Home / Blog

Colorist Lou Levinson on Restoring (and, Sometimes, Re-Thinking) Movies with the Baselight

Gladiator Last week at NAB, Laser Pacific colorist Lou Levinson dropped by Filmlight’s demo room to show reporters a quick look at his work digitally restoring two popular titles on the super-powered Baselight color-grading system — director Steven Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan and director Ridley Scott’s Gladiator. If you’re like me, you might wonder how much restoration really has to be done on two films released at the turn of the 21st century. I mean, how bad can they look? As described by Levinson, these two restorations were class acts. The original camera negatives were scanned at 6K on a Northlight scanner to create a detailed and nuanced 4K image to work with. (If the same work were being done today, Levinson said, a Northlight 2 would likely be scanning the film at 8K — a resolution that he said is “getting near film’s theoretical limits.”) Color-grading was performed on the Baselight 8, a system powerful enough that organization becomes the biggest problem for a colorist to manage, rather than any issues with the capabilities of the hardware or software, Levinson said. If a picture is in really bad shape, Levinson said he’ll turn to tools from The Pixel Farm to perform serious geometrical restoration on distorted film frames. Levinson chatted a little bit about dust-and-scratch removal — the latest toolsets make it much easier to fix vertical scratches, he says — but a restoration job can be more complicated, and more amusing, than just that. Levinson showed us a shot from Gladiator in which several members of the film crew are just visible around a corner of the Roman cityscape. They have now been painted out using a clone tool to replicate bits of brickwork where they once stood. (Levinson suspects one of the men caught in the shot is Scott himself, but has yet to enlarge the image enough to verify that hunch.) On Saving Private Ryan, one of Levinson’s primary goals was to recapture the ENR (silver-retention) look of the film’s original answer prints. That got me thinking about an issue I’ve always assumed to be fundamental to the job of creating new video masters. Is a colorist attempting to be true to film history by recreating the look of an original theatrical screening of a film? Or is he trying to take advantage of digital technology to, let’s say, “enhance” the image in (one hopes) tasteful ways? I asked Levinson if he considered an original answer print to be the ultimate reference when working on a project like this. “A lot of creators never stop thinking about their films,” even after their release, Levinson said in response. He went on to explain that the director is the arbiter of how far a colorist should go in refining a film’s imagery. He mentioned one type of director — naming no names — for whom a film’s look is a bit of a moving target. “I’ve done the same movie four times and had it look different all four times,” he said. I talked about this subject a little more with Laser Pacific mastering guru Ron Burdett, who insisted that the company won’t even consider a restoration project on a living director’s work unless that director is available to sign off on the restoration. (What happens when a living director butts heads with a living cinematographer is a whole ‘nother story.) As you might expect, film grain is often one of the first characteristics of the picture to receive scrutiny. Some directors display their grain proudly, while others prefer to have it dialed down a notch or two for posterity. Before you bake in that decision, you need the fellow who helmed the movie to give it the thumbs-up. Levinson is a go-to guy for Spielberg, having worked on digital masters for E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, Schindler’s List, Jurassic Park, and more of his films. On deck to receive some Baselight TLC is Raiders of the Lost Ark, which will get a full restoration and perhaps a stereo 3D makeover. But the current science project at Laser Pacific is an implementation of the IIF-ACES workflow (see Film & Video‘s coverage of its use on season two of Justified), a 16-bit OpenEXR process that requires 76.5 MB per frame and 1.8 GB per second of footage. The first beneficiary of that will be the live-action version of 101 Dalmatians starring Glenn Close from 1996. We’ll try to get more information on that project for publication here at StudioDaily later this year.

5 Comments

Categories: Blog
Tags: , , , , , , ,

  • http://www.hellonwheelsproductions.com Wolfgang V. Einstein

    I like the color of the still posted…above…
    Being Tech afficionados….we are not as inspired by some of the greenish gray work that is coming to theatres near us…somekind of dreary mood is implied…downright depressing stuff….Sometimes otherwise nicely done color on film looks dreary in theatres sporting digital projection…lacking in sufficient candle power in the lamphouse?…or maybe in need of a tweek or two on the projector settings?
    Spielberg’s most popular films are bright and with good color density and saturation…I suppose Lou Levinson is golden eye in charge….probably some directors do try to get an analog video camera look as if shot under fluorescent tubes from their film footage….
    “Subjective subject color is!”(Yoda)

  • Dan Petitpas

    It sounds to me more like “remastering” than “restoring.” I tend to think of the work of Robert A. Harris on Lawrence of Arabia and Sparticus as restoration, where the film may be damaged or parts have to be reconstructed from various elements. Doing some coloring work and taking out a few scratches isn’t really restoration..

  • Richard Kirk

    I notice people describe the look of a film in physical terms. We want the ENR look of the answer print; we want to get the fluorescent tube look; and so on.

    We can physically model many of these processes. I know of no lab that will do ENR, but we can model the film processes and create a plausible imitation. Even changing the lighting or film stock, or swapping analogue for digital is possible, provided the reflection spectra are not too bizarre, and you do not go beyond the gamut of one of the processes. We could make a grading tool based on physical lighting and capture processes.

    However, in ten years time, do you think people will still ask for looks based on physical processes? I guess people will ask for some historical looks for period films: things like newsreel black and white, or early Technicolor. People with years of film experience will probably stick to what they know. But will people describe a greeinsh cast as ‘fluorescent-ish’?

  • Wolfgang V. Einstein

    “But will people describe a greeinsh cast as ‘fluorescent-ish’?”
    Who knows how people will describe a green-ish cast….if a result of shooting film without or without the correcting filters or if they just want a greenish grey effect for the “mood” ?
    And you are correct that parameters can be developed and somewhere probably do already exist to digitally recreate approximations of certain “Film Looks”…
    However, basically the end result projected on a screen or displayed on an i Pad etc.etc.etc…is really an artistic/technical decision, subject to many variables down stream and the only thing that matters in the end is
    Did the audience enjoy the movie? or NOT!
    Some “restorations” we have seen change the colors of the entire film, maybe the only remaining copy is an old and faded dingy scratched stretched grubby release print…if they can pull it back together at all is to their credit…and better than nothing at all is really great when you thing about it….but to be sure even the artist technician restorationists at the Louvres get carried away as they remove the centuries of grime and oxidation…and sometimes the end result causes the painting to lose it’s character….and who knows if Rembrandt really ground up rubies and saffires into lindseed oil pastes and smeared them onto the toile? Probably he was just trying to get his commission from some powerful Machiavelian bastard before he had his head chopped off for squandering costly artist supplies or before he starved to death.
    Joey Violante (Joey V. ) knows how to get nice color ..if you are in New York…
    The Technicolor Lab on Lankershim never fails with my footage…if I screwed up shooting the camera NEG…I ask them to fix it up…the Lab Always saves it…they know what to do, they are the best …they NEVER FAIL
    they are professionals not BS Artists.

  • D Riordan

    As an exhibitor of classic film on the big screen, I recoiled in disgust at the recent BluRay transfer of GONE WITH THE WIND. All teals and oranges, of course; no Technicolor! Sorry, but it’s actually hard to watch now.
    With repertory divisions of major studios now recommending we all screen classic film on DVDs, is this the pathetic future of showing historic film?
    Classic films should be restored, not ‘re-mastered’. It is perfectly acceptable to call it a restoration if the scratches, blemishes, and other assorted damages to the image from years of abuse are removed, but colorists, and other technicians involved should respect the work of those who originally made these classic films, many of whom are not around to approve of such changes. I realize colorists have amazing technical prowess, but, please use respect when restoring classic films that have made themselves classic by looking (and sounding) the way they did on their first release.