BBC News 1999

So I have a question...



This isn't how I regularly saw the BBC News at 10, back then I had a 4:3 bulgy glass telly. However as the capture shows, some people clearly could see the 16:9 14:9 cut image that was transmitted.

My question is one that always bothered me, even at the time on my 4:3 CRT I noticed it. Why does the headline insert on the left not cover the whole of the screen? Why the sudden cut which gave away its digital origins? On my TV it ended up with a tiny sliver of darker panel behind that I never knew what was (being younger I assumed the inset was actually there rather than keyed over)

Does anyone know why it was done like this?

When the refresh came with more red in the set the insert was updated and looked far more "real" and more subtly inserted. What I don't understand is why the first one ever existed, transmitting in 4:3 or 14:9 cut still meant the studio and gallery were 16:9 so they would be able to see that it cut off abruptly surely?

I suspect they didn't think enough 16x9 viewers would care - which is sad, get the small things right and the big things look great

It was back in a time when people expected inserts and knew they weren't real. They also used to have inserts over the presenter's shoulders often just floating in mid air. It wasn't pretending to be real as back then real was dull, graphics were cool.

I think the first one above is much better. The skeuomorphism on the second is just poor (as Apple have now realised).

I think that might be real - isn't the darker panel where the set has a corner in it? In the later version they key on top of it.

To me it looks like deliberate design (possibly not the best design ever) rather than accident

Agreed. Yes, the updated look appears slightly more realistic and perhaps better aligned ... but viewers have been used to seeing backdrops and background elements appearing behind news readers from around the late 1970s at least – many of which were obviously keyed:

ITN 1979
http://www.retelevise.com/external/itn-1979.png

BBC 1982
http://www.retelevise.com/external/bbc-1982.png


So I'm not sure it would have been an issue that this graphic was clearly superimposed. I think Steve's right ... it was most likely a deliberate feature of the design.

I love seeing clips of the end of the ITN News at 5:45 - it always used to cut from the MCU with the keyed in background as shown above to a wide(r) shot of the studio revealing a mustard yellow background! They really didn't try to hide the fact that the MCU background was clearly fake.

Its so funny to hear you say that, because I just watched a couple of clips of old 545 bulletins on YouTube and thought exactly the same thing.

Plus, the backdrop changes in-vision, as the presenter leads into one story from the next. One could be forgiven for thinking that far from trying to hide the fact the background wasn’t real, perhaps they were actually trying to show-off their use of the technology, which I guess at that time, was still pretty new(ish)?

As I said above!

The grey panel on the right is real, the metal "ladder" and the red edge on the left of frame is part of the graphic, though mirrors what is in the studio (so that it made sense on other shots without graphics) The beige/ivory area revealed at the bottom of frame was real I think.

Originally there was a plan for the beige/ivory gap and the red area to the left of frame (I think - it might also have included the metal ladder as well) to be real, and the shot framed so that the graphics fitted into the gap on shot, but that would have dictated the shot size, rather than the size of the presenter...

Someone ( ) had the idea of making the left hand side entirely "virtual" and fully keyed so that you only had to line up to the edge of the grey curved edge of set.

About showing off the use of new technology?

I couldn't quite see that point being made in your post, or perhaps I just made it more explicitly ... but either way, I'm glad we seem to agree (exclamation mark)

You've spent 14 years worrying about that?

It's not skeuomorphism - it is mimesis, as the graphic is intended to look as if it were part of the set (and not just realistic). It's not a real display with plastic poles made to look metal (which would be skeuomorphic), nor is it a software's GUI trying to mimic the physical version of itself (which would be the modern definition of skeuomorphic).

I remember at the time thinking that it looked rather good - it wasn't obviously fake.