HD...I'm curious

On Fri, 26 May 2006 00:20:11 GMT, "The Wizard"
wrote:

As I've mentioned before *Ancient Dads Army and Python* is probably the REAL
reason the TV companies (Especially Sky) are trying to get TV watched again
and of course in Skys case an excuse to raise the subscription prices.
All this to make utter tripe,dogs,dots,coming soon/next banners look
better???

WTF are you talking about now?

In the Days of Dads Army/Python etc, We got quality programming and ignored
how bad or good the picture was.

Like hell you did. Your memory is playing tricks on you - it's easy to
remember the programmes you liked from that age and then assume that
everything broadcast those days was of an equal standard. Let me tell
you, it wasn't. Look at an average night's line-up from 30 years ago
and there'll be hardly anything that wasn't shown once and never seen
again. Show that kind of material today and a channel would be
bankrupt within hours.

--

On Fri, 26 May 2006 08:54:31 GMT, Nigel Barker wrote:

Great I would imagine. The older the material the more likely it is to have been
recorded on film which easily exceeds HD quality.

Dad's Army and Python were mostly shot on video.

The film inserts (which probably were never stored after being
transferred to the master videotape) were often shot on 16mm, which
again is very unlikely to show any significant improvement in HD.

Now programmes that were completely made, edited and stored on 35mm
are a different matter - Space 1999 being the most obvious example
which was recently re-mastered in HD. The ITC archive is likely to be
a very rich source of good material, as indeed are many US-made series
(e.g. Quincy) produced before the (with hindsight) disastrous move to
tape-editing.

--

Zero Tolerance wrote:

The ITC archive is likely to be
a very rich source of good material, as indeed are many US-made series
(e.g. Quincy) produced before the (with hindsight) disastrous move to
tape-editing.

Likely to be? It is - I (and probably you) know only too well the
trouble a team went to in 1999 to recover the catalogue and check the
quality of the original material. Some of the subsequent releases to DVD
prove that.

"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 26 May 2006 08:54:31 GMT, Nigel Barker wrote:

Great I would imagine. The older the material the more likely it is to
have been
recorded on film which easily exceeds HD quality.

Dad's Army and Python were mostly shot on video.

The film inserts (which probably were never stored after being
transferred to the master videotape) were often shot on 16mm, which
again is very unlikely to show any significant improvement in HD.

Now programmes that were completely made, edited and stored on 35mm
are a different matter - Space 1999 being the most obvious example
which was recently re-mastered in HD. The ITC archive is likely to be
a very rich source of good material, as indeed are many US-made series
(e.g. Quincy) produced before the (with hindsight) disastrous move to
tape-editing.

--

I don't care if Quincy is in HD, it's just so full of unbelievably awful
acting. The bloke who plays Quincy has the acting ability of a concrete
post.
Regards Mike.

Mike GW8IJT wrote:

I don't care if Quincy is in HD, it's just so full of unbelievably awful
acting. The bloke who plays Quincy has the acting ability of a concrete
post.

However the storylines were (and still are) very interesting. Some of
the issues in the series are still very relevant today. Quincy, St.
Elsewhere and House all have an important place in my collection.

Mike GW8IJT wrote:

I don't care if Quincy is in HD, it's just so full of unbelievably awful
acting. The bloke who plays Quincy has the acting ability of a concrete post.

The late Jack Klugman could do both shouty and whiney.
That's twice as good as Charles Bronson.

--
Eiron

No good deed ever goes unpunished.

"Mike GW8IJT" wrote in message
...
"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 26 May 2006 08:54:31 GMT, Nigel Barker wrote:

Great I would imagine. The older the material the more likely it is to
have been
recorded on film which easily exceeds HD quality.

Dad's Army and Python were mostly shot on video.

The film inserts (which probably were never stored after being
transferred to the master videotape) were often shot on 16mm, which
again is very unlikely to show any significant improvement in HD.

Now programmes that were completely made, edited and stored on 35mm
are a different matter - Space 1999 being the most obvious example
which was recently re-mastered in HD. The ITC archive is likely to be
a very rich source of good material, as indeed are many US-made series
(e.g. Quincy) produced before the (with hindsight) disastrous move to
tape-editing.

--

I don't care if Quincy is in HD, it's just so full of unbelievably awful
acting. The bloke who plays Quincy has the acting ability of a concrete
post.
Regards Mike.

Aw! Come on! He wasn't that good!

Roger

In article , says...
Dom Robinson wrote:
In article ,
says...

"bixx" wrote in message
news ...surely with all the repeats on BBC not all of the BBC HD output is
going to be Planet Earth and Attenborough documentaries. Surely they're
going to have to start broadcasting Dad's Army and a bunch of old Python
stuff at some stage.

Excuse my ignorance (and the time to go a hunting in these groups), but
how is that going to look?
P

You are correct, not all of the content on HD channels will be HD. When
SD
material is broadcast on a HD channel I imagine it will look much the
same
as it would on a SD channel

AIUI, SD content (TV, DVD, VCR) looks worse on an HDTV than it does on an
SDTV.

This is very dependent on the TV. Some HDTVs are poor at displaying sd
resolutions, but some are very good.

My Sony Bravia 3lcd 50inch does an excellent job of hd (from the xbox360 and
original chipped xbox) and sd from tivo, gamecube and sky etc.

The capacity for a Tivo picture ( a recompressed mpeg2 stream, often from an
initially poor bitrate signal) to look poor on a 50 inch screen is pretty
huge, but no, the picture quality is pretty good.

Ta for the info. Out of interest, what's the model number for that one and
what price is one? (Just to give me some idea)

50" is too big for me (oo-er, missus!) as I sit probably too close to my 32"
WS normal telly as it is. Plus, I've got stuff on top of it which would fall
off a flatscreen
--

Dom Robinson Gamertag: DVDfever email: dom at dvdfever dot co dot uk
/* http://DVDfever.co.uk (editor)
/* 1096 DVDs, 324 games, 228 CDs, 108 cinema films, 34 concerts, videos & news
/* pursuit force (psp), the storys, wallace & gromit, broken flowers, 24 game

Join the DVDfever.co.uk forum - http://dvdfever.co.uk/phpbb2
New music charts - http://dvdfever.co.uk/music.shtml

"Nigel Barker" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 25 May 2006 19:09:34 +0100, bixx wrote:

...surely with all the repeats on BBC not all of the BBC HD output is
going to be Planet Earth and Attenborough documentaries. Surely they're
going to have to start broadcasting Dad's Army and a bunch of old Python
stuff at some stage.

Excuse my ignorance (and the time to go a hunting in these groups), but
how is that going to look?
P

Great I would imagine. The older the material the more likely it is to
have been
recorded on film which easily exceeds HD quality.


You're correct it'll be the late 80's where the problem lies as they started
to use Video, I have Season 1 Hill Street Blues and it looks awful on my
HDTV

Mike GW8IJT wrote:

The bloke who plays Quincy has the acting ability of a concrete
post.

Well, an inanimate carbon rod won an award in the Simpsons.

--
Digibox problem? : A reboot solves 90% of these.
The Sky Digital FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/8vef5
UK TV overseas: http://tinyurl.com/6p73
BBC reception questions? ; http://www.astra2d.com/
Fed up with on-screen logos? : http://logofreetv.org/
----
Only the truth as I see it.
No monies return'd. ;-)