Eurobird 1 failure (was Sky satellites)

"james" wrote in message
...
In message , Paul
it's an
absolute disgrace that film makers from Timbuktoo and Kalamazoo haven't
bothered to keep up and are still into wind-up cameras and sprocket-driven
double-perf pull-down film transport mechanisms! Shameful! Anyone not
offering us their movies on nice, button-bright out-sourced shiny discs,
with all the subtitling done to perfection is shown the door smartish.
Their protests about 16mm and 35mm being world standards are just so much
out-dated hogwash talk these days.


The 'third world' tend to intercept current technology. I would think
setting up a 35mm process from recording to developing to editing
would be prohibitively expensive compared to an all electronics system from
the local Ali Bin Dixons.

"james" wrote in message
...
In message , Paul Martin
writes
In article ,
james wrote:

When all that was done a sub-title black 35mm film had to be made. The
technique then was to run a 35mm film on one TC machine, and run
simultaneously the actual movie on another TC machine. This avoids
tampering with the positive.

That sounds very 1970s to me. Nowadays, the "film" would be a digital
recording on a server. The telecine job would have already been
outsourced somewhere "independent".

I could be mistaken but that could be sommat to do with BBC 2's 'World
Cinema' having it's heyday back in the 1970s.

I'm with one hundred per cent on this one. Us smart, intelligent
westerners have built up a damn fine knowledge base about digital
recordings and all jazz singer sound technology therefore it's an absolute
disgrace that film makers from Timbuktoo and Kalamazoo haven't bothered to
keep up and are still into wind-up cameras and sprocket-driven double-perf
pull-down film transport mechanisms! Shameful! Anyone not offering us
their movies on nice, button-bright out-sourced shiny discs, with all the
subtitling done to perfection is shown the door smartish. Their protests
about 16mm and 35mm being world standards are just so much out-dated
hogwash talk these days.
James Follett.


I bought a DVD boxed set of Inspector Colombo episodes for my YL,
the telecine is awful, the sound of the film running through the machine
is interfering with the soundtrack, clickclacking all the way through the
program

Steve Terry

On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 18:39:35 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller
wrote:

Just like THAMES chose to broadcast "Death On the Rock"
and suffered the consequences.

Channel 4 repeated "Death On The Rock" a few years later (part of the
'Banned' season, although it wasn't) and suffered no ill effects.

--

On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:30:08 +0100, james
wrote:

Actually I have problems convincing people that the Pace BSkyB
receiver I rigged in our new conservatory for my wife, whose name
escapes me, works perfectly well without a Solus card or a BSkyB
card,

a LIDL FTA set works better
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
...
: On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 18:39:35 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller

: wrote:
:
: Just like THAMES chose to broadcast "Death On the Rock"
: and suffered the consequences.
:
: Channel 4 repeated "Death On The Rock" a few years later (part
of the
: 'Banned' season, although it wasn't) and suffered no ill
effects.
:

Genie out of the bottle and all that, by then any damaged had
been done and (like Thames) the programme and 'after-shocks' were
just a historical notes in history...
--
Regards, Jerry.

"Jerry" wrote in message
...
"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
...
: On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 18:39:35 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller

: wrote:
:
: Just like THAMES chose to broadcast "Death On the Rock"
: and suffered the consequences.
:
: Channel 4 repeated "Death On The Rock" a few years later (part
of the
: 'Banned' season, although it wasn't) and suffered no ill
effects.

Genie out of the bottle and all that, by then any damaged had
been done and (like Thames) the programme and 'after-shocks' were
just a historical notes in history...

Just a few dead terrorists after all.

The Merkins wouldn't have batted an eyelid if it hadn't been the kind they
were currently supporting.

(With the current fashion for historical apologies, I wonder when Obama is
going to get around to apologising for US support for the IRA, financially
and flying terrorists across the Atlantic to speak to so-called Irish
Americans.)

--
Max Demian

In message , Jerry
writes

"Zero Tolerance" wrote in message
...
: On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 18:39:35 +0000 (UTC), J G Miller

: wrote:
:
: Just like THAMES chose to broadcast "Death On the Rock"
: and suffered the consequences.
:
: Channel 4 repeated "Death On The Rock" a few years later (part
of the
: 'Banned' season, although it wasn't) and suffered no ill
effects.
:

Genie out of the bottle and all that, by then any damaged had
been done and (like Thames) the programme and 'after-shocks' were
just a historical notes in history...

Unlike 'Death of a Princess' a dramatisation for English TV about the
beheading of Saudi princess for adultery. That programme can never be
shown again. The recent fall-out from Blair's 'lay off the wogs' order
that stopped police delving into baksheesh payments by BAe to our Saudi
allies was bad enough. England can't afford yet another spectacle of a
foreign sec having to apologise to the Saudis as Lord Carrington had to.

--
James Follett

In message , Paul
Martin writes
In article ,
james wrote:
In message , Paul
Martin writes
In article ,
james wrote:

When all that was done a sub-title black 35mm film had to be made. The
technique then was to run a 35mm film on one TC machine, and run
simultaneously the actual movie on another TC machine. This avoids
tampering with the positive.

That sounds very 1970s to me. Nowadays, the "film" would be a digital
recording on a server. The telecine job would have already been
outsourced somewhere "independent".

I could be mistaken but that could be sommat to do with BBC 2's 'World
Cinema' having it's heyday back in the 1970s.

I'm with one hundred per cent on this one.

Where in my post did I say or imply that the telecine was to be done in
Upper Elbonia? The transfer to tape or disc (and probably the
subtitling too) would in all likelihood be contracted out to a tiny
high-rent facility in London's Soho.

With you one hundred per cent on this one. I was once running a Movieola
over a strip club in Dean Street. Had all manner of swarthy chappies
breezing in, wondering if I could convert 35 and 16 to Beta or VHS. On a
Movieola? Bloke upstairs could do it except that he wouldn't without
money upfront.

As other posters have said, shooting on tape or disc is much cheaper
than film nowadays. (Even Hollywood is gradually abandoning film as an
origination format.)

With you one hundred per cent on this one. Save a fortune convincing
Chavs, and Will Of God believers that a system using lines gives far
better resolution than silly film that only offers resolution down to
granular level.

--
James Follett

On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 14:47:18 +0100, Paul Martin wrote:

Given the graininess of some Hollywood films I've seen, 4k is overkill.

Field of Dreams?

Or even cornier movies?

In message , Zero Tolerance
writes
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:30:08 +0100, james
wrote:

with films from Czech, Lebanon, Finland etc -- countries with
vibrant film industries but whose products now rarely make it to
English TV screens ever since the BBC were obliged to stop their
World Cinema series.

Obliged? Who by?

Take care recording Brit Shorts. Possession of movies such as the Danish
short OgginNoggin are illegal under the new Dangerous Pictures Act. Even
possession of clips from FTV's junior fashion segments are dodgy

--
James Follett. http://www.powcorp.com/title/view/401/ice
http://www.screendaily.com/5007287.article
http://www.trueblood-online.com/cast...n-moyer-to-be-
in-powers-ice/ www.james-follett.co.uk