|
|
Post by lfbarfe on Feb 10, 2006 23:41:55 GMT
Desperation maybe but I have some material on 1st gen low band which are direct dubs and the quality is very good indeed. I haven't watched any U-Matic material since university, where the library had lots of 1970s OU progs, and my recollection was also that the quality was very good. Most of the OU stuff I saw was monochrome, admittedly. I read somewhere that low-band U-Matic was, on paper at least, somewhere around S-VHS in terms of resolution. Just found this - users.tkk.fi/iisakkil/videoformats.html - looks quite good. It depends on your definition of broadcast standard. The old BBC/IBA standards were very high, and U-Matic wouldn't have passed muster, but some impoverished stations overseas thought it was good enough, at least. That would make a lot of sense. I'm not sure what the state of the paper archive is at LWT. Sorry. |
|
|
|
Post by bryanL on Mar 12, 2006 0:39:38 GMT
Apologies to all--- the memory played tricks with regard to LWT taping the Frost programmes on Sony U-matic. The machines were earlier sony ones, I think they were the CV-2100ACE. And yes, they did Tx from these machines in Gibraltar! (There's a guy at Sky used to work there in the transmission area).
|
|
John Stewart Miller
Guest
|
Post by John Stewart Miller on May 7, 2006 0:00:25 GMT
The Mind of MR J G Reader exists entirely despite being mostly in B/W. I heard the Callan tapes were discarded because they were damaged , (the studio safety copy exists to one of the missing ones ) . Lawrence's list is lamentable but stuff like Magpie/Frost was probably transimmted live in the first place ? Allegedly Verity Lambert had a spring clean and discarded what she regarded as ' Tat ' B/W material when she was there in the 1970s . Before you condemn her , you have to think of the 1970s mindset . Colour tv licences were very expensive compared to B/W , thus people did not like their screens filled up with B/W programmes.The BFI turned its nose up at TV at that time was reluctant to accept anything. So this may explain there was no deliberate wiping policy and why the B/W material has gone ... and just maybe there is still hope for colour material like AOW and Sexton Blake ? Some interesting info there John, but thinking on this I wonder how much of the documented existant Thames material from the early period falls clearly into that easily definable as 'tat'; or unsaleable B+W material as such. The reason I say this is, for example, 'Do not adjust your set' at the time though written for a childrens audience was clearly a satirical product at an adult level; and of the Thames episodes only one (plus later found extra VT) exist. However every episode of 'Two Ds and a dog' exist, which; though I grew to like it; I recall as a simplistic series aimed at very young children. Similarly shows like 'Zingalong' for pre school children seem to have been labelled as worthy as having samples kept. Yet the earliest Thames childrens TV serial I believe produced in colour 'Queen street gang' seems to have been wiped, but theoretically thus marketable. 'Do not adjust' as a Rediffusion run had been very popular and marketed in Europe, so it would have made sense to retain these. Other early colour products 'Sexton Blake' and 'Ace of wands'; (which was reviewed favourably in the Times); must have had market potential. And a noteable omission is the opening night of Thames, which surely would have been an investment to keep in terms of prestige as well as history? My conclusion is I suspect that the early parts of Thames library, as with some periods of the BBC might relate to individual production requests rather than evaluating shows on their own merits? |
|
|
|
Post by Charles Roberts on May 12, 2006 12:52:39 GMT
Yet again this poster is not me.........
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2006 16:26:16 GMT
Yet again this poster is not me......... John Miller (or John Stewart Miller, as he signed above - note the different spelling of Stewart / Stuart) is quite definitely a real person. I can vouch for this as he is a friend of mine and has been posting here for quite some time on and off. He only changed his posting name to avoid being mixed up with people of a similar name like yourself. If you choose to register under the name "Johnstuartmiller", fair enough (in which case he can revert to being just "John Miller" again). It doesn't need you to constantly keep making remarks though, as if he's an imposter using your name. That's his name and he has as much right to use it as you do (if Johnstuartmiller is indeed your real name). Nuff said. |
|
