noggin's posts, page 100

15,946 search results, most recent first

NG
noggin Founding member

Split Personality

thegeek posted:
Even though they've been held by the same company for quite some time now, Ofcom still issue separate licences for London Weekday and London Weekend. The timings for the latter are still
Quote:
between 5.15pm on Friday and 6.00am on Monday each week, except for the time between 6.00am and 9.25am on each Saturday and Sunday.


The licencee for all the ITV licences (save for the two Scottish ones and UTV) is ITV Broadcasting Ltd, which is the successor company to Anglia Television.


I wonder why they chose Anglia Television to become ITV Broadcasting Ltd? (I guess using existing companies to become the new sections of the company made sense?)
NG
noggin Founding member

Split Personality

Markymark posted:
Steve in Pudsey posted:
Would the usual convention of the TV day beginning at 0600 not have applied?


I think it’s unique to the UK, and goes against every PVR that’s in use today, and every VCR from the outset


Well - to be fair - internally UK broadcasters have (or had) the concept of 2500, 2600 etc. as schedule times when a show was broadcast after midnight, but before closedown and thus scheduled/billed on the previous day.
NG
noggin Founding member

Split Personality

Steve in Pudsey posted:
Would the usual convention of the TV day beginning at 0600 not have applied?


Does that only date back to the days when Breakfast Time/TVam started though?
NG
noggin Founding member

Kodi Filmic Effect

harshy posted:
noggin posted:
harshy posted:
I noticed if you deinterlace 1080i25 to 1080p50 whilst it preserves the motion softens the picture very subtle though.


That will depend on your deinterlacer.

If you are watching any interlaced content on an LCD/LED, OLED or Plasma - then your TV is deinterlacing (or your DVD/Blu-ray player might be if you are playing a DVD on that and outputting a progressive video signal), and you are simply comparing your TV/Player's deinterlacing and scaling algorithm with ffmpeg's deinterlacing algorithm (and your Kodi platform's scaling algorithm)

Only CRTs (and the very early Hitachi ALiS plasmas) display interlaced content as natively interlaced after all. (And ALiS only did it for HD content)

If you are offline deinterlacing in ffmpeg you will also be decoding and re-encoding - so the concatenation of codecs may knock the edges off the picture a bit. That's why I use quite a high -crf of 18 when doing libx264 re-encodes.

w3fdif (aka Weston 3-field) is a BBC-designed deinterlacer that uses a clever V/T filter rather than any motion adaption or compensation. It delivers a consistent and pretty high-quality deinterlace. YADIF 2x is also a popular deinterlacer, but it is adaptive, so can get things 'wrong'. I personally prefer w3fdf as it's more consistent - but it does expose alias artefacts in your source material (such as caused by LED matrix walls etc .)

Thanks noggin after reading your advice sometime ago I been using the bbc based deinterlacer but not the crf so I’ll build that into the script and try, it’s really fascinating I wish I could find a job doing this 👍🏼


-crf is just a way of fixing picture quality, rather than bitrate. If storage space isn't a major issue then -crf 18 should be pretty transparent.
NG
noggin Founding member

Lorraine Kelly escapes £1.2 million tax bill

russty_russ posted:
Jonwo posted:
Whataday posted:
I'd imagine Ant & Dec would be harder to tap as A) They have enough money for the best lawyers in the land, and B) they have a production company which makes content for ITV.

As Brekkie says, I'm surprised Lorraine hasn't wound up producing her own show.


I imagine ITV would be reluctant to allow their talent to produce their daytime lineup. The ITV daytime lineup apart from a handful of shows is in house productions.

It's pretty easy to find out if a presenter has a limited company since they have to register with Companies House. Googling Holly and Phil for example, both have limited companies although Holly is registered under her married name. Phil has one limited company named after Gordon the Gopher!


Interesting in that Gordon the Gopher company it features Peter Powell. I wonder if it's the same chap from radio / Top Of The Pops etc
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04540382/officers


Almost certainly - Peter Powell went from being a DJ to being an agent/manager I believe. I think he managed his ex-wife's career when they were married (Anthea Turner), and before.

I believe Peter Powell has been a very senior executive (Chairman?) of James Grant Management Group. (Who are a major talent operation) Don't they represent Phil and Holly ?
Last edited by noggin on 23 March 2019 7:16pm - 2 times in total
NG
noggin Founding member

Kodi Filmic Effect

Neil Jones posted:
noggin posted:
MakeMKV shouldn't touch the video encoding or the audio encoding. If you are seeing a filmic effect on the output of MakeMKV, it's almost certainly caused by your playback solution not handling interlaced content correctly (not MakeMKV adding any artefacts.) MakeMKV literally just takes the video and audio streams from the DVD VOB files and puts them in a Matroska MKV wrapper - leaving the actual video and audio data untouched.


This makes sense as I was just looking at the file through the laptop screen (which I have checked is actually refreshing at the standard rate of 60Hz and the file was at 25fps so yes that would explain that effect).


Ah - never judge any video quality on a laptop, PC monitor, tablet or phone (with the possible exception of the current iPad Pros which have support for multiple refresh rates). Only ever make judgements on a display that is correctly displaying your content at the right refresh rate. (This is why broadcast edit suites still have monitors as well as PC screens in them...)
NG
noggin Founding member

Kodi Filmic Effect

Neil Jones posted:

Is there any real difference in final file size between 256k audio and lower (most DVDs seem to be encoded to 192k) and variable bit two pass rate for the video?

If you are playing back content on a platform that decodes (or will passthrough) Dolby Digital then there is no need to transcode it - so you can do an "-acodec copy" and leave it untouched.

However if you are taking a 192k Dolby Digital (aka AC3) 2.0 source and transcoding it, you want to avoid concatenation compression artefacts (i.e. the Dolby Digital psychoacoustic encoding interacting with the different AAC psychoacoustic.) As a result I usually bump up the AAC bitrate a bit to try to avoid introducing needless compression artefacts. You could go a bit lower if you were starting with a cleaner, lossless compressed (or uncompressed) source like WAV, FLAC, Dolby True HD, DTS HD MA etc. However for the sake of 64kbps it seems a bit pointless. If you can't hear the difference, go for your life !

Quote:

I know it really depends on the source material and how complicated it is but the general consensus from everything I've read online seems to suggest the variable bit rate generates a better picture but will obviously take longer to render all other things being equal.


Variable bitrate will give a better picture for a given average bitrate, than constant bitrate at the same bitrate - and thus eventual file size (everything else being equal), and two-pass encoding will optimise quality for a given bitrate yet further, at the expense of encoding speed. However if you use -crf encoding you're chosing to use a variable bitrate to achieve a constant quality, at the expense of fixing the bitrate and file size. However the result is also faster. For me it offers the best compromise between speed and quality - as storage is of relatively low importance to me (so I don't mind if the files are a bit bigger)
NG
noggin Founding member

Noel on Strike

dosxuk posted:
The issues for "new" TVC were not turnaround, but storage and access for the sets, which is much reduced from the previous arrangements.


Yes - though to be fair in the latter days of the old TVC era, set storage was often off-site as the costs for storing set in the ring-road were proving to be prohibitive for some productions. It was often cheaper to transport sets to and from site for each studio block, and store them off-site more cost-effectively in the gaps.
NG
noggin Founding member

Kodi Filmic Effect

harshy posted:
I noticed if you deinterlace 1080i25 to 1080p50 whilst it preserves the motion softens the picture very subtle though.


That will depend on your deinterlacer.

If you are watching any interlaced content on an LCD/LED, OLED or Plasma - then your TV is deinterlacing (or your DVD/Blu-ray player might be if you are playing a DVD on that and outputting a progressive video signal), and you are simply comparing your TV/Player's deinterlacing and scaling algorithm with ffmpeg's deinterlacing algorithm (and your Kodi platform's scaling algorithm)

Only CRTs (and the very early Hitachi ALiS plasmas) display interlaced content as natively interlaced after all. (And ALiS only did it for HD content)

If you are offline deinterlacing in ffmpeg you will also be decoding and re-encoding - so the concatenation of codecs may knock the edges off the picture a bit. That's why I use quite a high -crf of 18 when doing libx264 re-encodes.

w3fdif (aka Weston 3-field) is a BBC-designed deinterlacer that uses a clever V/T filter rather than any motion adaption or compensation. It delivers a consistent and pretty high-quality deinterlace. YADIF 2x is also a popular deinterlacer, but it is adaptive, so can get things 'wrong'. I personally prefer w3fdf as it's more consistent - but it does expose alias artefacts in your source material (such as caused by LED matrix walls etc .)
Last edited by noggin on 23 March 2019 2:24pm - 3 times in total
harshy and London Lite gave kudos
NG
noggin Founding member

Lorraine Kelly escapes £1.2 million tax bill

JKDerry posted:
mr_vivian posted:
Jon posted:
So I assume you voluntarily pay more tax than you are required by law then? Or are you saying "no you can't have that - it's all mine'?


I am sure Lorraine pays tax (or she'd be in prison) but the HMRC clearly believe she should be paying more.

Regarding your question - I have received notices from HMRC in the past that I owed them tax and I paid up. Sure it wasn't over a million but I paid them what I owed them.

This ruling from the judge may well be lawful but it doesn't mean it's ethical.

I guess Lorraine's tax bracket is at the 45% mark? Her salary must be large from ITV.


That's the entire point of this issue. Lorraine isn't taxed as PAYE (Pay As You Earn) with normal employer deductions for income tax and national insurance.

Instead Lorraine's services to ITV are provided by her service company, who ITV pay. ITV aren't employing Lorraine directly, they are contracting Lorraine's service company to provide her services (just as you might contract a cleaning company to clean your offices, rather than directly employing cleaners yourself)

This means ITV don't pay any employer national insurance contributions, and don't handle her income tax via PAYE. Those responsibilities are devolved to the company that employs Lorraine (i.e. her own service company).

Lorraine's service company employs Lorraine, not ITV. Her service company may employ her at a very low salary (so she doesn't pay any income tax, or only pays at a low rate) and only pays a small amount of National Insurance contributions.

Her company keeps the rest of the ITV payment (pre-tax), and then pays the company shareholders (Lorraine, but possibly also her husband, kids, relatives etc.) lumps sums via dividends, which are then also taxable, but possibly not at the same rate as would be the case for PAYE income tax, and won't incur NI payments.

Similarly Lorraine's company may cover a lot of her expenses, allowing money to spent that has yet to be taxed as income (though some of these may be taxed as benefits).

This is a widespread technique to reduce the amount of tax paid by people, and was deemed legal and acceptable for many years.

It is a technique the HMRC are trying to reduce the use of though, particularly where people working via service companies are doing so only to avoid being taxed PAYE, and where employers are using it to minimise their NI payments, when the people working are, in effect, direct employees.

Lorraine seems to have argued that as she is a performer, her approach to taxation was valid. HMRC was arguing she should refund the HMRC the amount they believed she saved in tax payments (comparing her service company taxation payments vs what she would have paid if she had been PAYE)
Last edited by noggin on 23 March 2019 10:56am - 3 times in total
NG
noggin Founding member

Loose Women

kernow posted:
noggin posted:
addlestones posted:
The View is amazing and should be on something like ITV2. Whoopi when in full health tends to do Mon - Thurs in the main chair and Joy takes over on Friday. Mon - Fri it's (left to right) - Whoopi, Abi, Joy , Sunny and Meghan. Friday (left to right) is Joy, Abi, Ana, Sunny and Meghan.


The View used to have a slot on a channel here but was dropped ISTR.


You might be thinking of The Talk, which used to be shown on Diva TV. Not sure if The View has ever been shown here.

The Ellen DeGeneres Show does get shown on ITV2 though, after previously being shown on Really.


No - The View definitely popped up on a UK channel back in the day. (Might have been a Sky subscription channel) I've never watched 'The Talk', but definitely watched episodes of 'The View' in the UK.
NG
noggin Founding member

Loose Women

addlestones posted:
The View is amazing and should be on something like ITV2. Whoopi when in full health tends to do Mon - Thurs in the main chair and Joy takes over on Friday. Mon - Fri it's (left to right) - Whoopi, Abi, Joy , Sunny and Meghan. Friday (left to right) is Joy, Abi, Ana, Sunny and Meghan.


The View used to have a slot on a channel here but was dropped ISTR.

I don't think US shows like that rate so well here as they are very US-centric, and don't appeal to a wider non-US audience (the same is true of US late night shows that channels keep trying to get a UK audience to watch, but we don't). To be fair, we wouldn't expect Loose Women to work in the US either.