Yeah, that’s just the casual googling anyone casually interested will have done.In the brief googling I did it sounds like Vard Opticoat was an industrial process that Toland had applied to the lenses he used. Like the fixed apertures he used I suspect these types of modifications were done by optical technicians at the time.
So, you are saying they are making the stuff up?I think you are on a wrong track. That "Vard Opticoat" I only find referred to in film-historic publications, but not in optics ones. I very much doubt there ever was an easy to apply potion to result in an AR-coating.
AR reflection layer first was achieved by etching glass, but later one went over to evaporation of anorganic substanced which then again condensed on the optical element put in such evaporation chamber.
So, you are saying they are making the stuff up?
Seems unlikely.
Gregg Toland mentioned it in an article he wrote in Popular Photography, June 1941, "How I Broke the Rules in Citizen Kane." If you search for that title, you may find an uploaded copy of a reprint of the article.
Toland says: "The Vard "Opticoating" system developed at the California Institute of Technology, proved to be one factor in the eventual solution of our lighting problem. Being essentially a method of treating lens surfaces, Opticoating eliminates refraction, permits light to penetrate instead of scattering, and thus increases lens speed by as much as a full stop. Our coated lenses also permitted us to shoot directly into lights without anything like the dire results usually encountered."
It's undoubtedly a process like deposition, not a substance you paint on a lens.
The name "Vard" is not one I know associated with the optical scientists, astronomers, etc, at Caltech at the time, but it could be anybody, or perhaps not a person's name. There would certainly have been a lot of interest in coating optics from the astronomy side as well as cinematography, defense industry, etc.
Helge, thanks for starting this thread. Very interesting and informative. Enjoyed everyone’s contribution. Great collection of knowledgeable folks.What a wonderful article.
Seems to be the stem of most of unresearched braindead quotes on the subject.
One of the ending paragraphs is interesting:
“Style too often becomes deadly sameness. In my opinion, the day of highly stylized cinematography is passing, and is being superseded by a candid, realistic technique and an individual approach to each new film subject.”Reminds me of Ansel Adams at about the same time speaking out vehemently against pictorialism, while at the same time doing something that can only be described as a version of pictorialism.
Gregg Tolands work is highly stylized and atmospheric whether it’s B&W or colour.
Of course what they are really speaking out against, as Toland also mentions is not stylization as such, while advocation “realism” (whatever that is).
But rather protesting to cookie cutter stylization, forced on everything.
Stemming from the easy and convenient commercial notion that style is something to be lifted and reused.
Pretending style and technique is a separate entity to “content”.
Thanks goes out to you who wrote here.
While no definitive answers where given, you all gave some valuable clues to the answer.
That’s more than I could have hoped for.
Should anyone in the future find further stuff to add, don’t hesitate.
Thank you very much for this.Gregg Toland mentioned it in an article he wrote in Popular Photography, June 1941, "How I Broke the Rules in Citizen Kane." If you search for that title, you may find an uploaded copy of a reprint of the article.
Toland says: "The Vard "Opticoating" system developed at the California Institute of Technology, proved to be one factor in the eventual solution of our lighting problem. Being essentially a method of treating lens surfaces, Opticoating eliminates refraction, permits light to penetrate instead of scattering, and thus increases lens speed by as much as a full stop. Our coated lenses also permitted us to shoot directly into lights without anything like the dire results usually encountered."
It's undoubtedly a process like deposition, not a substance you paint on a lens.
The name "Vard" is not one I know associated with the optical scientists, astronomers, etc, at Caltech at the time, but it could be anybody, or perhaps not a person's name. There would certainly have been a lot of interest in coating optics from the astronomy side as well as cinematography, defense industry, etc.
I really doubt he was ignorant about the difference between refraction and reflection, esp. considering all else he knows.Yes, of course. Either typo or... ignorance.
I really doubt he was ignorant about the difference between refraction and reflection, esp. considering all else he knows.
Glad you all liked the article.
Gregg Toland mentioned it in an article he wrote in Popular Photography, June 1941, "How I Broke the Rules in Citizen Kane." If you search for that title, you may find an uploaded copy of a reprint of the article.
Which article ???
Do you mean this one?
http://faculty.sacredheart.edu/castonguayj/ms101reader/carringer.htm
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?