Quote Originally Posted by falotico View Post
I went out to see the HFR (High Frame Rate) presentation of the "Hobbit" in 3D and Imax. The movie is projected at 48 frames per second, which can be done with the new digital cameras/projectors. This was positively the worst motion picture image I have ever seen for a newly released major motion picture. It looked like a videotape of a television studio production. EVERY INTERIOR SET LOOKED ARTIFICIALLY LIT! You could see the make-up on all the actors and all the colors were unsatisfying; thin. This will kill off HFR for the time being.

By contrast, the best motion picture color image I have seen in the last few years was a showing of a nitrate Technicolor dye-transfer 35mm print of a 1944 US Army film about the WACs (Women's Army Corps) made to encourage enlistment in WWII. This showed thousands of people and all the faces looked beautiful. Only dye-transfer Technicolor could make actors look younger and thinner. Most cinemas are not licensed to show nitrate and the surviving prints are rare, so few people on Earth can really say they know what these DT prints look like. I believe they are the finest moving color image process.

I know that there are a lot of EK loyalists out there, but Kodak has never produced a color image as good. But remember, Technicolor used EK black and white film stock for image acquisition; used EK manufactured matrices for the dye-transfer process; and imbibed the dyes onto EK release print stock. So Technicolor was actually an offshoot of EK products.

Digital motion pictures are like electric guitars compared to classical violins.
Man you make my mouth water the way you describe the nitrite... Mmm haha


Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1, 5DmkII / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk