8mm Forum: Eastmancolor film

This is topic Eastmancolor film in forum General Yak at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=003822

Posted by Dave Groves (Member # 4685) on February 06, 2016, 11:21 AM:

I guess just about all of us have suffered the dreaded Eastmancolor fade. When did the change to this stock take place and how long were prints produced before it was discovered what was happening? Was other stock being used during the same period and did any lab continue to produce prints that have not been affected by fading?

Posted by David Pringle (Member # 5158) on February 06, 2016, 11:36 AM:

Have a look at this History of colour motion picture film
It mentions 1950 as the date of introduction Eastman and 10 yrs before fading was noticed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRheZ_MUYiY

Posted by Dave Groves (Member # 4685) on February 06, 2016, 12:20 PM:

Thanks David. An interesting item indeed that I hadn't come across. 1952 seems to be the year Eastmancolor made strides but how did this affect 16mm prints. Did everything just move across until the fading problem reared it's ugly head?

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on February 06, 2016, 01:17 PM:

I remember in the very good documentary, "Glorious Technicolor" (and extra DVD in the two disc set of "The Adventures of Robin Hood), that, when eastmancolor first started being used, those who worked in the cameras in Hollywood immediately noticed the difference.

One professional cameraman was attempted to photograph a star and when he looked at the developed prints, her lips were the color of liver. No matter what lipstick was used, it looked like various shades of liver, where Technicolor always great a very accurate rendering of whatever was used on the lips.

Posted by Joe Vannicola (Member # 4156) on February 06, 2016, 09:48 PM:

When I started collecting 16mm tv spots, someone joked that Eastman prints began to turn color the moment it left the lab.

Posted by Brian Fretwell (Member # 4302) on February 07, 2016, 06:23 AM:

I suspect the studio bosses knew and thought "It's cheaper and as long as the prints do the release circuit before they fade, who cares?!!!"

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on February 08, 2016, 12:26 PM:

Well, actually, it's pretty good thinking, from a business standpoint. After all, who would collect faded prints? [Roll Eyes]

Posted by Mitchell Dvoskin (Member # 1183) on February 09, 2016, 12:41 PM:

Kodak's History Of Motion Picture Film Stocks

Posted by Mathew James (Member # 4581) on February 09, 2016, 02:37 PM:

Here is a URL some have referenced before in regards to film stock. It is very informative as well.
http://www.paulivester.com/films/filmstock/guide.htm

Posted by Dave Groves (Member # 4685) on February 10, 2016, 04:33 AM:

Thanks guys for the info and the links. I now know a bit more about the story behind the catastrophe.

Posted by William Olson (Member # 2083) on February 10, 2016, 06:54 PM:

Nothing beats real technicolor. Although Kodachrome was a reversal stock, its processing was probably closer to the Technicolor process than any other stock of its kind. That probably explains the gorgeous color and long shelf life.

Posted by Brian Fretwell (Member # 4302) on February 11, 2016, 05:15 AM:

Yes, neither Technicolor of Kodachrome had colour couplers and dye formers in the emulsion, both could use more stable dyes after/during processing.

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2