[ARC5] WW II Aircraft factory pictures

[Jay Coward]

Time to change the subject line? ! ! !
What happened to [ARC5] ?
 Jay



-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Knoppow <1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com>
To: Gaston Dessornes <gaselen at earthlink.net>; jfor <jfor at quikus.com>
Cc: arc5 <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>; Clare Owens <clare.owens at gmail.com>
Sent: Sun, Feb 17, 2013 3:09 pm
Subject: Re: [ARC5] WW II Aircraft factory pictures



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gaston Dessornes" <gaselen at earthlink.net>
To: <jfor at quikus.com>; "Richard Knoppow" 
<1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com>
Cc: "Clare Owens" <clare.owens at gmail.com>; 
<arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 2:34 PM
Subject: Re: [ARC5] WW II Aircraft factory pictures


> Ever  seen  color  pictures BEFORE Kodak ?
> Gd
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
> To: "Richard Knoppow" <1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com>
> Cc: "Clare Owens" <clare.owens at gmail.com>; 
> <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 12:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARC5] WW II Aircraft factory pictures
>
>
>> My belief has always been that Ektachrome was the better 
>> film for natural
>> color rendition. IMO, Kodachrome produced "WHAM, POW, 
>> SOCK" cartoon-like
>> images.
>>
>> YMMV.
>>
>> -John

     Kodachrome was brilliant because it was intended for 
direct viewing and projection and because people of the time 
wanted brilliant color. Technicolor made the same decision 
about how it should look even though it was capable of very 
subtle color. Ektachrome had different dyes and a different 
gamut of color.  Certainly color advertisements made using 
it never looked as good as Kodachrome, not even Kodak's 
promotional stuff.
     Before Kodachrome there were a number of color 
processes but the one most used for commercial purposes was 
to make color separation negatives using a "one-shot" 
camera. This was a camera with a beam splitter and filters 
in it.  The negatives were then printed using a three-color 
process, usually three color carbon until about the late 
1930s when Kodak aquired the dye transfer process and made 
it easier to use.  Three color carbon or carbro is an 
extremely difficult process. There were a two or three labs 
in New York who catered to the advertising industry and did 
nothing else. In person these prints are quite beautiful but 
did not reproduce as well as Kodachrome transparencies for 
four-color half-tone printing.  Kodachrome did not totally 
supplant this process and both the cameras and printing 
materials continued to be available into the mid 1950s, 
partly because they did not need an outside processor, 
namely Kodak, to be used.
     Eventually, Ektachrome and Ektacolor (negative color 
film) were perfected sufficiently to supplant other 
processes, helped by Kodak's discontinuance of Kodachrome in 
commercial formats.
     BTW Kodak also made low-contrast Kodachrome for 
indirect use, that is for making duplicates or making 
reflection prints.
     Unfortunately, you have hit a special interest of mine 
and so all this OT stuff. Enough, enough.


--
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles
WB6KBL
dickburk at ix.netcom.com 

______________________________________________________________
ARC5 mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html