American Cinematographer - August 1996 - 45

miniatures and models in 35mm
5248 stock because

we

on

wanted it to

be as grainless as possible to match
the look that had been set in 65mm.
We used twin Fries Mitchell cam¬
eras on a

which

lighter-weight 3-D rig,

was

in

the 65mm 3-D

same as

rigs, so I had to take

into account all of the
eters that we

the

essence

had

same

on

param¬
the 65mm

footage."
Once in the desolate fu¬
ture, Cameron was able to establish
his trademark cinematic style of
taut action, fast editing and fluid,
gymnastic camera movement. But
with cameras weighing nearly 450
pounds each, it wasn't easy. "You

can't

move a

450-pound

camera

very rapidly," Cameron says.
"That was the biggest barrier to
hurdle - we had to figure out how

in three ways -
and the distance

them.
sense

size, perspective
object is from
actually learn to
an

They can
where their focus is. [In

a

film], the audience is focused on
the screen, so we have to cheat that.

to

"We'll often talk about

speed, exhila¬
ration and dynamic movement
people expect in a Terminator film."

pulling focus differently for 3-D
than we would for 2-D, just to

to move

these massive

create that

sense

cameras

of

"Movement

was

our

single biggest challenge," agrees
director of photography Russell
Carpenter, who had to solve the
logistical and physical nightmare
of wielding a camera the size and
weight of a refrigerator. "I quickly
much more
exact science than conventional

discovered that 3-D is

a

35mm

photography. The two im¬
have to be in exact relation¬
ship to each other. If you bump the
camera, or if you go around a curve
which introduces g-forces and
torque on the magazines and starts
to flex the two images - you have
to be aware that you might be in¬
ducing eye-strain in the viewer.
Also, the slightest shudder can ruin
the 3-D effect, so a lot of testing was
done in order to design rigs that
didn't introduce those problems in

ages

-

environments that

had

no

3-D

cameras

previously been subjected to."
"We are creating the ulti¬

mate

illusion," boasts 3-D director

of

photography Peter Anderson,
whose past 3-D credits include
Disney's Magic journeys and Cap¬
tain Eo, as well as Muppet Vision
and 15 other productions. "View¬
ers' eyes and brain-processing are
very sensitive. So we have to make
3-D work

[within those param¬
eters]. When we look at something
close, our mind actually knows
that it's focusing close. People who
only have one eye can judge depth

make it work. Sometimes we'll de¬

lay it, sometimes we'll accelerate it.
Basically, we'll look at a situation
and say, 'This is the way I would
look from here to here.' Then we'll
make the focus work that way in¬
stead of just tracking with the par¬
ticular object, modifying it for how
we want the shot to begin and end
and incorporating the interocular
and convergence so that it looks
the way a human being would see
it. In T2 3-D we just happen to be
or five times faster
would in most 3-D theme

doing that four
than

we

park films."
Adds

Carpenter, "We had
to realize that what might work
really well in a conventional mo¬
tion picture might cause visual
whiplash in 3-D. Luckily, Peter
Anderson
his

was on

this show, and

experience helped to guide us

and let

us

bend the rules

a

little bit.

For instance, when we were
a

shot, he would

doing
constantly be ad¬

justing the apparent depth and the
apparent placement of objects
within that depth - because in 3D you can arbitrarily say, 'I want
the object to appear as if it's right in
my face; now, I want to take that
object and move it 50 feet behind
the plane of the screen. But if you
have [an object placed in the 3-D
foreground] and you make a cut,
that thing just disappears as if it's
vaporizing in front of your eyes! If
you then cut to something that's

August 1996

way off in the distance, it's as if
somebody's just snapped a rubberband on your eyeball - it's quite
jarring. So a lot of thought had to
be given as to where potential cuts
would be. It's

a

shock for

some¬

body who's coming from the world
of conventional 35mm cinematog¬
raphy to enter this world of 65mm
3-D photography. A number of the
methods that you'd normally use,
in terms of lighting to create
depth in 35mm photography, are
no
longer necessary. The depth cre¬
ates

itself."
The film's

A Mini-HK

confronts the
Terminator in
the

collapsed
The

garage.

device

was

primarily seen
as a

CG

element, while
a

practical

model stood in

during its
eventual
destruction.
This shot

was

photographed
with

a

35mm

Arriflex

camera

dynamic open¬
ing chase through the debris-rid¬

equipped with a

den War Zone had to match the

lens

acrobatic, kinetic

Steadicam

ferocity that had

thrilled audiences in the first two
Terminator installments (both shot

by Adam Greenberg, ASC), and
offer newer, more exciting feats.
Originally, the production had in¬
tended to utilize the inoperative
Kaiser Steel Mill location in

Fontana that had been used to

great success in Terminator 2. How¬

by the time the production
gearing up to shoot, the origi¬
nal site "had been dismantled piece
by piece, taken to China and put
back together again," notes Car¬
penter. "But the raw ore that the
mill had used was also mined by
Kaiser, so we went to their big
open-pit mine out at Eagle Moun¬
tain near Blyth."
The long-abandoned mine
location was conveniently slated
for demolition, and the production
obtained permission to destroy any
ever,
was

Stereovision
on a

operated by Bob
Ulland. The

footage

was
later scanned
and enhanced

digitally before
being outputted
to 65mm film.

IActual 70mm
film

clip. See
lighting
diagram,
opposite.)

of the few structures that remained

standing. "The desert location
on for acres and acres. Unlike
the situation on most sets, you
could see very far into the dis¬

went

tance," Carpenter recalls.

American

Cinematographer

41
American Cinematographer - August 1996

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of American Cinematographer - August 1996
