Jump to content


Photo

New Vitachrome images!!


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Brian Rose

Brian Rose
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Student
  • Kansas City area

Posted 28 November 2006 - 06:46 PM

Here are the latest 16mm tests to produce color images from black and white negative. Most of the images are three color still tests, like earlier. I mounted a bolex on a firm tripod, in a quite spot, and took three takes of the scene, one red, one green, one blue. I then tinted them, and combined them in Adobe Premiere Pro.

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

The last image, here, is special.

Posted Image

Here, I took two cameras, mounted together, and filmed a scene to see how well I could capture real motion. The result has some flaws. First, it is a two color image (like early technicolor) so the tonality is limited. Secondly, because the two strips are not geometrically identical, there is color fringing. However, I've taken a lesson, and my next step is to develop a method of capturing identical images in perfect sync.


Any feedback would be most appreciated! Or, if anyone has a technicolor beamsplitting prism lying around....
Best,
Brian R. Rose
  • 0

#2 Keith Mottram

Keith Mottram
  • Sustaining Members
  • 824 posts
  • Other

Posted 28 November 2006 - 07:34 PM

okay so i'm confused the object is to shoot the subject with black and white film on seperate cameras and then tint the negs to make colour correct? well why not just use the same piece of neg three times and tint it with different colours?

keith
  • 0

#3 Brian Rose

Brian Rose
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Student
  • Kansas City area

Posted 28 November 2006 - 07:41 PM

That's what the first tests did. However, it is not possible to capture motion, since you are shooting successively, not simultaneously. The last photo is of a preliminary test using two cameras to capture motion. Essentially, to capture moving object, you need to have all three strips runnign at the same time, and ideally, captuing precisely the same image, through a beamsplitter, or shutter mechanism.
Best,
Brian Rose


okay so i'm confused the object is to shoot the subject with black and white film on seperate cameras and then tint the negs to make colour correct? well why not just use the same piece of neg three times and tint it with different colours?

keith


  • 0

#4 Keith Mottram

Keith Mottram
  • Sustaining Members
  • 824 posts
  • Other

Posted 28 November 2006 - 08:07 PM

my point is if you shoot motion why cant you just use the same piece of film three times to create the same effect? the same piece of film tinted in three different ways and combined in premier. no colour fringing or geometrical thingys. or am i getting more confused?

keith
  • 0

#5 Brian Rose

Brian Rose
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Student
  • Kansas City area

Posted 28 November 2006 - 08:14 PM

Hmmmm, I think there is a bit of confusion here. Okay. Everything visible to the human eye consists of three primary colors: red, green and blue. To capture color, one needs to record these three colors. So, if you want to do it with black and white film, you have to have three records, one for each color. If you have a stationary object, yes, you may use the same strip of film, and just take three photos, one after the other. If you want to record actual motion, you need to record all three records at the same time, which necessitates three separate strips of negative. Does that clear it up at all?
Brian
  • 0

#6 Tim J Durham

Tim J Durham
  • Sustaining Members
  • 742 posts
  • Director
  • East Coast, Baby!

Posted 28 November 2006 - 08:54 PM

Hmmmm, I think there is a bit of confusion here. Okay. Everything visible to the human eye consists of three primary colors: red, green and blue. To capture color, one needs to record these three colors. So, if you want to do it with black and white film, you have to have three records, one for each color. If you have a stationary object, yes, you may use the same strip of film, and just take three photos, one after the other. If you want to record actual motion, you need to record all three records at the same time, which necessitates three separate strips of negative. Does that clear it up at all?
Brian

Are you trying to get a job with Turner Classics colorizing old B&W movies? What's the purpose of this process?
Not puttin it down, just curious.

BTW, green is a secondary color...
  • 0

#7 Brian Rose

Brian Rose
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Student
  • Kansas City area

Posted 28 November 2006 - 09:08 PM

Why am I doing this? Why not? Sure, it'd be easier to use color neg, but screw easy. I do it because it is hard. It is worth the hassle to actually CREATE beautiful color. I would like to make this process practical, and use it on a film. I hope to use this in some way for my senior thesis project, and I want to do something really special. Creating my own color process does just that. And, hopefully I can make a name for myself as a color cinematographer, and perhaps that will help with finding a job. I figure, you've gotta have something to set yourself apart from everyone else in the field. There aren't too many people using three strip color processes...But more than that, I think that black and white tricolor seps are better color neg. They have much better archival properties, and yield far richer, and more accurate colors. Additionally, I have more control over my image, since I can manipulate any of the three color records any way I please.

Also, I might mention that whether green is primary or secondary depends on if you are referring to additive or subtractive color methods. Subtractive processes, that which use dyes (like Technicolor and dye transfer printing) rely upon yellow, magenta and cyan as the primaries, and so you are correct in that green, red and blue are secondary. However, my process is ADDITIVE, and therefore, red, green and blue are the primary colors. I shot the negative using RGG seps, and then tinted them their respective colors in post. I did not use YCM. Hope that clears that up.
  • 0

#8 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19765 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 28 November 2006 - 09:56 PM

my point is if you shoot motion why cant you just use the same piece of film three times to create the same effect? the same piece of film tinted in three different ways and combined in premier. no colour fringing or geometrical thingys. or am i getting more confused?

keith


Because each separate b&w neg has to be shot thru a red, green, and then blue filter to record the monochrome version of those separate color tonalities. You can't just take a single b&w image and know what objects were red, green, or blue unless you just want to guess and then hand-paint them.

He's basically doing what a 3-strip Technicolor camera did simultaneously, exposing the red, green, and blue color information on three separate b&w negatives. The problem with exposing them one after the other is that colored objects move between passes so they won't line-up when combined. For example, a green tree swaying in the breeze will have color fringing.

In fact, it's how color film works -- it is made up of at least three layers of silver halide emulsion separated by filters, each layer capturing the RGB information separately; during processing, color dye clouds are released by color couplers that correspond to the amount of silver density created in that layer, after which the silver is removed.

It's also the same principle of storing color images using b&w separations.
  • 0

#9 Brian Rose

Brian Rose
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Student
  • Kansas City area

Posted 28 November 2006 - 10:00 PM

Thanks David for explaining that-you did it better than I could!
Brian
PS: Can't wait to see "The Astronaut Farmer!"
  • 0

#10 Hal Smith

Hal Smith
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2280 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • OKC area

Posted 28 November 2006 - 10:38 PM

BTW, green is a secondary color...

In light the primaries are red, green, blue. Light is additive, when equal amounts of red, green, and blue are added together you get white light.

Color film is a subtractive process.

A developed color negative has magenta, cyan, and yellow layers, the complements respectively of green, red, and blue light. Each layer is recording its complementary color. When printed onto negative print film the colors complement again.

White light passing through a developed print's successive color layers is "tinted" by the layer's colors. When white light passes through the magenta layer (passing blue and red) layer, the green is subtracted out. If it further goes through yellow layer (passing red and green) the green has already been subtracted out leaving only red. If white light passes through a cyan layer then a yellow layer only the green is left.

There's a lot of black (sic) magic going on in the dye chemistry involved to get an accurate representation of the original scene. that's where Kodak and Fuji keep their secrets (and make their money).
  • 0

#11 Film Runner

Film Runner
  • Guests

Posted 28 November 2006 - 10:44 PM

Why am I doing this? Why not? Sure, it'd be easier to use color neg, but screw easy. I do it because it is hard. It is worth the hassle to actually CREATE beautiful color. I would like to make this process practical, and use it on a film. I hope to use this in some way for my senior thesis project, and I want to do something really special. Creating my own color process does just that. And, hopefully I can make a name for myself as a color cinematographer, and perhaps that will help with finding a job. I figure, you've gotta have something to set yourself apart from everyone else in the field. There aren't too many people using three strip color processes...But more than that, I think that black and white tricolor seps are better color neg. They have much better archival properties, and yield far richer, and more accurate colors. Additionally, I have more control over my image, since I can manipulate any of the three color records any way I please.

Also, I might mention that whether green is primary or secondary depends on if you are referring to additive or subtractive color methods. Subtractive processes, that which use dyes (like Technicolor and dye transfer printing) rely upon yellow, magenta and cyan as the primaries, and so you are correct in that green, red and blue are secondary. However, my process is ADDITIVE, and therefore, red, green and blue are the primary colors. I shot the negative using RGG seps, and then tinted them their respective colors in post. I did not use YCM. Hope that clears that up.


This is very interesting. I think you should explore it and figure out a way to make it work using motion.

Three Bolexs on a camera rig each running on a shared drive shaft. Each shot would have to be painstakingly set up but it could be groundbreaking.

Asking why people do things is kinda silly...

Why would anyone want to climb Mt. Everest. I know I wouldn't but for some people that's the nuts for them.

Maybe the answer would be to build your own custom camera.

Here is an idea. Use a shutter like the Beaulieu. Nto a spinnign shutter a guillitine shutter.

_________________________
| |
| |
| Single shutter |
| |
|_________________________|

Moving up and down
| |
| |
\/ \/

Over three film gates close

______ ______ ______
| | | | | |
|_____| |_____| |______|


If you get the gates close enough you could possible share a single lens.

I wonder if a 65mm/70mm Imax lens would cover three 16mm gates close to each other. I am guessing if you got them close enough you coudl do it with a 65MM/70mm Imax lens.

If you could have them really close together you might get three Super 16mm gates close enough.

You could have the camera autoload from the top.

Have an old school Arri M sync light flash a fram when the camera starts. That way you can sync up the three film streams in post.

Heck, you could do it.

Sorry for the shitty attempt at ASC art but I think th eguillitine shutter woudl be the best way to handle this custom camera.

F.R.



One that has three film gates but only one shutter
  • 0

#12 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19765 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 28 November 2006 - 11:15 PM

Three side-by-side gates recording a single lens' image would just get you three side-by-side images. You'd need a prism to split the light three ways to each gate. Technicolor built a camera with a 3-way prism and three side-by-side gates but never used it. The prototype sits in the lobby of Technicolor Labs.
  • 0

#13 Film Runner

Film Runner
  • Guests

Posted 29 November 2006 - 01:35 AM

Three side-by-side gates recording a single lens' image would just get you three side-by-side images. You'd need a prism to split the light three ways to each gate. Technicolor built a camera with a 3-way prism and three side-by-side gates but never used it. The prototype sits in the lobby of Technicolor Labs.


Ooops. yeah missed that.

Okay. The 3 way prism. Would the gate sthen be like.

1\_/3
2

Or would they still be side by side.

_ _ _
1 2 3

F.R.
  • 0

#14 Hal Smith

Hal Smith
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2280 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • OKC area

Posted 29 November 2006 - 02:02 AM

I'll beat this rapidly dying horse one more time. ;)

Three chip and tube color cameras have color separation optics. Find an old 1" Plumbicon camera and salvage the prism and lens mount out of it and you're on your way to being able to build a three strip camera. There would be lots of "issues" to solve but at least you'd at least have good separation optics.

It's unlikely you could find a salvaged image orthicon color camera at this point but if you did, you'd have the optics necessary to build a DIY 35mm camera. I'm envisioning three Arri 2's sitting on crystal motors modified so that all three motors would be driven by the crystal reference frequency of only one of the motors. I'm afraid the motors would have to be the high dollar Cinematography Electronics motors since all three cameras would have to be not only at the same speed but also in phase (shutter) sync. The Tobin motors run at an accurate speed but I don't think they have the capacity to run at a predetermined phase angle. It would give one a lot more design freedom to arrange the cameras and optics relative to each other if they were slaved electronically, not mechanically.
  • 0

#15 James Erd

James Erd
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 187 posts
  • Director
  • Palo Alto, CA

Posted 29 November 2006 - 03:21 AM

If you could run your camera @ 72 fps and have the R,G,B, filters pas in front of the lens or film plane @ 1/3 that rate you would have your B&W separations. Naturally there would be an error on fast moving objects but you can always claim artistic license B) However you could recombine the results for 24 fps.... emmm theoretically :blink: but first you have to get the rig set up. A Bolex with a 1:1 shaft would be a good testbed. The disc with the filters needs to run off the same motor but at 90 degrees off axis and at a 1:3.
  • 0

#16 Nick Mulder

Nick Mulder
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1023 posts
  • Other
  • Auckland, New Zealand

Posted 29 November 2006 - 03:28 AM

If you could run your camera @ 72 fps and have the R,G,B, filters pas in front of the lens or film plane @ 1/3 that rate you would have your B&W separations. Naturally there would be an error on fast moving objects but you can always claim artistic license B) However you could recombine the results for 24 fps.... emmm theoretically :blink: but first you have to get the rig set up. A Bolex with a 1:1 shaft would be a good testbed. The disc with the filters needs to run off the same motor but at 90 degrees off axis and at a 1:3.


Take away the blue and do the same rotating gel thing with a projector and you have Kinemacolor - the first color projection process invented if you are to believe the net - you could get away with 48fps then (;
  • 0

#17 James Erd

James Erd
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 187 posts
  • Director
  • Palo Alto, CA

Posted 29 November 2006 - 03:39 AM

Take away the blue and do the same rotating gel thing with a projector and you have Kinemacolor - the first color projection process invented if you are to believe the net - you could get away with 48fps then (;


So that would be just red and green then? I think I remember something about that. Seems like it might be a little difficult to watch on the screen though. I was thinking the final print would be arrived at by step printing with the appropriate filters and then project.
  • 0

#18 Chris Perceval

Chris Perceval

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Other

Posted 29 November 2006 - 04:30 AM

Are you familiar with the work of William Frieze-Green? I believe he used B&W film and coloured the frames alternately green and red. In the 20s he worked hard to popularise his process and as part of this shot a wonderful travel movie driving from Land's End to John O'Groats. He never overcame the issue of colour fringing round moving objects and Technicolor did for him in the end. Never-the-less the work had a unique look and this movie is of great social and historical interest being pretty much the first colour documentory (although intended as a PR vehicle) in the UK. The BBC did a 3 or 4 part documentory on Frieze-Green following the route he took and even finding some of the folks who appeared in the original, then children, now octogenarians! Worth checking out if this sort of thisn interests you.
  • 0

#19 Mark Dunn

Mark Dunn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2426 posts
  • Other
  • London

Posted 29 November 2006 - 05:21 AM

That was William's son, Claude. William dropped dead at a film industry shindig in 1921, a forgotten pioneer.
  • 0

#20 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19765 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 29 November 2006 - 10:47 AM

The BBC doc mentions though that they took the Friese-Greene material and combined the red and green frames over each other, rather than show them alternating as originally projected. This improved the image considerably -- the flashing of red / green is pretty annoying.

2-strip Technicolor knew this was a problem which is why they worked so hard to get the two colors on one final frame, eventually using a cemented print and then later dye-imbibation on a single print.

If you don't want to deal with a prism, you could use a partial mirror in front of two cameras at right-angles to each other, seeing the same thing simultaneously, sort of similar to a front projection rig. Clairmont Cameras even has a over-under rig for that. That would get you two color records captured at the same time of the same thing.

Three colors would be harder. I suppose a simplified version of a 3-strip camera would be to make one of the two cameras in the mirror rig a Mitchell that could be bi-packed, and then do what Technicolor had to do: have the b&w film in front be blue-sensitive stock with a magenta filter in front, but with no halation backing on the stock, and have the stock dyed red so that it filtered the light passing through to the panchromatic stock behind it, recording the red info. Trick is how to get a blue-sensitive b&w stock with no halation backing that is dyed red...
  • 0


CineTape

Glidecam

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Willys Widgets

CineLab

Abel Cine

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

Opal

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Wooden Camera

Visual Products

Opal

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

Technodolly

Rig Wheels Passport

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

Ritter Battery