Why Haven't All Black And White Cartoons Been Colorized Yet?

[Dawalk]

Hi, my screen name is Dawalk and this is my first post, so I'm new to this, though I've been lurking on here for a while. I have a question concerning the b&w cartoons. I was wondering: Why is it that some such as the WB's "Porky's Duck Hunt" and "Porky's Hare Hunt" have been computer-colorized but others still haven't? It can't be because that would take away the original spirit, charm, feel or whatever it is that these grayscale animated featurettes have, otherwise the shorts that I just mentioned would never have received that treatment. I'm curious to see how those that haven't been brought to color would look, I'd much rather that than redrawn versions and never knew there were such things until coming across a redrawn version for "Moonlight For Two" at Dailymotion. If anybody can, could you help out and explain this to me please, what's up with that? Thanks.

[J. B. Warner]

These days, colorization is out and film preservation is in. Thanks to networks like Turner Classic Movies, the preconception that people will only watch old movies if they're in color has been pretty much debunked. The same applies to cartoons - with the Looney Tunes Golden Collections and the Popeye sets and the Disney Treasures series and so on, there's been a real effort in recent years to present black-and-white cartoons in their original format. Nobody colorizes cartoons today because there's not a demand for it anymore.

[Eric B]

With DVD releases, they should be able to provide colorized and B&W tracks; just like they do for the language. That way, they can be watched either way.

[J. B. Warner]

With DVD releases, they should be able to provide colorized and B&W tracks; just like they do for the language. That way, they can be watched either way.

It's not that easy. Video takes up more space on a DVD than audio, meaning that colorized versions of the cartoons would have to be included alongside the black-and-white versions as two separate files. For something like Disc 4 on the Looney Tunes Golden Collection Volume 5 (which is all black-and-whites), that'd mean putting 30 cartoons on one DVD instead of 15, and the quality would suffer.

[Eric B]

True, though if some DVD's can do different angles; wouldn't that be the same kind of thing? Since it's just a color difference, then isn't there a way to do that withou a separate file? Of course, viewers could always turn down the color on their TV set or player. (Makes you wonder why anyone ever complained about colorization!)

[Dawalk]

True, though if some DVD's can do different angles; wouldn't that be the same kind of thing? Since it's just a color difference, then isn't there a way to do that withou a separate file? Of course, viewers could always turn down the color on their TV set or player. (Makes you wonder why anyone ever complained about colorization!)

Exactly, great point. That does make much better sense. How did I miss thinking of that? Though I don't know for sure whether all t.v.s actually have that option of turning down the color, therefore it's probably not the same for everyone and maybe not all t.v. sets have that kind of access.

These days, colorization is out and film preservation is in. Thanks to networks like Turner Classic Movies, the preconception that people will only watch old movies if they're in color has been pretty much debunked. The same applies to cartoons - with the Looney Tunes Golden Collections and the Popeye sets and the Disney Treasures series and so on, there's been a real effort in recent years to present black-and-white cartoons in their original format. Nobody colorizes cartoons today because there's not a demand for it anymore.

Thanks for the explanation. I never knew what gets colorized and what doesn't was determined too. Who decides that exactly, the public or whoever works on putting the content on the DVDs? If the former, do they actually send letters and how did they manage to get through to the big bosses? But is there anything that isn't dictated by the popular/public vote and support rule? This is one of the reasons why I resent that and disagree with that idea. I know that my feelings/thoughts may not matter, but I'll mention it anyway: If what's probably, like, a few or some b&w cartoons that had already been brought to color, then the others that have never been completed in the same fashion should also be done. I mean, sure, everybody should be free to watch cartoons, live-action movies or whatever else in b&w if they like. I mean, in my case, I'm actually partial to both. I've got nothing against either one or the other. I just think that for some of us, we still should have alternatives anyway instead of everything being left up to what the majority says. And I agree with what Eric B. typed, all viewers would have to do is switch off the color if they'd like to see something in b&W (that's if anyone's t.v. even has that function).

It's not that easy. Video takes up more space on a DVD than audio, meaning that colorized versions of the cartoons would have to be included alongside the black-and-white versions as two separate files. For something like Disc 4 on the Looney Tunes Golden Collection Volume 5 (which is all black-and-whites), that'd mean putting 30 cartoons on one DVD instead of 15, and the quality would suffer.

The quality would suffer how exactly? There'd be no room left for extras/bonus features you mean? If that's the case, then there should be a release of two DVDs, one each that would have a separate alternate of those cartoons, one b&w; the other in color. Those could make for another edition of Looney Tunes anthology DVDs (or DVD sets) that could give some of us who wish to choose either the Looney Tunes DVD case/set with the original b&w format or the colorized one. If It's A Wonderful Life can get a colorized version (although I know that can be seen on the DVD exclusively in that case), then the same can and should be done (not necessarily on the same disc/DVD set), but as a separate/alternative DVD case/set as I mentioned. Now I don't see how that also can't be the perfect, reasonable solution if they were to be done that way.

[Raidon Makoto]

I don't know what people have against colorization. As long as the original is out there along with the modified version, I have no problem with colorization (heck, I encourage it).

It is true, two different video tracks would take up space. Perhaps the solution would be to have the DVDs be double sided, one black and white and one color.

[Eric B]

Exactly, great point. That does make much better sense. How did I miss thinking of that? Though I don't know for sure whether all t.v.s actually have that option of turning down the color, therefore it's probably not the same for everyone and maybe not all t.v. sets have that kind of access.
I thought of that. But I think all sets probably do have color control somewhere. It just might be harder to find than on the old sets that had the dials right in the front. Everything is digital now, so with some, it is only accessed from a menu brought up with the remote. Some might still have those thin black dials behind a panel in the back.

[Ed Liu]

The real reason why this isn't happening is because of money. Everything you are suggesting costs money, from computer colorizing the shorts to offering them for home video release in multiple formats or double-sided DVDs. I think Turner's prior experiments with colorized movies showed that there wasn't as much demand for them as he thought there was. Add in the fact that the demand for black-and-white cartoons is way lower than something like, say, Casablanca. Doing anything you're suggesting may be technically possible, but it probably costs a lot more money than it will ever recoup.

Turning off the color on your TV is also not the same as seeing the original black-and-white source material. Black-and-white film stock is chemically different than color film stock, reproducing color and shadow as shades of gray in a specific way. A black-and-white movie will look the same no matter what TV you happen to be watching it on. What is being suggested means you're taking a black-and-white image, slapping colors over it, and then relying on whatever happens to be in your TV circuitry to turn the colors back into shades of gray. I can guarantee you that a still from a B&W film shown that way will not look like the original B&W material, not to mention that it would look different from TV to TV, and in extreme cases would completely obliterate the original art.

From a film preservation perspective, I think colorized anything is an abomination unless the original filmmaker tinted the prints. I'm happy to see all those things lie safely in the dustbin of history.

[J. B. Warner]

From a film preservation perspective, I think colorized anything is an abomination unless the original filmmaker tinted the prints. I'm happy to see all those things lie safely in the dustbin of history.

I'm with you on that one. Not only can I not stand to watch a colorized cartoon, but I can't understand why other people would rather see them than the original black-and-white version. Colorized films are inferior to the original in every visual aspect.

[Raidon Makoto]

From a film preservation perspective, I think colorized anything is an abomination unless the original filmmaker tinted the prints. I'm happy to see all those things lie safely in the dustbin of history.
Many films made back in the day were only black and white because of technological limitations. I'm sure that a great deal of the old films filmmakers' would have preferred their film in color as opposed to black and white, but they couldn't do it because its just too expensive/not possible.

[Ed Liu]

Many films made back in the day were only black and white because of technological limitations. I'm sure that a great deal of the old films filmmakers' would have preferred their film in color as opposed to black and white, but they couldn't do it because its just too expensive/not possible.
If this does happen to be true (and I think that's an extremely presumptious "if"), then they can come back and color their films themselves or re-shoot them using color film ;). If they can't do that, then I have to assume that what they left us is what they wanted their films to be, black-and-white and all. Silent movies were silent because of technological limitations, too, but that doesn't mean I want to watch a Buster Keaton or Charlie Chaplin movie with voice-over actors dubbing the lines just because technology allows it now.

Besides, if history is any gauge, "fixing" a film after the fact to take advantage of newer technology has a mixed (http://www.hanshootsfirst.org/) track record (http://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk/329842-e-t-s-walkie-talkie-switch.html) at best.

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Many films made back in the day were only black and white because of technological limitations. I'm sure that a great deal of the old films filmmakers' would have preferred their film in color as opposed to black and white, but they couldn't do it because its just too expensive/not possible.


Maybe, but keep in mind they tailored their images to make the best use of the black and white medium as possible. The lighting and compositions for a black and white film are quite a bit different than a color film, and they specifically made it that way to take advantage of their limitations. If you slap color on it it would be similar to trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. You could DO it, but it wouldn't look quite right. For example: there are some copies of a colorized It's a Wonderful Life floating around, and if you compare it with the B&W version, you'll see what I mean about the color version looking "off". You just can't slap color onto a black and white film because it just isn't as simple as a coloring book.

In B&W cartoons, there's the use of "spotting blacks" that's specifically suited for the b&w medium. If you slap color on all the "white" space, it still would look "off" because the lighting and shadows were specifically used with the b&w medium in mind.

[Mecha-Daffy]

I firmly believe colorizing films destroys the filmmaker's original intent. I think they make the colors by digitally analyzing the shades of gray and mapping it to a color palette. This always looks bad. The colors are usually too bright or too contrasting.

However, I just saw part of a B&W movie and turned my TV's color off. I didn't find any noticeable difference between my custom setting and the normal one. Maybe the difference is subtle. Regardless, I'm still against colorization.

And putting 30 cartoons on a disc would decrease the quality. There's only so much space on a DVD, so they would have to compress the images, which always results in quality loss.

[Mister Intensity]

Also there was such a big uproar when Turner colorized the early Popeyes and that was before widespread Internet. Imagine what type of uproar now that the Internet is widely available beyond high-level research facilities.

[Eric B]

OK, I had always heard something about the shadowing and lighting technique of B&W.
I just found this blog that explains it:
http://www.bigtimeattic.com/blog/2007/02/tips-and-tricks-spotting-black-areas.html

Still, B&W is just drab and unlifelike and hard to watch to me. There should be some way with digital technology that they can incorporate the shadowing/lighting into color.
And, they can also always sell separate discs for B&W and colorized. Like someone said, it's not like they're destroying the B&W version. With DVD's, it should relieve the fear that people probably had when colorization was first done that the originals would stop being shown. Now, they would both be sold side by side, and you can pick whichever one you want. Perhaps both (which would then bring in more revenue!)

[Ed Liu]

Still, B&W is just drab and unlifelike and hard to watch to me. There should be some way with digital technology that they can incorporate the shadowing/lighting into color.

Do yourself a favor and watch any of the new Warner Bros Popeye DVDs (http://news.toonzone.net/articles/24430/popeye-the-sailor-vol.-2-cartoon-classics-best-viewed-without-friends). If you can watch any of them and still call them drab and unlifelike even though they're in black-and-white, I'll give you a dollar. There's more life in any one of those shorts than in entire seasons of brightly colored shows.

[Eric B]

By "drab and unlifelike", I meant the contrast of B&W to the real world. (not the animation or anything, which is where I would say they had "more life" than later stuff). Just like the more detailed and realistic looking the animation is, the better it is (hence, the popularity of 3D CGI now). So a world without color just has something missing. But this is just my opinion.

However, they did do a great job on those Popeyes, from what I see on the screenshots they provided in the link. (It's more live action that the "drab" effect is worse on, because of the fact that it is otherwise 100% realistic, and you expect real world action to have color, as that's our experience).

[Dark_Lord_Khrima]

It costs money to color them and so unless a company has something invested in them, there would be no reason to color them. Also, sometimes black and white just looks or feels better with the way the cartoons are made.