Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2014 8:29:17 GMT
I was aware way back that the only existing transmission version was the BBC tape as Timescreen listed it in their archive holdings guide in the '80s. A potential 80 minute version was news to me when it was mentioned here the other day, although I remain "shocked" whenever any television material is junked (whenever / whatever it may be).
|
|
|
Post by Paul Vanezis on Nov 11, 2014 9:44:01 GMT
OK. So now we're getting to the bottom of it.
The version screened by the BBC the other day was complete, so the very version claimed to have been wiped in 1997. I suspect that the BBC gave Anderson back the original film transfer or a dub of it and having done that, if they had indeed kept the original, then disposed of it, keeping just the version they originally TX'd.
So, basically what the BBC did is the same as the ABC returning missing shows back to the UK, or Nigerian TV returning 'The Web of Fear' to TIEA last year.
It's amusing isn't it that we don't express shock at the ABC junking all their BBC shows or any of the other broadcasters who throw away UK TV shows under the terms of their original contracts, but it's fine to express shock at the BBC doing exactly the same thing (despite them being the saviours of the material in this case).
Paul
|
|
|
Post by Marie Griffiths on Nov 11, 2014 10:39:09 GMT
Only found it myself just before posting this. My EPG doesn't mention Gerry Anderson at all, only found that when googling to see more details on it. I assume as it's on BBC4HD it's HD or upscaled. Surprised the 80 min version was wiped so late in 1997! 1997 That us outrageous.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Nov 11, 2014 11:15:55 GMT
Only found it myself just before posting this. My EPG doesn't mention Gerry Anderson at all, only found that when googling to see more details on it. I assume as it's on BBC4HD it's HD or upscaled. Surprised the 80 min version was wiped so late in 1997! 1997 That us outrageous. Marie, please go back and read the rest of the thread.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2014 12:44:05 GMT
Most of us here who care about archive television are always genuinely shocked whenever anyone junks anything. It's more shocking though when the owners / makers themselves junk their own material. As it's turned out, overseas archives have safely held on to large amounts of UK material for decades (even though they weren't required to) when the owners here didn't bother. It's saved a lot of British programming.
This whole thing isn't really about the BBC at all though (no one said it was) but about whoever junked the highest quality material for the show; odd that something like this was shot on 35mm and then edited on tape (particularly so since Gerry Anderson traditionally worked purely with film). At least the programme survives, which is the main thing.
|
|
|
Post by Marie Griffiths on Nov 11, 2014 13:49:28 GMT
Marie, please go back and read the rest of the thread. I stand by what I said. It is outrageous if content is lost in 1997 whoever it may be. I think we are still blasé about this subject thinking it is an issue for the past and that some content is not worth saving.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Nov 11, 2014 14:09:08 GMT
Marie, if you'd gone back and read the rest of the thread, you'd have seen that there is no evidence that an 80-minute version ever existed, so your complaints about it being junked, by whichever company, are misguided.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Nov 11, 2014 14:16:55 GMT
Most of us here who care about archive television are always genuinely shocked whenever anyone junks anything. It's more shocking though when the owners / makers themselves junk their own material. As it's turned out, overseas archives have safely held on to large amounts of UK material for decades (even though they weren't required to) when the owners here didn't bother. It's saved a lot of British programming. This whole thing isn't really about the BBC at all though (no one said it was) but about whoever junked the highest quality material for the show; odd that something like this was shot on 35mm and then edited on tape (particularly so since Gerry Anderson traditionally worked purely with film). At least the programme survives, which is the main thing. Thing is, Laurence, it's just the same as the BBC junking the film elements for any old programme. The finished programme is the main item, anything that was used to create it would have been fair game to junk, and it would be unrealistic to expect this material to have been kept. And yes, whilst we can get better transfers out of film now, it's only relatively recently that there would have been any benefit in keeping them.
|
|
|
Post by Peter Stirling on Nov 11, 2014 14:22:19 GMT
Marie, please go back and read the rest of the thread. I stand by what I said. It is outrageous if content is lost in 1997 whoever it may be. I think we are still blasé about this subject thinking it is an issue for the past and that some content is not worth saving. Seems a storm in a teacup to me it was broadcast on BBC4 just how I remember it on BBC1. and quite frankly if there was anymore of it (which looked liked it had been knocked up in the lunch break and spare set dept, of filming Space 1999) then we were probably spared LOL. NBC in the US showed it in a hour slot as a treat for children, the break bumpers simply said E=MC2 which stimulated curiosity and then an interest in science, so the programme can be regarded a success and we saw it again the other night... .......so what's the problem? Anderson may have indeed made an 80 minute version but it appears no broadcaster at all went with this? Knowing Anderson's attitude to style coming before scientific facts it may have been generally agreed to keep the science to make it educating (it was aimed at kids after all) rather than wallowing in fancy set pieces?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2014 14:53:45 GMT
Thing is, Laurence, it's just the same as the BBC junking the film elements for any old programme. The finished programme is the main item, anything that was used to create it would have been fair game to junk, and it would be unrealistic to expect this material to have been kept. And yes, whilst we can get better transfers out of film now, it's only relatively recently that there would have been any benefit in keeping them. I don't think it's quite the same thing. If raw production material from (e.g.) an old TOTP were discarded, the transmission edit would be of roughly the same quality (i.e. PAL 625 lines). But junking far higher definition 35mm film reels (which must also have been far more expensive to shoot) and solely keeping an inferior 625 line VT version doesn't make much sense. In those days too, programmes were routinely screened from film prints. It's odd that an Anderson project didn't choose to keep the film originals; more flexibility with options for distribution, screenings etc. that way back then too. As it was an independent production too (and not owned by a broadcaster), it seems strange they wanted to tie it to a specific and lower quality transmission version.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Nov 11, 2014 15:02:30 GMT
Thing is, Laurence, it's just the same as the BBC junking the film elements for any old programme. The finished programme is the main item, anything that was used to create it would have been fair game to junk, and it would be unrealistic to expect this material to have been kept. And yes, whilst we can get better transfers out of film now, it's only relatively recently that there would have been any benefit in keeping them. I don't think it's quite the same thing. If raw production material from (e.g.) an old TOTP were discarded, the transmission edit would be of roughly the same quality (i.e. PAL 625 lines). But junking far higher definition 35mm film reels (which must also have been far more expensive to shoot) and solely keeping an inferior 625 line VT version doesn't make much sense. In those days too, programmes were routinely screened from film prints. It's odd that an Anderson project didn't choose to keep the film originals; more flexibility with options for distribution, screenings etc. that way back then too. As it was an independent production too (and not owned by a broadcaster), it seems strange they wanted to tie it to a specific and lower quality transmission version. You're looking at this through 2014 eyes. Yes, with modern HD transfers, blu ray potential and HD broadcasts, a 35mm print is going to offer more. however, in 1976, or even in 1997, a PAL transfer wouldn't have appeared much of a lower quality option.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2014 15:07:39 GMT
I'd have to disagree as it's nothing to do with Blu-ray or hindsight etc. at all. Film was a more flexible and universal medium back then. It went to places where VT didn't. As Anderson worked in film almost totally, this is an odd decision. Still, that's the way it was.
|
|
|
Post by Richard Marple on Nov 11, 2014 21:39:39 GMT
I can understand using film with puppets if there needs to be large amount of edits, & complicated sound syncing when this wasn't easy on videotape.
Also if high levels of exports are expected film makes sense as it was a more universal medium. I've heard many Australian shows like Skippy the Bush Kangaroo used for film for this reason.
|
|
|
Post by markboulton on Nov 11, 2014 21:43:30 GMT
Oh dear... That old weather-worn "hindsight" cliché gets wheeled out again. A way of misdirecting people into believing that no-one at the time had any *foresight* (the very reason why higher quality acquisition methods were used in the first place).
|
|
|
Post by Ken Griffin on Nov 11, 2014 23:12:39 GMT
This whole thing isn't really about the BBC at all though (no one said it was) but about whoever junked the highest quality material for the show; odd that something like this was shot on 35mm and then edited on tape (particularly so since Gerry Anderson traditionally worked purely with film). At least the programme survives, which is the main thing. This appears to have been what happened: 1. Anderson supplied a copy of the film to the BBC 2. The BBC made an edit (possibly removing one of the captions). This was done on videotape. 3. The BBC screened it from videotape and presumably returned the film to Anderson (otherwise why edit the offending material on VT?) 4. The BBC kept its videotape copy until 1997 before disposing of it. This seems quite reasonable - it was a bought-in programme with no BBC involvement. 5. At some point, the rights holders lost or destroyed the 35mm master material for the programme, meaning that their best available master was a videotape dub. 6. This dub was not from the BBC VT - the captions are fully intact. Somehow, through Chinese whispers, this situation has combined with a myth about a longer version, producing an implausible account where Anderson gave the BBC his master material, the corporation cut it down to 50 minutes, kept the cut version and destroyed the original master, which had somehow migrated onto videotape at some point during the intervening 20 years. This has subsequently been circulated by people who really ought to know better.
|
|