Thanks so much. I’m glad you enjoyed the demo. 

I know it’s not new information for someone like yourself, but instead tries to offer a new paradigm or lexicon for people much less technical than yourself who have been held back and stuck in the mud by constrained thinking: the culturally prevalent and customary superstition that the camera makes an indelible look on the image. 

I’m trying to get creative filmmakers to realize that the camera is just a data collection machine, not the look-maker. And that, if they really want to control the look, they need to separate the concepts of data collection and look. 

They can’t assume they know anything about the quality of the data collection from advertised pseudo-specs (like “4k”). Relentlessly repeating in a tone of smug certainty mantras about the “look of film" doesn’t make it any more true than did the relentless repetition in the 1500’s that the sun revolved around the earth. 

I know people like you and many VFX people already know all this. But this issue is a lot like climate science: for people who have actually studied the scientific facts, the truth is clear and it’s not a two-sided issue. But for the general public who has created a mental image based solely on propaganda from interested parties and not based on scientific facts, there are still two sides.

Anyway, since nobody will ever stop rooting for their own team, I’m hoping to help us move past superstition by refocusing the discussion away from partisanship. I don’t want it to be film vs digital. But merely a new paradigm where it is understood that the aesthetic look comes from display preparation, not the gray box behind the taking lens. 

The acquisition format is very important for image quality (breadth and precision of data collection), not for look. More quality gives more options for look, but doesn’t enforce any one look or another.

Sorry to preach to the choir here; I know you already know all this.

You’re right that I didn’t reveal my methods, but it’s not because I’m being proprietary about it or acting like it’s a “secret sauce.” It’s just that it’s not the topic of the demo. Getting into color science would be a text-book length undertaking, not a 7-minute demo. I’m trying to change the paradigm of how creative people (not engineers) think about the relationship between acquisition format and “look,” and not trying to teach a technical Color Science seminar.