technicolor

[bonanzataz]

somebody mentioned (i think it was mutinyco) that technicolor stopped printing technicolor film. you know that beautiful, soft yet extremely vibrant look that old movies shot in color have? the "technicolor" look. is it still possible to even get that today WITHOUT digital manipulation? i love the way that looks. if i ever got a budget or a good idea that would warrant it, i would love to shoot on technicolor. today's film looks so bland and ordinary. i hate crystal clear picture and that's why i hate dv. it's so fake looking. if i'm watching film, i want to know i'm watching film and not video. i love grain, i love little scratches on the film and specks of dust. "flawless" transfers on DVD's irk me sometimes. anyway, i'm straying off the topic. do any film companies still produce film stock that could make your movie look like Vertigo or Singin' in the Rain or old movies like that?

[mutinyco]

With regard to what you're talking about, it's not so much the stock you shoot on (although it certainly plays a big role), so much as what it's printed on. Traditional Technicolor was a 3-color system that printed the images onto clear strips making what was literally a transparency. It was like printing images in a magazine -- it was an actual PRINT. Nowadays what you're seeing is a positive image on actual film. It's a totally different process. I think The Godfather, Part II was the last American film to ever use traditional Technicolor before the system was sold to the CHINESE! It was only for Apocalypse Now Redux that Vittorio Storaro and Francis Coppola resurrected the old system, because Storaro wanted the colors to be as vibrant as possible. But I don't know how much of a future it will have. It's expensive and digital intermediaries are taking over with gorgeous results. Look at O Brother Where Art Thou? and Panic Room, among others. The movies are still shot and projected on film, they're just color corrected digitally.

[aclockworkjj]

Traditional Technicolor was a 3-color system that printed the images onto clear strips making what was literally a transparency. .

Is it kinda along the same graphic printing as RGB or CMYK???  I mean when you say 3-color process, is it silmilar in that aspect?

[mutinyco]

Yes. Exactly. Like RGB.

[pete]

to see recent technicolor works watch anything by Zhang Yimou, especially the upcoming "Hero" with Jet Li.  Beautiful lush colors.

[mutinyco]

That would be because Technicolor sold its system to China in the '70s.

[Xixax]

Pete's sig gives me the willies. I dunno why.

[Xixax]

Way to kill a good thread, Michael... So I'll freshen.

Is Pete still around? He has done some nice work...

I'd really be interested to read more about the technicolor process.

As a layman, I've always just assumed that film was always just a positive image on the celluloid strip and light was shined through it, just like a slide.

But after reading this thread, and the discussion of (if I understand correctly) THREE strips of film to project a single image, that seems really interesting to me. Were the three strips bonded together and then a single light shone through them, or were there three projectors (one for each color) aimed and calibrated and timed and focused just precisely?

[mutinyco]

It's not 3 strips of film, but 3 layers of color on a transparent strip. It's like doing magazine printing. It's literally a print of the image -- as opposed to a positive film image.

[pete]

I'm still around.  working on a fight scene with my friends right now, cut together a tiny rehearsal sequence here:
http://neo-modus.com/stuntpeople/pete
but otherwise I'm just doing school stuff and writing for a lotta things.
with nothing to contribute to the technicolor talk except to read this month's american cinematographer magazine in which Christopher Doyle talks about shooting hero and the colors and stuff.