This is topic The Umbrellas of Cherbourg / Les Parapluies de Cherbourg (1964) in forum Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000802
Posted by Tao Yue (Member # 836) on 02-12-2003, 02:08 AM:
 
The Umbrellas of Cherbourg
Neg edges say "Agfa Gevaert" (presumably the o-neg) and "Eastman Safety Film" with X(circle)(triangle) and a 1986 datecode (?).
Print quality is so-so, about what you'd expect for a 10-year old print. Both the platter people and the changeover people have taken their toll: leaders are really beat up, lots of footage lost at heads and tails due to ID frames being cut, five layers of splicing tape, etc. Other than that, not too bad.
 
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 02-12-2003, 07:20 AM:
 
Maybe you mean a plus-circle-triangle date code, which would be 1994 (more likely than 1986 for a 1993 restoration of the negative):

http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/support/h1/identificationP.shtml#135427

On a print, clear edgeprint against a dark background usually comes from the printing negative. Dark printing usually is the print film's edgecode.
 
Posted by Tao Yue (Member # 836) on 02-17-2003, 04:27 PM:
 
No, it was an X, not a plus.

The AGFA markings were white on black.

The Kodak markings were blue on clear (letters looked like they were formed by LED) and said: 86 003 021 1 07 EASTMAN SAFETY FILM X(circle)(triangle). Nothing else I could find on the print, but the heads and tails have lost a *lot* of ID frames.
 
Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 02-23-2003, 05:43 PM:
 
To call this release a restoration is a big fat LIE!
What they did it make a new dupe negative from the Tech IB print they found, then new prints were struck. [Mad]

Duplicating a Tech IB print is NOT the way to get a good quality dupe, and certainly it is not restoration work! The colors (in the European release prints I saw) are too bright, the image is quite grainy and not very sharp. [Frown]

There would have been other ways of correcting color problems, but they chose the easiest (and probably cheapest) way.
 
Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 02-25-2003, 04:13 PM:
 
I agree that making an internegative from a projection-contrast release print is not the optimal way to make copies. What happened to the original negative or protection masters?
 




Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2