[rollei_list] Re: ...Kodachromes taken 50 years ago "Processed by Technicolor R"
- From: Richard Knoppow <dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 12:59:01 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
At some point Kodak began licensing others to process Kodachrome,
evidently Technicolor was one of them. However, the process was exactly the
same as Kodak used in its own processing plants. Technicolor was a completely
different process. Tech ended the use of their original three-strip color
separation cameras about 1951 and began using conventional color negative film
for the originals. These, however, continued to be printed using the
Technicolor "dye imbibition" or dye transfer process until it was also
discontinued, I think about 1980 (not sure of this date). Tech provided lab
services to the motion picture industry and also had a still processing
division. FWIW, Technicolor had a long relationship with Kodak who made most
of the specialized film materials for them.
Another FWIW, the Technicolor process could be adjusted to produce all
sorts of "looks" including quite subdued color. The very vivid color those of
us of a certain age associate with Technicolor was mainly due to market
research on audience preference. I am not sure but think Kodak may have done
the same thing with Kodachrome which was similarly very vivid. Technicolor
prints seem to be very long lived because of the types of dyes used and, of
course, the three-strip originals were B&W silver images. Technicolor worked
well because there were very dedicated people there who made it work, it could
look just awful if not done very carefully. Eventually, the equipment at the
Cole Ave plant in Hollywood just wore out so they dropped the process.
Technicolor was economical for very large runs of prints but at the time it was
discontinued the industry typically made only a couple of hundred release
prints at which volume Tech had a hard time competing with multi-layer films.
I believe "Taxi Driver" was the last feature to be printed using the IB
process.
--
Richard Knoppow
dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Los Angeles, CA, USA
-----Original Message-----
>From: CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Aug 8, 2014 12:44 PM
>To: "rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [rollei_list] ...Kodachromes taken 50 years ago "Processed by
>Technicolor R"
>
>I had not payed attention to the Kodachrome slides frame data. They
>say in one of the sides "KODACHROME Transparency", "Processed by
>TECHNICOLOR R" (with the circle meaning Registered Trade Mark); the
>other side says "Made in U.S.A. P.701" , the number of slide in the
>batch is also printed in red (f.e. 1,2,3...) and even more
>interesting, it is engraved on each frame (via pressure on the
>cardboard, without ink) the slide process date: The 18 Kodachrome
>slides in the little box were processed in "DEC 59" (December 1959)
>and belong to the same roll. I suspect some other slides in the box
>with plastic frames are also Kodachrome from this batch, because it
>was necessary to replace the cardboard frame sometimes, when it became
>broken or jammed during the projection.
>
>"Processed by TECHNICOLOR R", could be the explanation for the vivid
>colors these slides showed when they were new, Technicolor process
>evolved and improved from 1916 to give and /or to improve colors for
>movies and it was also applied to improve color vividness for films of
>still photography too.
>
>Carlos
>
>2014-08-06 12:20 GMT-03:00 CarlosMFreaza <cmfreaza@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> One of my sisters found a box containing some K 14 35mm Kodachrome
>> slides taken by my father between 1958 and 1962, the box also
>> contained some E-6 35mm Ektachrome slides taken by me when I was 16
>> and 17 years old (1972/73). We believed all these old slides were lost
>> and, in fact, most of them are lost, but these few slides in the
>> little box have some of the magic from the old times, when, as
>> fascinated kids and teenagers, watched the projected images .
>>
>> The slides show very faded colors, dust, scratches and some units have
>> fungus and humidity stains too, anyway four or five Kodachromes look
>> pretty good, I don't know the cause for the difference, they are from
>> the same time, same lab an were kept in the same box.
>>
>> I'm scanning them using the infrared cleaning option, Vuescan works
>> fine for the purpose, at least a lot better than the Epson Digital ICE
>> software. Vuescan eliminates most of the scratches and dust; BTW, it
>> can not solve problems if the image was destroyed in the emulsion
>> itself.
>>
>> The scanning software options to restore faded colors and chromatic
>> losses hardly work to improve the image quality for these cases, most
>> of the slides need very much work with levels and curves; I'm
>> having some acceptable results for a few slides but others are beyond
>> my limited skills and knowledge, I think I'll convert them into Blank
>> and White images.
>>
>> Carlos
>---
>Rollei List
>
>- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
>- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
>- Online, searchable archives are available at
>//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
