Colorization of black-and-white films
Colorization of black-and-white films refers to the process of adding color to classic films that were originally shot in monochrome. This technique, developed by Wilson Markle, involves creating a new film print from the original negative, followed by a videotape copy. Using computer technology, colorists manually add color to each object in every frame, often relying on research to ensure authenticity in their color choices. The rise of colorization in the 1970s and 1980s was driven by the desire to attract younger audiences who preferred color films, leading to significant revenue opportunities for studios.
However, this practice has sparked considerable controversy, with critics arguing that colorization undermines the artistic integrity of the original works, which were thoughtfully composed in black-and-white. Notable figures in the film industry have referred to colorization as "cultural vandalism," fearing it alters the creator's original vision. Despite legal rights allowing studios to colorize films, many filmmakers and historians advocated for the preservation of the original versions, leading to the establishment of the National Film Registry to protect culturally significant films from such alterations. While interest in colorized films has waned over time due to concerns over quality and aesthetics, the process remains a way to introduce classic content to new audiences, albeit amidst ongoing debate.
Colorization of black-and-white films
A process to add color to black-and-white, sepia, or monochrome motion-picture images
Colorizing film tediously by hand was possible even for the earliest filmmakers of the 1890’s. By the 1980’s, however, computers made it possible to add color to entire films far more efficiently. The process was seen as a profitable way to attract television audiences to the many old black-and-white films to which television networks owned broadcast rights. Critics, film historians, and movie purists loudly denounced the practice, however, creating a long-running controversy.
Colorization by computer is a process invented by Wilson Markle. After striking a new film print from the original black-and-white negative, a videotape copy is then made from that print. Then, using a computer, color is added to each object in each frame of the print. As the original colors of complexions, hair, clothes, furniture, and other visible objects are not always known, the colorists must rely on common sense, aesthetics, and their own judgment. Often research into studio archives produces information or photographs of sets and costumes that allow color choices to be authenticated.
The Pros and Cons of Colorization
With the increased popularity of old movies on television in the 1970’s and 1980’s, it was clear to studio heads that the huge backlog of black-and-white films and television shows could fill many hours of air time, cost very little, and produce healthy profits. The audiences most coveted by television stations, however, were young people who had grown up watching most films in Technicolor. Black-and-white films did not appeal to them. Colorization was clearly the answer. The process had been used successfully to color the black-and-white pictures of the Moon taken during a 1970 Apollo mission. Since that time, the colorization process had been improved by several different companies, each developing slightly different computer technologies, such as Neural Net, pattern recognition, and background compositing, and interactive processes that allowed pixels of similar tones automatically to be given similar colors.
The downside of colorization was its expense and labor-intensiveness. Colorizing a film or an old black-and-white television show was estimated at one time to cost $3,000 per minute of running time. The film or show had to be colored frame by frame. Single objects were digitally tinted in each frame, one at a time, until every object in that frame was colored. One old film or show could therefore cost $300,000 or more. Still, a colorized film shown on television could generate revenue of at least $500,000, and even more revenue might come from the sale of videocassettes, so colorization seemed a good business plan.
Colorization’s High Point
Television mogul Ted Turner bought all or parts of the film libraries of the Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (MGM), Warner Bros., and Radio-Keith-Orpheum (RKO) movie studios. He commissioned Color Systems Technology to begin colorizing more than one hundred of his movies over the next few years to make them more appealing to television viewers. Yankee Doodle Dandy (1942) and Topper (1937) were two of the first black-and-white films redistributed in color.
Controversy erupted when Turner said he intended to colorize the iconic Citizen Kane (1941). Critics, historians, film directors, and fans all decried the plan, calling colorization “cultural vandalism” and film “bastardization.” Turner responded that he had been joking; he had no intention of colorizing Citizen Kane. Actually, the film was still under the control of the Orson Welles estate, whose permission was needed for anyone to tamper with it in any way. Turner did, however, proceed to colorize several other movies, including the venerable Casablanca (1942). Sufficient outcry among movie directors and others in the film industry caused Congress to create the National Film Registry in 1988. This registry was a list of movies, chosen by the Library of Congress at a rate of twenty-five per year, that were deemed to be culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant. The National Film Preservation Act of 1988 made it illegal to distribute or exhibit a colorized version of a black-and-white film included in the registry, unless the film was labeled with a suitable disclaimer.
The Controversy
Those who considered film an art form considered colorization an immoral appropriation of the original filmmaker’s conception. They contended that black-and-white films were works of art in a form created by the filmmaker and were not to be altered by anyone else for purely monetary gain. Even those who saw films as collective artworks, rather than realizations of personal vision, asserted that colorization was simply ugly, that the technology was not advanced enough to produce satisfactory results, and that the black-and-white originals were more aesthetically pleasing than their colorized versions. Filmmakers, however, had no legal rights over their films, which in almost all cases belonged to studios and production companies, not to directors. Consequently, the corporation that owned a film could colorize it regardless of its creator’s desires. Film directors especially felt that colorization destroyed the artistic integrity of their black-and-white films. They felt that if studios were allowed to add color, there would be nothing to prevent them from adding different sound tracks, introducing additional scenes, or even reediting the entire film.
Impact
As the decade waned, so did the interest in colorized films, especially since, as critics had pointed out, most of them had washed out colors and overly soft contrasts. The colorized films could obviously not match the high quality either of the original black-and-white cinematography they replaced or of contemporary films originally shot in color. The cost of colorizing remained high, even with advances in computer technology, and the integration of color into the films was less than satisfactory. As a direct result of the controversy, though, the U.S. government began to maintain an annually growing list of films that were considered to be part of Americans’ cultural heritage, increasing both funding for and interest in film preservation and film history.
As television channels began to proliferate and the need for reasonably priced programming increased, colorized television shows seemed more appealing. The cost of colorizing favorite black-and-white television shows was far less than making new shows in color, and there were no residuals to pay to actors, directors, and others who had either passed on or were contractually excluded. In spite of the strong argument in favor of colorizing old shows, McHale’s Navy was one of only a very few television shows to be colorized during the 1980’s. Though many disagreed about its value, colorization offered a process to reintroduce old black-and-white films and television shows to present and future generations.
Bibliography
Grainge, Paul. “Reclaiming Heritage: Colourization, Culture Wars, and the Politics of Nostalgia.” Cultural Studies, October, 1999, 621-638. Discusses the controversy over film colorization’s impact on American culture and its regard for early movies.
Mathews, Jack. “Film Directors See Red Over Ted Turner’s Movie Tinting.” The Los Angeles Times, September 12, 1986, sec. 6, p. 1. A detailed account of the reactions of filmmakers to Ted Turner’s decision to colorize black-and-white films he had purchased from large Hollywood studios. Comments from both proponents and opponents, including Woody Allen, Billy Wilder, and colorizing company executives give a balanced discussion of both views.
Sherman, Barry L., and James R. Dominick. “Perception of Colorization.” Journalism Quarterly 65 (Winter, 1988): 976-980. Researched data on mostly favorable audience response to colorized films with audiences finding them more contemporary than black-and-white films.
Young, James O. “Still More in Defense of Colorization.” Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 50 (Summer, 1992): 245-248. Discusses arguments for and against film colorization, supporting the view that it is not morally equivalent to tampering with such instantiated artworks as paintings or sculpture.