|
Post by Jaspal Cheema on Jan 1, 2018 22:11:28 GMT
Stunning.But this goes beyond film restoration into cutting edge chemistry and physics,even medicine.It's almost like trying to save a life,keeping a person's heart beating against all the odds..
|
|
|
Post by andrewfrostick on Jan 2, 2018 8:55:18 GMT
This is really exciting technology, whether it's Morecombe and Wise, Who or whatever. It just shows what can be rediscovered from the impossible. To just recover stills is a feat of genius! I know if The Massacre was found as a melting lump I would love to see some stills even if it wasn't moving images. This offers some hope for all missing TV.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2018 22:32:06 GMT
Thanks for these links.
I also followed a link to this recovery process on twitter and kind of wished I hadn't for on the same page it was mentioned that Web 3 is in the hands of a fan (lol).
I remember on the Newsnight piece about The Avengers recovered episode it was mentioned that approaches have been made to people who have missing material and refuse to give it up. I thought straight away they might be referring to Doctor Who episodes. Very sad.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Jan 2, 2018 23:36:29 GMT
Thanks for these links. I also followed a link to this recovery process on twitter and kind of wished I hadn't for on the same page it was mentioned that Web 3 is in the hands of a fan (lol). I remember on the Newsnight piece about The Avengers recovered episode it was mentioned that approaches have been made to people who have missing material and refuse to give it up. I thought straight away they might be referring to Doctor Who episodes. Very sad. That specifically referred to material that has now been returned. There are missing programmes in the hands of private collectors. Only a very few that I know don't wish to return their films, at least not at the moment. In most cases, nearly all, it's not because they don't want people to see their films, it's because they still fear the wrath of the TV companies and/or other rights holders and their representatives. We all of course recall what happened to Bob Monkhouse and ultimately it was the material that paid the price. Film collectors are in my view the heroes of lost programme recovery. Without them a great many more programmes would never have been 'collected' to survive. Regards, Paul
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2018 0:54:51 GMT
Thanks for the above insight, Paul, that's really great, and sounds positive too. Wondering then if it would be productive, or counter-productive if tv companies were to announce a missing-episode armistice, like the police do with firearms? Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Jaspal Cheema on Jan 3, 2018 10:56:48 GMT
Thanks for these links. I also followed a link to this recovery process on twitter and kind of wished I hadn't for on the same page it was mentioned that Web 3 is in the hands of a fan (lol). I remember on the Newsnight piece about The Avengers recovered episode it was mentioned that approaches have been made to people who have missing material and refuse to give it up. I thought straight away they might be referring to Doctor Who episodes. Very sad. That specifically referred to material that has now been returned. There are missing programmes in the hands of private collectors. Only a very few that I know don't wish to return their films, at least not at the moment. In most cases, nearly all, it's not because they don't want people to see their films, it's because they still fear the wrath of the TV companies and/or other rights holders and their representatives. We all of course recall what happened to Bob Monkhouse and ultimately it was the material that paid the price. Film collectors are in my view the heroes of lost programme recovery. Without them a great many more programmes would never have been 'collected' to survive. Regards, Paul Not wishing to open up a can of worms Paul...but would that include missing episodes of Dr Who...?
|
|
|
Post by bevanthomas on Jan 3, 2018 11:13:26 GMT
Thanks for the above insight, Paul, that's really great, and sounds positive too. Wondering then if it would be productive, or counter-productive if tv companies were to announce a missing-episode armistice, like the police do with firearms? To be fair the BBC has offered an amnesty. On more than one occasion and continually, IIRC...
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,863
|
Post by RWels on Jan 3, 2018 14:41:35 GMT
This is not making much sense, people have never been threatened with legal action over returning lost episodes. In fact the policy at the BBC is that you get your original film returned plus a digital copy. People calling in may have been ignored or may not have always been treated as best as we'd wish. But sued or threatened, I don't think so. Legally I'm not even sure what the position is, it's not illegal to own a film print, or to pick up something that has been junked. And the offense would have expired even if it were. But I don't think that's the only reason. It would be crazy, and think of the bad publicity it would be. Although I suppose the exact response depends a bit who they talk to.
There is the odd story of the man in the USA who has a missing baseball game but is not allowed to do anything with it. But that's a different game altogether. If any of the recent returns (Who from private collector, Till Death, 1948 Show) had led to trouble, we would have heared.
|
|
Richard Develyn
Member
Living in hope that more missing episodes will come back to us.
Posts: 574
|
Post by Richard Develyn on Jan 3, 2018 15:35:34 GMT
This is not making much sense, people have never been threatened with legal action over returning lost episodes. In fact the policy at the BBC is that you get your original film returned plus a digital copy. Paul might not have been referring to the BBC. Richard
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,863
|
Post by RWels on Jan 3, 2018 16:08:20 GMT
This is not making much sense, people have never been threatened with legal action over returning lost episodes. In fact the policy at the BBC is that you get your original film returned plus a digital copy. Paul might not have been referring to the BBC. Richard Well no I suppose if anyone knows what he's talking about...
|
|
|
Post by Jaspal Cheema on Jan 3, 2018 18:52:31 GMT
That specifically referred to material that has now been returned. There are missing programmes in the hands of private collectors. Only a very few that I know don't wish to return their films, at least not at the moment. In most cases, nearly all, it's not because they don't want people to see their films, it's because they still fear the wrath of the TV companies and/or other rights holders and their representatives. We all of course recall what happened to Bob Monkhouse and ultimately it was the material that paid the price. Film collectors are in my view the heroes of lost programme recovery. Without them a great many more programmes would never have been 'collected' to survive. Regards, Paul Not wishing to open up a can of worms Paul...but would that include missing episodes of Dr Who...? And also the reason why Bob Monkhouse was taken to court ( and in a legal case he eventually won ) was because it was thought he was using his film collection for profit ie hiring a James Bond to the son of Terry Wogan,when in fact all he was doing was lending him the film as a friend-something we all do.His film collection was never thought to be illegal,only what the criminal justice system thought he was doing with it.He still retained his film library after he won the case.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Biggs on Jan 3, 2018 19:56:49 GMT
This is not making much sense, people have never been threatened with legal action over returning lost episodes. In fact the policy at the BBC is that you get your original film returned plus a digital copy. People calling in may have been ignored or may not have always been treated as best as we'd wish. But sued or threatened, I don't think so. Legally I'm not even sure what the position is, it's not illegal to own a film print, or to pick up something that has been junked. And the offense would have expired even if it were. But I don't think that's the only reason. It would be crazy, and think of the bad publicity it would be. Although I suppose the exact response depends a bit who they talk to. There is the odd story of the man in the USA who has a missing baseball game but is not allowed to do anything with it. But that's a different game altogether. If any of the recent returns (Who from private collector, Till Death, 1948 Show) had led to trouble, we would have heared. Something did happen along those lines with The Lion. The collector who had it, wanted to sell it (after the BBC made a copy) and someone at the BBC suggested the film was effectively stolen material and was still technically still the property of the BBC - something that would potentially open the collector up to legal action. It all got sorted fairly quickly, with Sue Malden over-ruling the idea and confirming the collector as the owner of the print, but it really wasn't good publicity. Full story is here for anyone interested: doctorwho.org.nz/archive/tsv57/lion.html
|
|
|
Post by Richard Molesworth on Jan 3, 2018 23:55:26 GMT
Not wishing to open up a can of worms Paul...but would that include missing episodes of Dr Who...? And also the reason why Bob Monkhouse was taken to court ( and in a legal case he eventually won ) was because it was thought he was using his film collection for profit ie hiring a James Bond to the son of Terry Wogan,when in fact all he was doing was lending him the film as a friend-something we all do.His film collection was never thought to be illegal,only what the criminal justice system thought he was doing with it.He still retained his film library after he won the case. Actually, he did not. As stated in his obituary in The Independant: "In 1978, he was arrested for conspiracy to defraud film companies by illegally importing films for his collection. The police seized his 1,800 films, but Monkhouse was later acquitted of all charges at the Old Bailey. He nevertheless lost the greater part of his collection because he would have had to go to court in order to establish his right to each film individually." Many of Bob's films were destroyed as a result of the court case, and I understand that there were a number of unique films amongst them, where Bob had the only known surviving print. Those were destroyed too. Regards, Richard
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,863
|
Post by RWels on Jan 4, 2018 0:17:49 GMT
Both cases were in the late seventies, so as listed in the link about The Lion, it was a new situation. At this time there weren't even any home videos to speak of - the status of home recorded video still had to be settled too.
|
|
|
Post by Jaspal Cheema on Jan 4, 2018 11:20:47 GMT
And also the reason why Bob Monkhouse was taken to court ( and in a legal case he eventually won ) was because it was thought he was using his film collection for profit ie hiring a James Bond to the son of Terry Wogan,when in fact all he was doing was lending him the film as a friend-something we all do.His film collection was never thought to be illegal,only what the criminal justice system thought he was doing with it.He still retained his film library after he won the case. Actually, he did not. As stated in his obituary in The Independant: "In 1978, he was arrested for conspiracy to defraud film companies by illegally importing films for his collection. The police seized his 1,800 films, but Monkhouse was later acquitted of all charges at the Old Bailey. He nevertheless lost the greater part of his collection because he would have had to go to court in order to establish his right to each film individually." Many of Bob's films were destroyed as a result of the court case, and I understand that there were a number of unique films amongst them, where Bob had the only known surviving print. Those were destroyed too. Regards, Richard But that doesn't make sense Richard-the story in the superb documentary 'The Secret Life of Bob Monkhouse' gives a different story.If that were the case,what about the cache of around 600 or so prints found after his death?
|
|