Quote Originally Posted by MattKing
Thinking back to conversations with my father, I believe I recall him saying that the Kodak labs would process their Kodachrome and Ektachrome to slightly different targets, depending on where they were located. As a result, it may have been the case that film processed by Kodak Japan would be more flattering to Japanese complexions then film processed in, e.g, Palo Alto, California.

I believe they would also vary somewhat at different times of the year - summer photography and Christmas photography have different tendencies.

You have to remember, of course, that this was at a time (the late 1960s to the early 1980s) when slide film and movie film volumes were huge, because many amateurs with very basic photographic needs were using those materials.

The other thing I remember when I see comparisons of this type between Kodak and Fuji is an observation of my father's - one of Kodak's largest markets for film and processing was in Japan, and they were very interested in maintaining that.
Not really germane to the topic I know but having started colour neg printing recently, I have started to see( real or imagined) colour casts in pictures be they still or motion pictures.

I am sure I have read somewhere that Kodak used to tend to have a cold bluish look, Fuji was warm and Agfa was fairly neutral and a little more muted than the other two. It was said this reflected how the respective nations producing them "saw" colour.

Certainly I remember thinking in the 1950s how motion pictures which were "Eastman or Deluxe" were much cooler than Technicolor which was always the film of choice for epic westerns. Colours were always saturated. Skies were deep blue and everybody was tanned. Shadows never had that blue look about them.I think Eastman was Kodak but I don't know about Deluxe or Technicolor.

I watched a film recently on U.K. tv called "Mulholland Falls" with Nick Nolte and it was a police crime drama with a political overtone set in California in the early 1950s. I am sure it wasn't my imagination that made me think it had an overall cool blue cast despite it being sunny. It seemed to capture the period very well and I had assumed that the producer was trying to replicate films of that period.

Any technical historians of film out there care to educate me?