I was thinking of using the two color scheme that some movies use, such as what this video talks about:

Why are Films Shot in Two Colors? - YouTube

However, I am concerned that it will become obvious to viewers and they will think what are the odds that every character only has two colors in their wardrobe or that every location coincidentally only has two colors. Or what are the odds that every location in this city only seems to be two colors... Thank you very much for any advice on this! I really appreciate it!

The odds of finding a two color location would be pretty remote, I would think. How to stop your color manipulation becoming too obvious? Just apply it lightly and carefully. With movies the color biases can be pretty savage and they can get away with it. Most of us go to the movies to suspend ourselves from real life... and color. We don't mind being manipulated in the name of "art". Suspension from real life is what movies are all about... isn't it?

Most movies have the budget to employ set dressers who will paint locations, furnish locations and fit out locations and light them in the complementary colors the Director and DP require for the scene in mind. Wardrobe works hand in hand with them and will supply clothing to match the complementary scene the Director is trying to establish.

Movies for the last few years have really tended to drift to working with complementary color palettes. The Orange & Teal one having been done to death... way done to death. Just have a look at a couple of fairly recent movies, for example. The montages below are from the Bond film "No Time to Die" and the pretty recent "The Fablemans".

Physical manipulation.
Note carefully how locations, fittings, furnishings and clothes have been carefully choreographed in a certain range of complementary color ranges. In the Fablemans for example, just look at the repainting of the walls, doorways, wall posters, the text even! Etc. Plus look at the subtle bias in the "whites" leaning towards teal in both film examples.

Electronic manipulation.
It's not only the physical world where this color manipulation takes place. A lot of it is done in post. Like the outdoor Bond scene down at the docks. How successful your manipulations of scene, color and mood setting works is entirely up to you. It can definitely work. I use these color bias processes in post quite often, but do it subtlety. 99% of the time clients wouldn't notice, but they like the results. When asked why, they can never put their finger on the reason why they like the results. Then you know you have succeeded. Most of us watch movies without giving much thought to the subliminal manipulation of color in scenes. Which is done specifically to manipulate our moods and responses.

I don't know. You may know all this. But if you don't and to give you an idea of how it's done in post, check out this old but good and still very applicable YT tutorial from Juan Melara.

Also go to Adobe and play around with their interactive color wheel to get ideas on what complementary palettes may work for the project you have in mind.

Chris Young

https://color.adobe.com/create/color-wheel

The Summer Blockbuster Colour Grading Tutorial - YouTube

I was ready for an exciting topic, but nothing happened. Has Ryan vanished again?

Looks like "Zip!"

Chris Young

I don't watch movies. For no reason other than they don't seem to make things I want to watch, so I'm immune to these colour fads. I don't make movies either, so all those presets and tweaks in premiere never get used. I'm just keen to render colours as they are, not change them. I even understand the art involved creating moods and emotions in the viewers, but am left thinking that the colourist is now the visual equivalent of the audiophile. Those well meaning but isolated folk who hear things others don't. Is this now what happens with image processing? They're aiming at at target normal people don't even notice?

In a recording studio somebody produces a piece of music, then it's recorded and mastered and ..... Done. Then the audiophiles turn that product into something people like me cannot hear, or if we can, like. Is this what happens now with movies? The actors do their stuff and its edited and tweaked, then it's tweaked for the few who even notice. I've been watching a copy of something up for an Oscar and my actor friend clearly hasn't noticed the toning that's been applied. It's mainly on location, and has made the end product bleak, cold and dismal, which to be fair, has been done well, but I don't like it.

Thank goodness I don't watch movies or own a posh hifi.

Ahh! In the school of fine art terms, you could be classed as a painter of images somewhere between Naturalism and Realism. On the other hand, depending on how you use light when you shoot, you may even be a bit of an impressionist like John Constable or Claude Monet. I tend to think along your lines :)

Chris Young

Claude Monet
The Terrace at St. Adresse.

... the audiophile. Those well meaning but isolated folk who hear things others don't. ...
In a recording studio somebody produces a piece of music, then it's recorded and mastered and ..... Done. Then the audiophiles turn that product into something people like me cannot hear, or if we can, like.

Paul, you must be hanging out with the wrong friends. ;-) The few folks I know who I consider (and who consider themselves) to be "audiophiles" favor either Blumlein or M/S depending on the nature of the musical performance (and somewhat depending on whether the product needs mono compatibility for broadcast). They would never consider further tweaking once the master is in the can, so to speak. Just give me a pair of C412s and I'm good to go.

Peace, out.

Don't get me started. I was thinking of a youtube video on reel to reels - and I got a Tascam 4ch and an old revox 4track out and played spotify on a playlist for a project I'm working on. I was monitoring off the Revox of tape output. I left it playing all morning, fiddling and faffing around and dcided I liked the off tape signal the best - good old analgue reel to reel. Just discovered I'd wired the things up back to front and the one I liked best was not off tape at all, but was direct from spotify. Failed! Maybe this intrigue with colour is the same thing? People see it, like it and convince themselves it's good and exciting. I wonder if they then replayed it with the switch off, seeing the real colours and might actually like it better?

My forte is audio (also my mezzo and piano) so I don't claim to be part of the "visuals" fraternity. But if colorists adjust the palette to create a mood, in my case the only mood created is "annoyed." In a prior life, I spent too many years adjusting monitors and projectors so color bars looked correct and everything matched. When I see munged-up colors today, I just want to grab some control and "fix things" so I can see the full spectrum where it ought to be. Besides, if I want to see everything looking gray and gloomy, I can just look out the window here in Pennsylvania.

I went off and watched a colourist video. He took some shots and tweaked the. With great care and attention, making subtle but once seen, obvious changes that really improved the images. Then, at the end, he then added the teal and the orange look and made it look horrible. I was immediately made to think of the audio mix process where you get it right with attention to detail, but once done, give it to a so called masting engineer who squashes the hell out of it to improve it and make it louder.

The executive producer must have seen that good grade and demanded an orange and teal look, because other films have that.