Andrew Schroeder

In both the shot of Lucas here and the one of him on the crane in the linked article he appears to be using a Nikkor-S auto 50mm f1.4 lens.

I recently shot a piece that used some silver confetti, we lit it hard from underneath so they would catch the light as they tumbled.

Well, after its exposed the negative was developed and a positive printing matrix strip was made for each strip. The matrix strips were kind of like stampers coated with their individual dyes. They printed each color on top of each other on a blank. For earlier 3 strip films they also added a fourth half tone black and white image over that, made from the green channel, to add contrast. You asked why cameras/film can't do this anymore, so I believe its a relevant answer. Unless a sensor specifically says its monochrome (meaning it has no CFA) it is a color sensor. The sensor stack, including the CFA, should be considered a part of the sensor. In bayer sensors all 3 color channels are interpreted by comparing photosites against adjoining photosites. Green and Blue values are needed to determine what the reds look like, and vice versa for the other channels for the image. So they're essentially tied to each other. Even if you work with RAW files you are working with them after theyve been demosaiced. You can use different programs to get different demosaic algorithms, but the colors will still be tied to each other. Film isn't quite as restricted, but the colors are still tied together by the layers that create them You could do that. But you would need some kind of beamsplitter like the three strip camera's prism, so that all 3 sensors received the same image and also lenses that would work properly with that set up. The three strip process was really three strip. It had two different light pathways after the prism, but the red and blue strips were sufficiently separated and recorded on different pieces of film.

At Technicolor they did quite a bit of on set QC before cameras even rolled with their color consultants, often to the point of fighting with the directors. That said, the things you listed aren't trivial. A lot of the magic is in the camera and printing hardware. The film negative was just black and white, and the prints were the inks printed onto a blank. Just look at a documentary done on a three strip camera to see how the camera and dye process affected images in a unique way on their own, without on set tinkering. If you're trying to replicate that look on digital cameras you won't get there with grading, LUTs or other post manipulation. Digital cameras just don't see a wide enough spectrum at the sensor level. You can play with the grade to try to make the image more colorful, but ultimately the colors you capture are tied to each other. Think of the image your sensor creates as a piece of fabric. You can stretch that fabric to a point, to make it bigger, but when you pull the edge hard enough the center moves too, or eventually tears. With film stock you can get closer, but will still run into the same issue. Background: I studied this for years and eventually developed (with my partner) hardware and a workflow to allow modern cameras to film in the three strip spectrum. We call it Optical Radiance. We have lots of examples at opticalradiance.com and on our Instagram. Other people may chime in and point to the work done on "The Aviator" or David Mullen's wonderful work on "The Love Witch". I think both films are great, but neither looks like three strip. In fairness I don't think "The Love Witch" ever claimed they were trying to look like three strip, it was people reviewing it that kept using the phrase. And for "Aviator" Scorsese has said he was looking to evoke his own memory of what it looked like, he wasn't after being accurate.

I've had very similar issues even when trying to meter for digital cameras, always overexposing and washing out color. My partner and I have a start up that deals with modifying digital cinema cameras for better color and as part of it, due to this issue, we ended up studying the history of measuring light. Long story short, there was never a true universally agreed upon set of standards, and the methods for how film sensitivity is measured changed a few times over the years. A surprising amount of current light meters use calculations that incorrectly account for these changes. For these and other reasons we ended up creating our own light meters, which use analog hardware.

It depends on the model, the only overall change I can think of are the coatings.

I collect vintage nikon glass including AI and the Auto-Nikkor series that includes the 28mm you asked about. In general the Auto-Nikkors (which have letters in their names like 28mm-N, 50mm-S, 135mm-Q, etc..) have a more classic look with lower contrast, smoother color and tone transitions and softer highlights, where the AI series has more contrast (but not as much as a modern lens) and punchier primary colors, but more abrupt color and tone transitions. The Autos that have a "C" next to their letter are multicoated (like the "S.C.") where a letter with no C (just "S") are single coated. With 2 exceptions: both the "35mm f1.4 N" and "28mm f2 N"are all multicoated no matter what the name variation says. The "28mm f2 N" has the same optical formula for the N, NC, K and AI. So with that particular lens its really just what kind of barrel design you like best/ can get. They should all render the same. The Auto and AI lenses all have similar focus throws around 180 degrees, give or take. AIS lenses are much shorter.

Hi, my name is Andy Schroeder. My producing partner and I recently launched a start up around camera tech we developed and I thought some of you might be interested in seeing what we can do. Our company is named Optical Radiance. We use patent pending tools to make any camera "see" in the spectrum of three-strip Technicolor (circa 1935 - 1955). It is an all analog process, no color grading is necessary on the footage after it has been filmed. Even if you're not interested in classic films there are some side benefits from filming in the process like a greater color palette and easily color matching mutiple cameras from different brands. I decided to finally become a registered user on the forum in part to let others know we're out here, but I don't want to make anyone feel like I'm putting on a commercial, so I'll just add that you can see examples and a more in depth explanation at opticalradiance.com If you have questions let me know, thanks (:

Hi, I've been shooting at ASA800 and am rating it for the same (I don't ETTR). The noise levels are very low, lower than the original pocket cam in a shootout (which is why I chose that ASA). But I'm also shooting in-camera 1080p ProresHQ for an Apples to Apples comparison, so the downscaling and compression will play into that. ASA3200 is grainier and the color takes a hit, but is still very usuable, not unlike the grain on the orignal cam at ASA800. I'll have to look at it in 4k and at diff.ratings in the near future, I started with comparing to the original as thats been my fav. camera to work with the last 5 years