How were the 35mm prints made?

[Brad Phipps]

I hear the process was slightly different than the 16mm telerecordings but just wanted to know how it was done in terms of translating fields to film (and that goes for Planet of Giants 3).

Guess I just want to make sure that The Dalek Invasion of Earth 5 isn't a "suppressed field" 35mm print.

[Mark Vanderlinde-Abernathy]

I'd also like to know "why" >.>

Wish I could buy Wiped. So expensive. Be cheaper to buy a missing episode almost!

[David Robinson]

I'll swap you my Wiped for Tenth Planet 4 or Power 1

[Alistair Gordon]

It's on Amazon at £17.20 but only 2 copies left!

[David Robinson]

Dec 1, 2012 13:35:00 GMT Alistair Gordon said:

It's on Amazon at £17.20 but only 2 copies left!

Tenth Planet 4 or Power 1??

[Mark Vanderlinde-Abernathy]

OMG. What a horrible choice to make!

Also I'm in America and it won't let me ship. Tried once.

In America the book is readily available on Amazon for $250! Which is something like £156.

[John Harwood (bjblackpool)]

Why hasn't the OP's enquiry been answered?

My understanding of the situation is that stored field recordings were easier with 35mm - the 35mm recordings of Quatermass and the Pit, dating from 1957/8, are all stored field. Moreover, the 35mm prints were all UK broadcast masters used instead of videotape for one reason or another: whilst suppressed field copies were "good enough" for sale to our colonial cousins, it would have been unsuitable for UK broadcast. The 35mm prints were used in lieu of VT either because a great many edits are required (as is the case with Planet of the Giants 3), or because there was a shortage of VT machines at time of recording (as I believe was the case with Dalek Invasion of Earth 5, which was recorded the day following the 1964 General Election, which had the lions share of BBC technical resources in that week).

[John Andersen]

Dec 4, 2012 21:27:42 GMT John Harwood (bjblackpool) said:

Why hasn't the OP's enquiry been answered?

My understanding of the situation is that stored field recordings were easier with 35mm - the 35mm recordings of Quatermass and the Pit, dating from 1957/8, are all stored field. Moreover, the 35mm prints were all UK broadcast masters used instead of videotape for one reason or another: whilst suppressed field copies were "good enough" for sale to our colonial cousins, it would have been unsuitable for UK broadcast. The 35mm prints were used in lieu of VT either because a great many edits are required (as is the case with Planet of the Giants 3), or because there was a shortage of VT machines at time of recording (as I believe was the case with Dalek Invasion of Earth 5, which was recorded the day following the 1964 General Election, which had the lions share of BBC technical resources in that week).

Well, John, I can only answer for myself. I didn't know the answer to his question. ;D

[Steve Roberts]

35mm film was simply too large to be moved on a frame in the couple of milliseconds of blanking between the end of one video field and the start of the next. Hence you either had to suppress one field entirely and move the film on in this period or store the first field by writing at a high intensity to the CRT as you moved the film on a frame, so that the light output from the phosphor decay matched the live second field, which would expose both fields when you opened the camera shutter.

Later, 16mm fast-pulldown cameras were developed which could move the film on a frame during field blanking, allowing both fields to be exposed live.

[Brad Phipps]

Thanks John and Steve.

[dennywilson]

Dec 5, 2012 16:42:13 GMT Steve Roberts said:

35mm film was simply too large to be moved on a frame in the couple of milliseconds of blanking between the end of one video field and the start of the next. Hence you either had to suppress one field entirely and move the film on in this period or store the first field by writing at a high intensity to the CRT as you moved the film on a frame, so that the light output from the phosphor decay matched the live second field, which would expose both fields when you opened the camera shutter.

Later, 16mm fast-pulldown cameras were developed which could move the film on a frame during field blanking, allowing both fields to be exposed live.

So what is the difference between the 35mm and 16mm versions of the processes? I'm still confused?