[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: "Dye-transfer process"
- To: 'multiple recipients of' <telecine at sun.alegria.com>
- Subject: RE: "Dye-transfer process"
- From: "Case, Dominic" <dominic_case at atlab.com.au>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 12:46:41 +1000
- Old-Return-Path: <dominic_case at atlab.com.au>
- Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 19:47:20 -0700 (PDT)
- Resent-From: telecine at sun.alegria.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <"inLPiB.A.dzC.zQGvz" at sun>
- Resent-Sender: telecine-request at sun.alegria.com
- Resent-To: multiple recipients of <telecine at sun.alegria.com>
> Why did Technicolor stop production?
I suspect it was cost rather than quality or aesthetics.
Production stopped in the early '70s. Remember this was the time that
cinema audiences were waning fast, and release print orders were much
smaller than they are today. Technicolor prints were apparently most
cost-effective for massive print runs, and apparently couldn't compete
with the simpler (?) Eastmancolor process. Also in the '60s and '70s
there was, regrettably, less concern about long life and dye fade. So,
economically, the Eastmancolor process drove the other out.
Maybe now that we are seeing 3,000 print orders, the process may be
deemed to be cost-effective again.
The concept of a locon Technicolor print for telecine is fascinating.
Dye responses are totally different from Eastman print dyes, so a new
masking setup will be needed. Question is, will the colour gamut of a
TV monitor be able to reproduce the distinct differences between
photographic and dye-transfer prints?
BTW thanks ST Nottingham III for a very informative posting on
mailinglist digest available......posting guidelines on the webpage