|
Post by Alan Turrell on Jan 10, 2019 10:42:43 GMT
Why can't this material that kaleidoscope find be put onto DVD's and made available for purchase I don't see what the problem is with that then everyone gets's the chance to see it or is it to time consuming.
|
|
RWels
Member
Posts: 2,854
|
Post by RWels on Jan 10, 2019 11:26:48 GMT
But we're not living in 1980 anymore (The Goodies haven't been on the BBC for ages) and people have huge screens in their living rooms today. I hope you're not slowly shuffling towards that "everything was better in the past" sketch again. (Now if you had spoken against forcing everything that should be 4:3 into widescreen, I'd be forced to agree with you.) Are telerecordings any "line" b.t.w.? They're film. They have a frame rate, but there the comparisons with PAL or NTSC stop, AFAIK. So who are you recovering these tapes for then?? Who?? Not the public and their roast dinner in a pill 4KHD world. Not the BBC or ITV unless it's a comedy show they can sell to one of the digital channels so they can have Johnny Vegas or Alexander Armstrong talk over. Who? Actually don't answer that....we all know. All of us distrustful fans only waiting to "steal it online". We know. Me? I am not recovering anything. I wish you would just make a statement instead of hinting at vague accusations, leaving us to guess what it really is that you are trying to say. What is it that you actually want, apart from having everything at your disposal right now without having to leave your chair? (How do you even go to the toilet - wait, don't answer that.) I can't decide if you're a very old person who has taken to grumbling, or just very young and don't remember that until some 10, 15 years ago you could not get whatever program you wanted, nor any information about it, unless you undertook serious legwork.
|
|
|
Post by Peter Stirling on Jan 10, 2019 14:03:35 GMT
When has that ever bothered the BBC? And I say, what is a huge sum of money when it comes to television? The revised budget for the new Eastenders set is now £86.7m. It's already £27m over budget. A crappy past-its-sell-by-date soap that people would probably still watch if it didn't have any outdoor scenes. LOL yes they have spent millions on a new Albert Square set so far..it would have been cheaper to get McCartney and Stone build some real houses there (like Brookside who didn't have public money) ..at least they would have needed less maintenance than an ephemeral 'set' needs.
|
|
|
Post by garygraham on Jan 11, 2019 0:22:58 GMT
As Sue said, the original lines determine the possible resolution of the telerecording. As we know, 16mm can look amazing but currently not if the original is a 405 line telerecording.
But who knows what will be possible in future? Maybe computers will be able to create high resolution versions of 405 line telerecordings? Perhaps there will be something that can scan videotape and unpick the helical tracks? I don't see why not when already they are able to get frames without unwinding a stuck together roll of film.
> LOL yes they have spent millions on a new Albert Square set so far..it would have been cheaper to get McCartney and Stone > build some real houses there (like Brookside who didn't have public money) ..at least they would have needed less > maintenance than an ephemeral 'set' needs.
Peter, they could have bought an entire real street of 50 houses in London and still had £30m left over to set up the production. And those would have had a resale value. It's scandalous. I'll be surprised if Eastenders is still running five years from now. So I predict this will turn out to be another phenomenal waste of money.
|
|
|
Post by garygraham on Jan 11, 2019 0:31:46 GMT
Why can't this material that kaleidoscope find be put onto DVD's and made available for purchase I don't see what the problem is with that then everyone gets's the chance to see it or is it to time consuming. I suspect that the person hours involved in clearing all the rights (if it can be done) makes it economically unviable. The problem is that TV companies paid a relatively low fee based on a couple of showings on television and anything after that has to be renegotiated: actors, music. It's the same story with the existing archive. People say why can't it be put online or be shown worldwide. If you're a photographer or musician who received two shillings in 1966 for your work being used and shown twice on TV in the UK it isn't fair for it to then be popped online worldwide forever. When the fee for worldwide rights forever would have been say twenty times more money. The BBC and others made all of these economic decisions (unions involved too). Another was to make programmes on 16mm instead of 35mm which cost three times the price for filmstock and lab work. Now that looks like a bad mistake and ITC wins out with its filmed series.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Douglas on Jan 11, 2019 0:34:09 GMT
Why can't this material that kaleidoscope find be put onto DVD's and made available for purchase I don't see what the problem is with that then everyone gets's the chance to see it or is it to time consuming. Nothing to do with being too time consuming - theres this little matter called copyright - not just BBC, and the other companies who originally broadcast it, but the rights holders, musicians, record companies etc. Look it up sometime.
|
|
|
Post by garyfreeman on Jan 11, 2019 10:30:09 GMT
is it just me, or does anybody else want to know what is actually on these tapes??
|
|
|
Post by Alan Turrell on Jan 11, 2019 11:09:22 GMT
Why can't this material that kaleidoscope find be put onto DVD's and made available for purchase I don't see what the problem is with that then everyone gets's the chance to see it or is it to time consuming. Nothing to do with being too time consuming - theres this little matter called copyright - not just BBC, and the other companies who originally broadcast it, but the rights holders, musicians, record companies etc. Look it up sometime. Yeh, I'll look it up and give it a good read before I go to bed tonight.
|
|
|
Post by petercheck on Jan 11, 2019 12:14:20 GMT
is it just me, or does anybody else want to know what is actually on these tapes?? No, you're not alone. Although I do find the transferring processes vaguely interesting, I'd much rather read about the tapes' contents instead.
|
|
|
Post by Ray Langstone (was saintsray) on Jan 11, 2019 15:46:32 GMT
is it just me, or does anybody else want to know what is actually on these tapes?? Kaleidoscope will announce that when they've gone through them all. There's a lot of tapes and it's a painstaking job.
|
|
|
Post by garygraham on Jan 11, 2019 21:19:32 GMT
is it just me, or does anybody else want to know what is actually on these tapes?? No, you're not alone. Although I do find the transferring processes vaguely interesting, I'd much rather read about the tapes' contents instead. I like hearing about both!
|
|
|
Post by petercheck on Jul 26, 2021 16:02:26 GMT
is it just me, or does anybody else want to know what is actually on these tapes?? Kaleidoscope will announce that when they've gone through them all. There's a lot of tapes and it's a painstaking job. Well, it's now 30 months later... any progress???
|
|
|
Post by garystevens on Jul 26, 2021 17:33:24 GMT
Well, it's now 30 months later... any progress??? Sat, 1 June 2019 screening of others including the Lift Off With Ayshea (in which Ayshea was a guest at the event) including screening of The Sweet & Chicory Tip before and after restoration and also a couple of others from the computer tapes! 5.30pm Reel Time volume 2. Lift Off with Ayshea in all its glory, restored from 405 line computer tapes!Pop At The MAC event on Saturday 7 August: macbirmingham.co.uk/event/pop-at-the-mac 4.00 Computer reels 405 compilation
|
|
|
Post by petercheck on Jul 27, 2021 6:22:33 GMT
Have any other full performances of this recovery (besides Chicory Tip) surfaced online?
|
|
|
Post by petercheck on Jul 27, 2021 8:00:38 GMT
|
|