|
|
Post by Jon Preddle on Mar 1, 2011 1:22:46 GMT
For the ultimate guide, index, directory and history of Doctor Who broadcasts around the world, from 1964 onwards... go to: www.broadwcast.org |
|
|
|
Post by Tim Burrows on Mar 1, 2011 12:57:59 GMT
Nice work Mr Preddle!
I notice you've used "Inside the Spaceship" rather than "The Edge of Destruction". Any reason?
Tim
|
|
|
|
Post by Jon Preddle on Mar 1, 2011 18:19:34 GMT
Nice work Mr Preddle! I notice you've used "Inside the Spaceship" rather than "The Edge of Destruction". Any reason? Tim Thanks Tim. Using that title was an executive decision. The search function on the site works with either title. Jon |
|
|
|
Post by Steven Sigel on Mar 6, 2011 3:43:17 GMT
Hey Jon
Why do you say that the T/R of Invasion of the Dinosaurs (1) is " of poor not-broadcast quality. "
and "The two 1974 tele-recordings were apparently of very poor quality. "
I don't think this is true -- I've screened the actual surviving print and, IIRC, it's no worse than any of the other Pertwee T/Rs that I've seen . It does have a slight edge/edge focus issue, but I believe that's because the print itself is slightly warped and is easily remedied.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ally Wilson on Mar 6, 2011 5:03:44 GMT
IIRC Steve Roberts has said that the print is in very good condition, and in fact better quality than most.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jon Preddle on Mar 7, 2011 4:55:54 GMT
Hey Jon Why do you say that the T/R of Invasion of the Dinosaurs (1) is " of poor not-broadcast quality. " and "The two 1974 tele-recordings were apparently of very poor quality. " I don't think this is true -- I've screened the actual surviving print and, IIRC, it's no worse than any of the other Pertwee T/Rs that I've seen . It does have a slight edge/edge focus issue, but I believe that's because the print itself is slightly warped and is easily remedied. Thanks Steve. It has been mentioned elsewhere that the T/R has some flaws, hence my comment about it apparently being of poor quality. I've duly amended the text on the BroaDWcast site to - hopefully! - make a clearer assessment of what the situation may have been. Jon |
|
|
|
Post by Steven Sigel on Mar 18, 2011 9:56:21 GMT
Hi Jon,
Check under 1983 - it still says " It is of poor not-broadcast quality." You probably want to delete that statement.
BTW - My understanding is that the theory about the tape being damaged during telerecording is incorrect.
|
|
|
|
Post by B Thomas on Mar 19, 2011 10:59:40 GMT
Cheers Jon - at least this explains why I've not seen any signs of life around your house for months  Having a great read through this - all your hard work over the years collecting listings and other minutiae has finally paid off - what a great resource... |
|
|
|
Post by kencohen on Mar 19, 2011 15:26:03 GMT
Maybe this will help a find some day. Who knows?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jon Preddle on Mar 19, 2011 19:03:54 GMT
Hi Jon, Check under 1983 - it still says " It is of poor not-broadcast quality." You probably want to delete that statement. BTW - My understanding is that the theory about the tape being damaged during telerecording is incorrect. Thanks Steve. I missed that 1983 reference. Duly deleted! The theory is only that. Until such time that further info comes to light all we can do is theorise. |
|
