Technirama(1956–1985)

VistaVision had been developed by Paramount with the assistance of Technicolor. Technirama was conceived as an extension of both that process and the dye-transfer system of manufacturing prints. The last films photographed in three-strip Technicolor were made in 1955; thereafter, films handled by Technicolor labs were shot using color negatives modeled on the Eastman Color system but printed using the company’s imbibition process for making positive prints. The new widescreen technology enabled its three-strip cameras to be repurposed, as they already had been for VistaVision; they were also compatible with new purpose-built VistaVision cameras. Initial development of a “universal frame process”, able to generate prints in all types of format, was undertaken by Technicolor’s British plant under the direction of F. George Gunn. However, the anamorphic lenses built by Technicolor’s French and Hollywood plants proved unsatisfactory. An alternative was found in the Delrama lens system designed by Prof. Dr. Albert Bouwers of NV Optische Industrie De “Oude Delft” in the Netherlands. As Grant Lobban explains it: “This employed specially computed curved surface reflecting prisms, rather than cylindrical lenses or refracting prisms. It was an auxiliary attachment big enough to cover the larger diameter of the lenses needed to cover the double-frame negative and allowed for a maximum angle of view of about 60-degrees, equal to that of CinemaScope and the other systems then in use for general film making” (Lobban, 2000). According to Lobban, the trade name Technirama was thus derived from the combination of “Technicolor” and “Delrama”.

The negative film stock to be used in Technirama photography was of the same type used in VistaVision, transported horizontally through the camera, with each frame eight perforations wide (double the standard 35mm frame size). The fact that VistaVision frames were not only larger in surface area than those of standard 35mm film stock but slightly wider (with an aspect ratio of 1.43:1) meant that the additional anamorphic squeeze of Technirama did not need the same 2x compression factor as CinemaScope. Instead, a 1.5x squeeze for the negative was sufficient to yield an image with the same projected aspect ratio as CinemaScope’s 2.35:1. Standard anamorphic positive prints of Technirama retained the same specifications as CinemaScope, with a 2x squeeze, thereby making them compatible with theaters already equipped for that process. However, Technirama negative stock used in European and American production contexts had slightly differing specifications. The European system anticipated that some positive prints would be made in the same eight-perforation-wide, horizontal format as the negative, for projection by purpose-built projectors in roadshow situations. Space was therefore left above the frame for an optical soundtrack to be printed there, alongside and on top of the image. The American system anticipated that such prints would not be needed, as horizontal VistaVision projection had never taken off after only a handful of North American theaters had installed the equipment in 1954–5. US negative stock therefore utilized the full height of the frame between the sprockets, yielding an even larger picture area.

Two companies manufactured projectors for horizontal projection of eight-perf anamorphic prints. The Italian Micronlambda projector was employed for the public debut of Technirama with the premiere of The Monte Carlo Story at the Reposi, Turin, in December 1956. The British company Gaumont-Kalee’s machine was modeled on its previous VistaVision projector, but the “Vistatal” anamorphic lenses supplied for it by Taylor, Taylor & Hobson employed a different method of “unsqueezing” the image from the Micronlambda, “by compressing it vertically, rather [than] expanding it horizontally, which was said to give better results” (Lobban, 2000). However, this projector seems only to have been employed for the London trade demonstration on June 1, 1957, which included a feature-length demo film, The Curtain Rises on Technirama (1957), incorporating test footage and excerpts from forthcoming Technirama pictures. Aside from these two occasions, there are no other recorded instances of horizontal anamorphic projection in theaters, with one possible exception. A brief item in Sight and Sound by the French critic Louis Marcorelles claimed that Solomon and Sheba (1959), which had been premiered in standard non-anamorphic, vertical-feed 70mm at the Astoria Charing Cross Road in London, was presented differently at the Gaumont Palace in Paris. According to Marcorelles, the film was shown there in a 2:1 screen ratio and projected “by a double horizontal system like that used for VistaVision (with, it’s worth pointing out, English Gaumont-Kalee projectors specially installed for the occasion).” Marcorelles claimed that this presentation was far superior to that at the London Astoria, which was in a wider aspect ratio (2.21:1). He reported that, when seen in its native format, the process “attains equal clarity right across the width of the screen. Distortion and haziness at the edges of the screen are eliminated; and King Vidor is justified in his claim that ‘the features of an extra at the extreme periphery of the screen are perfectly discernible.’ One couldn’t say this of the London version” (Marcorelles, 1960: p. 69). It should be noted that this account has not been corroborated by any other source. What can be said with confidence is that horizontal projection did not catch on with Technirama any more (indeed, rather less) than it had with VistaVision.

A relative handful of Technirama films were supplied with four-track magnetic stereo soundtracks, mono being standard on 35mm Technirama release prints. Robert E. Carr and R. M. Hayes (Carr & Hayes, 1988) identify only eight Technirama films as having stereo soundtracks, including Sayonara (1957) and Auntie Mame (1958). In addition, some 35mm prints of films released in Super Technirama 70 also had stereo tracks, including Spartacus (1960) and Zulu (1964). The distinctive strength of the 35mm prints was in their dye-transfer color process. Surviving original copies retain the rich color values of IB Technicolor and the spectacular clarity claimed for Technirama photography by its first promoters, whereas most 70mm prints, even when manufactured by Technicolor labs, have faded as the imbibition process was never used for large-format printing.

One disadvantage of Technirama by comparison with other widescreen and large-frame processes was that the use of a frame twice the size of regular 35mm meant that twice as much footage was used up in photography, necessitating frequent reloading of cameras and increasing the stock allocation (Technicolor’s initial promotion suggested that this was in the order of “only” a 60 per cent increase, as Technirama’s greater definition permitted more use of master shots and fewer setups). This most likely led to Technirama being superseded by other processes, most notably Panavision and Technicolor’s own Techniscope (which used a frame half the size of regular 35mm), that were significantly cheaper and more efficient, if not as satisfactory in their end results.