Colorizing Old Historical Film Footage

[Judge]

Disconcerting to see various television sources like the History Channel and National Geographic choosing to colorize classic historical film footage these days.

I guess what prompted me to post about it was seeing something blatantly colored incorrectly. A German Imperial battle flag in particular on a documentary about the Hitler Youth. Seemed mighty lame to see such a mistake, though it's not the first time National Geographic has made such an obvious blunder.

Is this just good marketing to capture viewers who object to black and white programming? I just don't understand the point of it all. Maybe this belongs in the WTF thread.

It almost reminds me of that nutty millionaire in Los Angeles in the 70s who had nude statues all over his property. The statues all had pubic hair. Really?

Colorizing b&w film seems novel, but it doesn't do anything to make them more authentic.

 

[Mary Terry]

I stopped watching the History channel years ago when they stopped being about history and began catering to the audience who believes in aliens from outer space and Bigfoot. I don't like the idea (corruption) of colorizing historical film footage because it becomes no longer historically accurate.

I was okay with Ted Turner's (Turner Classic Movies) colorization of old Hollywood movies back in the 1980's because they usually are just garbage from Hollywood. A situation where putting lipstick on a pig may actually help.

 

[RetiredDinner]

My assumption is that they colorize them because viewers prefer for them to be colorized. Slightly bright colors are just a lot better to look at then monochrome colors. At least that's my opinion, and I'm sure a lot of people share that opinion. B&W can just look so grim (to me). And even when it's a documentary about a grim subject like WW2, it's unnecessary. The fact that they make mistakes might be because they use software to automatically color them in.

And even if they color it in manually or it gets reviewed afterwards multiple times, humans make mistakes. There are not enough aspies in the world to fix small mistakes like that before it's too late

 

[Judge]

My assumption is that they colorize them because viewers prefer for them to be colorized.

Pandering to form rather than substance. That seems so counter-productive in trying to photoshop...er uh....explain history.

Reflects rather badly on our society, IMO. Especially coming from National Geographic. Sad.

 

[onlything]

Agreed. There are some historical series that just don't feel the same after being colorised. Classics should remain classics.

 

[Mia]

It's possible that colorizing an older film does appeal to some. Yet not everyone feels that way. Black and white films show some depth and clarity that color does not. There's a kind of beauty to them, that cannot be reproduced in colour. Casablanca is an example of an exquisitely filmed movie that would lose it's mood and place in time, if it were colorized.

 

[Judge]

Interesting that Steven Spielberg took a more realistic approach in "Saving Private Ryan" and "Band of Brothers" doing the opposite.

Where they deliberately- and effectively desaturated color throughout these two presentations to project a more realistic sense of color given how truly rare it was used in World War Two.

 

[Judge]

It's possible that colorizing an older film does appeal to some. Yet not everyone feels that way. Black and white films show some depth and clarity that color does not. There's a kind of beauty to them, that cannot be reproduced in colour. Casablanca is an example of an exquisitely filmed movie that would lose it's mood and place in time, if it were colorized.

True. I suppose there might be an argument to be made that colorization may bring a subject "closer" to young people in modern times.

Then again I'd think people would want to witness the Third Reich. Not try to identify with it.

 

[Tom]

Some people believe the world was in black and white in those days.

 

[Judge]

Some people believe the world was in black and white in those days.

LOL. My family didn't even enjoy color tv until around 1968.

Quite a shock seeing all those Munchkins and the witches in color.

 

[Tom]

LOL. My family didn't even enjoy color tv until around 1968.

We got ours around the same time. Football games were always impressive. All that green.

 

[Judge]

We got ours around the same time. Football games were always impressive. All that green.

I still recall having to go over to a friend's house to see Jonny Quest in color on Friday nights.

Circa 1964

"You must die, Doctor Quest." Remember hearing that almost as much as "He's dead, Jim."

At least the color for this programming seemed appropriate.

 

[Tom]

Great show!

 

[Judge]

Here ya go. This is what I'm talking about.

Channel Homepage

 

[Mary Anne]

Here ya go. This is what I'm talking about.

Channel Homepage

It doesn’t bother me. It would bother me if any old “film noir” movie were colorized. That would be blasphemy. Or the old silent movies .

On another thought, Do you think that colorizing Nazis makes them seem more human? Romantising the times? (I doubt that was the intent- but it could be argued). That is a philosophical discussion.
Another thing about colorizing the Nazis is that stark red, white and black. Maybe it’s a graphic design choice and nothing more?

What IS sad, is that one of my former clients is 24 years old and told me that he “will never watch a black and white film,” and that “an old movie is from the 1990s!” So it’s truly sad that we have to colorize WW2 just to get young people to learn about it on tv.

 

[RetiredDinner]

Some people believe the world was in black and white in those days.

I'm afraid I have to admit I also thought that for a large part of my younger childhood.

Pandering to form rather than substance. That seems so counter-productive in trying to photoshop...er uh....explain history.

Well, it's what people want. Most people don't really care about facts. You won't believe how many times I've heard people tell a story that was just extremely untrue after a short Google (like the guy who impregnated multiple girls in a hot tub, which is untrue for many reasons. I've heard that one twice.).

But honestly, National Geographic has an official Snapchat story. Don't expect them to constantly be actively trying to inform people of whatever they're writing about, they care too much about the views.

 

[Mary Anne]

I'm afraid I have to admit I also thought that for a large part of my younger childhood.

Well, it's what people want. Most people don't really care about facts. You won't believe how many times I've heard people tell a story that was just extremely untrue after a short Google (like the guy who impregnated multiple girls in a hot tub, which is untrue for many reasons. I've heard that one twice.).

But honestly, National Geographic has an official Snapchat story. Don't expect them to constantly be actively trying to inform people of whatever they're writing about, they care too much about the views.

I heard on NPR that a national poll of school kids found they did not even know what the “Holocaust” was.

 

[Judge]

You'd just think that when it comes to history in the modern age, people would go out of their way to report it in the most accurate manner possible. Coloring itself is questionable. But when they color something incorrectly, that really gets to me when it's something historical in nature.

Sad to see technology being used to achieve such a less-than-noble result.

 

[Mary Anne]

You'd just think that when it comes to history in the modern age, people would go out of their way to report it in the most accurate manner possible. Coloring itself is questionable. But when they color something incorrectly, that really gets to me when it's something historical in nature.

Sad to see technology being used to achieve such a less-than-noble result.

Can you describe what was colored inaccurately? I take a huge interest in WW2 German history, including how they led up to the political mindset after WW1.

 

[Judge]

Can you describe what was colored inaccurately? I take a huge interest in WW2 German history, including how they led up to the political mindset after WW1.

It may seem trivial to many, but this isn't the first time National Geographic messed up so badly.

In the beginning of this broadcast, they depicted people flying the German Imperial War Flag with a horizontal and vertical red cross, when it's actually a black cross like the image below.

They made an even bigger error in their broadcast of "Nazi Scrapbooks From Hell", alleging an SS adjutant (Karl Höcker) in a particular photograph was the man standing on a rail platform in Auschwitz directing who was to go to the gas chambers and who would do manual labor.

Natl. Geo went to a ridiculous effort to claim this man whose face couldn't be identified was in fact Höcker. What was so preposterous about this claim was that anyone who understands uniforms of this period could tell by the thick ribbon on his peaked cap and shoulder straps was indicative of a non-commissioned officer.

Karl Höcker was the adjutant to the camp commandant- an officer of the SS. Not an NCO. I even went to the effort of emailing Rebecca Erbelding about it, who is or was a historian for the US Holocaust Memorial Museum. She confirmed my observation as well, as apparently did many others. Eventually Natl. Geo reedited that particular show, though in a rather lame way to point out that the man may not have been Karl Höcker in the first place. I just expected better from a publication like National Geographic magazine.

Although given the man's official duty in the most notorious of Germany's death camps, it's far more outrageous that the man faced little due process and ended up dying in his own bed rather than at the end of a hangman's noose.