Coronation Street

Trying uploading the first episode of Corrie or DW to YouTube, and see if ITV or the BBC respectively issue a copyright takedown.

I bet both would.

I had a quick look through a few more episodes on the DVDs, and I did spot 2 episodes from 1967 do have the "From the North" frontcap... but it's too clean to be part of the telerecording, and a look on Corriepedia shows both those episodes were shown as part of Granada's 25th birthday in 1981- so the frontcap was probably added then. It also has an endcap with a "©Granada UK 1967" strap which also definately isn't original as they didn't use copyright dates until 1975 (and the endcap's a videotape still- so not part of the telerecording).

Probably of no interest to anyone, but in tonight's second episode there was a moment in the middle of a shot where it all went filmic for a few seconds, at about 5.5 minutes in when Todd ran out into the street. Only thing I could think of is if something needed painting over in post, and it got done at 25fps (looked like both fields were blended) and spliced back in? A boom mic that didn't get spotted on the day?

I wac actually going to mention that, but you beat me to it! Not the first time I've seen similar things- in EastEnders a couple of years back there was a shot that was filmic too, but it went to 50i once it cut to another camera. And Emmerdale a few years back on a shoot in the village where it looked like one camera must have been set to 25p, as all the shots from one angle were, but the rest were 50i.

Also today's second ITV3 episode (from 31/3/86) was the first they've shown where the copyright said "Granada Television" rather than "Granada UK", so presumably that's when the change took place. Credits still on a physical roller though.

Why did they originally do it on tape only to go use film for a decade?


I've caught a couple of episodes and it's certainly jarring when they move from video to film and back again. One shot went from the very much video Rovers Return to a real pub. Couldn't help but think of Monty Python

It makes me wonder too, though looking at those episodes it still wasn't entirely on tape- for the most part it seems to be shots on the street on video, whereas location shoots away from there are on film, though there's exceptions to both. Though as I said with only 8 episodes per year on the discs you can't get a definitive grasp on how it was (and of course the 60s episodes being mostly telerecordings means you can't tell- the couple of videotaped episodes on the 1969 disc that do have location work are on film though).

Looking at it though, the switch to film seemed to take place around the same time Bill Podmore took over as producer in 1976- maybe it was his personal decision? Corriepedia says that David Liddiment, when he took over from Bill Podmore as executive producer in 1988, orchestrated the switch to video on location.

I guess it's possible that they saw film as more convenient at the time? As I imagine in the 70s doing video location shots would need those massive cameras wired up to an OB unit, but film could be done with much smaller portable 16mm cameras, not to mention video editing being harder in those days compared to film? By the time they switched back to video the portable cameras that you could just stick a betacam tape in would have been widely availalbe. I could be wrong of course.

Another thing about the 8 episodes per year is they're not always spread out as well as they could be, there's some long gaps, and there's several episodes clustered close together- for example there's numerous 4 or 5 month gaps between episode, but then there's a few months with 3 episodes (May 1983 and December 1988 for example). I can think of several episodes I'd have liked to see on the discs that aren't there as well.

I've seen it go 25p on Eastenders when there's been a very slow, empty panning shot - I think at the time it was thought it was probably down to the broadcast encoders not spotting that it was interlaced.

Then you used to get the opposite issue when they'd forget to filmise the odd scene or entire episode of Hollyoaks...

The shot I'm thinking of had a fair bit of movement (a car driving off and a couple of characters walking), I'm presuming it was an incorrectly set up camera or some editing hiccup.

Possibly on those slow panning shots they've actually slowed the footage down? That could effectively filmise it too.



The move to HD means that should pretty much never happen now, as stuff is shot natively 25p now.

Talking about a current storyline, I do like the way with the Daniel and Phelan story, they still portray the local press as having investigative journalists trying to get under the skin of a story to reveal the truth.

In reality the Weatherfield Gazette would have two reporters based miles away in say Oldham, copying and pasting Weatherfield Council press releases, and that'd be it.

The whole Pat Phelan storyline is becoming more and more far-fetched and detached from reality by the day. I’ve got a kitchen colander with fewer holes than the current plot.