|
Author
|
Topic: what to do with red prints?
|
|
|
Timothy Ramzyk
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 220
From: Milwaukee,WI,USA
Registered: Nov 2006
|
posted January 31, 2013 08:40 PM
quote:
I suppose I think along Shorty's train of thought that perhaps
a bath of blue dye, then yellow would help towards restoring
the colours ( if this were possible, remember this is wishful thinking ) or maybe a tinted projection lamp perhaps in conjunction with a certain filter.
Well, I'm afraid it's a matter of not being able to retrieve whats gone for good. A color film image is part due to the original exposure, and partly due to chemical reactions that bring those colors out of the the film. When those colors fade away, they just aren't there to be retrieved any longer.
That's why red prints are not only lacking color, but appear lighter and flat, with a decreased range of contrast.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Timothy Ramzyk
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 220
From: Milwaukee,WI,USA
Registered: Nov 2006
|
posted February 01, 2013 02:47 AM
It's a funny thing, most mediums hit their peak just as they fall into permanent decline. There is a world of difference between the image quality capable on the first laserdisc, VHS, DVD... from the last. Same held true for film, those eventual low-fade stocks that Derann used in the last 10 years waay out-shined the 80's Super color titles I bought, and they will no doubt outlast them all in color.
It's sounds like technology in reverse, but as I suggested earlier, it would probably be possible now, to strike beautiful LLP Super 8 prints with a digital HD exposure, there's just no economic incentive to develop such a process, though in the long run it would probably boil the cost of making prints down to just a matter of the positive film-stock.
If I were a wealthy man, I'd love to finance such an experiment, but alas, I can even afford to dream about it.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
[ February 01, 2013, 01:43 PM: Message edited by: Timothy Ramzyk ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Joe Caruso
Film God
Posts: 4105
From: USA
Registered: Jun 2003
|
posted February 01, 2013 11:25 AM
Call me crazy - Like throwing out an old comic book because the colors fade? You can't always buy another and if you do, it will be at a premium - You can't (unless you're well-financed), always buy another print of a rare film - Then, how is it, on some Eastman stock (travelogues, as example), I cracked open the original cellophane on some, and the prints looks as good as when it was manufactured near forty years past; Vibrant, Spectacular and True - I ramble on - Would never throw out an old recording, just because it's worn, nor an old toy because it don't work - There is some value to all these as well as red prints - You don't hear of a 16 collector tossing a grainy original of a Hal Roach short, just to get a Dupont - Point is, my opinion, keep them - Shorty - And yes, cyan filtering helps
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rob Young.
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1633
From: Cheshire, U.K.
Registered: Dec 2003
|
posted February 01, 2013 11:49 AM
Joe, I'm nostalgic too, but red prints, especially 16mm were made to serve a purpose and that purpose is done. (I'm not talking about rare or valuable prints).
The film lives on in new, better versions, so why hoard it?
If new versions weren't genuinely better (like throwing out film and replacing it with VHS, for example) I'd understand, but so much hard work has gone into providing new, better versions of films that worn out old prints have now served their purpose and to keep hold of them, to me, seems just somehow retentive.
I'm a big film advocate and I still love my vinyl record collection, so I'm not in the habit of dumping old technology for new, but there is a great A.A. Milne quote (from Winnie The Pooh, if I'm not mistaken) which I tend use as a judge of hoarding;
"If it isn't broke, don't fix it...if it is very broke, don't fix it either"...
| IP: Logged
|
|
Osi Osgood
Film God
Posts: 10204
From: Mountian Home, ID.
Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted February 01, 2013 02:53 PM
If it can be found, (as it was on this forum years ago), there actually was a patended process by which color was supposed to be able to be corrected on fading film. I remember seeing the drawings for the machine, (from the original patent paperwork, I think).
Now, I don't know if anyone was ever able to construct this "box", but what I believe it was was some form of chemical bath that was supposed to either restore, re-balance or re-apply the missing layers that have faded.
(Now, I know that there will be a mad dash by some on here to try to retrieve that series of posts, but it was rather interesting).
While I would of course be in favor of this kind of machine being built and used, (could you imagine the business this person would get from collectors who want to restore precious prints?!) ... but I do have a thought on this ...
Someone has mentioned, not too far back that, while you may be able to restore a layer that has been compromised, would you also be able to restore the "contrast" and such of that layer which, If I understand correctly, is a characteristic of that specific color layer?
Thoughts folks?
--------------------
"All these moments will be lost in time, just like ... tears, in the rain. "
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Timothy Ramzyk
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 220
From: Milwaukee,WI,USA
Registered: Nov 2006
|
posted February 02, 2013 02:31 AM
quote:
Osi Osgood - If it can be found, (as it was on this forum years ago), there actually was a patended process by which color was supposed to be able to be corrected on fading film. I remember seeing the drawings for the machine, (from the original patent paperwork, I think).
I remember hearing a whiff of this elsewhere a few years back, but then I never heard anything about it again. I'd think studios, and archives would have been very eager to get such a process off the ground for problematic elements, where other means of restoration were not feasible due to fading.
For this to be possible the must be some sort of record of the faded color still in the emulsion, or the initial exposure, that isn't visible to the naked eye, but that can be brought out with chemistry. Almost as if you were "re-developing" a lost color.
I'd love for it to be true, and I'd love to see a before and after demo, but I also think if it were true I would have? Maybe if it can be done it's so laborious that treating thousands of feet of film isn't feasible?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Thompson Scott
Film God
Posts: 3063
From: Gt. Clifton,Cumbria,England
Registered: Jan 2012
|
posted February 02, 2013 09:39 AM
Hi Rob, there's also another slant on that old saying, "If it isn't
broken, break it", ala Tony Blair & the Labour Party.
There's no way that I would throw a red print of a favoured film,
at least not until it could be replaced with better, and I STILL
have DVD as back up.No with the application of a couple of
gels, they can still be enjoyed.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Timothy Ramzyk
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 220
From: Milwaukee,WI,USA
Registered: Nov 2006
|
posted February 02, 2013 02:02 PM
quote:
Has anyone ever seen an explanation of the chemical breakdown that happens with dye losses? Do the mutant substances just evaporate into thin air, or are they still incorporated into the emulsion, albeit clear? If the latter, too bad there is no known calalyst to rejoin the broken molecules.
Well, any film would fade it were exposed to light indefinitely, but as most are only illuminated for one 24th of a second, that's not what's going on. They fade in the dark, which to me says chemical instability.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
