Documentary News Letter (1944-1945)

34 DOCUMENTARY NEWS LETTER No. 3 1944 I^W . AN EXAMINATION OF COLOUR by RONALD NEAME (Reprinted in abridged form from the A.C.T. Journal). I" et's face it, colour has come to stay. There •'-'are some of us that like it and some of us that don't, but, whether we do or we don't, it's not going to make the slightest difference. Each year for the past five years the percentage of technicolor production has increased, and it's my guess that in five years' time black and white will be on the way out for good. Of course colour will be vastly different from what it is to-day. lam convinced that before long we shall be able to dispense with three negatives and when Monopack, or its equivalent, is in general use, the present technicolor camera will go the same way as the "camera booth" of the early talkies went. Mind you, there's nothing wrong with the camera, some of its features are first-class, and should be adapted at once to black and white cameras. Remote control focus, what a joy that is, and how much superior the viewfinder with its minimum of parallax. But size is against it, and although Technicolor will support it up to the hilt and maintain that it really is quite mobile, there is no doubt that it considerably slows up production and is a poor substitute for the comparatively light and up-to-date Mitchell. Soon, too, faster film will enable us to get rid of some of the oversize lighting equipment which at the moment makes colour a heavy-handed business. Lighting for technicolor is rather like drawing with a piece of charcoal after having got used to a very fine pencil, but it is surprising how quickly you get used to working with a "key" light of 800 foot candles instead of the 100 foot candles that you have probably been working with in the past. When even experienced technicians go on to a technicolor set for the first time they get the impression that a great mass of light is turned on to set and artists from every direction, without any apparent system, and this has led to the quite wrong impression, in some circles, that lighting for technicolor is a haphazard affair, In actual fact, lighting for colour is almost in all respects the same as lighting for black and white, with the exception of contrast. Contrast Contrast is one of the great problems of technicolor to-day. In black and white, if negative contrast is increased the blacks look more black and the whites look more white, shadows go heavier and highlights stronger. In colour, something else happens as well — the reds look more red, blues look more blue, pink faces look more pink — sometimes "lobster" — and before you know where you are you are faced with very glorious technicolor. As in black and white, the higher the contrast the better the definition. Hollywood has realised this and that is the reason why all colour pictures from America are extremely colourful. With them, definition and visibility are of paramount importance, they are prepared to sacrifice more subtle tones of colour for clarity of vision. In England this becomes sorrewli; t of a problem for the lighting cameraman, producers and directors, not for the most part being technicians, want the best of both worlds, they quite naturally want good definition but are determined not to put up with "red, white and hot technicolor" as served up by America, and it is very difficult to make them realise to what a large extent these two things are bound up together. Colour Separation Out of this arises another problem — "colour separation." This again plays a large part in deciding the quality of results. If a face is photographed up against a bright blue, no matter how flatly it is lit, it will stand well away from the background. If, on the other hand, the background is pink, only the most carefully modelled lighting will give reasonable results. Here again you can see how Hollywood technicians work! In all their big musicals (The Girls They Left Behind is a perfect example) sets and costumes are all designed to give the greatest possible "colour separation"; thus even the flattest flood lighting will give good bright results on the screen. There is no doubt that seeing your first test in colour is a great thrill. Technicolor always "do you proud" on your first test — two, or at the most three, days after you shoot, it will arrive back from West Drayton, its quality good and true in every detail. I'm sure your first reaction will be — "But this is easy" — and so it is in theory, and when everything goes right. But making a test is one thing, shooting on the floor — perhaps in confined spaces — another, and there are still plenty of hurdles to get over before technicolor becomes easy. Some of these hurdles are going to remain until after the war. Problems of Lighting One of your first major problems will be getting enough foot candles out of a light while still having it sufficiently near full flood to cover a reasonable area of subject matter. Most of the lighting equipment in this country is getting pretty old and worn. Naturally the studios stick up for it, and claim that lighting cameramen are fussy and unreasonable people, but it is undeniably a fact that we are not getting nearly as much light from our lamps as we used to, and it has become necessary to have your 150 amp. key not more than 25 feet from your actors in order to get a good even light of 800 foot candles. This means that if your set is on the large size, you cannot light your artists from the rail, it being too far oft". Therefore the best thing to do is to put your lamps on stands on the floor, or on rostrums. In black and white there is no problem here: it is only a two-minute job to bring in a Mole "Junior", but in colour the increase in lighting time is extensive; carrying a 1 50 amp. H.I. arc around is not a very quick business. I became convinced that Hollywood must have found a way round this problem, and sent a cable to Mole Richardson of America, asking for photometer readings from one of their 150 amp. arcs. When I received the reply I took the same readings from one of our own lamps— the result makes rather a sad story : Readings with 150 amp. H.I. arc with Y.\ Filter, 25 ft. from Weston Meter Hollywood Studio Home Studio , foot candles foot candles I Full flood 385 160 10 turns spot 610 230 20 „ „ 1,410 460 30 ,, „ 4,220 1,360 There would appear to be two main reasons! for this pitiful discrepancy. The first, "Pool" car-l bons, and the second that the Americans are] putting 150 amps through their lamps, whereas I up to now we have only been using 136 amps.l I am glad to say that recent experiments with | higher amperage have already proved a great! success and I hope before long all studios wiJll convert their grids in this way. In addition to the! light being brighter it is also much cleaner ancU whiter, and this is indeed important. It is essential when lighting for colour to makel sure that your arcs are burning correctly. If thel gap between the positive and negative carbons isl too large, in addition to loss of light the colour ofl the light will change to pink instead of white, andl our old pal "lobster" will crop up again. While writing about the colour of light, it] would be as well to mention another problem, thel problem of "practical" lamps on sets: wall] brackets, table and standard lamps, etc. The! ordinary 60 watt or 100 watt bulb is far tool yellow to look natural, therefore it is necessary! to dip these in a blue cellulose before using them| on colour sets. So far, I have discussed only straightforward lighting, and before passing from this to nightj and effect stuff, I would like to sum up by stressJ ing the importance of getting fully exposed negaJ tives with plenty of detail in the shadows. Therq is no doubt that sometimes excellent results ca be obtained by breaking this rule, but generally SIGHT and SOUND A cultural Quarterly MONTHLY FILM BULLETIN appraising educational and entertainment values Published by: TlieBritishFilniliistitute, 4 Great Russell Street, London, W.C.I.