Technicolor films on DVD (1 Viewer)

[Filip Plesha]

Nope. If by filmed you mean shot in camera (and I can't think of any other meaning of the word "filmed"), then no.
Last technicolor film was shot in 1954 and released in 1955.

The later films still had "color by technicolor" in them, but that ment that technicolor developed the Eastmancolor Kodak negative, and made dye transfer prints out of them.

Suspiria was like any other color film of that time shot on color negative film, and was printed with dye transfer process.


I find if funny when people comment on how technicolor films from late 50's and 60's look great on DVD, when in fact the image on the DVD comes from color negatives/positives, which have nothing to do with dye transfer printing process.
Sure, technicolor did a great job processing the negative, and you can thank "color by technicolor" for a well developed clean looking negative, but any other lab doing the processing by the book would give the same kind of image. The color is not "by technicolor", it's "by Kodak" really.
So on DVD, if the film is processed properly it makes no difference wheather color is "by deluxe" or "by technicolor" or warnercolor or any other first class lab.

"color by technicolor" ment something to moviegoers because for them that logo really ment something, it ment that they were seeing dye transfer prints.

But for DVD transfers is only means "color not screwed up by dirty chemistry"


So suspiria wasn't filmed in technicolor anymore than "the family man" or "godzilla" were filmed in technicolor. Both of these newer films had some prints made on the new technicolor process #6 that is now discontinued, this time probably for good.

 

[Jim Peavy]

Huh; I was under the assumption Suspiria was shot using three-strip Technicolor, with the three matrices used to adjust the color in the final printing stage. That's what I've heard, anyway. I've definitely heard Suspiria was not filmed and/or processed "like any other color film of that time".

Back to Wax Museum on DVD: is it true this has been digitally tinkered with on the disc? Hard to believe Warners would mess with the colors (or they'd even go to the trouble). But I definitely see blue on the disc, and I wonder how you can get blue out of two-color (red and green) Technicolor. I'd love to hear from some experts on this (Mr. Harris?).

 

[Damin J Toell]

This seems to be a lingering artifact of Anchor Bay's misleading documentary, which incorrectly juxtaposes cinematographer Luciano Tovoli with a 3-strip camera. The film had dye-transfer prints during its original release, that's it. The only thing that makes Suspiria notable at all in this regard is that it was one of the last films to have such prints struck at the time (the US dye transfer facility closed in 1975 (a reprint of Swiss Family Robinson was the last domestic print done there, and The Godfather Part II was apparently the last new domestic release), while the British facility closed in 1978). The equipment was sold to China.

Technicolor briefly brought back dye-transfer printing in the late 1990s, but it was defunct again by 2002. I was lucky enough to see Apocalypse Now Redux via a dye-transfer print, at least.

And, please, don't anyone let Vincent Pereira know that someone was confused about Suspira and 3-strip Technicolor.

DJ

 

[Filip Plesha]

Every film transfer has to be "messed with" in order to make the colors acceptable for DVD or TV.
You can't just put a negative in the telecine machine and record that to some video format.
Every transfer requires a new color timing, just like when you are making prints.
So every transfer gets a new color job, supervised either by the director and/or cinematographer, or by looking at archival IB prints (in case of older films) and trying to match that.

 

[Charles Ellis]

Have Blood & Sand and Becky Sharp been released on DVD yet?

 

[Will Krupp]

There is a public domain BECKY SHARP dvd available, but this is taken from the horrible horrible public domain prints struck in two-color Cinecolor.

The beautiful UCLA restoration has never seen a commercial release on VHS, laser, or dvd. It shows up on TCM every so often, but the telecast version seems heavily digitized, for lack of a better word.

The best television presentation of the restoration was in 1993, when AMC used it as the centerpiece to their film preservation series. It looked wonderful then (and I was lucky enough to tape it at the time.)

 

[Jack Theakston]

If you're lucky to have the director still around, that's fine, but there's no saying that he will be correct from memory-- it will be a revised version of the film because of this aspect.

Restorationists try not to rely on dye-transfer prints as a color timing source because of (1) the high-contrast factor involved in the printing process will ultimately be different than that of the eastman low-con transfer element and (2) while dye-transfer was a great archival system, it led to a variety of hues from print to print, particularly on older films.

No two IB nitrates I have compared have ever looked the same. Unless the film was a big production and the studio was willing to throw out the fluke prints, you would see a wild variety of timing, even in the big venues-- although depending on the studio, vault prints were usually OKed by the director.

I'm going to say what really should be reiterated on this board more often: there is no such thing as "perfect presentation" of a film at any venue any time for simple economic reasons. Some people like to nitpick about ever-so-off aspect ratios-- yet I sympathize with those who are talking about blatently WRONG aspect ratios--, others color balance... if you went to 100 different theaters for any film, even today, you would see 100 slight variations of a film.

No theater I know of have a perfectly cut 1.85 plate (there honestly is no such thing as the perfect 1.85 ratio, only ~1.85), and outside of the digital realm --and even inside-- every print of every film I've ever compared doubles of have had slightly different (albeit some dead on) variation. Directors know this and that's why there's such a thing as "action protect" and "title protect" areas within films.

Back on topic, equally bizzare are people who will complain of a slight shift in color between two editions of ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD, claiming that it's still not colorful enough when they've never seen an original print and would be shocked to see how pastel colors were represented in original release prints.

 

[Jim Peavy]

Except for you, of course; right?

 

[Filip Plesha]

Except for you, of course; right?


Have I said anything that is untrue yet?

 

[Arnie G]

I can't find an area to discuss books so I thought I might ask if anyone has a book called Glorious Technicolor: The Movies' Magic Rainbow; Ninetieth Anniversary Edition and their thoughts on it.

 

[Charles Ellis]

It's out at BORDERS. A very big coffeetable book that tells the company's history up to today, with a lot of color plates illustrating the various versions of Technicolor and the films that used them. For instance you'll see frame enlargements from the early (red-green) Technicolor films like The Toll Of The Sea, The Black Pirate, and Mystery Of The Wax Museum. And of course for the three-strip era there's GWTW and other blockbusters. And at the end of the book is a listing of EVERY film that was either shot or printed in Technicolor.

 

[Arnie G]

Thanks for the info Charles. I think I'll get it. I couldn't find any reviews for it but it looks like it will be cool. I have a Borders coupon for 25% off! :p)

 

[Charles Ellis]

Be prepared to spend mucho dinero- it's a big book. Check out the BORDERS website, or Barnes & Noble, or even Amazon as to the actual size and price.

 

[Robert Harris]

While the Basten book is certainly interesting and has some nice illustrations, it is not a consummate source.

The listing of productions by year make no inference as to whether something was three-strip or Eastman color or printed dye transfer or direct positive.

RAH

 

[Charles Ellis]

Thanks for the heads-up, Mr. Harris! I'm forever in debt for what you did for Lawrence Of Arabia, My Fair Lady and other classics!! What other Technicolor classics are being restored as we speak?

 

[Arnie G]

Thanks for the info Robert. Is there a better book on the subject you would recommend?

 

[Robert Harris]

The Basten book is probably the most interesting out there. Richard Haines has done a smaller and more technical tome, which is also available.

RAH

 

[Will Krupp]

I have the original edition of the Basten book (from about 20 years ago.) Is it worth picking up the anniversary edition? I wonder what the differences are. Thanks for the tip about it. I'll have to check it out.

Mr. Harris is correct about it being interesting but far from complete. Martin Hart's website clears up a lot of points left vague in Basten's book, and the era from the 1940's onward is rushed and lacking in detail.

It's still a great addition to any library.

 

[Sean Patrick]

from imdb about suspiria :

It is often incorrectly assumed that, to achieve the rich color palette, the film was shot using the outdated 3-strip Technicolor process. This is untrue: no film after the mid-1950s was shot using this method. The film was instead shot on normal Eastman Color Kodak stock and was then printed using the 3-strip Technicolor process, utilizing one of the last remaining machines. This issue has been confused somewhat by the fact that, on the 25th anniversary documentary featured in the 3-disc DVD set, a discussion of the printing process by cinematographer Luciano Tovoli was incorrectly followed by a diagram showing a 3-strip camera.

 

[Muir Hewitt]

I'm hopeful that one day Warner Bros will release Doctor X and The Mystery of The Wax Museum, as a double bill on DVD. The problem is, of course, that the DVD of House Of Wax contains Mystery as an extra, but I was hoping that following the death of Fay Wray, that someone was going to use her death as a good reason to bring some remastered prints of her other movies onto the DVD format, apart from King Kong as a tribute to this great star!