Search results

Sir: I was only expressing my opinion, which I tried to do in a respectful way, without getting personal. If I dug in my heals, then it was because I thought I was right. I could say the same thing about you, because you were equally tenacious. Your diligence has paid off and you've convinced...

Mr. Krupp: I respect your knowledge of Technicolor and your opinions, but just for fun, I'm going to get super nit-picky and point out what seems to me to be an inconsistency in your position on two-strip Technicolor. As I understand it, you claim that it should be the number of strips of...

I stand corrected on the publication date of Richard Haines book, it was 1993, as you said. Thanks for pointing out that error. Why his DOB was included with the publication information I don't know, but I admit that didn't read it carefully. I was out of high school by 1957 when Haines was...

Well, I'm nit-picking, but it was still two separate strips of film stuck together and the cement didn't work most of the time, the cement broke down under the arc light and the strips separated so often that Technicolor gave it a name, they called it "cupping". Cupping was so bad when they...

OLDTIMER: Yes, Technicolor Process one was an additive two-color system, which was both photographed and projected from a single strip of film, so it was indeed a single-strip, two-color process and not a two-strip process. However, from a broader perspective, Process One was a total failure...

I saw Follow Thru on the UCLA campus, more than 30 years ago, right after UCLA restored it. But, in my opinion, outdoor scenes just didn't work in two-strip Technicolor, the sky was not blue in Follow Thru when I saw the restoration, it was a washed out gray. At least, that's how it looked...