TI
Never mind the ident, the announcer is even worse! The ident would have been better if it was clean frankly!
I Love TV Me!! posted:
that is crap
Never mind the ident, the announcer is even worse! The ident would have been better if it was clean frankly!
PC
There was a nicer ident at 19:00, with a circle of stones, and some nice sweeping high shots.
TI
Finally got to see the 7:30 UKTV People ident. Its terrible...and the announcer for that channel is poor too. To be honest the woman on UKTV Docs is better. Oh and the UKTV Docs 'stones' ident is quite good. I quite like the music on UKTV Docs idents too.
This Is Granada posted:
Oh so whats UKTV People like then? Can't get to a TV now so have no idea.
Finally got to see the 7:30 UKTV People ident. Its terrible...and the announcer for that channel is poor too. To be honest the woman on UKTV Docs is better. Oh and the UKTV Docs 'stones' ident is quite good. I quite like the music on UKTV Docs idents too.
NU
Good point : DOGs are smaller.
Bad point : UKTV G2 sounds pants.
Worse point : Why have they STILL not upgraded to Widescreen? I'd guess that at least 50% of their output is made in 16:9, the digital mediums all support 16:9, so why do we have to put up with chopped 4:3 pictures? Crikey, even $KY channels now show in Widescreen.
Bad point : UKTV G2 sounds pants.
Worse point : Why have they STILL not upgraded to Widescreen? I'd guess that at least 50% of their output is made in 16:9, the digital mediums all support 16:9, so why do we have to put up with chopped 4:3 pictures? Crikey, even $KY channels now show in Widescreen.
CW
Again, why another call for a blind widescreen 'upgrade' (which you actually cite not only as a bad point, but the worst point)? It's about as pathetic as people who blasted the new look ITV News for no other reason than it's still in 4:3, as though having a non-widescreen news programme was the biggest crime on earth. Sky have been very realistic with their introduction of widescreen, only using it to any great extent over the last year or so, and with large parts of their output still in 4:3, and still recognising that things like Sky News might as well stay in 4:3 since there's no real point in changing it to widescreen.
And whilst much of UKTV's output is admittedly now in widescreen, it's all been framed for 14:9 transmission anyway - which is what UKTV transmit widescreen programmes in - you're not really missing much. And away from that, a huge amount of material is still 4:3.
I would say that this reorganisation (I'm not calling it a 'revamp' or a 'rebrand' or a 'relaunch' when most channels have only got lightly re-edited idents and a shiney new DOG) was borderline on whether or not they should have gone widescreen (on some channels; even though UK Gold has lost it's way the vast majority of it's output is 4:3 - I therefore see no point at all in making it a widescreen channel), but I certainly don't think it's strictly required yet.
What I predict will happen is that the channels will happen is that the channels will all got a full revamp either late this year or early next year, and then you will see some of them (the ones which predominantly show recent BBC material which will of course be widescreen) changing to widescreen.
As with Sky, I actually find it very refreshing to see a broadcaster demonstrate such a mature and realistic attitude to widescreen, rather than just jumping on an overly hyped bandwagon and switching almost all output and transmission to it when only a minority of people had widescreen sets (the BBC and ITV have both been predominantly widescreen for almost 4 years, for god's sake - it was way too soon).
cwathen
Founding member
Quote:
Worse point : Why have they STILL not upgraded to Widescreen? I'd guess that at least 50% of their output is made in 16:9, the digital mediums all support 16:9, so why do we have to put up with chopped 4:3 pictures? Crikey, even $KY channels now show in Widescreen.
Again, why another call for a blind widescreen 'upgrade' (which you actually cite not only as a bad point, but the worst point)? It's about as pathetic as people who blasted the new look ITV News for no other reason than it's still in 4:3, as though having a non-widescreen news programme was the biggest crime on earth. Sky have been very realistic with their introduction of widescreen, only using it to any great extent over the last year or so, and with large parts of their output still in 4:3, and still recognising that things like Sky News might as well stay in 4:3 since there's no real point in changing it to widescreen.
And whilst much of UKTV's output is admittedly now in widescreen, it's all been framed for 14:9 transmission anyway - which is what UKTV transmit widescreen programmes in - you're not really missing much. And away from that, a huge amount of material is still 4:3.
I would say that this reorganisation (I'm not calling it a 'revamp' or a 'rebrand' or a 'relaunch' when most channels have only got lightly re-edited idents and a shiney new DOG) was borderline on whether or not they should have gone widescreen (on some channels; even though UK Gold has lost it's way the vast majority of it's output is 4:3 - I therefore see no point at all in making it a widescreen channel), but I certainly don't think it's strictly required yet.
What I predict will happen is that the channels will happen is that the channels will all got a full revamp either late this year or early next year, and then you will see some of them (the ones which predominantly show recent BBC material which will of course be widescreen) changing to widescreen.
As with Sky, I actually find it very refreshing to see a broadcaster demonstrate such a mature and realistic attitude to widescreen, rather than just jumping on an overly hyped bandwagon and switching almost all output and transmission to it when only a minority of people had widescreen sets (the BBC and ITV have both been predominantly widescreen for almost 4 years, for god's sake - it was way too soon).
Last edited by cwathen on 9 March 2004 12:55pm