Sky reveals HDTV launch lineup

Peter Duncanson wrote:
On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:17:30 +0000 (UTC), "fred_eg_bowinatuck"
wrote:


"Max Demian" wrote


The very first lander carried a B/W camera.

And the image went fuzzy every time anything moved

The deicision to use black and white was more to do with bandwidth than
cameras!


ISTR that the first colour picures from the moon were obtained by
putting a spinning 3-colour filter wheel in front of the lens of the
monochrome camera.

Yes (as stated elsewhere in this thread). Not a new idea, even 35 years ago,
John Logie Baird was experimenting with the concept in the 30s and 40s, after
he lost the 'race' for b/w TV.

--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

In article , Ivan wrote:
The very first lander carried a B/W camera. The US prelude coverage was
in color, but grainy
images of Neil Armstrong stepping off the ladder were definitely
monochrome.
[...]
Thinking back I was probably miffed because it wasn't shown on BBC2, where
at least the talking heads and panel of 'experts' would have been in colour!
(in my area BBC 1 and ITV didn't switch over to colour until 1970)

Working at Television Centre at the time, but not having a TV in the flat where
I lived, I just went back into work for the night of the first moonwalk. As I'd
been working the day before and was to work the day after, and the moonwalk
itself was delayed by about 6 hours, it must have been the longest shift I've
ever done, but I was there for a historic occasion and got to see it in 625
lines while the rest of the nation would have had 405.

Rod.

In article , Paul Ratcliffe wrote:
There are 575 active picture lines in the 625/50 system. One of them is in
the form of two separate half lines, at the end of one field and the
beginning of the other. Some equipment that includes buffer storage can cope
more easily with this by providing storage for 576 lines. You could say
there are 576 picture lines per frame, though two of them are only half the
duration of all the others.

Just to be pedantic, the lines are all the same duration. In the analogue
world, the 2 lines are half blanked to give 2 x 1/2 active lines.
In the digital world, the lines are full width, giving 576 active lines.

They come out of cameras as half lines, so the signal that is transmitted cannot
have any more picture info than that.

Rod.

I remember that factory from when we used to live near there, I worked at a
photo-processing lab down CL for a while.

IIRC it's all been redeveloped now, hasn't it?

"tony sayer" wrote in message
...

No, Coldhams lane Cambridge.....

In article ,
Roderick Stewart wrote:
In article , Ivan wrote:
Also IIRC didn't the BBC receive a fair amount of flak, because they
chose to make the Forsyth Saga in black-and-white, at a time when the
BBC was actually transmitting programmes in colour!

It was the last big production in black and white. I don't know the
reason for this, but in 1967 the first production studios to be
converted to colour, TC6, 7 and 8, would be just being completed and
tested, so maybe the BBC didn't think they were ready to undertake
something of this size. There's a big difference between transmitting
films from a telecine machine or chat programmes from a presentation
studio and creating a major multipart drama, particularly if the
technology is new and you're not sure of it.

TC6, 7 and 8 weren't converted to colour, they were never black and white.

Eric

"Charlie Pearce" wrote in
message news

I think what Mr. Onella meant by "We are getting more of an upgrade
with HDTV" was that 480 - 720 or 1080 is a bigger improvement than
576 - 720 or 1080....

Charlie


Yes, that is correct. Our NTSC is pretty much a "low-end" item.
NTSC was OK when it was the only game in town, but the image
is so outclassed by HDTV! Not sure if lifelong PAL users feel
the same sense of improvement.

Incidentally, the Maxim Company website has an instructive table at
http://www.maxim-ic.com/appnotes.cfm/appnote_number/750 . It is
"Performance Requirements for Various Video Standards." (I found
it while looking for Kell Factor, which I found well-explained on this
and other pages.)

BTW, where does SECAM figure in this? Maxim didn't address it
in their table.

"Sal"

In article , Java Jive
writes
I remember that factory from when we used to live near there, I worked at a
photo-processing lab down CL for a while.

IIRC it's all been redeveloped now, hasn't it?

Some of it has, Leica occupy the old TVT factory nowadays....

--
Tony Sayer

Roderick Stewart wrote:

Working at Television Centre at the time, but not having a TV in the flat where
I lived, I just went back into work for the night of the first moonwalk. As I'd
been working the day before and was to work the day after, and the moonwalk
itself was delayed by about 6 hours, it must have been the longest shift I've
ever done, but I was there for a historic occasion and got to see it in 625
lines while the rest of the nation would have had 405.

Well upconverted from 525 at least

It was simulcast on BBC 2 in 625 lines according to this:-

http://www.tvhistory.btinternet.co.u...roadcasts.html

We had a brand new dual standard TV rented from DER, my father wanted maximum
picture and reception quality for the event, then on the afternoon before the
moon landing my Grandmother broke her arm. We all jumped into the car and sped
off on a 50 mile journey to attend to her, consequently we ended up watching
the landing on her duff old (circa early 50s) 405 line TV, that normally needed
to be thumped every 15 minutes. Fortunately it behaved impeccably that night :-)


--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

In article , Mark Carver wrote:
Working at Television Centre at the time, but not having a TV in the flat where
I lived, I just went back into work for the night of the first moonwalk. As I'd
been working the day before and was to work the day after, and the moonwalk
itself was delayed by about 6 hours, it must have been the longest shift I've
ever done, but I was there for a historic occasion and got to see it in 625
lines while the rest of the nation would have had 405.

Well upconverted from 525 at least

Yes, it probably would have been, if not converted already from some other standard
used only by the moon camera itself. My memory may be playing tricks, but I'm sure I
remember reading somewhere that it used a slower frame rate to save bandwidth.

It was simulcast on BBC 2 in 625 lines according to this:-

http://www.tvhistory.btinternet.co.u...roadcasts.html

Only from 9.00am, after the historic event had already happened, which fits with my
personal recollection. I thought it a shame that they couldn't have made an
exception and switched on the higher quality network for something so special.

Rod.

Roderick Stewart wrote:
In article , Mark Carver wrote:

It was simulcast on BBC 2 in 625 lines according to this:-

http://www.tvhistory.btinternet.co.u...roadcasts.html


Only from 9.00am, after the historic event had already happened, which fits with my
personal recollection. I thought it a shame that they couldn't have made an
exception and switched on the higher quality network for something so special.

Indeed ! Though in July 1969 were BBC 1 and ITV on 'trade test' in 625 from
Crystal Palace (and perhaps other transmitters)? and therefore the coverage
might have been shown by either or both of those two in 625 ?
(I realise the official 625 launch for BBC1/ITV was not until November 1969)

Heaven knows how the broadcasters would cover such an event today, we might
just catch a glimpse of the moon's surface in the gaps between the 'breaking
news' banners, on screen clocks, and DOGs.


--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.