From Elon Musk claiming that Grok AI will make a “historically accurate” Odyssey film to academic Emily Wilson saying she “would be ashamed to have written any part of this script,” it seems like Christopher Nolan’s latest epic, currently sitting at a triumphant 94% on Rotten Tomatoes, has divided opinion. But I’ve just caught a video from photographer and YouTuber Anthony Gugliotta, investigating why some viewers are saying The Odyssey looks blurry.
I haven’t seen the film in an IMAX cinema, but I have to say, I didn’t actively notice the presence of any softness. Then again, I’m not a fan of razor sharpness and to me, the ethereal look of the film really complemented the source material. I generally think the cinematography looked great.
But as to why The Odyssey might look a little soft in places, Anthony’s video gives two very plausible answers. Firstly, IMAX 70mm is a massive format, which makes shallow depths of field more obvious. Secondly, the production was using modified Panavision Primo 65 lenses, which contained anamorphic lens elements, further enhancing the shallow depth of field.
So here’s the thing, you’re working with very shallow depths of field to start with. You then have to use longer focal lengths to reach standard cinematic fields of view, because of the huge format. And finally, you might be shooting at wide apertures. All of this results in a sliver of a focal plane. This is a focus puller's nightmare for close-up scenes because very little movement from the actor in question will throw everything out of focus.
Ultimately though, I’ll take a slightly soft cinematic production over AI slop and CGI borefests any day of the week. Then again, what do I know? I watched 1988’s Bloodsport at the weekend and thoroughly enjoyed it…
You might also like...
How Christopher Nolan made a 300-pound IMAX camera disappear when making The Odyssey. Has color grading gone too far? This YouTube video hits on a subject I’ve pondered for years. Check out the best cinema cameras.
