|
|
Post by emitron on Dec 5, 2006 21:57:12 GMT
I'm a bit saddened I missed seeing the recently discovered Admag at this years MBW, but here is one I found a few years back and features an actor better known for his comedy roles. For people who like continuity, what could be better than a live link from the A-R Clock right into a programme.
|
|
|
|
Post by Clive Shaw on Dec 6, 2006 8:41:29 GMT
I was wondering Andy, was this admag transmitted over the network, or was it just a mockup to show a client (SR) what could be done ?
|
|
|
|
Post by emitron on Dec 6, 2006 10:08:09 GMT
I was wondering Andy, was this admag transmitted over the network, or was it just a mockup to show a client (SR) what could be done ? Thanks Clive, that's a very good point you made. As far as the presentation and way the programme runs, it appears to be a live recording. It's too elaborate for a mock run because too many senior Gibbs company people are involved and it's more elaborate than most admags I've seen. They toast the company at the end with enthusiasm for the coming new year. There are enough hesitations to suggest a live recording in one go and not a slicker re-edit. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Henderson on Dec 6, 2006 12:47:11 GMT
Meeeeooowwww!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  inetnum: 137.158.0.0 - 137.158.255.255 netname: UCTNET-B descr: University of Cape Town descr: Lovers' Walk descr: Lower Campus descr: Rondebosch descr: Cape Town descr: 7701 country: ZA org: ORG-ZZ213-AFRINIC admin-c: FG51-AFRINIC tech-c: FG51-AFRINIC status: ASSIGNED PI mnt-by: TF-137-158-MNT mnt-lower: TF-137-158-MNT source: AFRINIC # Filtered parent: 0.0.0.0 - 255.255.255.255 |
|
|
|
Post by LanceM on Dec 6, 2006 16:31:17 GMT
Is there any chance that we might get a look at some of this material Andy ? You also seem to have a lot of very interesting items. The BFI really does want to look at your material. As you had stated in the past they had turned down your collection of material. Since it appears that this outlook on your collection has changed, I was wondering if you might consent now to loaning some of your material so that it not be forgotten. Plus, wouldn't it be nice if you had a section of your material showcased at a missing believed wiped convention ? Official recognition of your work would be nice, would it not ? At any rate I would hope something happens soon with this material. It would be a shame if it remained missing ( which is what the material is still now). Posting pics of missing material you have to tantalize posters about something they may never get a chance to see. This is confusing as the BFI will accept your material, when you stated they will not, what is the problem I ask ? Could you please consider preserving these items for future generations to learn from, and to draw new conclusions and ideas based on an era long past. A legacy that you could give to new generations, please consider this.
Lance.
|
|
|
|
Post by emitron on Dec 6, 2006 18:15:15 GMT
Is there any chance that we might get a look at some of this material Andy ? You also seem to have a lot of very interesting items. The BFI really does want to look at your material. As you had stated in the past they had turned down your collection of material. Since it appears that this outlook on your collection has changed, I was wondering if you might consent now to loaning some of your material so that it not be forgotten. Plus, wouldn't it be nice if you had a section of your material showcased at a missing believed wiped convention ? Official recognition of your work would be nice, would it not ? At any rate I would hope something happens soon with this material. It would be a shame if it remained missing ( which is what the material is still now). Posting pics of missing material you have to tantalize posters about something they may never get a chance to see. This is confusing as the BFI will accept your material, when you stated they will not, what is the problem I ask ? Could you please consider preserving these items for future generations to learn from, and to draw new conclusions and ideas based on an era long past. A legacy that you could give to new generations, please consider this. Lance. Thanks Lance. A public forum like this isn't a good way of discussing the subject, so this is all I will say and no more. People generally have their own agendas on forums and that is to be expected, even their assumptions, but the tone on this forum and others seems to me that people are willing to have a go at me and other collectors as if we are withholding material. It gets legs and tails grafted by fantasists who know nothing about the subject. I've already and predictably had as much insults, weird e-mails and the like as enthusiasm for my blog. Judging by the numbers who revisit to look there are hundreds of people who never post here. The blog isn't there to tantalise, it's there to fill as gap which doesn't exist elsewhere. It isn't just about films I've found, but about the whole forgotten aspects of UK Television. A friend recently asked me why I bother given the hostility I've faced on some forum threads. Usually misplaced as anyone who had met me knows I'm a fairly easygoing, good natured guy (most of the time!) People seem to look for conflict where there is none. It is unfortunate, but I can't change that. As Chris Perry mentioned on another thread Kaleidoscope offered material recently, the BFI know about it, but don't wish to use it. They know about my material, but don't wish to use it. That isn't the same as refusing. So instead of people hammering at myself and Chris, direct yourself to asking the BFI. A lot of missing material which does get donated never sees the light of day anyway. One thing should be utterly clear, the BFI are not at fault either. There are a lot of complex reasons why things are the way they are and they aren't helpful to discuss in public. It basically isn't anyone's business but the people concerned and is a private matter. I've reached the point where I may want to move on anyway, so the option of selling prints remains and I think this will be likely. the new owners can then do what they want with them, though they might not be as agreeable as I've been to discussing that on a forum! |
|
|
|
Post by Clive Shaw on Dec 7, 2006 10:27:36 GMT
As far as the presentation and way the programme runs, it appears to be a live recording. It's too elaborate for a mock run because too many senior Gibbs company people are involved and it's more elaborate than most admags I've seen. They toast the company at the end with enthusiasm for the coming new year. There are enough hesitations to suggest a live recording in one go and not a slicker re-edit. Thanks Andy, and in response to your later reply I am glad you are making use of the material you have found by discussing it and showing examples on your blog. It's better that someone like yourself who has an interest in the lesser, more mundane examples of television you have found and can be used to build up a picture of what the television experience was like in the 1950's. We all know about Quatermass and 1984 but damn little else, so to see these admags as examples of how ITV was experimenting with commercialism is truly fascinating. Much better than them being stored on a shelf at the BFI with access to only those who know they are there and their worth as examples of 50's/60's day to day TV. |
|
|
|
Post by emitron on Dec 7, 2006 11:12:35 GMT
As far as the presentation and way the programme runs, it appears to be a live recording. It's too elaborate for a mock run because too many senior Gibbs company people are involved and it's more elaborate than most admags I've seen. They toast the company at the end with enthusiasm for the coming new year. There are enough hesitations to suggest a live recording in one go and not a slicker re-edit. Thanks Andy, and in response to your later reply I am glad you are making use of the material you have found by discussing it and showing examples on your blog. It's better that someone like yourself who has an interest in the lesser, more mundane examples of television you have found and can be used to build up a picture of what the television experience was like in the 1950's. We all know about Quatermass and 1984 but damn little else, so to see these admags as examples of how ITV was experimenting with commercialism is truly fascinating. Much better than them being stored on a shelf at the BFI with access to only those who know they are there and their worth as examples of 50's/60's day to day TV. Thanks Clive, you said that better than I could. I do think there has been too much focus on "Cult TV" and not enough on the vast majority of TV that most people saw from 1936 to 1976. It's tougher doing that, but the end result is that I can cover things that aren't mentioned anywhere else on the Internet. As they are obscure, it's hard to get people interested, but if they are, perhaps it might encourage a wider appreciation of old television and that, I think would be a good thing. |
|
|
|
Post by LanceM on Dec 7, 2006 16:33:30 GMT
Hey Andy,
As I have always stated, I really do appreciate your work. I look forward to the next posting on your blog. I was a little confused about some issues when I posted that last thread, apology is due there. Your time and effort are appreciated by many here, I have tried to tell anyone who has a passing interest in old TV to have a look at your site, they found it very comprehensive, and enjoyable. No hard feelings then ? Keep up the hard work.
Lance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Doherty on Dec 8, 2006 22:56:55 GMT
A new viewing facility at the National Film Theatre, will be completed in March.
Initially, it will be selected films and television programmes that will be available for public viewing. However, it is the ambition of the B.F.I. to make available, all of its holdings to the public.
So, I believe a positive effort is being made to bring the N.F.TV.A. Archive to those who are interested in archive matters.
Of course, the B.F.I. Archive is about keeping and preserving films and television programmes, and that means "keeping them on a shelf". Better that, than wiping and junking, don't you think?
They are now involved in giving the public the opportunity to see this fabulous archive. It should be remembered that the 'Missing, Believed Wiped' events, are a 'showcase' for newly recovered programmes, and this is in addition to the screening seasons relating to different aspects of television.
Over the past twenty years the improvement in accessing old television material, whether by video and DVD, or public screenings of programmes by the Kaleidoscope Group and the B.F.I., not to mention screenings on British television, has been beyond even my expectations. Certainly, twenty years ago, I would have regarded even the possibility of buying programme classics like Quatermass and 1984 at your local record shop, as being a pipe dream.
I have just bought the DVD of the superb BBC 1972 'Metro-Land'.
This, alone, illustrates that the television organizations and B.F.I. are doing what they can, and I am sure much more of the television archives will be made available to the public.
With the excellent work of Chris Perry and Andy Henderson, I don't think we have to worry about a lack of highlighting of the issues that affect television archiving.
Yours,
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon Winters on Dec 9, 2006 12:40:31 GMT
Being new to this forum I don't want to step on any toes, but I am a little concerned to read that the missing programmes that Andy has kindly highlighted are likely to be up for sale in the future.
In view of the publicity given to them on this forum and on Mausoleum Club, there is likely to be a lot of interest from collectors, so the price might go very high for people like me and others who buy missing prints IN ORDER TO lend them to the BFI.
Therefore, could I respectfully ask Andy to lend them to the BFI now, and sell them when they have been returned? Otherwise, a potential buyer might hide them away form the nation for ever, and the chance of all of us seeing them at the BFI will be nil.
We have now established beyond doubt that the BFI would be delighted to loan them.
The BFI have a fast turnaround for copying missing episodes - usually just a couple of weeks in my experience.
Andy would be a winner, because the prints would get a professional examination and would be repaired if necessary. This would make them more valuable. We would all be winners to know that these programmes are secure. There would be no loser in this.
If transportation of the films to and from the BFI is a problem, no doubt someone will offer to do this as a free service to the nation. If not, I will.
It could be done with no hassle and all completed by January. How about it, in the spirit of Christmas?
|
|
|
|
Post by emitron on Dec 9, 2006 15:29:07 GMT
In view of the publicity given to them on this forum and on Mausoleum Club, there is likely to be a lot of interest from collectors, so the price might go very high for people like me and others who buy missing prints IN ORDER TO lend them to the BFI. You should then question why you are collecting films and potentially outbidding known people trying to do the same thing. That'll be the same generic people who post regularly on here who know my user ID on e-bay, knew I was bidding on a film, knew my intentions and yet have outbid me in the past, pushing up the prices of films even further. Not to mention those people I know of who post on this forum and elsewhere who support the cause but are hiding prints away themselves for future profit. |
|
|
|
Post by Simon Winters on Dec 11, 2006 16:25:03 GMT
That was a particularly unhelpful and unreasonable reply to my posting, which was made in good faith and for the right reasons. Above all, it did not answer my question at all!
To turn to your points.......there are no doubt several people who monitor ebay in the hope of finding a missing film, intending to lend it to the archives and then retain the original film as an artefact. That's great. nothing wrong with that at all. I don't think such people should defer to you (or anyone else) and refrain from bidding on it! I can't believe that you feel that you have some sort of prior claim over others!
Anyway, can we get back to asking my original question, which I think is a reasonable one. (and there is no need to be so negative, by the way).
|
|
|
|
Post by emitron on Dec 11, 2006 18:11:35 GMT
That was a particularly unhelpful and unreasonable reply to my posting, which was made in good faith and for the right reasons. Above all, it did not answer my question at all! To turn to your points.......there are no doubt several people who monitor ebay in the hope of finding a missing film, intending to lend it to the archives and then retain the original film as an artefact. That's great. nothing wrong with that at all. I don't think such people should defer to you (or anyone else) and refrain from bidding on it! I can't believe that you feel that you have some sort of prior claim over others! Anyway, can we get back to asking my original question, which I think is a reasonable one. (and there is no need to be so negative, by the way). It is your choice if you wish to interpret my reply as negative. Though, I've got quite a sharp writing style (no point in chewing cabbage twice if you don't have to). I shouldn't have to generally (not just to you) waste a lot of time justifying the whys and hows of my film collection to complete strangers on the internet, who don't introduce themselves or their background, but expect me to answer their questions and sometimes even demands. Many people wouldn't even bother. It's my goodwill that people are testing by generally hammerering on about missing films as if we were rescuing pieces of the Dead Sea Scrolls or Noah's Ark. " I can't believe that you feel that you have some sort of prior claim over others!"That was your implication which is simply untrue. Originally, if I went on e-bay and found a missing film and saw that someone I knew had bid on it already and stamped the item, I left the film alone. That act of goodwill worked for a while until I was getting outbid by other people buying into the missing episodes collectors club who also knew the subject from this website and the whole thing became a free for all. The only solution is to put in a maximum bid. He who wins can do so by sheer force of money and I'm not interested in wasting my own money over the normal price for such a film print. In the end the seller wins and there is a competitive fight rather than a group agreement. What should have happened in an ideal world is that one person could bid and the others would chip in with the physical print being donated. I tried to arrange this a few years ago, but the politics were too complex and there were all sorts of problems. At least I tried the idea, but it didn't work out. I'll now go through your original post bit by bit. "Being new to this forum I don't want to step on any toes, but I am a little concerned to read that the missing programmes that Andy has kindly highlighted are likely to be up for sale in the future. In view of the publicity given to them on this forum and on Mausoleum Club, there is likely to be a lot of interest from collectors, so the price might go very high for people like me and others who buy missing prints IN ORDER TO lend them to the BFI."Well...that'll be fine for me making a profit I guess after years of free goodwill! "Therefore, could I respectfully ask Andy to lend them to the BFI now, and sell them when they have been returned?"No one officially from the BFI have asked me. They've had years to do so and I guess if they needed them for a show they would have asked me. There have had plenty of missing material to choose from in recent years. "Otherwise, a potential buyer might hide them away form the nation for ever, and the chance of all of us seeing them at the BFI will be nil."They might, they might not. Chances are they won't. "We have now established beyond doubt that the BFI would be delighted to loan them."Have we? I've heard nothing officially. "The BFI have a fast turnaround for copying missing episodes - usually just a couple of weeks in my experience."You didn't explain what you have returned? "Andy would be a winner, because the prints would get a professional examination and would be repaired if necessary. This would make them more valuable. "I'm surprisingly capable of tending to my own prints as they are and as far as I know they aren't crumbing to dust such that a repair would make them more valuable. "We would all be winners to know that these programmes are secure. There would be no loser in this."That's your intepretation of this. "If transportation of the films to and from the BFI is a problem, no doubt someone will offer to do this as a free service to the nation. If not, I will." So, I'm to allow a complete stranger I'd never heard to take my film collection away on their own truck on behalf of the BFI? Getting this into perspective, these are old film prints, probably unique but not that important. So, getting into your "saving them for the nation" parlance, if you've recently given the BFI some missing prints and really do have the spirit and fervour to "save them for the nation" I'd think you'd surely want to donate the physical prints and not just lend them? "It could be done with no hassle and all completed by January. How about it, in the spirit of Christmas?"The spirit of Christmas could extend to you donating the physical copies of your film prints if you only have a few? You seem to have the idea that what you've seen so far are all the films I have, but you didn't ask if there were more. There are. I'd guarantee the total could not be telecined by January even if I sorted them out now. |
|
|
|
Post by Christopher Perry on Dec 11, 2006 18:50:28 GMT
Hi people
It seems a shame that this thread seems to be annoying Andy (if I am reading this correctly).
I would like to echo his comment that the BFI have not contacted him to ask him to return anything as far as I am aware.
I have emailed Dick and told him what we have found in the last 2 years, we have also offered it direct to copyright holders. The general feeling is return it if you want, but we have not asked you for it.
I saw Dick at MBW 2 weeks ago and he did not ask us to return anything, though we will happily do so if he wishes.
The MBW events have limited time and do cherry-pick the best stuff returned, our Kaleidoscope events show a broader range of obscure (!) shows, and we will show our missing material next year at an event.
The bottom dollar is this - it is expensive for archives to copy material to then do nothing with it. So if the archive knows it is safe in a private collection then they feel it is safe to leave it there and not try to spend limited resources copying it.
If Andy does sell his prints, then we will try to buy them, and show them, but for now they are in safe hands so people do not need to worry.
Chris
|
|
