|
||||||||
Vidfired B & W episodes |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#26 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,045
|
Quote:
I dunno. The recording numbers for the 6 eps are:
VTM/4T/42231 VTM/4T/42378 VTM/6LT/42351 VTM/6LT/42764 VTM/6LT/42924 VTM/6LT/42774 All were in Studio D at Lime Grove, which may explain the idea of a mid-story change - they simply had to go with when the booked studio was upgraded? The other "fly in the ointment" with the theory the serial went 625 at episode 1 is that other VT/FR codes follow suit to the above. E.G. the recaps done in the same VTR for the next episode in each case are 35M/4T/blah changing to 35M/6LT/blah for the one done with ep 3 for the start of ep4. I can't remember if there is a quality change on the eps (I don't remember thinking there *was*). If not, then that would indeed seem to over-ride the above codes, and it was 625 starting with ep 1. There should def be an improvment w.r.t. "The Ice Warriors", the previous story (and done in the same studio) - is that the case? I seem to think yes. The switch in the middle of EOTW was a technical/engineering one, it was on January 1st 1968 that the BBC decided that everything to be broadcast from then on would be made in 625-lines, and then converted down to 405 on transmission. Some BBC1 programmes made the switch to 625 before this, but New Year 1968 was the deadline date. It was for this that the BBC moved their 625 to 405 standards converters from their respective studios out to the 405-line BBC1 transmitters. This was so the BBC could set up a distribution network that was working entirely in 625-lines so there was no need for standards switching anywhere in the network and so they could prepare themselves for the impending launch of colour on BBC1 in November 1969. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wigan
Posts: 4,877
|
Well I watched Enemy of the World and I couldn't discern a great improvement in PQ at episode 3, but I thought there was a noticeable improvement over the previous serial, The Ice Warriors. Inconclusive for me, so insufficent to dismiss the documentation as being in error.
One thing I noticed on both serials was a pronounced "egghead" effect in many shots (less noticable for Enemy of the World though). It looks as if there's picture geometry distortion, stretching vertically anything near to the top edge. I also wondered if the cameras were mounted relatively high, so looking down on the foreheads of many of the actors, which would have exacerbated the effect. I seem to remember a lot of old video footage has that kind of distortion and perhaps it was also a "feature" of many domestic TVs of the time too. It could be caused by distortion in the scanning of the video cameras, or optical distortion in the lenses or introduced in the playback monitor used for transfer to film. I guess maintaining linearity with all the analogue adjustments was a major headache in those days. The PQ for both The War Games and The Web of Fear, both of which I've seen quite recently, was much better. I assume from improvements in the technology. |
|
|
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: West London
Posts: 6,931
|
@AidanLunn
Thanks for that timeline information about the switch-over, that all makes prefect sense. It all happened a few years before I joined the BBC. @GDK If the "egghead" effect is present on all camera shots, it would definitely have been a vertical linearity error in the film recorder monitor. And yes, maintaining anything in alignment was a nightmare in those days, it was still pretty bad when I was doing film recordings a few years later! The machines were already old, and of course full of valves!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wigan
Posts: 4,877
|
Valves which would tend to drift as they warmed up and over time too as they aged.
I would say the "egghead effect" is present on all the studio shots to one degree or another. It's just more noticeable whenever the top of someone's head is near the top of the frame. The brain knows what the shape of a head should be. |
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: south west
Posts: 9,914
|
Quote:
Lime Grove studio D was upgraded to work on 625 (with EMI 203 cameras) in 1965. By the time of Enemy of the World, all BBC studios in London had models of camera that were switchable between 405/50, 525/60 and 625/50, as these cameras were designed to be multi-standard by the manufacturer (usually EMI, Marconi or Pye) for maximum sales and export potential.
The switch in the middle of EOTW was a technical/engineering one, it was on January 1st 1968 that the BBC decided that everything to be broadcast from then on would be made in 625-lines, and then converted down to 405 on transmission. Some BBC1 programmes made the switch to 625 before this, but New Year 1968 was the deadline date. It was for this that the BBC moved their 625 to 405 standards converters from their respective studios out to the 405-line BBC1 transmitters. This was so the BBC could set up a distribution network that was working entirely in 625-lines so there was no need for standards switching anywhere in the network and so they could prepare themselves for the impending launch of colour on BBC1 in November 1969. |
|
|
|
|
|
#31 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,228
|
Quote:
Valves which would tend to drift as they warmed up and over time too as they aged.
I would say the "egghead effect" is present on all the studio shots to one degree or another. It's just more noticeable whenever the top of someone's head is near the top of the frame. The brain knows what the shape of a head should be. |
|
|
|
|
|
#32 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,228
|
Quote:
Do any of those 35mm transmission prints survive though? I don't remember ever seeing or indeed even hearing of one. What a shame if that's the case, as the exterior scenes would look fantastic!
![]() *Plus two other 405-->35mm ones, IIRC, one live from the studio; one done from two tapes. |
|
|
|
|
|
#33 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,045
|
Quote:
There are cases of cameras being wrongly adjusted. One of the cameras on "Curse Of Peladon" has a noticeable vertical stretch on it, for example.
In common with much colour TV during the 70s, Doctor Who was shot using EMI 2001 cameras. These monsters required twice daily line-up/set-up routines of about an hour and a half each. Once during the middle of the day and once before any recording/live transmission! Apart from the camera tubes themselves, the second version of these cameras were completely solid state (no valves) and even these could drift with temperature and age, as heat will affect all things, especially capacitors. |
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: West London
Posts: 6,931
|
This is very off-topic, but I remember lining up an EMI 2001 camera just the once, on a training course at the BBC Evesham training centre. I never worked in studios, so never had to do it "for real" thank goodness! I thought that the studio engineers must have had the patience of saints. I remember a panel absolutely covered in knobs, which had to be adjusted to get the registration as good as possible between the outputs of the four tubes in the camera. If it wasn't right, the result was visible colour fringing on edges, especially at the corners of the picture. It took ages to do, and perfection was often just not possible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wigan
Posts: 4,877
|
Human nature being what it is, if the setup took one and a half hours and had to be done twice a day, it wouldn't surprise me if some of the time the setup procedure was only partially done, depending on how bad/rapid any drift was.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#36 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: West London
Posts: 6,931
|
Quote:
Yes, the ones I listed (where they survive) are the original TX prints*. I don't know if they cut any 35mm filmed footage back into them or whether it was telecined into the studio (as normal) and film-recorded back out again as per the rest of the ep.
*Plus two other 405-->35mm ones, IIRC, one live from the studio; one done from two tapes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#37 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,045
|
Quote:
This is very off-topic, but I remember lining up an EMI 2001 camera just the once, on a training course at the BBC Evesham training centre. I never worked in studios, so never had to do it "for real" thank goodness! I thought that the studio engineers must have had the patience of saints. I remember a panel absolutely covered in knobs, which had to be adjusted to get the registration as good as possible between the outputs of the four tubes in the camera. If it wasn't right, the result was visible colour fringing on edges, especially at the corners of the picture. It took ages to do, and perfection was often just not possible.
![]() http://www.tvcameramuseum.org/emi/2001/emi2001_5.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
#38 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: West London
Posts: 6,931
|
Yes indeed!
I think that might just be the tip of the iceberg actually, as there are only amplitude and position controls there. I'm sure there must have been at least linearity controls too!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#39 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,228
|
Quote:
That is strange, because I and my colleagues before I retired worked on many DW restorations, and I certainly never did one from a 35mm source, and I don't remember any of my colleague doing so either. The film recordings we worked from for the black and white episodes were always 16mm, original negatives if we were lucky, prints of very variable quality if we weren't.
![]() http://www.purpleville.pwp.blueyonde...TheKrotons.htm http://www.purpleville.pwp.blueyonde...ind_robber.htm http://www.purpleville.pwp.blueyonde...edsofdeath.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
#40 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: West London
Posts: 6,931
|
Thanks again!
Those were not stories I was involved in restoring sadly. As they only have one episode each that was on 35mm, I was probably just not around when they were transferred from the film which is why I wasn't aware that any of them were 35mm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#41 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,346
|
Quote:
Is anyone re-evaluating the surviving 60's episodes now that we are seeing them nearly as they were transmitted originally with Vt interiors & filmed exteriors, rather than the ratty old fim prints we've watched for years since?
Rewatching The Mind Robber does show up how bad the Tardis interior set had got by that point, with its photographic blow up walls. |
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: West London
Posts: 6,931
|
"Too crisp" is subjective of course.
It is always a real bone of contention with archive restoration as to whether the aim should be just to restore the material back to how it would have looked when it was new, or whether you should now try to make it look even better, because you now can! We had many arguments over this amongst ourselves, both when restoring DW and other programmes of course. Modern display devices are much less forgiving, you can't compare the image quality from an HD flat panel with that from a flickery 405 line valve TV. That's part of the problem, intrinsic defects that were relatively inconsequential in the 1960s, are now only too visible for all to see on modern digital systems. Where do you stop with "enhancement", which as I said is all subjective anyway?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#43 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: 100 Acre Wood
Posts: 4,110
|
Quote:
No, there's a distinct change from 405 to 625 with episode 3 of "Enemy of the World" (VTR: 16/12/67) and they never did a 405-line one afterwards. There is some evidence that the eps film-recorded live from the studio for editing on film were done with 625 cameras to keep the definition up (e.g. "Dalek Invasion of Earth" ep 5 in Oct 1964) even before the general changeover.
If you've got The Claws of Axos DVD, then it's worth a look. |
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,346
|
I myself would prefer it to be left untouched. Having a grainy effect makes it authentic.
While its ok to improve, they did go a bit OTT. |
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wigan
Posts: 4,877
|
For me, always going back to the best source available, regardless of whether it exceeds in PQ what was originally shown at the time, has to be the best answer, but I wouldn't go much beyond cleaning up the image.
Not quite the same context, but the blu rays of upgrade of original Star Trek to High Definition gave you the choice to watch the original effects or all-new CGI effects. The resulting CGI effects were variable. Some looked very good, some more like computer game graphics from a few years ago. I dare say the new effects will not "date" well. There were other things they needed to cleanup such as coffee stains on shirts and nails in sets which were visible in HD, but not originally. This extra detail was available because it was shot on film - unlike the vast majority of UK TV productions at the time. I always hated the transition in PQ between video interiors and filmed exteriors (It bugged me as child, even before I knew what the cause was! ).If only I]Doctor Who[/i] had been shot on film back then! But I guess the ambition of certain (most) stories would then not even have been attempted. The one story that was shot on film Spearhead from Space looks pretty damn good on blu ray! ![]() The other stories recorded in 625 or 405 line should just be the best cleaned up image they can be from the best source available. |
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,346
|
Thats how id love the Who dvds to be. Let us fans choose which version to watch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wigan
Posts: 4,877
|
Quote:
Thats how id love the Who dvds to be. Let us fans choose which version to watch.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 3,703
|
TV reception in the 1960s was sometimes hit and miss, telly sets were of variable quality, transmission was subject to all sorts of variables, so the average viewer usually didn't see TV shows in anything like the best possible quality.
But if we have the technology now, to reproduce the best possible picture quality of, say, a 1966 Doctor Who episode, I frankly don't understand why anyone wouldn't want to see that. People in the 1960s would have been thrilled to have seen TV in better quality. So much was lost in the transmission / reception process back then. Surely no-one is suggesting that we should be watching DVDs in the same sort of fuzzy quality that viewers in 1966 would have been used to, just to be authentic? That's daft. And surely any restoration work is just that, restoring the picture back to it's best possible look. I don't understand the technical side of all this, but surely it's not possible to make a Doctor Who episode from 1966 any clearer than when it was first made? Nothing is being added in, is it? And nor should it be - unless it's very clearly signposted - and when this happens, new effects for example, the Doctor Who range has always been very good at giving the viewer the option to watch with the new or old effects - no Lucas revisioning here, thank goodness. So the restored story now looks better on our massive, crisp TVs, than what the viewers at home saw 50 years ago, but I can't see that this is anything but a good thing. |
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 554
|
Having just watched Tomb of the Cybermen, and apart from the great story, also enjoyed the sharp and clear images on screen, I'm happy for the technical bods to try and make the footage look as good as possible, without trying to "change it".
I guess if you're really worried about authenticity, it would be a lot easier if a pristine set of Video Tapes from that era had been saved from that era (a quick trip in the TARDIS back to 1967 would do the trick!) so that the technical bods knew how the show actually looked back then, as transmitted. |
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,228
|
Quote:
Not quite the same context, but the blu rays of upgrade of original Star Trek to High Definition gave you the choice to watch the original effects or all-new CGI effects.
The resulting CGI effects were variable. Some looked very good, some more like computer game graphics from a few years ago. I dare say the new effects will not "date" well. In doing this (preparing the HD copies of TNG), did they try to make the FX look like the originals, or did they upgrade them (or both, as with TOS)? Does anybody know? (I haven't watched much TNG, HD or otherwise.) (Incidentally, in watching HD versions of "The Gilmore Girls" (for the early eps - shot on Super 16, edited on SD video) and I notice that, for a couple of shots in the early eps, they don't seem to have been able to find the original film, so noticeable SD shots (presumably from the old SD video masters) have been subbed in.) |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:10.



