No I had never heard of flexichrome but googled it. Looks interesting
:)https://www.etsy.com/listing/222329304/kodak-flexichrome-process-vintage-colors?show_sold_out_detail=1&frs=1
The point I was trying to make RE: the article was that the rendering of tones
is just that. It's a technical issue that was dealt with as it could be given
the materials then as well as now.The author is trying to manufacture a
relationship between film manufacturing, sensors and her original topic where
none exists.
On Sunday, April 28, 2019 1:56 AM, `Richard Knoppow
<dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I passed it along because I rarely see pieces about
photography and thought it might be of some interest. The person
writing it assumed a lot of things about commercial photography
that are not true. I've seen many other news feature pieces about
other things that had the same problem; the writer was not
personally familiar with the technology.
Fuji film was popular in the motion picture industry for a
time mainly because it was cheaper than Kodak.
Also, in the bad old days there were a lot of hand colored
B&W. The very best looked like color photos or even oil
paintings. Most looked like what they were; tinted photos. I
tried hand coloring a couple of times but could never get the
hang of it.
Does anyone remember Kodak Flexichrome?
On 4/27/2019 7:43 AM, (Redacted sender msampson45 for DMARC) wrote:
Worth noting, as well, that the portrait business never used=============================================================================================================
color transparency film. It was B/W until color negative film was
introduced c.1950.
Remember that their end product was a print- something
transparency film never did well. Slide film was for advertising,
editorial, and family slide shows.
Mark
