The article, “LEDs
and the ‘Color Rendering
Issue’” (July
26, 2012), mentioned the
Academy of Motion Picture
Arts and Sciences
and its
current Solid-State Lighting
Project.
Perhaps in the optimistic hope that there
may be other useful solid-state light sources
in the future, the phrase “which includes
LED emitters” is tagged onto the Academy’s
description of its field of inquiry.
To my knowledge, LEDs represent the
only solid-state lighting technology at this
time. At any rate, the current published results
of the Academy are worth further
examination, particularly as they apply to
broadcast production.
Since the 1920s, various motion picture
industry-supported research groups have been organized to address specific technical
issues in the industry. The sponsorship
of these efforts shifted back and forth between
organizations that not only included
the Academy, but the Association of Motion
Picture Producers, The Society of Motion
Picture and Television Engineers and the
American Society of Cinematographers.
Interestingly, one such
group from the past was
called the Motion Picture
Research Council. Among
its other advances, the
Motion Picture Research
Council was credited
with the development of
the Small Studio Crane, a
mainstay of early network-television production
(Fig. 1).
 |
Fig. 1: Small Studio Camera Crane |
The current organization, The Science
and Technology Council,
revives this tradition and is under the
auspices of the Academy. In the Council’s
words: “The primary purpose of this investigation
is to provide the industry with
data needed to properly evaluate the impact
of using solid-state lighting,
as well as to provide a framework for the
evaluation of future light-emitting technologies
as they are developed.” This is a very ambitious project.
The work of the Council is quite unique.
To access a portion of this very comprehensive
review of color reproduction, visit
the Academy’s website: www.oscars.org/
science-technology/council/projects/ssl/.
Notice on this page the links to Symposium
Videos. This group of seven short talks
is narrated by Jon Erland, a renowned Motion
Picture visual-effects technologist. Starting
with the “Science of Color,” Erland, in a
wonderfully entertaining manner and with formidable authority, covers the entire scientific
field of color and illumination and
how it applies to camera reproduction.
I suggest that the reader watch all the
talks as they illustrate the very thorough
manner in which the Council approached this subject. There is a great deal of information
about the complexities of dealing
with light sources whose color spectrum
is discontinuous.
To illustrate the color differences between
light sources, the Council’s report
makes use of the Macbeth Color Chart to
evaluate the color rendition of the various
sources. The commercial lighting industry is fixated on the Color
Rendering Index.
However, as I have previously
mentioned, a
better scale, the Color
Quality Scale,
has been proposed by
the National Institute of
Standards and Technology
(formerly the
Bureau of Standards).
 |
| Fig. 2: Three Color Scales |
I have reproduced
the three color charts
for you (see Fig. 2)
to make a subjective
comparison, bearing in
mind that the reliability
of printing this reproduction
is probably uncertain.
We can still make
the judgment that there
is a great similarity between
the Macbeth and
CQS colors as well as a
great disparity between
both of these and the
eight desaturated colors commonly applied
to formulate the CRI of a source. To
a scientist, the CRI represents a very forgiving
and inaccurate standard and the
reliability of its value should be carefully
considered. The Council’s study is in agreement
with this statement.
DISCONTINUOUS LIGHT SOURCES
As you look at the Council’s videos and
the graphs illustrating the spectrum of the
LED sources and fluorescents tested, they
dramatically show the peaks and valleys of
colors in the case of the LED and the rather
narrow spikes of high energy of a fluorescent
lamp. The study is very adverse to
the use of fluorescent sources, saying they
would be impossible to correct. In fact, you
might come to the surprising conclusion
that the LED source is a more adaptable
discontinuous source.
This conclusion is rather alarming at
this point in time due to the very extensive
use of fluorescent sources in motion picture
production (and television) for quite a
number of years.
The Council study does not offer any
practical solution to solving the use of any
discontinuous source other than redesign.
It does offer the conclusion that no practical
gels or filters exist with an inverse
discontinuous spectrum that could be applied.
Also, even if they existed, the loss of
light would reduce the efficiency of the
source to the point that any advantage that
might have existed is lost.
The report does anticipate that the
spectrum of LED sources for motion picture
(and television) lighting will improve in time, which, in
the case of LEDs,
has proven to be
true. Prepare for
some disappointment
as the study
does not specifically
identify the actual
three LED fixtures
tested, so you
will not be able to
contact your favorite
supplier with
a manufacturer’s
model number.
ULTRAVIOLET
In the Council’s
very thorough treatise,
one important
fact was omitted.
Of all the sources
with discontinuous
spectrum, the LED
does not generate
energy in the invisible
ultraviolet part
of the spectrum. Light sources such as metal
halide, HMI, Xenon and fluorescent light
produce significant amounts of UV energy,
which can do great damage in a short period
of time to plastic gels, artworks, transparencies,
etc. This is a very advantageous
characteristic of LED sources.
There is a group of camera test videos
listed on the website that can be loaded
and viewed; these videos bring a sense of
reality to the Academy’s study. Experts in
the areas of makeup, costumes and props
comment on the results of using the different
illuminants. There are side-by-side comparisons
of each of the three LED sources
against the identical scene as rendered and
balanced for tungsten light. The tungsten
light is assumed to be the ideal.
This is where the plot thickens. Although
the differences between the rendering
of the subjects under the discontinuous
spectrum of the LED sources and the
standard are noticeable, even the experts
seem to have difficulty in describing the
degree of disparity.
It is my opinion that under the broadcast
environment—with all of its departures
from the ideal inherent in the system
from acquisition, transmission and, finally,
display—these slight differences in color
reproduction are insignificant issues. As I
have stated in the past, the more significant
issues relative to the use of an LED source
are instrument performance and initial investment.
Bill Klages would like to extend an invitation
to all the lighting people out there
to give him your thoughts at billklages@
roadrunner.com.