534 L'enfance nue

[HistoryProf]

Also, never been prouder of this forum that no one took Gary Tooze's bait

having just noticed this thread had tripled in size in two days, I got to that point and thought 'oh boy, here we go...' - and then....nothing. awesome. Maybe just everyone has him on ignore by now? the only time he ever seems to post here is to lay down some woe is me beats. whatev.

As for the CC/MOC question, personally I think i like the CC slightly more than the MOC. I just think it looks more authentic and has more detail, and to me the MOC seems to be the stretched one and kind of washed out/contrasty. But it's mostly just a matter of personal aesthetic taste, and rather pointless to argue about it. get the one you like and enjoy it. :shrug:

[hangman]

But it's mostly just a matter of personal aesthetic taste, and rather pointless to argue about it. get the one you like and enjoy it. :shrug:

Thing is as Svevan has pointed out that has become the fallback answer to the discrepancies in color timing of criterion. True there are complications to getting the most accurate color representation for the reasons pointed out by justeblanc.

But going by track record of Criterion with color transfers, especially over MoC, I would easily be more inclined to MoC's color than Criterion given that they don't really manipulate color timing (if at all) in a manner that appears to be a bias towards certain tones. I mean just look at the Ozu topics for this debate Course we also have members who have seen the film in print who do recall strongly that yellow is certainly not the color of the film. As for comparing with the French DVD the MoC release does not differ with regard to the color representation. Even then from my own experience with the Pialat's I've seen (L'enfance nue, La Guele Ouvert, Nous ne vieillirons pas ensemble, and Van Gogh; seen Van Gogh and Nous ne viellilrons pas ensemble on print) I don't see him as using any strong yellow filter, though the DVD's and prints are MoC and Gaumont so...

As for stretching well I don't really have anything to say about this since I did not notice it at all, and neither did anyone from the MoC thread or glowing reviews, to really speak out and say that its a noticeable bother.

[Don Lope de Aguirre]

In fact, Pialat considered the photography of L'Enfance nue successful precisely because it rendered the ugly colours and harsh contrasts of the setting.

There seems to be a Californication going on. Do people in that part of France at that time of year actually have those skin tones?

(The same goes for Le Cercle Rouge as pointed out by a previous poster and -not by Criterion, I know- Secrets & Lies)

[justeleblanc]

In fact, Pialat considered the photography of L'Enfance nue successful precisely because it rendered the ugly colours and harsh contrasts of the setting.

There seems to be a Californication going on. Do people in that part of France at that time of year actually have those skin tones?

Well, in what year to cinema's color technology accurately depict skin tones?

[Matt]

Well, in what year to cinema's color technology accurately depict skin tones?

I dare you to make less sense.

[justeleblanc]

Well, in what year to cinema's color technology accurately depict skin tones?

I dare you to make less sense.

Well played. But certainly when you look at older color films the skin tones are different than they are in today's color films. Does no one else notice this?

[knives]

Orange and teal.

[Matt]

Well, to make a contribution apart from snide jokes, yes, they are different. Today's color film technology is very much advanced from previous decades. But every film today is also different from each other. There are so many choices available to filmmakers now (even beyond teal and orange) that you'd be hard pressed to find a dozen examples to back up the generalization that skin tones look more natural now than then.

There were fewer, but just as different choices available to filmmakers 50-60 years ago. Do you want Technicolor (which will make everything look like strawberry jam), Eastmancolor (which will make blues and reds pop at the expense of yellow), Fujicolor (which will tinge everything green), Kodachrome (which stays beautifully vivid for decades), etc. Even then, with filters, lighting, and color timing, a filmmaker could make skin tones look as natural or unnatural as he desired.

[rf1960]

I have seen L'enfance three times in theaters (twice in France), and none of those times did I see anything like those Crit screencaps show.

[Donald Brown]

There's no possibility that the film stock used for this film would normally deliver the color seen on the Criterion disc.

It would either have to have been manipulated during filming using filters, or altered later through unusual film development or by messing with the color timing when striking production prints. The only other possibility is that the film stock was defective, as in it was very old or it had been exposed to extreme heat.

Whether this is the color Pialat preferred or not, I don't know, but if it was, he would've had to have gone out of his way to make it look so. I'm perfectly willing to entertain the idea that Pialat wanted it to look this way, but understand that simply using this particular stock, or pretty much any stock, would not have produced these colors without deliberate manipulation or something seriously going wrong.

[justeleblanc]

There's no possibility that the film stock used for this film would normally deliver the color seen on the Criterion disc.

I don't doubt you but please say more about the specific film stock as this may solve the issue.

[Donald Brown]

I'm not sure what you want to know. Matt already summarized some of the differences between the most common stocks. None of them will produce colors seen on the Criterion disc without being altered. Skin tones would still be recognizable as human skin.

[Jeff]

Eastmancolor (which will make blues and reds pop at the expense of yellow)

L'enfance nue is Eastmancolor, which makes the Criterion transfer all the more perplexing.

[Matt]

Though I'm really no expert, I've never seen a film stock that would produce, by default, such a heavily yellowed spectrum. As DB says, Pialat and his cinematographer, Claude Beausoleil, would either have had to use a filter when shooting (in which case, the original negative and all elements struck from it would be biased toward yellow) or have had to adjust the color timing of prints struck from the negative to achieve this effect. Now, the latter is entirely probably and it would also be probable that Pialat or Beausoleil did not supervise every single print that came out of the lab, especially those prints struck after the initial release. So it's entirely possible that some people saw, in theaters, prints that looked like the Criterion disc and others saw, in theaters elsewhere, prints that looked like the MoC/Gaumont. And the people doing the telecine for these releases could be looking at release prints for reference and coming up with accurate, yet completely different, results. Unfortunately, the only people who can speak with any authority on the director's and cinematographer's intentions are dead (unless the guy who did the color timing is still around and can remember this film 42 years on). Everyone else is just giving an opinion. From what little I know about Pialat, though, he doesn't seem like the kind of director who would go out of his way to make his images look unnatural. I would think he'd want the most unfiltered, unaltered image possible (and that's just my opinion).

L'enfance nue is Eastmancolor, which makes the Criterion transfer all the more perplexing.

The MoC looks just like Eastmancolor to me.

[oldsheperd]

L'enfance Nue starring John Boehner. Tha guy's tan

[Matt]

I should also add that you could get a yellow cast to the image if you shot in tungsten light on just about any film made for use in daylight, but then that doesn't explain why exterior shots also have a yellow cast to them. Film stocks are balanced to reproduce certain color temperature ranges accurately. Shooting with artificial (tungsten) light on daylight film gives you a yellow image. Shooting in daylight with tungsten films gives you a blue/cyan image.

[zedz]

L'enfance nue is Eastmancolor, which makes the Criterion transfer all the more perplexing.

The MoC looks just like Eastmancolor to me.

Well, exactly, which also, by some wild coincidence, also matches the descriptions by people who have actually seen the film projected. I was actually just about to note that Matt's earlier description of Eastmancolor ("which will make blues and reds pop at the expense of yellow") matched the MoC palette to a T and was going to blindly wager that that was the film stock used, before I read on to find that Jeff had already conveniently confirmed it. I don't see why it's so hard to believe that Criterion might have got it wrong in this instance. This stuff happens all the time: it doesn't make them bad people.

[Matt]

But I'm just dying to know how they arrived at the result they did.

[swo17]

I'm assuming they were using a print for reference that somehow or other had been manipulated to roughly the color scheme evident in the Criterion caps. Either that or there was a bright blue pool table featured in the film somewhere. I can literally think of no other possible explanation.

I do, however, think the MoC looks slightly stretched and cropped on the sides in comparison to the slightly more realistic proportions of the Criterion.

[JOI]

But I'm just dying to know how they arrived at the result they did.

CC promised a "forthcoming" post about this via fb, stay tuned I guess...

[Flike]

They commented on FB that there will be a Current post in reference to the colors controversy.

[Svevan]

I can't imagine a response that doesn't include the word "recall." Where was the Criterion blog during the Gertrud and Nevsky controversies? Would've liked to hear some wriggling on that one (though I'm fine with the Gertrud aspect, for the record).

[cdnchris]

Gary needs to have his head examined for not calling this clearly in favour of MoC

I just got back from vacation and looked at the disc so I'm late on this, but yes, it's yellow. I wouldn't call it "pissy", but maybe more "Heaven's Gate-y" (if there is a difference.) And I'm curious as to this choice as well, and find it a little distracting but I think what Gary is talking about are other aspects of the transfer as being stronger. The transfer itself is very stable, has very few artifacts, and looks great (again, getting past the yellow) upscaled. If it wasn't for the yellow I'd be perfectly pleased with it, but I'm very curious as to the choice for colouring.

[Florinaldo]

In the weekly update e-mail on the DVDBeaver Yahoo mailing list, Mr. Tooze declares himself much more categorically in favour of the MoC edition. Here's the exact quote:

It's obvious to see that the dual-disc MoC L'Enfance Nue really blows away the Criterion of the same Pialat film.

Curious discrepancy between that and the "official" review on the site itself.

[tajmahal]

In the weekly update e-mail on the DVDBeaver Yahoo mailing list, Mr. Tooze declares himself much more categorically in favour of the MoC edition. Here's the exact quote:

It's obvious to see that the dual-disc MoC L'Enfance Nue really blows away the Criterion of the same Pialat film.

Curious discrepancy between that and the "official" review on the site itself.

In other words, stating the obvious. Jesus, the man has copped so much shit for so long. Damned if he does, and all that. If I'm interested in a dvd, and given the opportunity to compare screencaps, I'll decide based on the caps, specs, reviews, and clued-up posters here. I chose the BFI Red Desert this way. He cops a serve for not saying in bold type that the Criterion Pialat is a dog's breakfast, though it is obvious to all and sundry.

Thanks, Gary, for your effort over the years. I'm sure smaller distributors will be sorry to see you go, especially if the new Beaver leans more towards major distributor, major title territory.

All the best.