We love to call out racism when we see it. Trust me. It’s our ultimate joy around here (see Anthony’s last post). Today Daily Kos, Wonkette, AmericaBlog and many other blogs are having great fun pointing out the difference in the color of Barack Obama’s face in the most recent Hillary Clinton ad versus the original color that appeared in a TV debate. Laypersons everywhere on the internet are comparing the side by side images and commenting as color theory experts. Their verdict is RACISM!
The tired, angry voice in my head screams out again: “Everybody’s a fucking expert!”
I’ve repeated that phrase for more than 15 years now - almost daily. As an accomplished creative director and video director I’ve had clients tell me they know nothing, but in the same breath go on a critical rant while they present a 25 point plan to make detailed adjustments on a project that they’ve hired me to direct.
Everybody should be critic, but not everybody can be an expert.
I happen to be both, so I will try in the quickest and simplest terms to explain what probably happened to the colors in Hillary’s ad.
Color correcting 101:
All film, video and pictures are color corrected (with the exception of most amateur or hobby-fessional work). We do this to fix unwanted color tints and to achieve a “look” that can also help convey a message. So far, we all seem to understand that.
Examples: Take a look at these two OJ covers. I’m sure you understand by now that all magazine pictures are photoshopped to make them look their best (we sometimes call it “retouching”). Color correction is always part of this process. Both magazines use the same image framed nearly the same way with similar bloody red type, but TIME wins this one by dialing down the saturation and darkening the picture overall to make OJ darker and scarier. Ooooohhhhh. Duh.
But here’s the rather boring punchline.
The people who made Hillary’s ad recorded Barack’s TV appearance, probably from a standard cable or satellite signal. Those signals need to be compressed to make it through the wires and into your home, therefore noise and artifacts (kinda like a bad emailed JPEG) will be present. Even if they got the footage from the network (which is unlikely), they may have been given the customary analog BetaSP tape, which is barely better than VHS.
Then they’ve got to take that footage and work with it. First thing they might do is try to reduce the noise introduced by the compression and correct the color. This softens the image and reduces detail in highlights and shadows. The net is an effective increase in contrast - a separation of dark and light tones - but still more flattering than the noise that would have speckled Obama’s face. It is obvious enough to see in the ad. Though it also looks like it was made a tiny bit darker overall, it’s accentuated by the poorly done vignette effect (the darkness around the edges of the frame). However, it’s barely any adjustment at all. And if it was truly an attempt to give Obama the TIME OJ treatment, it was a weak attempt.
Color is more complicated and difficult than it seems. This is why we hire color experts and spend thousands of dollars on software and hardware in attempt to keep our color optimized and calibrated.
Three still examples of the original video in this image (taken from AmericaBlog) show slight, normal color shifts.
The exact same colors that are produced on TV can’t be reproduced in magazines. The colors that you see on your shitty Windows machine are different from the colors I see on my Mac. Your computer monitor, TV, dvd player, cable network, satellite provider and even your eyes… all store and decode color differently. Do I need to remind you that there’s also a button or a dial on all of those machines that gives you the power to make Barack Obama appear forever purple if you feel like it?
We call that “operator error”
UPDATE: FactCheck.org agrees with me, they spent some more time on showing visual comparisons and they are right on point.
TAGS: Barack Obama, debate, election, Hillary, Hillary Clinton, obama, paris, Photoshop, Racism, Verdict, Video, war
SUBSCRIBE TO RSS
March 5th, 2008 at 3:21 am
Leave it to the Clintons…Wow, darkening the guy’s face. What scumbaggery! Racism? Indeed!
March 5th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Cool post. It’s funny how quick we are to make assumptions — and how quickly the same assumptions can change when we actually have real information. I had no idea “color” was so complex…
May 20th, 2008 at 7:28 am
A good man would prefer to be defeated than to defeat injustice by evil means.