Monday, October 24, 2011

We had color before we had sound



I just find these fascinating.



What people could do and what people would pay for are not the same thing.



It must have been like 3-D movies. "Nice gimmick, but why bother?"

6 comments:

Tohoscope said...

Dang. They look like renaissance paintings.

Christopher M. Sobieniak said...

Yeah I seen these examples before. There was also some experimental sound stuff going on during those days as well (The "Dickson Experimental Sound Film" is a good example). Certainly a time of experimentation and figuring out how to make it work.

Christopher M. Sobieniak said...

It must have been like 3-D movies. "Nice gimmick, but why bother?"

It's hard to tell. I suppose it was still rather costly or hard to make the chemicals/dyes for those things to work properly back before such stable processes were developed over time (and even then, filming movies in B&W stayed around for quite a long time since I'm sure it was still a cost preference anyway, though many can argue over the intentions of the filmmaker him/herself if it came to that).

Dr. Mila said...

Here's one from 1899, but they were painting directly on the frames.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkT54BetFBI

Christopher M. Sobieniak said...

Painting directly on frames was done on a number of prints out there.

Dr. Mila said...

I think Dan has Caravaggio on the brain. http://www.caravaggio-foundation.org/ https://www.kimbellart.org/Exhibitions/Exhibition-Details.aspx?eid=74