

does anyone know how to achieve this look? crop the vig yet keep the vertical height or some way to reduce vig without zooming in a lot? skate perception being erased from history is such a bummer

bataaard

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
  • Rep: 42
Re: HVX200 Opteka 0.3x vig solution?
« Reply #1 on: March 28, 2023, 04:49:13 AM »
in your editing software, you have a width and height of the footage settings. I'm pretty sure he extended the width of the footage until the vig disappear, without touching the height setting.


in adobe premiere:
uncheck "uniforms scale", and up the "scale width"



Jordan Wiens

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 918
  • Rep: 49
  • @wardenjeans
    • portfolio avatar image
Re: HVX200 Opteka 0.3x vig solution?
« Reply #2 on: March 29, 2023, 10:17:42 AM »
there was another user that was on here that shared their strat of using after effects' optics compensation. it stretches out the corners leaving the vertical height intact. looked really good albeit some blurriness in the corners (which you can compensate with some sharpening).





and their full length using the technique. they had an hpx170 with 1 spacer on the opteka so it was pretty wide to begin with. you can see it unzoomed in some b-roll shots. your after effects settings will vary depending on how much vig you have/want.



youtube.com/wardenjeans
twitch.tv/wardenjeans

CossRooper

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • SLAP Pal
  • ******
  • Posts: 1627
  • Rep: 139
  • What are you up to, drawing leafs?
    • timecube avatar image
Re: HVX200 Opteka 0.3x vig solution?
« Reply #3 on: March 29, 2023, 12:32:08 PM »
there was another user that was on here that shared their strat of using after effects' optics compensation. it stretches out the corners leaving the vertical height intact. looked really good albeit some blurriness in the corners (which you can compensate with some sharpening).





and their full length using the technique. they had an hpx170 with 1 spacer on the opteka so it was pretty wide to begin with. you can see it unzoomed in some b-roll shots. your after effects settings will vary depending on how much vig you have/want.



shit looks really good.

i feel like edge blur is the #1 downside to the opteka

Jordan Wiens

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 918
  • Rep: 49
  • @wardenjeans
    • portfolio avatar image
Re: HVX200 Opteka 0.3x vig solution?
« Reply #4 on: March 29, 2023, 07:12:41 PM »
Expand Quote
[close]

shit looks really good.

i feel like edge blur is the #1 downside to the opteka
its due in part to stretching the pixels that much tho too.
youtube.com/wardenjeans
twitch.tv/wardenjeans

swan pablo murphy

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 41
  • Rep: -5
Re: HVX200 Opteka 0.3x vig solution?
« Reply #5 on: March 30, 2023, 03:53:01 PM »
great stuff thanks for the advice fellas. greatly appreciate it.

slapcurbsnotwomen

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 193
  • Rep: 19
Re: HVX200 Opteka 0.3x vig solution?
« Reply #6 on: April 06, 2023, 03:23:05 PM »
Damn watching those 16:9 fisheye clips look pretty good, gonna have to switch it up after I finish my video, I have a hvx with the opteka 72mm fisheye, I use 3 spacer rings and the adapter, then I crop to 4:3


moshandwallies

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
  • Rep: -2
Re: HVX200 Opteka 0.3x vig solution?
« Reply #7 on: April 13, 2023, 02:09:25 AM »
in your editing software, you have a width and height of the footage settings. I'm pretty sure he extended the width of the footage until the vig disappear, without touching the height setting.


in adobe premiere:
uncheck "uniforms scale", and up the "scale width"



I don't think he used this method because if you only change the scale width, the footage looks really bad and stretched. I also tried to use the WayBack Machine which is an internet archive to see that thread on skateperception but it didn't work. Also the method used by Sean C doesn't look like the one used by Matt Hunter, at least to me. If anyone else has more suggetions it would be helpful