Zip Doodah

I didn’t mean to break any rules here- and I apologize if my message was interpreted as that.

I like the fans of course and just like the idea of a good version available on the film, as you all do. I would not want that version to be available everywhere, and have the profiteers start going around to conventions with it.

I’ve personally never made a profit off a ‘preservation’ film transfer. The people who contributed to help with the transfers did help, but it never covered the actual costs. Transfer is expensive!

Clearly some members of this forum are willing to share pms on a public forum; I’m astonished by that.

I do like the blu-ray edition- but somehow seeing the film in IB with the grain intact is different…

There is a 35mm IB Tech transfer of Disney’s Pinocchio on BDR- grain intact, except it goes out of focus for a few minutes during the puppet show.

No comment.

Sounds cool- but how do I *do* this? I'm working in after effects. So- does anyone know how to take 2 b/w channels, combine them and have an adjustable color for each channel?

I've been playing with channel mixer a bit- and am able to bring both files together and give them a color- but the adjustments are  on ONE of the two color layers, with no indication of how to change my color levels...this is new territory to me!

Hello list…

I need advice!

I’m working on recombining an old Cinecolor cartoon. I’ve transferred the 2 b/w records of the film (one red color, one blue/green). I’ve been taking the two sections into after effects, but so far I haven’t figure out how to combine them successfully- and get the adjustment to match the original look. Any suggestions on how to combine two color records effectively?

I'm offering the 35mm IB tech transfer from previous posts. Funds from the sale will be used to defray the transfer cost. It's on a DVD. It's also being offered as an HD mpeg.

PM me for details, and thanks for your work on this project!

Spaced Ranger said:

. Also, I was suspicious of the 35mm's shaded shirt color compared to the 16mm's properly flat, painted cel color:

 

 

 

A quick thought on the 'properly' painted shirt- and, to calm your suspicions (!) it looks like that on the IB print.

A standard Eastmancolor print (like the one you're using and comparing to) looked very different in the first place from the original IB technicolor release. Even a 1971 IB release print looks different than a 1946 original release Nitrate technicolor print- and very different from the Eastman versions. You've actually lost more green and yellow in the Eastmancolor print than can even be recovered from that copy, though I give you huge kudos for trying.  Something that needs to be considered about 'accurate' colors on the cels versus the original film is how the Technicolor process worked in the first place- so 'accurate' is thrown out the window entirely since the process NEVER reproduced the color spectrum in any kind of accurate way, in animation or in live action- that's just a basic fact. That said, the Eastman print projected side by side when it was brand new next to a Technicolor print would look drastically different- and did since it was a contact print from a single color neg compared to Technicolor's 3 neg dye transfer process. Color wedges were made of scenes to determine what certain colors would reproduce as in the technicolor process, then painted a color up or down to reproduce the wanted color in the process. This was the only way to do it then.  About four years after this film was made Eastman's single color neg allowed a less bulky camera to be used finally for live action, with a single strip of film.  Animation was shot progressively- that is, the three color records were shot next to each other on a single strip of film, with the filter wheel turning for each frame, creating the three color records. Technicolor would then take these three records and make the three seperate color negs from those. The printing process using ink created film that looks more like color printing in a magazine from the era rather than a color photograph. Technicolor also often (especially in the early years) took the red negative and made a faze in b/w to boost the contrast on reds (just in live action). So, accurate becomes entirely in how you define it!  My thinking is that the closest to 'accurate' would be to have the film look as close as possible to the look of the actual Technicolor release- as gaudy and bright as it is..

poita said:

Do you still have the IB print?

I'd love someone to take a look at the film on a lightbox or project it and let us know if the girl at the end of Reel 4 and at the start of Reel 5 have that much colour disparity on the film, or if it is due to different settings when scanned.

I looked at my notes about the transfer and pulled the 35mm out as well. Reel 4 and 5 have the same setting throughout the transfer, and looking at the 35mm frames of the film the color shift is fairly accurately represented in the transfer.  Technicolor had of course limited tools to do color correction, and it seems they usually used filters to match other elements in a scene. So, the answer is that it's actually like that on the actual prints. Other prints may vary as well. When you're collecting film you'll often have two different looks between reels, though prints from the same year/run look pretty identical color-wise (you can match them frame for frame if you have two from the same year). Collectors often complain that Technicolor got sloppy the last few years of printing (they stopped the process in 74- the last film to come out in IB was the Godfather part 2, although the printing technique was used in China for many years afterwords and in England (there are IB prints of Jaws, Star Wars and Empire Strikes Back-but not US prints)). Turner struck new IB tech prints of Gone with the Wind in 1997 or so. A handful of prints were struck of Apocalypse Now redux in IB technicolor even more recently- and it looks absolutely astonishing.

There will be an offer to the list of an unrestored animated feature soon to help finally defray the cost of transfer- and the original hd file to a few of you folks to work with.

From the end of reel 4

From the beginning of reel 5- Technicolor variance is displayed pretty well between these two scenes!

This seems like a good route to go. Perhaps an offer of the 'raw' transfer in SD for now and the cleaned up version when finished as a bdr and a standard disc. 

I'm debating on how to make the available work on this. Right now there are 5 1920x1080 prores quicktime files- those are the top quality from the transfer. I had thought of making the same offer here as the fundraiser was to help make the transfer (a DVD plus an HD Mpeg-4 quicktime that fits on a seperate dvd)  but I also like the idea of a few folks here cleaning it up further before making it available. Thoughts?

I also like the idea that if there is this much effort put in that it would be much nicer to start with much better material as this transfer has....

poita said:

CA is common on the Shadow unit, misregistered printing as part of the technicolor process usually presents quite differently, and the one-light transfer is responsible for the crush.

Do you still have the print BTW? i.e. could it be scanned again?

I have never heard that and don't understand how that could be. The Shadow is a line array scanner, like the Spirit- so there would be no ability for misaligned or color creep of any kind really. I would be interested in seeing how CA is common on the shadow, as I can't find anything to suggest that. What is clear is that particular shots vary in alignment on the 1971 print. :) 

I don't think the color issue we're seeing in this particular shot has to do with the telecine at all in this case- just a shot with not quite as aligned color, so very common on Technicolor prints. We're luck in that most of the print has much better alignment of color overall

Some of the issues with Technicolor film are related to how the process worked, both in filming and in printing. 2 of the 3 negs running through a Technicolor Camera were bi-packed, the third color record was recorded with a prism. There were huge baffles all around the camera to keep it quieter since they were quite noisy. All three strips were of course black and white film. The lab would then make a raised neg from these materials, then they were printed in a similar manner as a magazine or book. There was a great issue years ago of a magazine called 'The perfect Image' that had a great article on Technicolor.  The shifts we are seeing in color is just as the actual print is.. and watching color shifts happen from scene to scene is common in a technicolor film print. None of this has much to do with the Telecine process in all likely-hood, through the blacks may be crushed in one shot in telecine, then fine in the next since it's only a one light transfer...

Technicolor went to a single Eastmancolor neg somewhere right around 1950 or 51. The real value of those older Technicolor records is that they preserve the color in separations, so they won't 'lose' color photochemically at all... 

The other hard thing to recreate in a photochemical fade is the color that just isn't there anymore. You've lost a range of yellow and blue in this print that just won't come back, sadly. In dealing with color correction on a lot of 'red' or 'pink' eastman material, I've found often the best you can get from yellows or blues is a lighter version of the color without much saturation. I am geeking out a bit seeing what you folks are able do though. 

What does 'CA' mean?

That particular frame sure looks bright and oversaturated- but that's how that scene is on the actual print! 

The transfer was done on a Shadow Telecine using a Da Vinci 2k for color adjust/ correction. A fairly standard setup for professional Telecine. A basic level was set at the beginning of each reel based directly on the color of the actual film- so it wasn't 'pumped' really....it's a fairly accurate representation of what an IB print of the film looks like. Wherever it ended up on the scope was a result of trying to get as close to what was on the print in a (very) basic setting.

 I'm always surprised seeing an LPP or other color stock print with great color, then comparing to a Technicolor print of the same film- the range is quite varied and unnatural, but also quite beautiful in its own right.  What it comes down to in transferring a film to video is what you'd like to get out of it- do you want it to look natural, or do you want it to be an accurate representation of what the Technicolor release looked like. That said, films were re-timed over the years as well, so a 1946 Technicolor print of Song of the South will likely also be different than a 1971 (72) print.

I've read some claims that Tech is hard to transfer from a print. My experience in transferring hundreds of hours of film over the years hasn't lead me to think that at all- but instead I've appreciated the odd, subtle/ not subtle, amazing results the process delivers.  So- all of that said, the goal in transfer in this case was to try and reproduce the look of this print overall. It wasn't a scene for scene transfer- rather, just a 'one light' with a basic setting at the beginning.

These stills were made by copying and pasting a single frame into photoshop from a pro-res quicktime, then bringing the levels up a bit. Often a pro-res film capture will look darker displayed in Photoshop from the file- so there was some adjustment done there.  

There's just a handful of people who have it currently. Would it be a good idea to open it up for some of the forum folks?

I don't want to step on the toes of your current project! 

This transfer is pretty nice and of course 35mm is about 4 times the resolution of the 16mm frame. The print had some wear and some splices, but was run with a wet-gate.  

When a transfer is done from a film print there is always some adjustment in Telecine, but there was no real boost to the color really in transfer- it's that juicy on the 35mm print.  It was offered as both a DVD with chapters as well as an HD mpeg-4 file (1920x1080). IB does tend to have some overlap in color at times (it's famous for a little halo around blacks depending on the color next to it).  Someone from another forum suggested some  pics get posted from the transfer (done about a year ago).

Yes- it's IB technicolor. It was done at HD prores. You can tell an IB print by its b/w soundtrack.  There was a crowd sourcing done and this IB print was transferred.

ww12345 said:

That looks nice! I'm convinced now that this can be a really, really nice release. I was thinking that this would just come out OK because of print limitations, but I see now that what we have is so much better than what is already out there. Look at the detail in his collar, for example. That detail is just not there in other transfers.

Great work, Spaced Ranger. Thanks for the help so far! :D

It is a little heartbreaking to see the limitations of a fading eastman 16mm. That print is from 1978 I believe.  Here are some still comparisons from a 35mm IB Technicolor HD transfer of the film. The film strips posted a little while back are from what appears to be a 35mm IB (Imbition Printing) trailer.

[/IMG]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[/IMG]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[/IMG]

[/IMG]

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Uploaded with ImageShack.us