|
Post by Philip Hindley on Jan 16, 2012 8:48:19 GMT
I think maybe The Quatermass Experiment could work set in the 50s.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2012 9:06:54 GMT
I must admit, pay-per-view doesn't interest me at all for two reasons. Firstly, I prefer to physically own a disc with the programmes on and secondly (and most important), watching via a computer screen / internet is always poor quality with video material having a filmised look to it.
It might be a good way of seeing older material (particularly as the BBC seem to have little interest in making their archive accessible via a company like Network in the way that ITV material is) but i'd personally rather own a DVD, to watch when I choose.
|
|
|
Post by Rich Cornock on Jan 16, 2012 9:35:23 GMT
the latest tv's have internet access so which you can watch the iplayer on. All you need to do to make a hard copy would be to connect a dvd recorder to it or a tv hard drive recorder which a lot of people have already to make a copy.
I think pay per view would be real progress as there are a lot of programs that dont make commercial sense to release on DVD due to low sales yet if available on pay per view would give people the chance to see them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2012 9:42:46 GMT
The issue for me though would be that VT material would appear filmised, which I really do not like to see. Also, you could burn a disc of the material but it won't be as reliable as a bought / pressed disc. It may be a way to see obscure material, yes, but will the disc play in five years time? A step forward in some ways but a step back in others.
Still, each to their own...
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Jan 16, 2012 13:00:26 GMT
The issue for me though would be that VT material would appear filmised, which I really do not like to see. Also, you could burn a disc of the material but it won't be as reliable as a bought / pressed disc. It may be a way to see obscure material, yes, but will the disc play in five years time? A step forward in some ways but a step back in others. Still, each to their own... I'm quite with you with regards to deinterlacing material - I would be most unhappy if the only version you could buy was deinterlaced. As for the storage, well, presumably you'd download a copy onto your hard drive, which you could then back up presumably. Therefore, if your disc failed, you could burn another. My concern is more with the compression that you would have to endure - unless you were talking large file sizes, you'd end up with blocky, artefacty, distinctly sub-DVD quality files. This would be more of an issue for very niche stuff, which almost certainly wouldn't undergo anything more in the way of restoration than the most basic automatic noise reduction.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2012 13:17:13 GMT
Yes. The de-interlacing issue wouldn't matter in the case of the many programmes which only exist on t/r, of course, but the picture quality thing is a big concern too because, as you say, there probably won't be any clean up or restoration undertaken on these niche items. So it's quite possible that some of the more ropey t/rs would end up looking not much better than the average BBC VHS viewing copy of old (minus time code) or a DVD-R recorded in LP mode!
|
|
|
Post by Greg H on Jan 16, 2012 15:41:45 GMT
Why on earth don't they remake some of the missing Doctor Whos using the techniques of the time? Surely it would be profitable? Plus it would be interesting to have some behind the scenes programmes covering the process. I would be 100% for this. I think they would have to be released straight to DVD though; if they were made to be shown on television there is not a chance in hell that the stories would escape a thorough 'reimagining' and updating so that they bore no resemblance to the source material. A recent example of this is the BBC's hound of the baskervilles. Whilst watchable enough for the most part it only had the most fleeting similarity to the original text. Probably best to wait for some competent fan efforts. Traditionaly the works of HP Lovecraft have translated very poorly to the screen; it took hardcore fans, HPLHS, to actually make an adaptation of the call of cthullu that worked and was true to the original. Perhaps in 15 years time we will be watching a faithful fan made version of the web of fear, using the original scripts and recreations of the props. Who knows?
|
|
|
Post by Greg H on Jan 16, 2012 15:58:05 GMT
I must admit, pay-per-view doesn't interest me at all for two reasons. Firstly, I prefer to physically own a disc with the programmes on and secondly (and most important), watching via a computer screen / internet is always poor quality with video material having a filmised look to it. It might be a good way of seeing older material (particularly as the BBC seem to have little interest in making their archive accessible via a company like Network in the way that ITV material is) but i'd personally rather own a DVD, to watch when I choose. Agreed on pretty much all points there. My bottom line about it I guess is that I would rather see a slightly crummy version of something than not get to see it at all. The old nth generation VHS copy I had from the fan circuit of Quatermass II a long time ago was barely watchable, but I always considered it better than not seeing it at all!
|
|
|
Post by Paul Cooksley on Jan 16, 2012 16:58:07 GMT
I watch alot of stuff from BBC iplayer via my new Sony TV.
HD streams fine, although, as previously mentioned, I cannot abide VT material looking "filmised" with the filmic wash that this process introduces....
By the way, not sure if I was reading this correctly, but as per a posting above, can you then record BBCi player stuff from the TV using a DVD recorder?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2012 19:31:10 GMT
Agreed on pretty much all points there. My bottom line about it I guess is that I would rather see a slightly crummy version of something than not get to see it at all. The old nth generation VHS copy I had from the fan circuit of Quatermass II a long time ago was barely watchable, but I always considered it better than not seeing it at all! Hmm. Having suffered years of watching nth generation VHS copies of programmes in order to just see them, then stepping up to first gen VHS when home video releases became widespread (and cheap) and then finally being able to watch yet more obscure stuff in near broadcast DVD quality (courtesy of companies like Network), going from there to substandard (filmised) and artifact-ridden online copies seems like a definite step backward to me! I paid my dues with substandard copies for over 20 years so that's why I can do without them now! ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
|
Post by Greg H on Jan 16, 2012 20:05:14 GMT
I know the feeling mate. I remember some of the old doctor who videos i used to trade for were so murky it was more like listening to an audio with a bit of movement on screen flickering between colour and black and white. Happy days ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
|
Post by Robert Belford on Jan 16, 2012 20:38:45 GMT
I've been using a free video player called PotPlayer. One of the deinterlacing settings makes the frame rate 50fps, turning each field into a frame and doing some kind of interpolating I suppose, so you get a "video look" on the PC screen when playing interlaced videos. It's a horrible thought that the day might come when it's difficult to see video programmes in an interlaced form. I hadn't thought about that. On the other hand some modern TVs can give a video look to anything - even feature films. I watch alot of stuff from BBC iplayer via my new Sony TV. HD streams fine, although, as previously mentioned, I cannot abide VT material looking "filmised" with the filmic wash that this process introduces.... By the way, not sure if I was reading this correctly, but as per a posting above, can you then record BBCi player stuff from the TV using a DVD recorder?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2012 21:11:08 GMT
I know the feeling mate. I remember some of the old doctor who videos i used to trade for were so murky it was more like listening to an audio with a bit of movement on screen flickering between colour and black and white. Happy days ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) (Laughter of recognition!) ![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png) I've been using a free video player called PotPlayer. One of the deinterlacing settings makes the frame rate 50fps, turning each field into a frame and doing some kind of interpolating I suppose, so you get a "video look" on the PC screen when playing interlaced videos. Very interesting to hear about that. There is a glimmer of hope then!
|
|
|
Post by Robert Belford on Jan 16, 2012 22:34:56 GMT
www.videohelp.com/tools?toolsearch=potplayerRight click on the screen then video > deinterlacing > deinterlacing settings then choose BOB (framedoubler). And when playing interlaced video you get a "video look" on your PC. Also I've experimented with Sony Vegas and VirtualDub. Starting with interlaced video and creating online clips that have a progressive frame rate of 50 fps. Again you get the video look or you can use them at 25fps for slow motion.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Moss on Jan 17, 2012 12:46:59 GMT
www.videohelp.com/tools?toolsearch=potplayerRight click on the screen then video > deinterlacing > deinterlacing settings then choose BOB (framedoubler). And when playing interlaced video you get a "video look" on your PC. Also I've experimented with Sony Vegas and VirtualDub. Starting with interlaced video and creating online clips that have a progressive frame rate of 50 fps. Again you get the video look or you can use them at 25fps for slow motion. VLC can also do this.
|
|