|
Post by Richard Tipple on Jan 8, 2014 20:27:34 GMT
I've had a chance to look at a couple of the Babelcolour videos, and have a few thoughts/observations: Whilst the video's presented in SD the actual picture appears within a border. That for me makes it more difficult to evaluate how it would appear on a TV at full resolution. The colourisation of skin, hair etc... isn't realistic enough for me as it generally looks like a colourwash (albeit with more nuances than I've seen in most colourisation). The clothing is hit and miss; some looks really good, some is less convincing. The Daleks look really impressive. I'm assuming their being metallic makes them less difficult to colour, as do the quality colour reference photos that are available. The colourisation of lighting effects looks good (for example the Kembel scenes), but I suspect this is because an artificial colour is being cast across the picture so reducing the need for flesh tones etc... Overall, much of colour has a 'colour wash' appearance, and I'm reminded of the early attempts to recolour Pertwee stories using NTSC colour sources. Maybe I'm expecting too much, but if the argument is that a colourised 60s serial would appeal to a modern-day audience then wouldn't their expectations be the same? So it's still a 'no' I'm afraid. To be fair I think there are some cases where the resolution of the source video doesn't help, and there are some sections that look fantastic, but overall I'm not as yet convinced. Sorry! Some good points there, I say if you don't rate Babels work you'll always be against Colourisation! He's far and away the best colouriser I've come across, as a community were very lucky he's a Doctor Who fan. It should be noted that Legend films allegedly priced themselves out of colourising an episode - probably because they knew the time wouldn't be worth the cost! And we'll say nothing of the criticism that Dr Who fans can dish out! Colourisations will never be perfect, but personally I really enjoy watching the good ones.
|
|
|
Post by shellyharman67 on Jan 8, 2014 20:36:05 GMT
I've had a chance to look at a couple of the Babelcolour videos, and have a few thoughts/observations: Whilst the video's presented in SD the actual picture appears within a border. That for me makes it more difficult to evaluate how it would appear on a TV at full resolution. The colourisation of skin, hair etc... isn't realistic enough for me as it generally looks like a colourwash (albeit with more nuances than I've seen in most colourisation). The clothing is hit and miss; some looks really good, some is less convincing. The Daleks look really impressive. I'm assuming their being metallic makes them less difficult to colour, as do the quality colour reference photos that are available. The colourisation of lighting effects looks good (for example the Kembel scenes), but I suspect this is because an artificial colour is being cast across the picture so reducing the need for flesh tones etc... Overall, much of colour has a 'colour wash' appearance, and I'm reminded of the early attempts to recolour Pertwee stories using NTSC colour sources. Maybe I'm expecting too much, but if the argument is that a colourised 60s serial would appeal to a modern-day audience then wouldn't their expectations be the same? So it's still a 'no' I'm afraid. To be fair I think there are some cases where the resolution of the source video doesn't help, and there are some sections that look fantastic, but overall I'm not as yet convinced. Sorry! Some good points there, I say if you don't rate Babels work you'll always be against Colourisation! He's far and away the best colouriser I've come across, as a community were very lucky he's a Doctor Who fan. It should be noted that Legend films allegedly priced themselves out of colourising an episode - probably because they knew the time wouldn't be worth the cost! And we'll say nothing of the criticism that Dr Who fans can dish out! Colourisations will never be perfect, but personally I really enjoy watching the good ones. Thats the thing Richard. It wont be perfect ! Maybe those who dont like it may suffer from OCD in perfection ? Heaven knows mate
|
|
|
Post by Paul G on Jan 8, 2014 21:12:38 GMT
Some good points there, I say if you don't rate Babels work you'll always be against Colourisation! He's far and away the best colouriser I've come across, as a community were very lucky he's a Doctor Who fan. It should be noted that Legend films allegedly priced themselves out of colourising an episode - probably because they knew the time wouldn't be worth the cost! And we'll say nothing of the criticism that Dr Who fans can dish out! Colourisations will never be perfect, but personally I really enjoy watching the good ones. Thats the thing Richard. It wont be perfect ! Maybe those who dont like it may suffer from OCD in perfection ? Heaven knows mate That's a bit harsh isn't it? I've reviewed the video and stated in plain unconfrontational language why it's not for me. I realise the limitations people who work on this are under, and I agree that they're working wonders. Thing is, when I watch a TV programme I want to be able to immerse myself in it without something jarring me out of it, which in this case the colourisation does. It doesn't need to be perfect, but it needs to be better than I've seen. I'd be interested to see how his work looks at SD resolution, though I suspect it's not presented that way for a reason. All of which is why colourisation of monochrome material isn't for me, and I don't think would help attract a new audience to 60s Who.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Watson on Jan 9, 2014 2:08:42 GMT
Thats the thing Richard. It wont be perfect ! Maybe those who dont like it may suffer from OCD in perfection ? Heaven knows mate That's a bit harsh isn't it? I've reviewed the video and stated in plain unconfrontational language why it's not for me. I realise the limitations people who work on this are under, and I agree that they're working wonders. Thing is, when I watch a TV programme I want to be able to immerse myself in it without something jarring me out of it, which in this case the colourisation does. It doesn't need to be perfect, but it needs to be better than I've seen. I'd be interested to see how his work looks at SD resolution, though I suspect it's not presented that way for a reason. All of which is why colourisation of monochrome material isn't for me, and I don't think would help attract a new audience to 60s Who. I agree - that was a little harsh. Colourisation artists and fans aren't going to win over sceptics by denigrating negative opinion. It may be that some will never approve of the practise, it may be that some need more time to be won over and it may even be that the art just needs to be perfected. The best way we are going to know it needs perfecting (as our own opinions are more likely to flatter) is to listen to the opinions of the sceptical and make changes accordingly. Personally I think BabelColour's work is amazing and stands out far and away as the best but even some of his work is not perfect (something he would no doubt agree with). There is always room for improvement...we just need to listen to those that sometimes have more discerning eyes and I think something wonderful will arise from it. To comment on the other points: - I think the reason many put their colourisations into a window is due to the copyright violating nature of the work. Windowboxing can be an effective device to deter those hunting copyright violators. - It may be a long time before the quality can rise to that which would be suitable for a DVD release (or transmission) but I believe when something is produced which is indistinguishable from true colour then the 60's material has the potential to reach a wider audience than the monochrome alternative (It is a fact that most people do prefer colour).
|
|
|
Post by Paul G on Jan 9, 2014 9:21:53 GMT
That's a bit harsh isn't it? I've reviewed the video and stated in plain unconfrontational language why it's not for me. I realise the limitations people who work on this are under, and I agree that they're working wonders. Thing is, when I watch a TV programme I want to be able to immerse myself in it without something jarring me out of it, which in this case the colourisation does. It doesn't need to be perfect, but it needs to be better than I've seen. I'd be interested to see how his work looks at SD resolution, though I suspect it's not presented that way for a reason. All of which is why colourisation of monochrome material isn't for me, and I don't think would help attract a new audience to 60s Who. I agree - that was a little harsh. Colourisation artists and fans aren't going to win over sceptics by denigrating negative opinion. It may be that some will never approve of the practise, it may be that some need more time to be won over and it may even be that the art just needs to be perfected. The best way we are going to know it needs perfecting (as our own opinions are more likely to flatter) is to listen to the opinions of the sceptical and make changes accordingly. Personally I think BabelColour's work is amazing and stands out far and away as the best but even some of his work is not perfect (something he would no doubt agree with). There is always room for improvement...we just need to listen to those that sometimes have more discerning eyes and I think something wonderful will arise from it. To comment on the other points: - I think the reason many put their colourisations into a window is due to the copyright violating nature of the work. Windowboxing can be an effective device to deter those hunting copyright violators. - It may be a long time before the quality can rise to that which would be suitable for a DVD release (or transmission) but I believe when something is produced which is indistinguishable from true colour then the 60's material has the potential to reach a wider audience than the monochrome alternative (It is a fact that most people do prefer colour). I can definitely see the potential in the Babelcolour work, and I have no problem with people performing and developing the process. As someone who works in the R&D field I agree that constructive feedback from an impartial source is a good thing, though I'm sure you and the other people working on this are aware of the areas that need improvement and are working hard on them. I also agree with your final point; people are put off by monochrome programmes, so colourisation would allow the material to reach a wider audience which again is a good thing. I believe that if the colour doesn't look realistic then most people won't give it a chance, and that's the biggest stumbling block for colourisation. It may well take a long time to get there, but the only way to get there is to keep pushing forward with it. My own personal preference for 60s Who is monochrome, but who knows; if (or when) true colourisation of monochrome material is finally achieved maybe my preference will change! Or to put it more succinctly, I think we're saying the same thing! And good luck!
|
|
|
Post by dougp on Jan 9, 2014 10:15:26 GMT
Am very pleased that the standard here is better than the Laurel and Hardy colourisations which were appalling!
|
|
|
Post by shellyharman67 on Jan 9, 2014 10:22:26 GMT
Am very pleased that the standard here is better than the Laurel and Hardy colourisations which were appalling! Like everything in Dr Who there are two sides. And so it should be. Harsh ? NAH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Paul G on Jan 9, 2014 10:53:00 GMT
Am very pleased that the standard here is better than the Laurel and Hardy colourisations which were appalling! Like everything in Dr Who there are two sides. And so it should be. Harsh ? NAH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now you've confused me. Are you saying that calling the L&H colourisations appaling isn't harsh? Or are you refering to my earlier comment regarding you branding a group of people as suffering from a mental health condition simply because they didn't like the colourisation? Seriously, you need to think before you start bandying around such phrases.
|
|
|
Post by shellyharman67 on Jan 9, 2014 11:27:17 GMT
Like everything in Dr Who there are two sides. And so it should be. Harsh ? NAH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now you've confused me. Are you saying that calling the L&H colourisations appaling isn't harsh? Or are you refering to my earlier comment regarding you branding a group of people as suffering from a mental health condition simply because they didn't like the colourisation? Seriously, you need to think before you start bandying around such phrases. Each to their own. And not harsh at all.
|
|
|
Post by Richard Tipple on Jan 9, 2014 11:59:10 GMT
I agree - that was a little harsh. Colourisation artists and fans aren't going to win over sceptics by denigrating negative opinion. It may be that some will never approve of the practise, it may be that some need more time to be won over and it may even be that the art just needs to be perfected. The best way we are going to know it needs perfecting (as our own opinions are more likely to flatter) is to listen to the opinions of the sceptical and make changes accordingly. Personally I think BabelColour's work is amazing and stands out far and away as the best but even some of his work is not perfect (something he would no doubt agree with). There is always room for improvement...we just need to listen to those that sometimes have more discerning eyes and I think something wonderful will arise from it. To comment on the other points: - I think the reason many put their colourisations into a window is due to the copyright violating nature of the work. Windowboxing can be an effective device to deter those hunting copyright violators. - It may be a long time before the quality can rise to that which would be suitable for a DVD release (or transmission) but I believe when something is produced which is indistinguishable from true colour then the 60's material has the potential to reach a wider audience than the monochrome alternative (It is a fact that most people do prefer colour). I can definitely see the potential in the Babelcolour work, and I have no problem with people performing and developing the process. As someone who works in the R&D field I agree that constructive feedback from an impartial source is a good thing, though I'm sure you and the other people working on this are aware of the areas that need improvement and are working hard on them. I also agree with your final point; people are put off by monochrome programmes, so colourisation would allow the material to reach a wider audience which again is a good thing. I believe that if the colour doesn't look realistic then most people won't give it a chance, and that's the biggest stumbling block for colourisation. It may well take a long time to get there, but the only way to get there is to keep pushing forward with it. My own personal preference for 60s Who is monochrome, but who knows; if (or when) true colourisation of monochrome material is finally achieved maybe my preference will change! Or to put it more succinctly, I think we're saying the same thing! And good luck! I agree with all of this. Nothing wrong with negative opinion, especially when it's structured as eloquently as Paul's feedback. I can't disagree with anything written here, other than I don't believe it has to be 'perfect' in order to win over new viewers. I believe a well colourised episode would be enough to make a large number of people who wouldn't normally give it a chance, take a look. Let's remember perfection can only exist within a framework of imperfection! Out of interest Paul, what do you make of my avatar? Am I on the right path with the skin tones, or would you like to see more gradual shades? All feedback very welcome!
|
|
|
Post by dougp on Jan 9, 2014 12:24:08 GMT
If you look at the standard of the Who work and then the L&H work the difference is obvious.
The L&H colours are really very poor and I do not think that is harsh. Technology has moved on.
|
|
|
Post by Paul G on Jan 9, 2014 12:34:47 GMT
If you look at the standard of the Who work and then the L&H work the difference is obvious. The L&H colours are really very poor and I do not think that is harsh. Technology has moved on. Yes, the L&H colourisations looked awful when they was first completed, so you'll get no disagreement from me. However, if you re-read my post I was questioning whether 'shelleyharman67' was saying the reference to OCD wasn't harsh.
|
|
|
Post by Paul G on Jan 9, 2014 13:03:35 GMT
I can definitely see the potential in the Babelcolour work, and I have no problem with people performing and developing the process. As someone who works in the R&D field I agree that constructive feedback from an impartial source is a good thing, though I'm sure you and the other people working on this are aware of the areas that need improvement and are working hard on them. I also agree with your final point; people are put off by monochrome programmes, so colourisation would allow the material to reach a wider audience which again is a good thing. I believe that if the colour doesn't look realistic then most people won't give it a chance, and that's the biggest stumbling block for colourisation. It may well take a long time to get there, but the only way to get there is to keep pushing forward with it. My own personal preference for 60s Who is monochrome, but who knows; if (or when) true colourisation of monochrome material is finally achieved maybe my preference will change! Or to put it more succinctly, I think we're saying the same thing! And good luck! I agree with all of this. Nothing wrong with negative opinion, especially when it's structured as eloquently as Paul's feedback. I can't disagree with anything written here, other than I don't believe it has to be 'perfect' in order to win over new viewers. I believe a well colourised episode would be enough to make a large number of people who wouldn't normally give it a chance, take a look. Let's remember perfection can only exist within a framework of imperfection! Out of interest Paul, what do you make of my avatar? Am I on the right path with the skin tones, or would you like to see more gradual shades? All feedback very welcome! Hi Richard I'm happy to offer critique, I just hope it doesn't come across as criticism! It's not easy for me to tell because the avatar's quite small, so I apologise in advance if I'm telling you something you already know! I've never tried colouring a monochrome image so I might not have an appreciation of the challenges you face, but there are two things that stand out to me: As someone who dabbles in sketching portraits one thing I've learned when producing flesh tones is the careful use of other colours to complement them. You can see what I mean in the 4 pages in this tutorial: www.portrait-artist.org/color/colored-pencil-tutorial.htmlOf course this is intended for coloured pencils, and I've no idea how feasible, simple or effective this would be in video colourisation, but it feels to me that something along those lines would bring it to life. I imagine this would be extremely time consuming to maintain a consistency across frames, and may well be impractical! Secondly, the areas of skin reflecting light should be lighter and have less of a fleshy tone to them. The shadowy areas could also be darker. Take a look at the picture of Hartnell on this page to see what I mean (I realise it's not a colourised image, which is why I'm using it as an example): dailypop.wordpress.com/tag/william-hartnell-doctor-wh/It doesn't have the 'wash' feel to it because the tones are very distinct. Obviously this depends on the light source, but again I think it's something to consider. So it's not really a problem with the tones not being gradual enough IMHO. I'd be interested to know how applicable this is, if at all, in the work you're doing.
|
|
|
Post by shellyharman67 on Jan 9, 2014 13:05:53 GMT
If you look at the standard of the Who work and then the L&H work the difference is obvious. The L&H colours are really very poor and I do not think that is harsh. Technology has moved on. Yes, the L&H colourisations looked awful when they was first completed, so you'll get no disagreement from me. However, if you re-read my post I was questioning whether 'shelleyharman67' was saying the reference to OCD wasn't harsh. Nope
|
|
|
Post by shellyharman67 on Jan 9, 2014 13:10:12 GMT
Regarding the whole who thing. Missing episodes, colour makeover. We all are a little OCD. You only have to read the comments of some. Passionate or obsession amounts to the same thing if it dominates ones life !
|
|