Up until 20 minutes ago I wouldn’t have asked this question, but then I saw this video: http://www.universeofmovies.com/ . It contains 1920s color test shots (at the 2:38 mark) and lots of color from the 40s. i did know that by the 40s there was color film for sure because I’ve seen WWII color footage. I guess I was shocked to see it in the 20’s and would like to know why it wasn’t used. Color wasn’t used commonly until around 1965 it seems. Was Wizard of Oz in real color? OK, I’ll stop now. Thanks for reading
It cost more; color was the 3-D of its day.
Classic Calvin And Hobbes dialog.
Yes, the Wizard of Oz was shot in color, in 1939. But it used the three-strip Technicolor film and as such needed expensive cameras. Also, it required a lot more lighting.
Early color processes were also difficult to work with. The cameras were enormous, required extremely bright lighting, and certain colors didn’t show up right, so they had to be very careful about makeup, sets and costumes.
I think it’s a little too soon to say if the 3D analogy is really accurate. It’s true that color was seen as a bit of a gimmick, and even as color processes were perfected in the 50’s and 60’s and became common for big-budget spectacles, “serious” films continued to be shot in black and white. That’s sort of the situation today with 3D, although who knows if 3D will become as ubiquitous as color.
This question makes me chuckle because every time I see “The Adventures of Robin Hood” with Errol Flynn, all I can think is some studio executive wanted to get his money’s worth out of using Technicolor.
That is funny, but really color was expensive and difficult. There is a ton of color WWII film
There were color films in the silent days. Douglas Fairbanks (Sr.) had The Black Pirate in 1926 in two-strip Technicolor (a forerunner of the process used in the 30s, with a more limited color palette). Other forms of color film predated that, including hand-tinted film where people manually put color on every frame.
But the expense wasn’t worth the result. Also, three-color technicolor was introduced when the Depression hit, so studios, which were struggling like everyone else, saw no need to take on the additional expense. Only a handful of color films were made each year until the 1950s, when color was perceived as an advantage over TV (which at first was only B&W).
Keep in mind it wasn’t just an issue of producing the film in color. You had to show it in color also. Like people have said, it’s like 3D is now - you don’t want to commit too much to 3D movies until enough theatres are equipped with 3D projectors.
Little Nemo, what special equipment do you think was needed to project color film?
Early Technicolor processes required special projectors. Later ones didn’t.
Some of the footage shown on ‘WWII In Color’ and similar documentaries is original colour footage. Most of it is colorized footage originally shot in B/W
As seen in Hugo, this was done for A Trip to the Moon and other films of its day - they came in both colour and B&W versions, apparently.
You can see color segments in a lot of old silent films – Phantom of the Opera not only had the bal masque sequence in “two strip” technicolor (although there was reportedly more in color, only this section survives), it also had a sequence in the Handscheigl hand-tinted process, where the Phantom’s cape swirls in red over the rooftop of the Opera.
Ben Hur had a color sequence, as did The Ten Commandments. The latter is in such poor shape that I thought it was really a badly-colored hand-tinted sequence. As noted, some early films had had-ttinted sequences. I’ve seen some of these. Even Winsor McCay’s very first cartoon (showing his charactyers from the Little Nemo strip) had hand-tinted scenes (the DVD releasze, apparently with modern computer coloration of these scenes, makes them look startlingly modern).
As noted, color was expensive, and required special experts (until the 1960s, the mocie credits gave prominent place to the “technicolor experts”) Short subjects were more common in color than were full-=length features, and cartoons were an obvious choice. Disney famously scrapped the black and white footage of the cartoon Flowers and Trees and re-shot it in color, which Disney apparently had a monopoly on for a few years. C0ompeting companies, like Fleischer studios, used a competing company, Cinecolor, which still had the two tones that “two sdtrip” Technicolor had. Look at the Betty Boop cartoon poor Cinderella tro see how this looked (you had orange and green, but not red or yellow. They used this to good advantage with Cinderella’s pumpkin coach Betty Boop - Poor Cinderella - YouTube ) Within a few years, though, full color became available to anyone (and Cinecolor eventually perfected a full-color process), and not only Fleischer got full color (look at the cartoon Popeye the Sailor Meets Sinbad the Sailor), but so did a lot of now-forgotten cartoon companies. You also had a lot of short subjects that you won’t see unless you watch features on AMC or pursue film history.
But color continued tyo be expensive, and they tried to wring their money’s wortyh out of it. Look at color films from the 1940s, and notice how vibrant the colors are, and what juxtaposiotions there were – you had contrasting colors placed near each other to bring them out. :Lucille Ball was called “Technicolor Tessie” because of her striking red hair and green eyes – she was made for Techbnicolor 9or made herself that way). If you compare 1940s color films with low-budget color films from the 1960s, when it was easily affordable, the difference is obvious between the carefully crafted 1940s color pallettes and the muddy, ill-lit 1960s efforts.
Color became more common in the 1950s, and I suspect the effort was not simply the result of the process becoming more mature (and therefore less expensive), but also the need to compete with the still mostly black and white television. Color movies were another weapon in the arsenal of tricks (including the various wide-screen process and theater gimmicks) that movies could use in their battle with television for the entertainment dollar.
I recall, as a kid, seeing black and white films into the 1960s. It was probably still cheaper, but I suspect that it was partrly artistic choice, too. Black and white films became synonuymous with “art house” or “deep” films, or war films (maybe because it invoked images of WWII newsreel fotage and thwe like). A few such films:
*
Twelve Angry Men
To Kill a Mockingbird
King Rat
The Train*
There’s no reason these couldn’t have been shot in color. Alfred Hitchcovck deliberately filmed Psycho in black and white, even though he’d made many color films before that (and he, like Disney, looked to new technologies), in part to keep costs down and to use his team from his TV show. Ray Harryhausen, an admirer of the work of Willis O’brien and his team’s invocation of black-and-white artwork of Gustave Dore and others, had been doing black and whiote films throughout the fifties, and had started making The Seventh Voyage of Sinbad in black and white, before switching to color. He never made another black and white film.*
the last commercial, non-art film I recall from the 1960s was the Cold War film The Bedford Incident. i suspect this was another case of using B&W because the story of a surface shiop tracking a Russian saub thus got the benefit of that WWII feel from black and white. By the mid-60s, color was cheap and plentiful, and if you used black and white you deliberately drew attention to yourself.
*Haryhausen had used color, in his Fairy Tale shorts, his test footage for films like War of the Worlds, and the segment he and O’Brien made for The Animal World. But 7th Voyage was his first feature film with his imprimatur in color.
Technicolor didn’t just make the film, they actually owned the process. If you wanted to make a movie in color, you had to rent the cameras – and the camera crews – from the company. You also had to have a “color supervisor” whose job was to ensure the costumes, scenery and makeup were all within the limitations of the film and lighting. For a studio system that controlled the creation, production and distribution of movies as ruthlessly as any assembly line, that meant ceding a lot of authority.
Kinemacolor and Prizma I also required special projectors.
It wasn’t just the “feel” of old newsreel footage, it was that virtually all of those old war movies made heavy use of stock footage actually shot during the war. If they’d made the rest of the movie in color, they wouldn’t have been able to splice in b&w stock footage. The navy used color film much more extensively, so movies like Midway and Tora! Tora! Tora! could be made in color.
All is made clear at the** American Widescreen Museum**.
It’s a huge site; its Technicolor history, including two-colour, is here.
Other, older processes ** are here**.
I do believe if you listen closely you will probably hear a distinct whooshing sound.