The Biggest Lie in Hollywood | Technicolor

Thanks to Bespoke Post for sponsoring this video! New subscribers get a free mystery gift with your first membership purchase -
go to bespokepost.com/nsgift and enter code NSGIFT at checkout.
Toto? I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore.
Support me on Patreon!
/ nationsquid
Buy Me a Coffee: www.buymeacoffee.com/nationsquid
Twitter: / nationsquidyt
Website: www.nationsquid.com/
Merchandise: teespring.com/stores/squids-s...
Google +: just kidding.
All other images, sounds, and clips are either created by me, properly licensed, in the public domain, under a Creative Commons license with attribution provided, or protected under Fair Use.
ENJOY THE PROGRAM.

[@nationsquid]

New Bespoke Post subscribers get a free mystery gift with your first membership purchase - go to bespokepost.com/nsgift and enter code NSGIFT at checkout. Thanks to Bespoke Post for sponsoring!

[@hsdkitty-chan_official]

First! I love ur videos

[@kain0067]

Dude you got some birds stuck in your hallway

[@InconsistentManner]

Ahh my arch nemesis CMYK... Learning the color values was a nightmare and made no (insert expletive) sense to Me. Even though many of My classmates were eventually able to understand this I gave up. This was the early days of the internet where there was cross publishing between print and internet, so learning CMYK was a must. I have kept out of publishing to a point where I only got as close as marketing in the late 00s. By then RGB was the standard and supplanted CMYK.

[@jaynedavies2757]

i loved the video, but especially your tinted delivery, that added to it, has well.

[@squidiskool]

5:20

[@Derpy1969]

But we’re not being tricked at all. The final film IS in color. Just because the way it was created required jumping through some hoops doesn’t mean we’re being tricked. It’s just a process.

[@penguinsushi8442]

Yeah..... don't understand his thinking in that it's "not colour" when it's clearly colour but just with more steps in the process.

[@JaspinBurner]

It's a misnomer.

[@pineapplequeen13]

I think he was going for the idea that it's created out of 3 monochromatic images, but that isn't as catchy of a video title, lol.

[@thomdenick]

Yeah, color photography is a process. It always has been. Also, no one thinks the Wizard of Oz is handcolored. I have never in my life heard that. It's common to hear it was the "first" Technicolor movie.

[@LilyLewis771]

Yeah, it’s like saying we were tricked because they used actors pretending to be witches instead of doing real magic like… we don’t actually think everything that happens in movies is ‘real’???

[@edamael]

Imagine making a 26-minute video to tell people you don't understand how colour works.

[@misterhat5823]

And then someone actually paid to sponsor it...

[@MyRackley]

@@misterhat5823 Just because they knew dummies like us would watch it. Lol.

[@Munakas-wq3gp]

Imagine making a 26-minute video to tell that a 2D color movie is indistinguable from reality

[@gorak9000]

Just wait until he learns how digital cameras, and digital displays (and even CRT displays) work [mind blown]

[@TrevorDennis100]

And yet he is unable to sync audio to visuals in his own video. That's irony for you.

[@methanbreather]

I do not know what is worse, the clickbait title, the wrong claims or that 'bored California teen girl' speech pattern.

[@jamesstafford7438]

That fucking vocal fry. 🤢🤢🤢

[@cle4tle]

"uhm akchually, the video you are watching right now is also a lie, since the cmos sensor in the camera uses a colour filter array to trick your eyes into seeing colour"

[@kirksealls1912]

Another rational person! Thank you!

[@AndrewTSq]

And its 30 still pictures a second!. So even the motion is a lie

[@kennyadvocat]

Black and white is also a lie cause its recorded as a negative and we don't see that way.

[@HandiasTobil]

also the lcd screen you're watching is in rgb subpixel format... YOU ARE BEING FOOLED

[@acmenipponair]

@@HandiasTobil At least nowadays all 2 million LCDs are adressed at the same time and it's not a CRT anymore, where in reality you only see ONE dot running with a really high speed over a phosphorized glass plate and what you really see as a "picture" is just the afterglow effect of it :D

[@RichardServello]

This is a really weird way to describe it, it’s not a trick. It is color. When you print color film you print it in 3 stages in the same way. This is chemistry, not trickery.

[@richardcarritt5126]

Agree but he has to be reachable to the average person, some of us may have more knowledge on this topic but others are new.

[@darren6202]

WOW! Dick by Name, Dick by nature.

[@EmperorKonstantine01]

you havnt been listening he is saying the final process is color, until then its trickery.

[@scaredyfish]

@@EmperorKonstantine01That’s not true, though. No film is projecting yellow light into your eyes. It’s still a mix of red and green that convinces your eyes it’s seeing yellow. If there’s a lie, it’s one your brain is telling itself.

[@bachtube11]

@@richardcarritt5126 I agree with you, when I read the title I already knew what was meant (Technicolor is based on 3 black and white films). But the title is somewhat clickbait. But I know almost every youtuber use some kind of clickbait, and this is relatively mild cklickbait. I tolerate that ;-)

[@Dwarvenminer1]

I don't really see where the lie is with this, it gives the energy of a redditor smugly claiming you're wrong about something based on a technicality that doesnt really affect the end result? "Ah, but you see! The film was actually 3 different colours laid ontop one another to give the impression of actual colour!" Yeah, wait until you find out it was also multiple pictures a second to give the impression of motion and not actually a moving picture...

[@papermario3982]

YES thank you, this bothered me a lot too lmao. There is no "lie" here, this is not black and white, this is a color film, the method used to capture the colors doesn't change that. Weird af framing

[@Daniel_WR_Hart]

I saw it more as clickbait, but yea, if it was encoded and decoded to show colour, then it's a coloured movie. He even mentions that these days our movies are encoded as 0s and 1s instead of film strips

[@papermario3982]

​@@Daniel_WR_HartIt's not even clickbait because he has the same thesis in the video itself, it's not just the title/thumbnail

[@DimJOfficial]

Clickbait

[@therealchayd]

I mean, *technically* even modern film is the same idea of different layers of colors combined, but the color sensitizing dye layers are all smooshed onto one roll of film rather than three.

[@jameysummers1577]

That's the internet today. Calling everything you know into question and being wrong at the same time. Challenging everything that you learned, strutting around like you know something, and being wrong. All with ads.

[@KratostheThird]

Use a proper AdBlock. But other than that, this is all revisionist garbage. If you want actual information on Technicolor, then I suggesting reading books from those who have studied the history of film and worked on film for many years. This is revisionist nonsense meant to drive up views and have a catchy title.

[@WokerThanThou]

@@KratostheThird I used adblocking when I could only afford to watch anything on a laptop. Can it be used for a flat screen television or a data phone (like a Samsung 55 or a Pixel 7)? Google search indicates some work is being done on it; but, it's kind of sketchy.

[@AndrewTSq]

I am chocked it was not "disinformation" "Misinformation"

[@guypersen7663]

@@WokerThanThou I can't help you with smartphones, but I do know you can avoid the TV problem entirely by connecting your laptop to the TV with an HDMI cable. That way you can have a big screen *and* any adblock you have installed.

[@DisgaeaFan707]

People like you prob think Pluto is still a planet. This is why my generation doesn't respect boomers. I trust my professors over you

[@trekkiejunk]

"You've probably been told growing up that the Wizard of Oz was hand-painted, frame by frame." No, just you dog. No one thought that growing up.

[@dash1dash2]

Especially when it says in huge letters "COLOR BY TECHNICOLOR" in the movie. 🙄

[@taylorwoolston8856]

Calling this "black & white" is kinda like calling a fully coloured-in colouring book "black & white". Just because the original material was black & white, doesn't mean the final result is black & white.

[@dukecraig2402]

Exactly, calling Technicolor a "lie" is a big stretch, for clickbait purposes no doubt. See it in color, it's color, simple.

[@jeromemckenna7102]

In the past when color separation was done using film. The film was black and white film.

[@AmanOU2be]

The original is real life, which is in color. So, instead of capturing that color, they filled it in with their best representation of it. So, calling the final product "color" is at least a BIT of a stretch.

[@scaredyfish]

@@jeromemckenna7102Film that is exposed through a red filter is an accurate record of the amount of red light it’s exposed to. The colour isn’t being created later, it’s being captured on film.

[@bachtube11]

I agree with you, when I read the title I already knew what was meant (Technicolor is based on 3 black and white films). But the title is somewhat clickbait. But I know almost every youtuber use some kind of clickbait, and this is relatively mild cklickbait. I tolerate that ;-)

[@tyjuarez]

Color film is actually individual RGB layers? Say it ain't so! Next you're gonna tell me that the motion picture itself is just a series of still images displayed sequentially at a high enough rate for persistence of vision to create the illusion of movement.

[@squidiskool]

LEGO Island désignant

[@JamieJamez]

6:25 He did.

[@oldtvnut]

Actually, RGB-sensitive layers that are processed into CMY dyes.

[@DoubleMonoLR]

@@oldtvnut Nobody watches the film from the CMY films/dyes though. They're just negatives.

[@AndrewTSq]

Well, then this video is a lie, cause it is being shown on my screen that has a red green and blue led for each pixel.

[@redneckcoder]

For crying out loud, every professional video camera into the early 2000s uses a 3-chip system where the light is split into 3 and hits three sensors each with a different color filter. The processor (for digital) then combines these three images into one. (You know, the processing Technicolor did, except inside the camera). Definitely deceptive and if this platform had community notes...

[@KratostheThird]

This video was made for the click bait and the views. Nothing else.

[@k.m.1524]

Also prisms and 3 chips are still used in broadcast cameras like the Sony PXW z750 and other GV, ikegami and sony cameras.

[@chrismofer]

exactly. regular film even is still 3 color layers in a single piece of film. or ektachrome has them in one layer. pixels on the screen we're watching this on "fake" color too. Cinema DLP projectors are currently 3-chip, also still used in pro broadcast cameras. no moire patterns from debayering, very nice.

[@fakeduck4474]

I don't get what is so bad about this video. Yeah the title is slightly misleading but it gives insight into how the technicolor process worked

[@redneckcoder]

@@fakeduck4474 Primarily it is the assertion that technicolor is "faking" color in some way. When its not - that its just a process to get to color just like many others that use similar principles. Though over time they have improved.

[@boilerhousegarage]

A ship full of red paint crashed into a ship full of blue paint. Both crews have been marooned!

[@atlanta2076]

I think the big irony is that sound is way more important than footage. If you watch a movie that has the best possible 4K material but has crappy audio, you'll be put off fast. But take low quality footage (if what you see is interesting) and blend it with top notch audio engineered sound... now that'll fly.

[@jamesslick4790]

YEP. A lot of amateur video makers mess this up. Sound is 60% of a movie! Our eyes are more tolerant than our ears!

[@jeganathanv4173]

I agree but film quailty is also important. If you shot on 4K & mixed the audio really good it will be a good movie!

[@purplesabbath9057]

That's exactly the reason why I still enjoy watching movies on Laserdisc to this day. The picture quality is far from the best that's currently available, but the audio can be simply astonishing.

[@Zombie_Trooper]

I completely disagree. Yes, audio is important, no bones about that, but in a visual medium it's silly to prioritize it. An entire generation lived in silent films for a reason, because they still communicated without sound or specific auditory cues. I've always found the reverse is true in film circles. Myself and others can handle bad audio because unless you're able to dial in on what constitutes superior audio, it won't kill the experience. Now if you can't see what you're viewing, then you shut it off. Can't say I know a single serious filmmaker who would exchange visuals over audio.

[@Zombie_Trooper]

@DavidRYates-tk2tq Exactly. Many of my favorite films are silent films because they use every VISUAL element to create the best experience. It's like saying the music video is more important than the music, it just doesn't make a lot of sense.

[@deadlyquestion]

It's no longer a black and white photo after it's been dyed into cyan/magenta/yellow though. It's like saying all of your clothes in the video are white despite being dyed brown and black, because of course they aren't. Yes, it is very interesting that each of the images were recorded in black & white to capture the brightest spots after being passed through a filter, that the process allowed dying the frames to combine to create a the color we see. That is absolutely fascinating and definitely worth making this video for. But after the frames are dyed, they're not black and white like you keep saying.

[@UKHeritageRailways]

The Technicolor imbibition process was much more complicated than that. The negatives were not dyed. Black and white prints were made from which negative matrices were produced. These carried the dyes which were transferred, one after the other, in perfect register, under pressure to clear film stock. The final prints do not use a photochemical process to capture the image, only the optical soundtrack. Because the dyes were very stable the colors do not fade like later photochemical processes such as Eastman Color.

[@donaldcarpenter5328]

good point

[@alariciii4963]

@@UKHeritageRailways That doesn't change the point he's making.

[@fakeduck4474]

A proper way to say it would probably be to say that they are still "greyscale" after they've been dyed

[@wintersbattleofbands1144]

Nobody ever told me the Wizard of Oz was hand painted. The posters ALL clearly proclaim it's in Technicolor. You must live in a weird, sheltered world.

[@KratostheThird]

Because this person tells lies on something that countless film historians and Hollywood people have already pointed out years ago. This video was honestly made for the click bait.

[@alex-bj3lh]

what a waste of 25 minutes. "did u know colour film was made...by selectively filming 3 primary colour channels and then dying them???" like yes that's literally how all practical colour representation works thanks dude

[@TwoStackedCRTTubes]

Thank you! This was such clickbaity waste of time!

[@kennethmiller2333]

Wait until he discovers screen printing!

[@a9ball1]

I think he was just trying to show what a hassle it was back then compared to now. Can you imagine having to do that process for every color video today. We would not have KZbin or TikTok if we were still using technicolor on everything. It's like comparing a 2024 manual transmission car to a model T. I bet you couldn't even get a model T to move.

[@kennethmiller2333]

@@a9ball1 Maybe i couldn't, maybe I could. However, if someone told me "they lied to you; the Model T wasn't a car," I'd still call them an idiot.

[@michaelclark9762]

It's even how our eye/brain system works! We don't see color. Light has no color. Our brains create a perception of color from the response of our retinal cones to certain wavelengths that are a very small part of the vast spectrum of electromagnetic radiation.

[@MegaAstroFan18]

I mean, yeah, meeting Elvis in person would be honestly rather horrifying since he'd have to be a zombie.

[@tommarnt]

a shitting zombie

[@astrinymris9953]

Yeah, it would have been better to choose a *living* celebrity to make this point. Or just say "your favorite celebrity crush."

[@paradiselost9946]

@@tommarnt morte las vegas! heart-staked hotel? more vampire, that one... my bad. cant help falling in graves... youre a zombie in disguise...

[@tommarnt]

@@paradiselost9946 lmao

[@paradiselost9946]

@@tommarnt what ive had stuck in my head since... "a little corporeal corruption..."

[@afterglow-podcast]

Sounds like the only lie is saying the image is black and white. Part of it is, but part of it isn't, and than the parts are layered to create color. It's not an illusion at all, it's a technique to create the same wavelength your eyes see in the everyday world.

[@donaldcarpenter5328]

good description

[@fakeduck4474]

Technically when they dye all three films it's still "greyscale" before they're combined but I get your point

[@KristopherBel]

Has anyone ever been told the wizard of oz was "hand painted?" Literally never heard anyone say that been watching this movie since i was a wee child.

[@martifingers]

This is somewhat misleading as others have noted. BTW the subtractive primaries are of course Yellow, magenta and cyan. Misnaming them as red, blue and yellow suggests the author of this script didn't really understand the underlying principles which accord with the physiology of the eye.

[@jeanelarson]

And completely missing the very clear relationship between Red-Green-Blue and CMYK. But most elementary schools still teach Red-Yellow-Blue as primary and skip science modules on light, wavelengths, perception, and color, so can you blame him for missing his own point?

[@metalgear6531]

Bro spoke for nine minutes and said nothing 💀

[@bobafettjr85]

Yeah I was expecting the "lie" to be that it was hand painted like the myth says. But it turns out color is fake because they had to film it in 3 different colors? That's what i already expected.

[@GrantGraff]

This is just a click bait video that tries to convince you everything is a lie, then spends 26 minutes only to tell you that the lie is technically true, but by looking at it with a "certain" view point it could maybe be proceaved as a tiny bit false.

[@jgunther3398]

he said he didn't know anything

[@donaldcarpenter5328]

bingo

[@jameysummers1577]

@@GrantGraff Well said!

[@haandotexe]

I've never heard the rumor that the wizard of oz was hand-painted and that concept sounds ridiculous to me. how could anyone actually believe that???

[@beachgirl_bev]

Yeah, I'm not sure where that came from? I'd be interested to hear a source

[@ShadowSora8491]

I could see that being the case with some of the backgrounds used on the set, and not with the film itself. I like how Squid explained how the technology actually works and how it makes black-and-white film look like colour to us.

[@TheStarshipGarage]

I've never heard that either

[@AbLaV]

To be fair, there are color films from the early days of film that they did hand paint every frame. The colors are funky in them because sometimes different people would work on the frames, or they ran out of a paint color and had to remix it... so it makes sense to me that people would believe that

[@james_fisch]

Might have come from the same ones who claimed that audiences ran from the theater scared when viewing "A train arrives at the station" lol

[@NyscanRohid]

"Red Blue Green: Additive coloring Red Blue Yellow: Subtractive coloring" Um, no. Dead-wrong no. (Edit: I'm going to retract my statement just a little. Red-blue-yellow _is_ a kind of subtractive coloring and has been around for a long time in the art world. CMY is just the more-accurate counterpart to RGB, and red-blue-yellow could be seen as an approximation.)

[@jocramkrispy305]

Given the *other* glaring inaccuracies by this point, I gave up here. But we've created engagement, so KZbin thinks it's a good video. Remember to thumbs down the video if it contains crap.

[@Carewolf]

Well. RGB is an additive color model, and RBY is a type of subtractive color model (aka color model for inks), just not as common or good as CMY, but probably more wellknown among laymen.

[@NicksIndieGames]

Yes, CMY has superseeded RYB as the correct subtractive primaries for more than half a century at this point. Its partially lingered on for way too long in traditional painting due to its history and because it works "well enough" for mixing.

[@Newhorizons4u]

You really thought you did something …

[@geordiebrit1461]

There was a VERY popular sitcom made by the BBC called Are You Being Served. For years the pilot episode was only shown in black and white, because the colour tape from the early 70's was wiped ( the pilot was also recorded on B/W telecine from a colour tv ). Decades later it was noticed that the RGB dots could be made out on the film. With bespoke software, the pixels were recreated ( NOT just colourizeing the filmed pixels ).The pilot is now in colour, and identical to the original video tape.

[@Chickenbreadlp]

I've read something similar once, how some older color BBC productions were put onto B/W film for distribution and remained the only existing backups of those productions. Tho the story I heard went a bit different: Because the color information on a normal TV signal is actually causing certain interference patterns in the signal most TVs made after the invention of color TV (even those that were only B/W) had an extra filter installed to filter out the interference from the color signal on the luminance information. The telecine systems used by the BBC at the time however did not have those filters, and so some clever people found out you can extract the color information from those interference patterns instead...

[@geordiebrit1461]

@@Chickenbreadlp WOW! Thanks so much for that. That there is even ONE method is astonishing. But potentially TWO? All of the early Dr Who episodes only exist because they too were also on telecine. Unfortunately they were B/W anyway. Dammit.

[@herschell64]

I believe they did it with some of the wiped Jon Pertwee Doctor Who episodes where only black and white copies reminded, one that comes to mind is Invasion of the Dinosaurs episode 1 I think it was

[@gwaunch1967]

@@herschell64I believe The Mind of Evil got this treatment as well.

[@dunebasher1971]

@@Chickenbreadlp Both you and @geordiebrit1461 have got part of the story. When making a B&W film recording of a colour show, it was meant to be standard practice at the BBC to insert a chroma filter to completely remove the chroma signal to prevent the dot patterning. However, this was not always done, so *some* (but by no means all) of their B&W film recordings of colour shows have the chroma dots and can be processed via the Colour Recovery system.

[@trixievonmothersbaugh1340]

I have never heard anyone say that the Wizard of Oz was hand painted. We always knew it was a process. I have no idea where that would have come from.

[@user-fj8wr8jh4e]

Yeah same, maybe at the time when it first came out. But in the mid 80s when i first saw it as a kid i seem to remember thinking it was layers of colors that were used. There were pictures floating around in magazines and on tv like on the back of his wall that were the same picture just different colors. I imagined that's how they did it. And they did.

[@MrEdWeirdoShow]

I think the narrator treated the "hand painted" thing as an old wives tale. And that Technicolor gave an almost hand painted appearance. BTW, why did nobody answer the question as to why today's big digital advances - including even AI - still cannot give the same or better look as Technicolor? Look at even the recently colorful Wonka - 1939's Technicolor Gone With The Wind still kicks its butt and all other butts, technically speaking.

[@nickfifteen]

​@@MrEdWeirdoShow I don't even think it was an old wives tales to begin with. It would be like if said _"the story we were all told that remote controls were powered by plutonium... was actually a lie!"_ Like, no, literally _no one_ ever claimed that.

[@donaldcarpenter5328]

colorization...."Ted Turner will NEVER touch MY films with his terrible PENS" ; fill in the blank....

[@kirksealls1912]

I think this is just a case of perpetuating a myth that practically nobody believed for the sole purpose of debunking it

[@bruno3]

I watched the whole video and I still don't understand why it's a lie. Is the whole movie a lie? After all, those people aren't really there in front of you, it's a trick, an illusion, just as much as the colour. The colour could be a lie if it were being added at a later time through a manual colouring process. But just because the process of capturing colour is intricate, that doesn't make it a lie.

[@a64738]

The movie maker is an idiot and you wasted your time... The movie is in color, filmed in color and, it just used a elaborate way to get the colors.

[@rlpittsjr]

Not a lie or trick, it's physics.

[@SmeddyTooBestChannel]

i always like joking about that one meme where it says "your brain tricks you into thinking this image is moving" and the image actually rotates because it's still technically correct. there's no actual... movement happening, lights on a screen are just constantly brightening and darkening to represent an image

[@etunimenisukunimeni1302]

Technically correct is the _best_ kind of correct 👍

[@BinglesP]

Reminds me of that post with intentionally poor grammar about two colors being the same when they're completely different, and it abruptly ends with a proof check suggestion to finger yourself

[@takanara7]

That's the same way all digital photographs work how is it 'fake color' - completely ridiculous.

[@donaldcarpenter5328]

yup

[@Tudmoke]

The biggest lie in the music industry: when your headphones are "playing sound", they're actually just creating oscillations in the air and making your eardrums vibrate

[@michaelclark9762]

That's also the way the tri-chromatic human eye/brain system works, too. Color only exists in the brain's perception created from the bio-chemical response of the human retinal cones to various combinations of wavelengths of "visible light", which is more properly defined as that very narrow portion of the vast electromagnetic spectrum to which human retinal cones are sensitive.

[@rosesandsongs21]

Well, what our eyes see are a light source's reflections on whatever object happens to be there so depending on the warmth and the intensity of the light source, colors change: no light, no image. On a picture, one thousands of a seconds of it is captured and it will never change, no matter the light source... Does that make sense? Hummmmm... not really, but I tried!

[@MyRackley]

It's not exactly how digital photography works. There's no dyeing process with Cyan Yellow and Magenta. The colour editors on "Barbie" movie had to go through a complex process to imitate the look of Technicolor. ♥💙💚 Those CYM secondary colours were also an important part of Cibachrome processing, which has sadly not survived. I have a few photos I took in the 70s which I had Cibachrome printed. 💛

[@bigalejoshileno]

You will be surprised finding out how the video codecs work

[@Mac40581]

Although I found the video interesting, I thought the title was disingenuous. Technicolor was not a lie, but a technological leap forward in movie making.

[@RobbieHatley]

I had to give this video a Thumb-Down because it contains a lot of false statements, and because its title is sensationalist clickbait. No, human eyes are _not_ sensitive to "only 3 specific frequencies"; instead, the "red", "green", and "blue" cones are sensitive to fuzzy-edged, partially-overlapping _bands_ of frequencies, so we can see any frequency from the bottom end of the "red" band to the top end of the "blue" band. So, if we see light that's 3/4 red and 1/4 green, it looks orange. Or, if we see mono-chromatic (single-frequency) light that actually _is_ orange, we also see _that_ as being "orange" and can't tell the difference. Yes, rainbows do exist, and yes, all of the myriad colors of the rainbow actually do exist, and each will trigger a different mix of R, G, B cones in different proportions. No, color photography, cinematography, and videography are not "lies"; quite the contrary, they are ways of making images of reality which more-closely mirror actual reality than greyscale images do. In short, it's a mistake to accuse people of "lying" when you know they're not just to make a quick advertising buck. Stop that, it's ugly.

[@Slight-View]

Shockingly Technicolor is still around today and it looks like they are a decently successful VFX studio now. Crazy to see a company doing the same thing 100 years later.

[@Azurethewolf168]

I thought they went out of business

[@beachgirl_bev]

Yep, their offices were near the studio I interned at back in college! It seemed like a cool place

[@CyanRooper]

"My blood type is Krylon, Technicolor type A." - High Voltage by Linkin Park

[@maritimemetaldoc6812]

Surviving as much as any VFX company can in 2024. They also do Animation and Advertising, They own 3 companies that work in each. MPC - VFX, Mikros - Animation, The Mill - ADs. Technicolor has had many owners over the decades though, Its based out of Paris now.

[@Slight-View]

@maritimemetaldoc6812 yeah hopefully they don't collapse to mismanagement like a lot of companies that have been "traded" around over the years.

[@bartbluemusic]

Well, that was a waste of 26 minutes. Nobody was lied to, nobody was tricked ... they promised a film in color and that's what we got. Doubt I will watch another brilliant video from this channel again.

[@ethervagabond]

Someone was tricked. The people that watched this video.

[@nickfifteen]

HAMBUGER > Don't Recommend Channel

[@donaldcarpenter5328]

i didn't find it all a waste, i know the diff between technicolor and eastman color and how it relates to linda eastman and the beatles and get back and i was wasted er, high when i watched the vid so no, it wasn't a waste...maybe reading this post is though lol

[@ethervagabond]

@@donaldcarpenter5328 definitely, give my eight seconds back! 😂

[@fakeduck4474]

I don't get the hate, yeah it's slightly misleading but it still explains a lot about the color film process that people might not know

[@AdamYorkGregory]

Yeah, if you think this is the biggest lie in Hollywood... what a click bait title. The resulting image is colour. The method requires three strips. That's why it is a process.

[@KuroAno]

8:45 Small mistake about subtractive coloring : the primary colors are actually magenta, cyan and yellow, hence the C(yan)M(agenta)Y(Yellow)K(ey, black) system used for printing.

[@pineapplequeen13]

I was just thinking the same thing. It frustrated me when I learned that the primary colors weren't red, yellow, and blue like we had been taught in elementary school because then I had to re-learn it when I was taking physics years later as CMYK.

[@flatfingertuning727]

​@@pineapplequeen13 Light, dyes/inks, and paints all mix differently. The range of colors that can be achieved by mixing white, black, red, green, and blue paints will often be better than could be achieved using white, black, red, green, and blue, or using white, black, cyan, magenta, and yellow. It's funny how many people think the red/green/blue color theory is "wrong", without recognizing that it's more accurate than the other theories when mixing most kinds of *paint*.

[@-book]

i'd argue this is a pretty big oversight tbh

[@Newhorizons4u]

Kinda crazy he didn’t even bother researching isn’t it

[@pineapplequeen13]

@@flatfingertuning727 See, THAT makes sense! I wish that was how they had taught it! Thank you, lol

[@agranero6]

Technicolor most amazing feature nowadays is that even via a digital media you recognize it immediately. The "lie" is a lie in spectral sense, but color is not really a thing that exists, light has a wavelength, and you see a spectral distribution of those things when you look at some thing. But our sensors are simple, faulty, like a spectograph with only three bands that are very large and asymmetrical, this allows different stimuli produce the exact same sensation because color is a cognitive process not a physical one.

[@oldtvnut]

Yes, the basic principle of trichromatic color reproduction, not requiring a sensational title and presentation.

[@michaelclark9762]

No, neither our eyes nor our cameras are like spectrographs with three narrow bands. They have wide sensitivity curves that overlap significantly. That's how the brain creates a perception of color from the way our three types of retinal cones are stimulated at different response rates to the same wavelengths of light.

[@agranero6]

@@michaelclark9762 I said: " *but very large* " meaning exactly that they are wideband ; " *and assymetrical this allows different stimuli produce the exact same sensation* " meaning exactly that they overlap, or that would not be possible.

[@cosmefulanito5933]

8:50 WRONG. Subtracting colors are Cyan, Magenta and Yellow.

[@goldwinger5434]

Is he a native English speaker? "Costed"? "Spinned"? I had to laugh at his pronunciation of "Cecil." LOL.

[@cmyk8964]

Still today, color photos and videos are just 3 black-and-white photos taken by the same camera. The photoreceptors in your digital camera can only detect one color of light; the advancement is that the filters aren't big spinning cellophane sheets or expensive prisms, but very tiny filters that cover individual photoreceptors. It's a mechanical recreation of the human retina with its short, medium, and long cones.

[@MrStratofish]

Digital camera sensors take just 1 black-and-white photo, not 3. The coloured filter in front of that sensor distributes which pixels have red, green or blue in front in a fixed pattern called a Bayer filter. From this single image, 3 images can then be extrapolated even though 50-75% of the data is not real and guessed from the surrounding pixels that do have real data automatically. I think the author here missed a trick in mentioning that at the end. It's every bit as impressive as Technicolor

[@donaldcarpenter5328]

"listen to the COLOR of your dreams"; John Lennon in Tomorrow never knows...

[@kirksealls1912]

THANK YOU. I’m glad I’m not alone here!

[@georgsteidl2249]

The Huawei Handy has actually RYYB nstead of RGB, cause that collects much more light or such

[@captbloodbeard]

@@MrStratofish Only some cameras are made this way. More expensive digital cameras, like those used for movies, are 3CCD cameras, so they have three sensors, one for each channel of RGB. But these still use a prism to split the light into 3 separate beams to hit each sensor, rather than a filter.

[@mildlycornfield]

How didn't the Cowardly Lion get heat stroke? I'm pretty sure he did, actually.

[@AndrewTSq]

yeah he did. "To cope with the heat, Lahr had to take frequent breaks, and the costume department had to regularly dry out the costume because it would become soaked with sweat. These conditions were part of the many challenges faced during the production of "The Wizard of Oz.""

[@ShallowVA]

This is like a three minute video stretched to half an hour.

[@kyleolson8977]

"You were probably told growing up that The Wizard of Oz was hand-painted, frame by frame" No. We were almost certainly not. Maybe you were also told the moon was made of cheese?

[@rho-starmkl4483]

😞First they told me that the Sun was green. Now they’re telling The Wizard of Oz movie wasn’t filmed in color.

[@zilsenoj5129]

One day we’ll be watching a Nationsquid video on a hologram.

[@Sicakasot]

lol if that day comes it’ll mean we can watch anime girl in 3d xd

[@james-transitfan-pz3gu]

On the Apple VR Pro :D

[@sesamestreetfriendsbarneyb3098]

@@james-transitfan-pz3gulol there is no such thing as the Apple VR Pro. It’s called the Apple Vision Pro. Also you can already watch KZbin on it. And it’s not hologram

[@sesamestreetfriendsbarneyb3098]

@@james-transitfan-pz3gu I think you mean the Apple Vision Pro.

[@james-transitfan-pz3gu]

@@sesamestreetfriendsbarneyb3098 and? it the VR headset i mean

[@arkadybron1994]

What a pointless waste of time. A bad overblown explanation of a technical process doesn't make it unreal. That's like saying moving pictures are a lie because it's really just a lot of still images, projected one after another.

[@netsurfer2975]

I just got tricked into watching a commercial in exchange for entertainment.

[@Minty1337]

13:30 "how did he not get heatstroke" well uh... that's the thing... he did. (at least from what I heard, could be wrong)

[@HappyPlaysWasTaken]

think that was the joke

[@Minty1337]

@@HappyPlaysWasTaken his tone didn't sound like a joke, hard to tell

[@onemintyrose]

was just boutta say this also mlp fan?

[@LordofSyn]

I remember hearing that too. Plus, the silver paint used on Buddy Epsen made him ill. The old theatre and movie productions were done as inexpensive as possible because the film was so expensive.

[@squidiskool]

@@onemintyroseapparently bronies really like learning about the film industry

[@sticklyboi]

im not sure why more people arent shitting on this video, its got a smug aura about it

[@wheedler]

To reduce engagement; if you comment on videos you don't like, you'll get more of them recommended.

[@txikitofandango]

because the smug aura isn't the worst thing about it

[@sticklyboi]

@@txikitofandango you reckon? i dunno man, the whole "well ackshually this isnt REAL color because the technique is etc, etc" is annoying enough

[@grimpicklex]

Then dude said “costed”. Oh man.

[@yellowrose0910]

@@grimpicklex AND "cyan" and "Cecil" all mispronounced.

[@kirksealls1912]

This video demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of how color photography works. With dedicated color film, there are three layers of silver halide each sensitive to either red, green, or blue light, with each layer dyed. With digital photography, each lights sensitive pixel has either a red, green, or blue mask over it so that it’s only sensitive to one of those colors, and then the image is reconstructed applying the colors appropriately. In other words, by this definition ALL color photography has always been a hoax. While there were efforts to find materials that would natively render different colors of light differently early on, no such material has ever been found

[@3vi1J]

Misleading clickbait title. Blocked.

[@richtravis9562]

I was born in the 60's. I have never heard that the wizard of oz was hand painted. and I was sending color FAX's in the 80's.

[@kirksealls1912]

I’m pretty sure this was a case of perpetuating a myth practically nobody believed in for the sole purpose of debunking it

[@Jared_Wignall]

I always love going back and looking at the various methods of filmmaking and how things were achieved. It’s incredibly fascinating.

[@JoeBlowUK]

The biggest trick of all, is the movie, the screen, in fact everything we see, is all upside down and wrong way round when it is projected onto the back of our eyes, but our brain simply flips the image for us.

[@TranquilVision]

You should be embarassed by this video, NationSquid.

[@Sazoji]

This has to be the least technical and historically accurate depiction of color film tech, I HIGHLY recommend anyone looking for history of the 3 strip system look at some more tech focused channels instead of misleading history and a poor narrative. I've produced a small list of all the cringe-inducing moments (mostly with his creative use of ignoring time entirety) but I've already stated the best thing you should do, LOOK ELSEWHERE!

[@wheedler]

I recommend Captain Disillusion.

[@dennishapca]

3:02 I actually thought someone knocked on my door and then thought my AirPods broke 😂

[@MarcKloos]

KZbin kept on recommending this video. I finally gave in and watched it. I want my 23 minutes back (I skipped the ad).

[@bgracey7225]

A clickbait way of explaining a concept many people have never heard about. All our film and video capture has always been done this way when it comes to "colour". A camera doesn't know what colour is; It's all about light and varying levels of it, no matter the medium or technology. We attribute colour to it after the fact.

[@m.i.andersen8167]

I guess "Nation squid" dropped out of school very early based on his science knowledge. He has absolutely no concept of light, colors, etc. The whole video is pure nonsense. Don't believe any of what is said in the video, but use it as an example of how wrong it can go if you spend your time making You Tube videos instead of going to school/taking an education or read some serious science books.

[@jamesslick4790]

Fun Fact: It took until 1972 Color TV sets to out sell B/W sets although NTSC color sets were available since 1954! What's real weird is that it took until the mid 1980s for TV sound to be in )))Stereo((( Analog TV used AM for the video and FM for sound. FM Stereo radio has been around since 1961. (The 88-108 FM radio band fit within the space between the analog TV channels 6&7!) Why did it take over 20 years for TV to adopt this tech?

[@GANONdork123]

Most likely because the speakers built into TVs themselves weren't far enough apart for viewers to tell the difference between sounds coming from one side or the other. It was all just in front of them.

[@megamix5403]

Cost. It's all about cost.

[@CyanRooper]

In Metal Gear Solid 1, one of the boss fights requires the player to pay attention to which direction the sound of a helicopter is flying. If you play the game on a TV with a mono speaker the side characters break the fourth wall and basically roast you for being poor. What makes it even funnier is that the plot of Metal Gear Solid 1 is set in 2005 (the game came out in 1998) so the characters were roasting the player for still using a mono speaker TV in 2005.

[@joesterling4299]

National TV-broadcast sound at one point was carried by phone lines, monophonic and with a frequency response that dropped above 5 Khz.

[@jamesslick4790]

@@GANONdork123 Fair argument, BUT there were portable stereos (later dubbed "boom boxes") available since the early-mid 1970s and they were not as wide as a 19" let alone aa 21" or 25" TV so their speakers wern't all that far away from each other (4"-5" seperation) .

[@stpnlll]

If the OP is confused by the "trickery" of technicolor film, wait til he finds out how complex human vision itself is.

[@uhuhhesaid]

Costed?!? *W*hat *T*he *F*uck?!? This guy makes me feel so *OLD*!

[@rays7805]

I'm giving this video a thumbs down because the title is a lie. I'm just 8 minutes in, and I'm actually going to stop watching. I was tempted to keep going, because you make really good videos. But I can't handle another minute of this one, because you're committing a big fallacy of definition, and constantly rubbing it in my face. You have said, "When people say that an image is in color, they don't mean that according to the collectively agreed-upon definition, or any definition which they may say they mean. They mean it according to a narrow, convoluted, and arbitrary definition that I have chosen. So when I lie about what the words mean, I can tell another lie and say that these people have lied." But they haven't lied; only you have. You know a story that was like this? When a science teacher in school told me that since we see the light that bounces off of things, and that these things absorb the other frequencies of light, these things are actually the opposite colors from what we see. I had learned the scientific concepts years before and was already way ahead of her. She wanted to say that what color a thing is should be defined by the frequencies of light it absorbs, not the ones it reflects. This throws out the collectively agreed-upon definition of "to be a certain color", replaces it with an arbitrary and useless definition, and turns the whole concept on its ear. Definitions like these make meaningful conversations impossible. You know what else was like this? When someone who was very intelligent and should have known better said that colors do not even exist. I know what he meant; they are an abstract representation of frequencies of light as interpreted by the brain. But again, this throws out the accepted definition of "a color existing", replaces it with something arbitrary and useless, and throws out the whole concept for no good reason. The common thread is that someone got a notion in their minds about what a concept meant, they decided that this notion should replace all the definitions that people have agreed upon, and then they stuffed these words into people's mouths every time they talked about a concept. It's dishonest. You can't just insist that people mean the things they say according to your definitions, not their own. You can't redefine words or phrases for everyone. That's not how language works. Language is culturally agreed upon. It isn't just decided by fiat, or by one person's whims. Here is what it might look like if I did what you did: No one has ever seen a NationSquid video. What they have seen is an encoded data stream that has been decoded, rendered onto a screen, captured by the eye, and interpreted by the brain. And even before that, it was captured by a camera, converted into digital bits, and encoded; and then it was decoded and re-encoded during the editing process, and the upload process. That isn't a video, at any stage, because I said it's not. I've decided that the only thing that can actually be called a video is the image at the instant that it hit the photocell, before it was encoded or recorded in any way. That is the only thing that was actually a video, and that is what everyone means when they talk about a video. So most of the time when people say "video", they're lying. Because I have a notion. Also, there is no such thing as a person. There is only an elaborate arrangement of cells generating an elaborate lattice of thought processes, which creates what merely appears to be a person. That isn't really a person, because I said it's not. I have a notion. Also, has anyone ever said that The Wizard of Oz was hand-painted? What are you talking about? Do better, NationSquid. This is beneath your usual high standards.

[@james_fisch]

This was very fun to watch, quite timely as i happened to rewatch Wizard of Oz last week. I can't help but wonder how audiences reacted in seeing color utilized beautifully with not just the three strip process, but the set design and the gorgeous transition from sepia tone to vibrant colors. In addition to that, I'm impressed that digital colorization of black and white movies is still crude and primitive. Hal Roach really bought into that in the 80s when he began colorizing Laurel and Hardy, which i grew up watching those versions as a kid in the late 90s. Nowadays i can see just how bad most of the colorization jobs were in that era, and now i see people attempting it again with modern video editing software. Mostly i see that with historical footage rather than movies, and it frankly looks worse than the colonization fad of the 80s.

[@Nitwon]

"nOt ReAlLy CoLoR aT aLl"

[@cab4]

Now I know why the 1950s Tripod aliens have the three eyes that they do. They see in technicolor.

[@GoldenKarelyt]

funny how i watched back to the future today and seeing a clip of it makes me happy.

[@wheedler]

I haven't seen it in years and seeing clips of it still makes me happy.

[@MrSarcasm101]

Technicolor isn't a science but a technique/process. Cool video!

[@richardlbowles]

"Follow the shades-of-grey brick road."

[@MirayMorningstar]

"We're not watching a movie, it's just moving photographs."

[@Mr_Flippy]

$30,000 in 1930's ~ $500,000 in 2024

[@asocos]

You mean 500k

[@Mr_Flippy]

@@asocos fixed it thanks my b

[@molotera8789]

100 °F ~ 37 °C put that as well

[@vast634]

A "millionaire" back then, was actually a rich person. (about 18 million today) Today a millionaire is someone somewhat well off, but not really "rich".

[@RS3DArchive]

You're talking absolute nonsense here. Technicolor is real color using a three strip process with black and white negatives. Not only is the color real, but Technicolor is more stable and lasts longer than one strip color film. It does not fade, has no side absorption, and looks the same today as it did when new. Color negatives like the kind used in Star Wars or The Godfather faded badly and were almost lost due to the use of CRVs or Color Internegatives before 1983. None of the movies shot on those formats have their original color anymore, and the versions seen today are electronically enhanced to make them look acceptable, that is why the Death Star interior is no longer khaki gray, and why there are purple highlights in Michael Corleone's hair. The original Technicolor films are not only real, but the color is fully intact and will continue to be for centuries to come. That is also why Disney continued to use it when he ran the company well into the 1960s. He did not want his films to fade away like so many others from the 1950s and 60s did. In the early 50s the Eastman Technicolor process used one strip color and required no special cameras. The colors were separated in the lab onto black and white negative. Singing in the Rain is a good example of it, the one strip film faded in only months, but the Eastman Technicolor negatives look just like they did back in the 1950s.

[@darren6202]

Quite ironic that you quote the guy as having 'talked nonsense' when most of your verbal shit smells the same.

[@RS3DArchive]

@@darren6202 You really ought to pull the bug out. What is this to you? Your attempt to bully with coarse language doesn't cut it.

[@kirksealls1912]

@RS3DArchive, I can’t believe after that wonderful response to this rather silly video the only comment you’ve gotten was from that fool

[@eddieb3d]

One negative (no pun intended) with technicolor as an archival method over a long period is film shrinkage. The three negatives would very slightly shrink at different rates causing misalignment. In the 90s some “restored” theatrical films from the technicolor negatives had strange chromic “fringe” effects. Almost like 3D anaglyph films but not as extreme. Computer scanning and auto alignment solved this problem thankfully.

[@3DJapan]

Why would someone tell me the Wizard of Oz was hand painted? That's ridiculous.

[@girinvdr]

Ugh this guy is insufferable

[@bbrehm6525]

What is that accent? California Valley Girl?

[@coolbdiggity]

the other videos this guy has made are much better

[@fungo6631]

The biggest problem with Eastmancolor was that it started fading badly pretty quickly as it was unstable. It's a problem with many older films that might not be stored the best where they fade into magenta.

[@RAFMnBgaming]

yeah, one of the things that to me is the most beautiful thing about technicolour films, shows, etc is that they look just as colourful now as they did fresh out the bath.

[@martifingers]

Also the video suggests Eastmancolor was a three strip process but my understanding it was an integral tripack film from which the Technicolour process was used to make prints. The script is a little ambiguous in places.

[@tarstarkusz]

20:30 "..color video took over television in the late 1970s...." What are you talking about? The late 70s? The last TV show filmed in B&W was in the mid 60s. There are literally ZERO TV shows filmed in B&W in the 70s. Even Sesame Street, which started filming in 1969 and was a low budget TV show for children was filmed in full color. While many TV shows were entirely taped, outdoor scenes were generally filmed with actual film.

[@scotpens]

Specifically, NBC became the first network to have an all-color prime time schedule in 1966. Rival networks CBS and ABC followed a year later.

[@PaulKapow]

Subtractive color is Magenta, Cyan and Yellow. Not red, blue, and yellow. That is why it is used in printer inks.

[@katelights]

colours used for subtractive processes are not blue red and yellow. they are cyan, magenta and yellow. Just like printer ink.

[@serenasamborski6856]

7:30 I've never heard anyone say this, are you just making stuff up?

[@brianhiles8164]

(01:50) _“What if all its vibrant colors was all a lie; just an illusion meant to trick your eyes.“_ You mean, like this digital video displayed from an Internet streaming service? Digital sensor, quantization, digital compression -- all the file formats and protocols -- lies, all lies? I am so depressed. _Back to seeing and hearing what the_ Puppet Master of Lies _has to say about_ The Wizard of Oz...

[@PeteC62]

I knew this was a stupid click bait video, but it was still annoying to have to watch a third of it to confirm that, yes, the video's title is the lie, not the color process.

[@michaelclark9762]

The biggest lie in Hollywood is something along the lines of "If you'll give me what it is that I want from you, I'll make you a movie star/director/producer/etc."

[@mzaliwa]

What does this guy think that colour actually is?

[@whiterose7055]

Technicolor works exactly the way modern digital camera sensors do.

[@dennis8196]

No one thinks The Wizard of Oz was painted. And It wouldn't be until the mid 60's the Wizard of Oz would be considered profitable. Sure it managed to make money, but after nearly bankrupting the studio. It was the technical work that was the money earner after the films release.

[@kirksealls1912]

I’m pretty sure the “hand painted” myth was just a case of perpetuating a supposed myth that practically nobody believed in for the sole purpose of debunking it

[@Fatlittledominocat]

how is using three different color sensitive reels of film and combining them any more of a "lie" than what the sensors in a digital camera or cones in our eyes are doing.

[@megjulia4007]

I am a huge, lifelong Beatles fan, and you taught me something new about my 4 favorite boys' best film today - thank you!!

[@goplad1]

Since this person failed to mention this bit of trivia I will. The first two-strip Technicolor film made in Hollywood was "The Toll Of The Sea" in 1922. This film can be seen here on KZbin. Worth it not only to see Technicolor technology in its infancy but to see the sublime Chinese American actress Anna May Wong in her first starring role.

[@mchristi314]

"By 1954, a company called Eastmancolor..." Except Eastmancolor isn't a company it's a trade name for a film stock and process for color motion pictures. The company who made it is Kodak. The name is a reference to Kodak's founder, George Eastman. And the process was actually introduced in 1950.

[@JLCL01]

I was kinda expecting a bit more when you mentioned Clerks but I guess the reason behind it being B&W implies budgetary restrictions. It was basically an indie film where Kevin Smith sold his house in orderto make it, iirc.

[@tarstarkusz]

Records or cylinders DO NOT PREDATE FILM! There are pictures taken in the civil war. The first picture was taken in 1826!!! The very first recording of sound was on On April 9, 1860!!

[@synoneiro]

True. I guess he meant moving film.

[@davinasquirrel7672]

Yes, I suspect that is the distinction, moving images. Most of the 19th century still photography were done on plates (not a single frame of film). So correct in that regard as well.

[@tarstarkusz]

@@davinasquirrel7672 The point is, photography predates sound by quite a while. It's kind of odd when you think about it. The chemistry and chemical making was far more difficult than recording sound on a wax cylinder. It's even more amazing that we had instant communication with Britain 2 years before the first sound was recorded! The first Atlantic cable was completed in 1858.

[@davinasquirrel7672]

@@tarstarkusz But we are talking still photography, done on plates, not 'film'. Basically the assertion is technically correct.

[@nick-it7mr]

Your video reminded me of a phrase I often said during my days as a Set Decorator: "We're making a movie, not a documentary."

[@awilliams1701]

The last true B&W movie is probably clerks isn't it? YUP! LMAO

[@yu_yuita]

ah yes, a great way to end a monday… with a nationsquid video :D

[@TheGuyWhoIsSitting]

I never heard this before that people thought this film was hand painted

[@brucemartinelli]

How thoroughly unlikable. I kept thinking to myself "please shut up". He's probably a nice person in real life but jeez.

[@oliverscratch]

Many black and white movie productions actually employed a color consultant. This person understood how various colors would translate to shades of gray on film. Colors of sets and costumes were carefully chosen to give the desired look in B&W, but this sometimes led to some odd on-set colors. An actor portraying a farmer might have worn an orange, purple, and puce plaid shirt, the colors chosen for how the shirt would look when rendered in gray.