28-10-2022, 11:11 AM
(28-10-2022, 07:51 AM)Ian Wegg Wrote:(27-10-2022, 05:33 PM)Chris KC Wrote:(27-10-2022, 03:56 PM)Mike Costigan Wrote: I understand your viewpoint, Chris, but the original film can still be viewed in unadulterated form if you so wish:
https://archive.org/details/pet1138r5alondon
That's a different flick Mike...
Mike's clip is the second part, the rest can be found here: https://archive.org/details/pet1136r5
But the point is the source material isn't affected at all, you can watch them in their original state if that's your preference.
I'm all in favour of AI enhancement when it's done well, it can bring old films like this alive and interest a much wider audience. For anyone who doubts the value of colourization I'd recommend Peter Jackson's WW1 feature, They Shall Not Grow Old, a truly amazing achievement in film enhancement. It's the next best thing to time travel.
They Shall Not Grow Old
It's a debate which has been raging in certain circles as the artistic community endeavours to protect the integrity of photographic and cinematic artworks, while commercial enterprises try to turn a fast buck out of "colorizing" Casablanca, for example.
I'd agree that if done thoughtfully and artistically, colourising (not necessarily with AI, which is an oxymoron in my opinion) can add something meaningful to a photo or a film clip. These instances are relatively rare though and the quality of most wholesale AI efforts is poor. "Enhancement" is also alteration and in subtle ways overwrites historical accuracy. I'd argue that trying to attract an audience of morons who are too dumb to appreciate a black and white image/film does not justify scribbling on it with felt tip pens. We'd do better to educate our masses to appreciate the fine art of black and white imagery in its own right.
The black and white original still exists - well maybe, for now. It's slowly getting harder to find unmolested copies in search results though.
A7F may not be the right forum to explore the topic in depth!