Lambing Live on HD

On 10/03/2010 17:12, Jim Lesurf wrote:

The content is probably much as before in level. Alas, the BBC seems to
take it for granted that such series always *have* to assume the viewer
knows nothing already.

A lot of repetition indicates that they know they are broadcasting to
folks of limited attention span, or merely placing moments in the
production so that breaks can be inserted at a latter reshowing on the
commerical re-run channels.


I wonder how many people in the UK already have a decent background in
science, but are thus simply ignored by BBC TV.

Loads.

Except for the sciences of gardening and cooking. If something like IT,
DIY or motoring maintenance could be done in the technical depth that
sometimes these other programmes reach?

It would be interesting if the BBC ever gathers the confidence to do a 'Bad
Science' TV series that debunks technobabble, bogus medicine, etc, *and*
actually explains the evidence and the scientific/academic methods anyone
can use for themself to see though such twaddle. Wonder if this will ever
happen...

"Consumer Affairs programming". Oh dear, there's a scam going on. Let's
look at the poor unfortunates affected. Laugh and be entertained. Oh
dear, they are making programs for daily mail readers and the Tiscali Idiot.

Meanwhile Channel 5's Gadget Show has turned into some sort of technical
p0rn show with a strange focus on every sort of physical activity apart
from the obvious ...

--
Adrian C

On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:14:02 +0000, Stephen Wolstenholme
wrote:

On Tue, 9 Mar 2010 20:50:03 -0000, "Ken Tukyfriedturkey"
wrote:

how many bloody lambs does one need to see born then...


Everyone I have asked think the program is a waste of BBC time that
could be filled with interesting programs like Shaun the Sheep
repeats.

One or two decent shots of Kate Humble's bum. Several hundred shots of
sheep's buttocks. Are they trying to tell us something?

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:12:45 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:


FWIW During the last year or so I have had the distinct impression that
many of the BBC series on 'nature' and 'science' have been driven by the
thought, "We have to make an HD version of something we already did a few
years ago that sold well." The fear being that SD versions will cease to
attract viewers/sales. The result is programmes that cover familiar
material and which concentrate on photography, graphics, etc.

I have also noticed recently a trend for the title captions, etc, to be
smaller than before. Perhaps for the same reason. :-)

The content is probably much as before in level. Alas, the BBC seems to
take it for granted that such series always *have* to assume the viewer
knows nothing already.

I dunno, I'm old enough to remember when we would congregate at a
friend's house who had a colour TV, bring smokables and drinkables and
settle down to some amazing Real Science in the likes of Horizon etc.

I wonder how many people in the UK already have a decent background in
science, but are thus simply ignored by BBC TV. Indeed I wonder what Brian
Cox thinks about this - or will do in due time if he hasn't yet spotted the
above patterns...

It would be interesting if the BBC ever gathers the confidence to do a 'Bad
Science' TV series that debunks technobabble, bogus medicine, etc, *and*
actually explains the evidence and the scientific/academic methods anyone
can use for themself to see though such twaddle. Wonder if this will ever
happen...

When in recent years did you watch a "science" programme that told you
something you didn't already know?

I found this a while back

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon...instrans.shtml

I suspect even this would be seen as "too controversial" for the
current bunch of lizard people to permit to be broadcast

In article , Martin
wrote:
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:42:42 +0000, Albert Ross
wrote:

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:12:45 +0000 (GMT), Jim Lesurf
wrote:


It would be interesting if the BBC ever gathers the confidence to do a
'Bad Science' TV series that debunks technobabble, bogus medicine,
etc, *and* actually explains the evidence and the scientific/academic
methods anyone can use for themself to see though such twaddle. Wonder
if this will ever happen...

When in recent years did you watch a "science" programme that told you
something you didn't already know?

Some of the Science programmes on BBC 4 have been good.

Yes, I agree. FWIW some of those *have* told me things I didn't know (or
had forgotten I'd known!) and were interesting. In some cases despite some
very annoying camerawork.

Maybe the problem is that the BBC has decided that BBC2 'science' is for
dimbos and beginners while anything that is assumed to require intelligence
or prior knowlege or interest is shoved onto BBC4.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 14:07:29 +0000, Albert Ross wrote:

One of the benefits of growing old is that you can exaggerate the
goldenness of the Golden Age, but I'm also sure I can remember some
decent Survivals and Equinox programmes on the "commercial channels"
that would give any BBC output a run for its money

And "Disappearing World" from Granada Television.

In message , Jim Lesurf
wrote
In some cases despite some
very annoying camerawork.

That's needed to make the BBC's HD codecs produce a better picture at a
lower bitrate.

--
Alan
news2009 {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 15:21:20 +0100, J G Miller
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 14:07:29 +0000, Albert Ross wrote:

One of the benefits of growing old is that you can exaggerate the
goldenness of the Golden Age, but I'm also sure I can remember some
decent Survivals and Equinox programmes on the "commercial channels"
that would give any BBC output a run for its money

And "Disappearing World" from Granada Television.

One of the disbenefits of growing old is that you forget stuff. I
remembered the logo but couldn't remember the name. Thank you!