 part, due to her red hair, considered a major plus for a Technicolor heroine). Harry Kleiner’s screenplay describes the Aborigines in this scene as “grotesquely streaked with ochre”.  In Kangaroo’s fictional world red ochre, a pigment widely used by a culture with the longest ongoing artistic tradition on earth, was associated with the grotesque. But then, cultural sensitivity was not high on the agenda. Despite well-informed local advisors, the Kangaroo script described didgeridoos as long wooden trumpets. Ultimately, despite a relentless publicity campaign, Kangaroo was dismissed by critics and spurned by audiences. The Australian High Commissioner in London reportedly requested that the subtitle ‘Australian Story’ be removed.
Before Jedda made it to the screen in 1955, there was another contender for the title of Australia’s first ‘natural colour feature’. In this instance, production swiftly followed the press announcement because it documented a real event. The Queen in Australia(1954), produced by the Commonwealth Film Unit, portrayed a youthful Queen Elizabeth on her first visit to the Antipodes. The filmmakers assembled a roll-call of local arts and technical talent and trained their lenses and microphones on Her Majesty as she travelled the length and breadth of the country. Prime Minister Robert Menzies, an ardent monarchist and home-movie enthusiast, committed the Commonwealth Film Unit to completing the film by April only two months after the Royal visit. This ambitious schedule placed the production under enormous pressure. Colour film of the era was especially sensitive to heat and, as with Kangaroo, the logistical challenges were considerable. Since there were still no facilities for processing 35 mm. colour footage in Australia, the exposed colour negative would be placed in refrigerated containers ready to travel overseas.  The Queen in Australia was shot utilising the Italian-invented Ferrania Color film system with footage flown to Denham Laboratories in London for processing, editing and post-production. 
The Queen in Australia, released in cinemas in Australia, in other British Commonwealth and the United States, was considered by many as a promotional reel for Australia. Local newspapers quoted reviews. The documentary would be “a magnificent overseas advertisement for Australia”. The audience would see “fine panoramic views of the Australian countryside and ‘superb colour’”.  Royal tours with their pageantry have been a popular subject for film, and especially colour film, since the earliest days of cinema. The association with recording royalty, for example, was critical to the success of Kinemacolor in Britain in the early twentieth century. 
Watching The Queen in Australia now is to glimpse another era. One million Australians lined the streets to greet the Royal visitors, cheer and wave flags. (There has always been a lot of flag-waving in the history of colour film. So much so that I think its evolution could be told through that subject alone.) As critic Paul Byrnes observed, The Queen in Australia was intended to demonstrate that Australia would stay British. Despite the influx of tens of thousands of migrants from Europe after the War, Australians were British citizens first and foremost. Always had been. Always would be. The New York Times, whilst describing the documentary as rather uninspired, complimented its colour palette. “The glimpses of cities, villages and the outback made fitting subjects for the Italian Ferrania Colour process in which The Queen in Australia was filmed. Its panchromatic hues vary in shading from pastel to vivid and compare favourably with better known processes”.  British Pathe’s Welcome the Queen documenting the same Royal Tour via Eastman Color, makes a useful comparison. It registers a far more restricted palette, skewed towards blue.
In late 1952, the Film Division of the Department of Interior carried out tests with Gevacolor in response to growing interest in colour film. The Department’s cameramen were reported to be “taking advantage of spring weather t