|
Post by B Thomas on Feb 22, 2006 5:01:37 GMT
Hiya Paul. Did you have any luck with whatever became of the old NZ National Film Library ? Then again, I think the footage I saw was B&W (and you mentioned colour material...) Hiya. I'm afraid time is far too short for me to track down anything in a foreign archive this side of my broadcast. I'm in an edit suite as we speak attempting to complete this monster! If you saw black and white footage, in all likelihood it was a black and white film recording which is what was typically done as a PasB at the time. When I get this project out of the way I'll chase it up. If you have any details of where you saw it and a date, that would be useful. Cheers, Paul Will do, cheers for that... By the way: best of luck - I know from experience how hellish editing can be...
|
|
|
Post by Gary C on Feb 22, 2006 8:41:48 GMT
Really? Editing is one of the things I REALLY enjoy!!
|
|
|
Post by John G on Feb 22, 2006 14:55:42 GMT
All very melodramatic, some of these replies. No excuse for junking the moon landing? It isn't junked as you know, just the studio links. Perhaps these people prefer watching James Burke to Neil Armstrong? The actual handling of this is fairly dry, with Burke adding little to the feed because the astronauts spoke through most of it. The total effect is downplaying to the audience. Unlike the ITV variety party. Going back to the 'attitude like that' comment, well, generally, yeah you can read into that comment any way you want, but at least I did go out of my way to find missing television as has Paul, which is better than achieving nothing by moaning about the obvious on here. When you go through enough old television, you do realise that 'old' does not always equate with quality. There was rubbish then as now. Well Lawrence if you reading, I think you will agree they have totally missed the point?.
|
|
|
Post by Laurence Piper on Feb 22, 2006 19:44:42 GMT
All very melodramatic, some of these replies. No excuse for junking the moon landing? It isn't junked as you know, just the studio links. Perhaps these people prefer watching James Burke to Neil Armstrong? (1) at least I did go out of my way to find missing television as has Paul, which is better than achieving nothing by moaning about the obvious on here. When you go through enough old television, you do realise that 'old' does not always equate with quality. There was rubbish then as now. (2) (1) The context is important, as well as the event itself. Part of the excitement of seeing historic footage like this is seeing the reactions of the studio experts to what's unfolding as it happens. You get the sense of being there. The point is that (e.g.) general election broadcasts are archived thoroughly, which include reactions / interviews / forecasts etc. If by your criteria, these are unimportant elements then surely such broadcasts should be limited to just a static caption on screen and a voiceover with the bare results after they have happened?!? This kind of programme makes history come A-L-I-V-E as we watch. Apollo 11 was an event in a broader sense than just the moon footage itself and the bringing it to us as it happened was a big part of that (and therefore NO excuses for archive mishaps with something so significant can be explained away, to my mind - it was history at the time, as it is now). (2) It isn't any kind of moral highground to claim to have found a few missing programmes, Andy. Some people don't have the time / know-how to undertake this effectively. Nor should people feel they HAVE to do something that they shouldn't need to do in the first place (either because the shows were junked originally OR because they feel they have to do what the TV companies aren't doing properly themselves to recover more of our lost heritage). Either (like me) you believe in TV as a creative medium capable of greatness equal to that of music, cinema, paintings, etc. or you do not. If you do then there should be no apologies made for not archiving programmes properly. If you don't believe it, then why bother coming to sites dedicated (supposedly) to seeking out what the rest of us consider worth retrieving? I cannot see where you are coming from at all. Cartainly it doesn't seem to be from a position of belief in the quality of TV as a medium. I see that the Apollo 11 coverage equates with rubbish in your book though so on that basis I have no conception of what does constitute "great" for you...
|
|
|
Post by B Thomas on Feb 22, 2006 21:36:35 GMT
Really? Editing is one of the things I REALLY enjoy!! Enjoy? Well... yes but other factors can spoil it (deadlines, length of finished project, harsh test audiences...).
|
|
|
Post by Andy Henderson on Feb 23, 2006 0:07:17 GMT
The excitement of the moment? - well you could run the entire soundtrack of James Burke with the CBS footage and achieve the same effect as in 1969. Once the Moon footage appeared all eyes were on the Moon, not the presenters, so you just have the soundtrack.
I'm not claiming any moral high ground, apart from mentioning that I found more than just a few missing programmes. That is a fact, just as it is a fact that Paul has found considerably more than a few.
I can see no justification for constantly moaning about the past and about areas in which (to be frank) you have no professional knowledge (as far as I know). It's all conjecture.
If you or anyone else cared as much about archive television, you could have turned your emotional posts into something more worthwhile. Neither Paul nor I had the slightest idea where to find missing episodes, until we found ways. We made time, we made an effort as did many other people who you don't hear about. Each in different ways, as I am merely an amateur and Paul works within a professional environment.
But please take my posting and twist them to fit your distorted picture of the past. You can then be satisfied that you have contributed nothing to the recovery of missing television.
|
|
|
Post by Laurence Piper on Feb 23, 2006 10:36:38 GMT
The excitement of the moment? - well you could run the entire soundtrack of James Burke with the CBS footage and achieve the same effect as in 1969. Once the Moon footage appeared all eyes were on the Moon, not the presenters, so you just have the soundtrack. I'm not claiming any moral high ground, apart from mentioning that I found more than just a few missing programmes. That is a fact, just as it is a fact that Paul has found considerably more than a few. I can see no justification for constantly moaning about the past and about areas in which (to be frank) you have no professional knowledge (as far as I know). It's all conjecture. If you or anyone else cared as much about archive television, you could have turned your emotional posts into something more worthwhile. Neither Paul nor I had the slightest idea where to find missing episodes, until we found ways. We made time, we made an effort as did many other people who you don't hear about. Each in different ways, as I am merely an amateur and Paul works within a professional environment. But please take my posting and twist them to fit your distorted picture of the past. You can then be satisfied that you have contributed nothing to the recovery of missing television. Sorry, but I watched the '69 moon landings and the studio presentation of them WAS a big part of the atmosphere! Anything in life devoid of context is meaningless! It's ridiculous that some of the other moon missions around the time HAVE been kept yet the most important one wasn't! I don't need inside info to recognise that that was an unforgiveable error of judgement. It doesn't take professional knowledge (just a passion and long-term interest in the subject of archive TV, which you seem to lack) to form an opinion as to whether or not the TV companies have done us all a huge disservice historically and culturally by wiping a lot of material which really should have been given to the nation as it's heritage. I'm really talking about YOUR attitude, Andy. Don't bring Paul into it. If you think it's all about counting the number of programmes each of us have found then think again (most of the people here probably haven't found anything - they just have a love for the medium and programmes and shouldn't feel ashamed they haven't recovered missing material). That really IS an elitist and distorted view. It would be great to find a lost item but some of us have lives outside websites too. If you think so little of TV, why bother at with it at all?
|
|
|
Post by John G on Feb 23, 2006 10:47:25 GMT
Quite frankly Andy you keep missing the point here and turning it it a personal crusade IE its you and Paul against us ignoramuses.
This is not about you sitting on your high horse telling us what you have done for archiving and hindsights a wonderful thing blah blah . We are not quite as dim as you think, to know that already. You find and trade films and tapes for your own benefit , well good for you! but does that really give you moral high ground to lecture to the rest of us of what we should or should not do?
What you fail to grasp is the fact that this was arguably the single most important event of the 20th Century. Its not another edition of No Hiding Place.
Never mind the BBC has a full colour recording of 1969's other 'great' event. Queen drives to Wales, waves at people , goes to castle and puts crown on Prince Charles's head.
|
|
|
Post by B Thomas on Feb 23, 2006 11:26:20 GMT
Hmmm... The only thing I can claim to have done in the way of recoveries is to nearly find colour copies of Jon Pertwee "Dr Who" episodes back in the '80s. I pointed out to the BBC where some of these could be found but discovered that Canada had unearthed the same material just prior to my contacting them. Oh well...
As for "people who have" and "people who haven't" entering into a "class struggle" and fighting between each other - well... I don't know what all the fuss is about...
|
|
|
Post by Rich Leaden on Feb 23, 2006 11:32:27 GMT
What you fail to grasp is the fact that this was arguably the single most important event of the 20th Century. Its not another edition of No Hiding Place. Never mind the BBC has a full colour recording of 1969's other 'great' event. Queen drives to Wales, waves at people , goes to castle and puts crown on Prince Charles's head. I would say it is the footage of the landing itself which is the key historical event .. not really the BBC talking heads studio stuff. Ergo if the US (CBS) coverage - and it was a US mission was it not - is complete as regards the mission footage itself - then that is what is really important in this case. Otherwise we might have to cry over the lack of say Canadian CBC or Dutch TV studio stuff or any other foreign coverage of it etc. It's the news that's key - not the newsreader! As to the investiture of Prince Charles .. it's not really a comparable example as (a) there won't be any US or foreign footage of that methinks and (b) it is a British event exclusively and should be archived if possible by the "home" nation TV
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Feb 23, 2006 11:33:26 GMT
Youre right.Why should one collector make the rest of us feel guilty we havent found any missing television like him and do the job we thought the BBC was doing in keeping them all those years?Its maybe only a few dozen real trainspotters out there who have been lucky finding something.Then they preach about it to the rest of us.Not everyone who returns recordings will do this I have to add. I am very glad those programmes turned up yes but the majority here are in love with the programmes and just wish the television archives would have done their job a bit better in the past.Andrew Henderson is making it too personal when all we rightly wish for the archive to be more full.
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Feb 23, 2006 11:34:48 GMT
My reply was to John by the way.Got pipped to the post there.
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Feb 23, 2006 11:43:43 GMT
I would say it is the footage of the landing itself which is the key historical event .. not really the BBC talking heads studio stuff. Ergo if the US (CBS) coverage - and it was a US mission was it not - is complete as regards the mission footage itself - then that is what is really important in this case. Otherwise we might have to cry over the lack of say Canadian CBC or Dutch TV studio stuff or any other foreign coverage of it etc. It's the news that's key - not the newsreader! Laurence and John are saying with world events like the first moon landing you have to see the other stuff with it to get the feeling of it and how it was seen then.You get that with elections and that kind of programme and as the other space missions have coverage preserved like that why not the same for the important one?It doesnt make sense.
|
|
|
Post by Clive Shaw on Feb 23, 2006 12:34:41 GMT
But hasn't somebody already said that the original BBC '69 moon-landing tapes got accidently wiped because of a labeling mess up, rather than the BBC actively going out to destroy the tape ?
I am sure we have all made similar mistakes to this !
These forums are too full of people preaching about how terrible the BBC was for wiping all those programmes, whilst ignoring the commercial reasons as to why the BBC had to do it.
It happened, get over it, we should be praising the likes of Andy and Paul who spend their spare time trying to track down what is left, rather than sitting and whinging on an Internet Forum about how beastly and horrible the BBC were to wipe those tapes in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by SteveS on Feb 23, 2006 13:00:50 GMT
For what it's worth, my contribution to the debate is this. I'm not someone that has ever found a missing programme and have always considered that there is someone better suited out there towards dealing with difficult collectors or knowing the right approach to make to TV companies. It would be very nice to locate something that is considered lost but I never felt I had to do so in order to be a TV collector. I guess that most of us that visit sites like these feel that way. We feel that this should be the job of experienced sleuthing amateurs or TV archivists. This view has been reinforced by some on this forum who seem to work in the industry. Some of us have families, kids, outside commitments and not enough hours in the day already to fit in more. We feel happy to let those already doing a fine job unearthing programmes to carry on doing so.
I do feel that we the audience and fans have been let down badly by the respective archives in the past. It was only fairly recently that I found out about the volume of programmes that are missing. Before this I really did think that most pre-recorded programmes were existent somewhere in the vaults if enough digging was undertaken. It was a real shock to find out this was not so.
Many lost items would generally be considered by us to be desirable as it isn't only the ephemeral or trivial that is missing. The Apollo 11 mission must surely be considered as one of those notable items as it even warranted a mention in Dick Fiddy's excellent book 'Missing Believed Wiped' as being one of the top 10 most wanted missing recordings. I didn't think until now that anyone could possibly argue with this. Sure enough, the actual space footage is the most vital material but the surrounding studio presentation adds important context (as has already been stated at length). Whatever our view though, should we feel somehow ashamed we haven't turned up a missing programme as have some of the more seasoned experts here? I don't think so. There are better ways of expressing opposing views though.
|
|