|
Post by Richard Molesworth on Feb 25, 2012 1:52:55 GMT
Simeon, I have to ask - why do you always seem to want to find photographs of people who have found/taken off-screen DW photos??
Seems very... strange...
Regards,
Richard
|
|
|
Post by Giles Sparrow on Feb 25, 2012 9:58:38 GMT
Simeon, I have to ask - why do you always seem to want to find photographs of people who have found/taken off-screen DW photos?? Seems very... strange... Regards, Richard I believe Simeon mentioned when he started his original thread on non-telesnap off-air photos that he was planning to put together a YouTube video on the subject, so I guess he wants pictures of the "culprits" for illustrative purposes. Whether a YouTube video is as good as a well-researched article, of course, is a matter of opinion, but then again, I can't get the hang of these new-fangled solar toasters either!
|
|
|
Post by Charles Daniels on Feb 25, 2012 12:09:36 GMT
Simeon, I have to ask - why do you always seem to want to find photographs of people who have found/taken off-screen DW photos?? Seems very... strange... Regards, Richard At first blush it seemed a little strange to me, but then I remembered that I've often wondered what David Holman looks like or Graham Strong. Just the curiosity I guess to know who these people were who were recording Dr Who off air in the 60s. Name to a face I guess.
|
|
|
Post by Simeon Carter on Feb 25, 2012 12:13:21 GMT
I believe Simeon mentioned when he started his original thread on non-telesnap off-air photos that he was planning to put together a YouTube video on the subject, so I guess he wants pictures of the "culprits" for illustrative purposes. I am intending to put together a YouTube video and having the pictures of those involved would make it much more engaging than just a name. Whether a YouTube video is as good as a well-researched article, of course, is a matter of opinion, but then again, I can't get the hang of these new-fangled solar toasters either! I am also wondering how I would present all this information as I could either do a YouTube video or an article but I'm not sure of that yet. I hope I'm not getting on anyone's nerves and If I am tell me so I can be less annoying!
|
|
|
Post by Alex Weidmann on Feb 26, 2012 13:50:38 GMT
It's certainly not beyond the bounds of possibility that other rare material was shot on domestic 8mm (and indeed, we covered all the known examples of off-air 8mm Doctor Who in Nothing at the End of the Lane #2), but I guess that we'd only be looking at quick excerpts due to the cost of the film stock, although that would be better than nothing! ;D Bit surprised by this comment. I would've thought b&w Standard 8mm film would be dirt cheap by the mid-sixties, given that it was introduced in 1932, so had already been around for over 30 years. Also would expect b&w stock to be cheaper than colour. Plus it was being replaced by Super-8 in the mid-sixties: so would've thought they'd be selling Standard-8 off cheap to get rid of their stock.
|
|
|
Post by Richard Bignell on Feb 26, 2012 17:27:26 GMT
Standard-8 film wasn't replaced by Super-8, it was just a different format, although the latter did become more popular as the years went on. No one needed to get rid of their stock as there were still plenty of cameras around. Indeed Standard-8 was still being sold by Kodak until the 1990s. The price didn't drop though, just because their was an alternative format.
I well recall as a teenager shooting a reel of Super-8 of excerpts from Logopolis #4. I certainly could only afford to do one 3.5 minute reel though, so just like the Hartnell/Troughton clips, the footage I took of the episode were only fairly brief sequences.
|
|
|
Post by George D on Feb 27, 2012 4:27:46 GMT
To put it in comparision even though 35mm film has been around for years and we have digital cameras now, its still more expensive to buy a role of 24 picture film and have it developed compared to the cost of digital.
Back in the 1970s before vcr and video cameras became common, i had a 8mm projector and camera and also collected 8mm films. If one went to their local store one might find a 3 min b/w silent prerecorded cartoon for around 4-5.00. while a 12 min colour sound would cost around 25.00. To put it in todays economy maybe multiply the price by 5?
Now this is for pre recorded material. if you want to make your own 8mm one would buy the film cartridge, and then pay to get it developed. As a child I only could afford to do a couple of these however im sure those who were older with more money could do things more rapidly.
The next comment I make cautiously hoping not to ruffle feathers at the same time.
I asked a question regarding the conclusion of the wheel in space 8mm lead which started this tread. My assumption is that nothing materialized as Im sure we would be aware of it. However, if we got into the habit of every question's response being "turn to this page of "wiped" then it would be more of a turn off to buying wiped than showing the value of the publication and could lead to less leads being produced. Fortunately thats not the case.
That being said since the lead did come from the forum, i dont think it was inappropriate to ask how it turned out and have it reported back to the forum.
Im sure the lack of response is merely an oversight and I hope the comment is taken with the respect its intended
|
|
|
Post by Richard Bignell on Feb 27, 2012 8:17:15 GMT
That being said since the lead did come from the forum, i dont think it was inappropriate to ask how it turned out and have it reported back to the forum. Whilst I understand the sentiment, George, it was I who was pointing people to look, not to Wiped! but to Nothing at the End of the Lane for the answer to that particular question. Whilst it's quite true to that the lead originated at this forum, it really can't be viewed as being exclusive to only here. I decided to take up the challenge and follow it through, so I hardly think that it's unfair for me to point people to the relevant research that provides the conclusive answer in a magazine that has only just been published and is available to anyone who wants it. But to ease your anxiety, no, nothing was found.
|
|
|
Post by adamjordan on Feb 27, 2012 11:20:40 GMT
Got to see Richard's article about this in NATEOTL recently. Sods law that the frame chosen to be printed in the 8mm magazine is almost exactly the same moment captured by the Cura telesnap that is handily printed for comparison. Only difference I noted was a slight shift to the left of the central figure. Or it might have been to the right as we have no way to know which was the prior frame!
|
|
|
Post by Jim Exley on Feb 27, 2012 12:38:41 GMT
In reply to Alex's post in particular, I hope a digression where I put on my "collecting old cine cameras" hat on will be acceptable. It wouldn't be fair to say Standard 8 was dirt cheap by the mid sixties - as Richard says, the price wasn't affected by the arrival of Super 8. Colour Standard 8, such as the late lamented Kodachrome, was then over a pound a roll, processing included. You could do black and white relatively cheaply though if you had a mind to; I have an advert from the late sixties illustrating some competitively priced black and white stocks from the then USSR, which you could process at home using the Russian "Lomo" spiral tank. The vast majority of 8mm home movies I've encountered seem to be on colour film though - I reckon B/W was a niche market for home movies by then. I also recall making a Super 8 three minute "digest" version of the Seeds of Death VHS in the days when I didn't own a VCR! The film was about £12 a cartridge by then. Kodak *did* do rather a price hike at the time Agfa threw their hand in with cine films and they thus became the only supplier! Cheers Jim
|
|
|
Post by evanmarshall on Feb 28, 2012 22:55:24 GMT
Just in case anyone's interested I can share that "Standard" 8mm is still available to buy to this day. Usually you'll find that it tends to come from Russian companies but it is still available in both colour *and* black and white. I worked as the archivist on a BBC Northern Ireland a number of years ago called Super 8 Stories and many of the Standard 8 film owners I encountered at the serious camera club end of the spectrum of contributors told me that they thought Standard was the superior format and continued to use it until they gave up altogether with film-making, despite the larger frame area afforded by Super 8.
Perhaps of interest to those here I always kept an eye out during the three series of the show for anything to do with Doctor Who and I did come across several little bits of interest.
1. A reel which was just tantalisingly entitled "Doctor Who". Putting it on I found a typical family living room of the 70s with some kids gathered round a TV. The opening titles of Doctor Who then come on (Tom Baker silver tunnel) and the camera starts to pan away just at the end with literally just a few frames of the episode after the titles. From the digital copy I made I froze the image and worked out it was the start of Robot Episode 1. Pity it couldn't have been even one frame of a missing episode!
2. An entire Doctor Who drama performed by a scout group. They had constucted a TARDIS and had a kid dressed as the Tom Baker Doctor with home made Daleks and even a home made Davros! It was all filmed in a quarry with model sequences of space ships and moon bases. They had actually scratched the emuslion off the frames at points to create lightning effect zaps from guns, which I thought was quite ingenious for an amateur effort. I think it was about ten minutes long from memory.
3. A Denys Fisher Cyberman proudly on display on Christmas morning!
4. A Dalek playsuit marching along in a fancy dress parade.
5. A mini movie a film-maker made of his two children playing around his car who open the boot only to find someone wearing a red Dalek costume inside! The Dalek then gets out of the car and chases them down the street.
6. Someone had filmed some innocent shots of his boy in the bath and sitting in the background was a Dalek Sponge! There were a couple of Dalek sponges as far as I'm told and this is actually the only known image of this variety ever to surface anywhere. I sent an image grab of it to David Howe back at the time but with the sponge just being a background image it was terrible quality by the time you blew it up in size.
Just thought I'd share!
|
|
|
Post by George D on Feb 29, 2012 4:08:08 GMT
Great share. Would be cool to put some of those films on youtube.
|
|