info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Low quality video
26 views
Skip to first unread message
Jeff Layman
Feb 14, 2021, 9:11:50 AM2/14/21
to
Tha"t TV have been doing an ad-free 60s music weekend. Some of the
videos from the period make 320 x 240 seem like UHD!
--
Jeff
videos from the period make 320 x 240 seem like UHD!
--
Jeff
JNugent
Feb 14, 2021, 10:07:21 AM2/14/21
to
On 14/02/2021 02:11 pm, Jeff Layman wrote:
> Tha"t TV have been doing an ad-free 60s music weekend. Some of the
> videos from the period make 320 x 240 seem like UHD!
VHS? Beta?
> Tha"t TV have been doing an ad-free 60s music weekend. Some of the
> videos from the period make 320 x 240 seem like UHD!
Andy Burns
Feb 14, 2021, 10:11:20 AM2/14/21
to
Jeff Layman wrote:
> That's TV
There are 41 sub-channels hidden within LCN 264, who knew?
> That's TV
There are 41 sub-channels hidden within LCN 264, who knew?
the dog from that film you saw
Feb 14, 2021, 10:37:21 AM2/14/21
to
On 14/02/2021 14:11, Jeff Layman wrote:
> Tha"t TV have been doing an ad-free 60s music weekend. Some of the
> videos from the period make 320 x 240 seem like UHD!
>
i recognise a lot of the videos from youtube.
> Tha"t TV have been doing an ad-free 60s music weekend. Some of the
> videos from the period make 320 x 240 seem like UHD!
>
wonder if they just downloaded them?
either way, it's been fun watching it, lots of great songs.
Jeff Layman
Feb 14, 2021, 11:40:27 AM2/14/21
to
performers!), many are original. They predate both VHS and Betamax,
which are from the 70s. Some would be conversions from film, while some
are probably original VTR on reel-to-reel tape.
What I find interesting is that although the video quality is often very
poor, the sound is quite reasonable.
--
Jeff
Arthur Conan Doyle
Feb 14, 2021, 2:23:09 PM2/14/21
to
Jethro_uk <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote:
>Ironically it seems that is as good as it got, whereas some older film
>content has been spectacularly upgraded to be pretty decent even now.
CBS did this with the original Star Trek series. As I recall, it was shot on
35mm film stock which they were able to rescan. I think some of the matte
material (mostly bridge computer displays and main screen content) was 16mm and
had to be redone as the original was lower resolution.
Is a bit of a double edge sword. A lot of that material was prepared and shot
with the understanding of resolution of the day. Boost that after the fact and
all of a sudden you start to see defects in the sets and semi-tranparent
clothing. :)
--
Usenet: The world's first (and best) social network.
>Ironically it seems that is as good as it got, whereas some older film
>content has been spectacularly upgraded to be pretty decent even now.
CBS did this with the original Star Trek series. As I recall, it was shot on
35mm film stock which they were able to rescan. I think some of the matte
material (mostly bridge computer displays and main screen content) was 16mm and
had to be redone as the original was lower resolution.
Is a bit of a double edge sword. A lot of that material was prepared and shot
with the understanding of resolution of the day. Boost that after the fact and
all of a sudden you start to see defects in the sets and semi-tranparent
clothing. :)
--
Usenet: The world's first (and best) social network.
NY
Feb 15, 2021, 4:28:09 AM2/15/21
to
"Jethro_uk" <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote in message
news:s0bmaj$lbl$1...@dont-email.me...
> Was chatting with SWMBO about this, watching "Yes Minister" which was
> almost all VT, which back in the day seemed far better quality than film.
16 mm film in the 1970s and 80s was very poor: grainy, soft (ie not sharp),
flickery (because it was 25p rather than 50i) and drab. It was very
noticeable because the standard production technique in those days was to
mix film exteriors with studio video interiors, and video was sharp, more
colourful and more smooth (because it was 50i). But it was a bit garish - I
remember a production of As You Like It, shot outdoors on video, being
described in a newspaper review as being "holiday brochure colours" - ie a
bit OTT.
Since then, the quality of both film and video have improved dramatically,
to the point that it is no longer possible at a glance to distinguish one
from the other, by looking for the tell-tale deficiencies of each.
I've noticed that a lot of old TV programmes that are repeated on UK Drama,
Yesterday etc, have an additional problem with the film inserts. Rumpole of
the Bailey on Talking Pictures TV at the moment is a good example of this.
There is a lot of smearing and double-imaging on movement. Maybe its more
noticeable on an LCD screen which displays everything in 25p - ie 25
complete frames per second, rather than two half-resolution fields, one
every 1/50 second. I think the problem is that the fields are being
"packaged" wrongly into frames: a given TV frame consists of two fields from
*different* frames of film, rather than both fields being from the same film
frame. You'd think that when the VT was being converted from analogue to
digital, this is something that would be checked for. My analogue-to-digital
(PAL to MPEG) converter has a 50% chance of doing it when I'm copying from
VHS, but I know about the problem and I check for it and start again if the
first few seconds display the characteristic symptoms. I'd expect
professional equipment not even to make that mistake. The problem is only
noticeable on film; video is fine.
news:s0bmaj$lbl$1...@dont-email.me...
> Was chatting with SWMBO about this, watching "Yes Minister" which was
> almost all VT, which back in the day seemed far better quality than film.
16 mm film in the 1970s and 80s was very poor: grainy, soft (ie not sharp),
flickery (because it was 25p rather than 50i) and drab. It was very
noticeable because the standard production technique in those days was to
mix film exteriors with studio video interiors, and video was sharp, more
colourful and more smooth (because it was 50i). But it was a bit garish - I
remember a production of As You Like It, shot outdoors on video, being
described in a newspaper review as being "holiday brochure colours" - ie a
bit OTT.
Since then, the quality of both film and video have improved dramatically,
to the point that it is no longer possible at a glance to distinguish one
from the other, by looking for the tell-tale deficiencies of each.
I've noticed that a lot of old TV programmes that are repeated on UK Drama,
Yesterday etc, have an additional problem with the film inserts. Rumpole of
the Bailey on Talking Pictures TV at the moment is a good example of this.
There is a lot of smearing and double-imaging on movement. Maybe its more
noticeable on an LCD screen which displays everything in 25p - ie 25
complete frames per second, rather than two half-resolution fields, one
every 1/50 second. I think the problem is that the fields are being
"packaged" wrongly into frames: a given TV frame consists of two fields from
*different* frames of film, rather than both fields being from the same film
frame. You'd think that when the VT was being converted from analogue to
digital, this is something that would be checked for. My analogue-to-digital
(PAL to MPEG) converter has a 50% chance of doing it when I'm copying from
VHS, but I know about the problem and I check for it and start again if the
first few seconds display the characteristic symptoms. I'd expect
professional equipment not even to make that mistake. The problem is only
noticeable on film; video is fine.
Mike Swift
Feb 15, 2021, 9:34:44 AM2/15/21
to
In article <i8ssl6...@mid.individual.net>, JNugent
<jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> writes
effort.
Mike
--
Michael Swift We do not regard Englishmen as foreigners.
Kirkheaton We look on them only as rather mad Norwegians.
Yorkshire Halvard Lange
<jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> writes
>> Tha"t TV have been doing an ad-free 60s music weekend. Some of the
>> videos from the period make 320 x 240 seem like UHD!
>
>VHS? Beta?
I copied some of my VHS motorsport videos to my PC, not really worth the
>> videos from the period make 320 x 240 seem like UHD!
>
>VHS? Beta?
effort.
Mike
--
Michael Swift We do not regard Englishmen as foreigners.
Kirkheaton We look on them only as rather mad Norwegians.
Yorkshire Halvard Lange
Mike Swift
Feb 15, 2021, 9:34:45 AM2/15/21
to
In article <s0bmaj$lbl$1...@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
<jeth...@hotmailbin.com> writes
William Tell, Robin Hood, Francis Drake and Sir Lancelot, the quality is
surprisingly good for something made 80 years ago.
<jeth...@hotmailbin.com> writes
>Was chatting with SWMBO about this, watching "Yes Minister" which was
>almost all VT, which back in the day seemed far better quality than film.
>
>almost all VT, which back in the day seemed far better quality than film.
>
>Ironically it seems that is as good as it got, whereas some older film content
>has been spectacularly upgraded to be pretty decent even now.
I've mentioned before we have been watching Talking Pictures episodes of
>has been spectacularly upgraded to be pretty decent even now.
William Tell, Robin Hood, Francis Drake and Sir Lancelot, the quality is
surprisingly good for something made 80 years ago.
Mike Swift
Feb 15, 2021, 9:38:49 AM2/15/21
to
In article <s0bb34$jk9$1...@dont-email.me>, Jeff Layman
<jmla...@invalid.invalid> writes
yesterday, the quality was dire, not sure if it was them or Virgin but
it was unwatchable, shows how critical we've become after watching HD
and VHD.
<jmla...@invalid.invalid> writes
>Tha"t TV have been doing an ad-free 60s music weekend. Some of the
>videos from the period make 320 x 240 seem like UHD!
Talking about low quality, I switched on the live rugby on the Beeb
>videos from the period make 320 x 240 seem like UHD!
yesterday, the quality was dire, not sure if it was them or Virgin but
it was unwatchable, shows how critical we've become after watching HD
and VHD.
Norman Wells
Feb 15, 2021, 9:59:04 AM2/15/21
to
On 15/02/2021 14:38, Mike Swift wrote:
> In article <s0bb34$jk9$1...@dont-email.me>, Jeff Layman
> <jmla...@invalid.invalid> writes
>> Tha"t TV have been doing an ad-free 60s music weekend. Some of the
>> videos from the period make 320 x 240 seem like UHD!
>
> Talking about low quality, I switched on the live rugby on the Beeb
> yesterday, the quality was dire, not sure if it was them or Virgin but
> it was unwatchable, shows how critical we've become after watching HD
> and VHD.
The rugby I saw yesterday was on ITV.
> In article <s0bb34$jk9$1...@dont-email.me>, Jeff Layman
> <jmla...@invalid.invalid> writes
>> Tha"t TV have been doing an ad-free 60s music weekend. Some of the
>> videos from the period make 320 x 240 seem like UHD!
>
> Talking about low quality, I switched on the live rugby on the Beeb
> yesterday, the quality was dire, not sure if it was them or Virgin but
> it was unwatchable, shows how critical we've become after watching HD
> and VHD.
the dog from that film you saw
Feb 15, 2021, 12:02:27 PM2/15/21
to
onto the video in the hands of the record company.
JNugent
Feb 15, 2021, 12:03:53 PM2/15/21
to
On 15/02/2021 02:32 pm, Mike Swift wrote:
> In article <s0bmaj$lbl$1...@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
> <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> writes
>> Was chatting with SWMBO about this, watching "Yes Minister" which was
>> almost all VT, which back in the day seemed far better quality than film.
>>
>> Ironically it seems that is as good as it got, whereas some older film
>> content
>> has been spectacularly upgraded to be pretty decent even now.
>
> I've mentioned before we have been watching Talking Pictures episodes of
> William Tell, Robin Hood, Francis Drake and Sir Lancelot, the quality is
> surprisingly good for something made 80 years ago.
They're all on film. I think the oldest ("The Adventures of Robin Hood")
> In article <s0bmaj$lbl$1...@dont-email.me>, Jethro_uk
> <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> writes
>> Was chatting with SWMBO about this, watching "Yes Minister" which was
>> almost all VT, which back in the day seemed far better quality than film.
>>
>> Ironically it seems that is as good as it got, whereas some older film
>> content
>> has been spectacularly upgraded to be pretty decent even now.
>
> I've mentioned before we have been watching Talking Pictures episodes of
> William Tell, Robin Hood, Francis Drake and Sir Lancelot, the quality is
> surprisingly good for something made 80 years ago.
is still a bit less than 70 years old, the first season having been made
just in advance of the start of ATV and AR-TV in September 1955.
Mike Swift
Feb 15, 2021, 8:12:47 PM2/15/21
to
In article <i8vnrn...@mid.individual.net>, JNugent
<jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> writes
done.
Obviously should have been 60 years, sneaks away stage left.
<jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> writes
>> I've mentioned before we have been watching Talking Pictures episodes of
>> William Tell, Robin Hood, Francis Drake and Sir Lancelot, the quality is
>> surprisingly good for something made 80 years ago.
>
>They're all on film. I think the oldest ("The Adventures of Robin Hood") is
>still a bit less than 70 years old, the first season having been made just in
>advance of the start of ATV and AR-TV in September 1955.
Captain Mainwaring voice, I see you spotted my deliberate mistake, well
>> William Tell, Robin Hood, Francis Drake and Sir Lancelot, the quality is
>> surprisingly good for something made 80 years ago.
>
>They're all on film. I think the oldest ("The Adventures of Robin Hood") is
>still a bit less than 70 years old, the first season having been made just in
>advance of the start of ATV and AR-TV in September 1955.
done.
Obviously should have been 60 years, sneaks away stage left.
JNugent
Feb 15, 2021, 8:48:25 PM2/15/21
to
On 16/02/2021 01:12 am, Mike Swift wrote:
> JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> writes
>>> I've mentioned before we have been watching Talking Pictures episodes of
>>> William Tell, Robin Hood, Francis Drake and Sir Lancelot, the quality is
>>> surprisingly good for something made 80 years ago.
>
>> They're all on film. I think the oldest ("The Adventures of Robin
>> Hood") is still a bit less than 70 years old, the first season having
>> been made just in advance of the start of ATV and AR-TV in September
>> 1955.
>
> Captain Mainwaring voice, I see you spotted my deliberate mistake, well
> done.
>
> Obviously should have been 60 years, sneaks away stage left.
>
> Mike
:-)
> JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> writes
>>> I've mentioned before we have been watching Talking Pictures episodes of
>>> William Tell, Robin Hood, Francis Drake and Sir Lancelot, the quality is
>>> surprisingly good for something made 80 years ago.
>
>> They're all on film. I think the oldest ("The Adventures of Robin
>> Hood") is still a bit less than 70 years old, the first season having
>> been made just in advance of the start of ATV and AR-TV in September
>> 1955.
>
> Captain Mainwaring voice, I see you spotted my deliberate mistake, well
> done.
>
> Obviously should have been 60 years, sneaks away stage left.
>
> Mike
"70" is nearer (a bit)!
Mike Swift
Feb 16, 2021, 7:35:31 AM2/16/21
to
In article <i90mj6...@mid.individual.net>, JNugent
For the real Nerds among us :-
The Adventures of Sir Lancelot - 1 Series - 30 Episodes - 1956-1957
Sir Francis Drake " - 26
Episodes - 1961-1962
William Tell " -
39 Episodes - 1958-1959
The Adventures of Robin Hood - 4 Series - 143 Episodes - 1955-1960
Missing as yet on Talking Pictures,
Ivanhoe - 1 Series - 39
Episodes - 1958-1959
The Buccaneers - 1 Series - 39 Episodes -
1956-1957
Where's my life gone?
The Adventures of Sir Lancelot - 1 Series - 30 Episodes - 1956-1957
Sir Francis Drake " - 26
Episodes - 1961-1962
William Tell " -
39 Episodes - 1958-1959
The Adventures of Robin Hood - 4 Series - 143 Episodes - 1955-1960
Missing as yet on Talking Pictures,
Ivanhoe - 1 Series - 39
Episodes - 1958-1959
The Buccaneers - 1 Series - 39 Episodes -
1956-1957
Where's my life gone?
JNugent
Feb 16, 2021, 10:53:56 AM2/16/21
to
On 16/02/2021 12:35 pm, Mike Swift wrote:
> JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> writes
>>>>> I've mentioned before we have been watching Talking Pictures
>>>>> episodes of William Tell, Robin Hood, Francis Drake and Sir
>>>>> Lancelot, the quality is surprisingly good for something made
>>>>> 80 years ago.
>>>> They're all on film. I think the oldest ("The Adventures of Robin
>>>> Hood") is still a bit less than 70 years old, the first season having
>>>> been made just in advance of the start of ATV and AR-TV in September
>>>> 1955.
>
>>> Captain Mainwaring voice, I see you spotted my deliberate mistake, well
>>> done.
>
>>> Obviously should have been 60 years, sneaks away stage left.
>
> JNugent <jennings&c...@fastmail.fm> writes
>>>>> I've mentioned before we have been watching Talking Pictures
>>>>> episodes of William Tell, Robin Hood, Francis Drake and Sir
>>>>> Lancelot, the quality is surprisingly good for something made
>>>>> 80 years ago.
>>>> They're all on film. I think the oldest ("The Adventures of Robin
>>>> Hood") is still a bit less than 70 years old, the first season having
>>>> been made just in advance of the start of ATV and AR-TV in September
>>>> 1955.
>
>>> Captain Mainwaring voice, I see you spotted my deliberate mistake, well
>>> done.
>
>>> Obviously should have been 60 years, sneaks away stage left.
>
>> :-)
>> "70" is nearer (a bit)!
>
> For the real Nerds among us :-
>
> The Adventures of Sir Lancelot - 1 Series - 30 Episodes - 1956-1957
> Sir Francis Drake " - 26 Episodes - 1961-1962
> William Tell " - 39 Episodes - 1958-1959
> The Adventures of Robin Hood - 4 Series - 143 Episodes - 1955-1960
> Missing as yet on Talking Pictures,
> Ivanhoe - 1 Series - 39 Episodes - 1958-1959
> The Buccaneers - 1 Series - 39 Episodes - 1956-1957
> Where's my life gone?
I have all of those (except "Sir Francis Drake", which I never liked) on
>> "70" is nearer (a bit)!
>
> For the real Nerds among us :-
>
> The Adventures of Sir Lancelot - 1 Series - 30 Episodes - 1956-1957
> Sir Francis Drake " - 26 Episodes - 1961-1962
> William Tell " - 39 Episodes - 1958-1959
> The Adventures of Robin Hood - 4 Series - 143 Episodes - 1955-1960
> Missing as yet on Talking Pictures,
> Ivanhoe - 1 Series - 39 Episodes - 1958-1959
> The Buccaneers - 1 Series - 39 Episodes - 1956-1957
> Where's my life gone?
DVD box-sets. Also the ITC series "Sword of Freedom" with Edmund Purdom
and Adrienne Corri.
I hope one day to be able to devote time to watching them.
Others I'd like to see again were "The Black Arrow" (BBC TV [I think],
late 1950s) and "The Scarlet Pimpernel" (ITV, late 50s and early 60s,
with Marius Goring).
J Nugent
Nov 25, 2021, 12:47:11 PM11/25/21
to
I now have the DVD set for "The Scarlet Pimpernel"... I *must* make time to watch a few episodes...
0 new messages