Sandy Vongries Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 The first color Photos...first link lead me to locate the others, as I had not heard of the process. You may find it interesting First color photos ever made from potato starch | Daily Mail Online These Beautiful Antique Photos Were Made With Potato Starch http://theimageworks.com/pdf/100years.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wogears Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 I have always loved Autochromes, but they were NOT the "first color photographs". That honor belongs to the Hillotype process. There were also cameras that exposed b/w film through RGB filters, making three negs that could be used to produce finished color prints. Technicolor worked that way later on. The Lumiere Authchrome was the fist widespread, commercially available color. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moving On Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 Reminds me of the old hand painted Melies film...... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh05WiO8cqg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 (edited) see WIKI on this at (Color photography - Wikipedia) On the surprising success of the first three-color image -- of a tartan ribbon (1861): A century later, historians were mystified by the reproduction of any red at all, because the photographic process used by Sutton was for all practical purposes totally insensitive to red light and only marginally sensitive to green. In 1961, researchers found that many red dyes also reflect ultraviolet light, coincidentally transmitted by Sutton’s red filter, and surmised that the three images were probably due to ultra-violet, blue-green and blue wavelengths, rather than to red, green and blue Public domain image Edited February 2, 2018 by JDMvW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 reminds me of the old hand painted Melies film...... Fantastic, I had seen only snippets before. This obviously had great impact on later film- The faculty scene in Horse Feathers, for example. The hominids in 2001: A Space Odyssey for another. :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moving On Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 (edited) I have a boxed set of all of his work on DVD. When I was in grade school the teacher wanted us to do a poster on the space program. I did a drawing from a science supplement that had this picture, and I added the "NASA" logo on the "rocket". She told me that wasn't what she had in mind but was amused, and made me bring in the reference I had used for a guide. The image has fascinated me since childhood but only later in life did I discover its origin. Here is an old photo of the drawing I made all this years ago.... I expect you might enjoy this..... Hugo (film) - Wikipedia Edited February 2, 2018 by Moving On Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moving On Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 From the link above: "When started, the machine draws out a scene that Hugo recognizes from his father's description of the film A Trip to the Moon. Isabelle identifies the signature, that of a "Georges Méliès", as her godfather. She sneaks Hugo into her home, where they find a hidden cache of more imaginative drawings of Méliès....." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Vongries Posted February 2, 2018 Author Share Posted February 2, 2018 Who cares about the first color photos. "There you go again" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norma Desmond Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 Seems like those who experimented and then invented the first color photos paved the way for Callahan and Eggleston to pursue their photographic visions in color. These photos are artifacts of photographic history. People have every reason to care about historical artifacts. [Tongue-in-cheek on]Let's not forget, though, that color photography, like Photoshop today, was the demise of photography as we know it! Oh . . . but . . . wait! :) We didn't need dialogue. We had faces! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moving On Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 "There you go again" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supriyo Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 The only problem is, that wasn't truth. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supriyo Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 Who cares about the first color photos. Show me the first color photos in which color was being used by a photographer as somehing beyond mere representation but also as a feeling, a mood. Eggleston? Definitely. But Harry Callahan and Saul Leiter before that... This is like saying, 'who cares about the first man in space, lets talk about space walks and space tourism'. First in any field is significant and worthwhile to discuss. Works of Eggleston and others won't make complete sense unless contrasted with the first and subsequent attempts in color photography. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moving On Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 The only problem is, that wasn't truth. Denial of the conveyance of feeling and mood using color in Sandy's accompanying photos speaks volumes. Especially when the context of the source of that denial is considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moving On Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 (edited) Alrighty then. I'm not telling the truth. The Great Pyramid of Giza. What's the truth of it. Is it the first stone or is it what all the stones represent? That's right. You already know the answer. The truth, the absolute irrefutable fact is the Pyramid does not exist at all without its first stone. That is the fallacy of the trolling premise....... Trolling is the most reasonable explanation for such an obviously flawed position being put forward. Edited February 2, 2018 by Moving On Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supriyo Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 Seriously, y'all should take things less seriously. Meaning that you're taking things too seriously Meaning that we are not drinking that heavily at the moment to have flow and synergy with your mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supriyo Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 You are saying all untrue things and claiming they are true. Thats untruth doubled up. If you want to discuss the conveyance of mood and emotions through color, why not start another thread. I would be happy to read your thoughts there and contribute. Why come to somebody else's discussion and veer things off-topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moving On Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 (edited) 'Nuff said..... LMAO.... "flow and synergy" Edited February 2, 2018 by Moving On Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Vongries Posted February 2, 2018 Author Share Posted February 2, 2018 It's a non sequitur. As are your posts to this thread which have no relationship to the original subject. Please have the courtesy to stay on theme or start your own threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norma Desmond Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 I’m halfway through my popcorn. Eggleston is one of my favorite photographers. Amazing color, especially when I’ve seen the prints themselves. This thread was about the first color prints. They have value in themselves. “Who cares?” is not a statement of truth. It’s a statement of opinion. I find it an absurd thing to say, but it’s fine to say it. Saying something like that will naturally garner a strongly negative reaction. That negative reaction should come as no surprise. It’s an understandably negative response to intentionally provocative negativity, often known as trolling. We didn't need dialogue. We had faces! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norma Desmond Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 I never knew a good conversation to start with “Who cares?” And, oh look, it didn’t! We didn't need dialogue. We had faces! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norma Desmond Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 I don’t know why that would be funny. If I said it, which is eminently possible, I did it realistically, not expecting it to be much of a conversation starter. I never mind expressing a starkly contrarian opinion if I have one. But I tend not to be surprised at strong reactions I get and know when I’m doing it for mostly provocative reasons. Probably most of us have trolled on occasion. Some are self aware. Others not so much. We didn't need dialogue. We had faces! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norma Desmond Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 But, again, the point is neither Eggleston nor whether you did or didn’t troll. For me, the point is the absurdity of the opinion of a photographer not caring about the earliest color prints, on at least some level, and then claiming that such a stance has something to do with truth. We didn't need dialogue. We had faces! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_sevigny2 Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 "Who cares?" is technically a question but it serves as a statement. To answer it with a statement, I do. So here's something by Sergey Prokudin-Gorsky, who made these for projection before anyone knew how to make color. prints (I think). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wogears Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 "Who cares?" is technically a question but it serves as a statement. To answer it with a statement, I do. So here's something by Sergey Prokudin-Gorsky, who made these for projection before anyone knew how to make color. [ATTACH=full]1232478[/ATTACH] prints (I think). I love that picture, and the beautiful restoration work. Camera Work had an issue of color prints made from Autochrome, but I have no idea whether that was a "first". EDIT: This photo was originally made by a three-exposure camera, not Autochrome (just to clarify). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moving On Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 "Who cares?" is technically a question but it serves as a statement. To answer it with a statement, I do. So here's something by Sergey Prokudin-Gorsky, who made these for projection before anyone knew how to make color. [ATTACH=full]1232478[/ATTACH] prints (I think). Thanks for the link. Great stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(800x800).thumb.jpg.c94833d6ea93605f47351873a94fc0cc.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now