American Cinematographer - August 1987 - 48

Setup for
photographing a
sequence involving

a

banana boat.

project
or

especially if he's

-

a

writer

has worked with the writers

-

1

get a sense of what his vision is,
what he would like out of the
movie. Then, rather than reading

something all alone and making up
my mind how something should
look, as I read the script I remem¬
ber certain things he may have
mentioned when I formulate my

- the spherical lenses are
superior. Also, the underwa¬
photography would have been

give

you

much
ter

bit cumbersome due
iness of anamorphic

a

to

the heav¬

lenses. We

thoughts. It's such a collaborative
affair, truly - I don't care what
anyone says. It's not at all a one

decided to consider shooting it in
other formats and I felt it might be
nice to shoot in Super 35 and have
one wonderful lens at the labora¬

form. Great directors
know that and they give cin¬

tory do
for the

art

man

ematographers freedom to
themselves. Everybody

express
grows

from that."
It

sion

was

McPherson's deci¬

photograph Jaws in the
Super 35 format, although it was
planned for anamorphic wide¬
screen presentation from the start.
The anamorphic conversion
to

would be done later. "Our cam¬
eras were centered by Panavision

specifications," he
blue
John
Dykstra, president of Apogee,

to

Super

35

noted. "We're doing our
screen work in VistaVision."

Inc.,

the location to oversee
operations.
McPherson explained his
for insisting upon the

was at

some

blue

reasons

Super

35

screen

format:

"Everybody wanted to
shoot anamorphic except me. I fi¬
nally talked them out of it, partly
because I don't like

46

lenses. Panavision does have some
wonderful new anamorphic lenses,
but generally speaking I don't like
the squeezed look anamorphics

American

Cinematographer

anamorphic

all the anamorphic work
consistency of the same
look and color. I had tested Super
35 but hadn't shot it before."
"Super 35 is spherical to
begin with,''McPherson con¬
tinued. "You're shooting 2.35:1,
which takes up about two-and-ahalf perforations straight across,
without a sound track. The only
reason to go to anamorphic from
this is to make room for a sound
track. You take that information,
blow it up, squeeze it to ana¬

morphic and then there's room to
the sound track in. That's the
product you look at on the screen.
If you're shooting anamorphic
originally, you're dealing with the
full four perforations of informa¬
tion. It's all right if you have won¬
derful anamorphic lenses all the

put

time and you

don't mind that
squeezed look, which is somewhat
unrealistic. And with anamorphics
you're always dealing with depth

August 1987

of field.

"Having talked with
fellows, I found
they generally prefer Super 35 be¬
cause they can control
every shot
with their own proven, singular
anamorphic lens. They can make
the entire show anamorphic with
one lens choice
they have in their
laboratory, whereas if we shoot an
anamorphic show we're at the
mercy of all our lenses, which
some

of the lab

sometimes aren't matched for
color or resolution. As diligent as
we were on this show in
making
lens tests, we find some that don't

quite match. We'd take a couple
of days and go through three, four
or five lenses of each caliber, and
we'd eliminate to get the very best
for color match and resolution at
different stops."
Zoom lenses are not pop¬
ular with McPherson, especially in
the anamorphic mode. "I never
like to zoom, but if a director
needs a zoom for whatever reason
there's much better quality with a

spherical lens. With anamorphics,
if you even think about zoom it's
frightening, because of the resolu¬
tion. A lot of directors feel they
need a zoom, but I'd like to have
them look at, side by side, some of
the tests I make on every show, as
a lot of cinematographers do. Put
the real resolution of spherical or

top-notch anamorphic primes
right next to that of a zoom lens at
American Cinematographer - August 1987

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of American Cinematographer - August 1987
