The easy explanation for that is that the camera was still at the time. It split's up into primary colours when you move it.
Gav, it may seem to you that this is an "easy" explanation, but the important point is whether or not it is a valid explanation.
1. Can gold actually be split up into the primary colors?
Gold is not the combination of red, yellow and blue - the primary colors. Gold is essentially yellow (primary color) and sometimes yellow-orange (primary color yellow combined with primary color red create the color orange)
2. Is it actually primary colors that are seen in the relevant sections of the video clip?
In the image below, for example, there are blue-green, white and flesh tones visible. These are not primary colors - in fact, white is created by all the primary colors combined together.
3. Is camera movement actually occuring throughout the relevant (suggested areas of LM gold) segments of footage?
Look at the gif clip below, or the actual online clip here...
At about 2:06 in the online clip, also seen in the gif clip below, the camera moves to the right and stops momentarily before moving back to the left.
The image below is seen during this time - when there is almost no camera movement...
There is no splitting up into primary colors in the above image, nor is there any gold mylar, while there is very little camera movement.
4. Are there any examples of the colors being split up into primaries elsewhere in the clip?
No. In fact, there is a lot of white seen in the clip while the camera is moving about, but they aren't split up into primary colors at all.
Sorry, Gav, but I don't find the "moving camera making gold split up into primary colors" theory even remotely valid.
Edited by turbonium, 01 October 2006 - 08:42 AM.