Is technicolor still used at all?

[DanielStone]

Somehow, I don't think so.

But I wanted to check none the less. I'm a nerd I guess, cause I stay after the movie's done just to see what the film was shot on, Fuji, Kodak, Panavision, etc....


being that Technicolor is a color separation process, isn't the color *more accurate* than the current methods of shooting color neg film and then scanning, and re-outputting to reversal film for display?

-Dan

[DanielStone]

*more accurate* from a color at the time of capture, I meant.

-Dan

[wildbill]

Technicolor isn't used anymore but I believe I saw a lawrence of arabia screening here a few years back projected in 3 strip technicolor. Of course, the lab Technicolor still exists.

[tiberiustibz]

I'm fairly sure it's the exact same thing. After all, color film is three layers of black and white film in one. Reversal film is less accurate because it isn't masked. I know that the technicolor printing process where they used dye transfer was restarted in the 90s because the look was popular. Toy Story was one of the movies that utilized it. The cameras are probably in museums or something. You can replicate technicolor for yourself using a panchromatic black and white film and three filters. By shooting three frames, one though a red, green and blue filter, and then combining those in photoshop or using screen printing or something like that, you can create a color image using just black and white film. I did it and it was pretty cool.

[Photo Engineer]

To reproduce accurate color, the capture process needs to include some method of masking to correct for unwanted color absorptions of the dyes. No positive system, to my knowledge, uses one. IDK if Technicolor did.

But, in addition to that, Pos-Pos reproduction is a "lossy" system that compresses data in the toe and shoulder during the print process. Neg-Pos processes are not and therefore survive multiple duplications without loss.

So, in regard to the OP, the color is not more accurate, but rather less accurate from a color rendition and a tone scale standpoint.

PE

[DanielStone]

so,

"back in the day", when "prints" were made, was it like we as still photographers make prints?

I totally understand the difference in latitude and compression rates of a neg-->pos vs pos-->pos system for reproduction.

but in the captions, when it mentions 'prints by deluxe', what does that mean exactly? surely they didn't enlarge EVERY negative, the hundreds of thousands, if not millions for a feature 90-120 minute film. but did they, or was it an automated process, with a machine?

thanks for all the help so far everyone

keep ideas coming, I'm enjoying this topic a lot!

-Dan

[MattKing]

The master is a negative, and is on long roll stock which is the same size as the film that is projected at your local multiplex.

The master is contact printed on to long roll print stock.

This is done using an automated machine.

Matt

[AgX]

To reproduce accurate color, the capture process needs to include some method of masking to correct for unwanted color absorptions of the dyes. No positive system, to my knowledge, uses one. IDK if Technicolor did.

But, in addition to that, Pos-Pos reproduction is a "lossy" system that compresses data in the toe and shoulder during the print process. Neg-Pos processes are not and therefore survive multiple duplications without loss.

So, in regard to the OP, the color is not more accurate, but rather less accurate from a color rendition and a tone scale standpoint.

PE

PE,
I don't understand your last point. Technicolor in its both versions (camera seperation films / camera three-layer film) is a Neg-Pos process.

[Michael W]

Good historical info about Technicolor here
Also some fascinating stuff about early colour processes in cinematography.

[Photo Engineer]

PE,
I don't understand your last point. Technicolor in its both versions (camera seperation films / camera three-layer film) is a Neg-Pos process.

If neither were masked, then rendition would be less accurate.

PE