I actually really liked the live titles, and hope they bring them back. I agree, it went wrong too many times, but with advancements in the software / hardware and simpler operation there's no reason this couldn't be improved. I would imagine the 'mistake' rate was below 1% anyway, and it gave a more dynamic feel to the TOTH.
Maybe a similar thing, but pre-rendered just before so it can be checked by someone.
On the other hand, can't VizRT do this sort of thing out of the box?
Sky use VizRT right? and they have animations with dynamic data?
Yep, the coming up promos are created by using a video input and a story headline or when it comes to webpages, feeds and data from their website, and importing it into an animated template.
That animation for both Tower and Ticker really was terrible wasn't it?
TOG - ohhh those letters bring me out in a cold sweat to this day!
That and the Live Rendered Titles every hour....
Funny, isn't it.
Whenever the BBC does something new (i.e. a revamp of its news output) some of the people that work at the Beeb come on this forum proclaiming it to be the very best thing since sliced bread and encouraging abuse to be directed at anyone who can see through the uncreative tat that the graphic and studio designers hired by the Beeb present as 'ground-breaking' and 'innovative' - buzzwords that equate to nothing more than a load of old toss.
If the branding and studio designers (the Amelias and Tristans all sitting round a big table at RedBee) actually came up with something original and not an idea nicked from Sky, watered down and then passed off as 'original', we wouldn't have BBC people actually coming on a public forum and slagging off their own branding just a couple of years later!
However, there have been BBC staff slagging off the old blue/glass effect studio used up until about 1998 - which, by presentation standards, was universally liked by presentation fans, viewers and other seasoned designers. But then came the late 1990s and influx of post-grads to the Beeb wanting to 'modernise' and discredit most of what went before as 'pompous' and 'out-of-touch'.
I'd like to see the current load of BBC designers come up with something as sustainable and solid-feeling as the old 1990s blue/glass look. It really was faultless and brilliantly executed. It wasn't messed around with (or 'tweaked') every 12 months, saving the need for the BBC to waste another towns worth of licence fees paying David Lowe and the RedBee brigade to come up with yet another re-hashed and diluted 'revamp' because the one launched a year earlier had dated so fast or the studio was falling apart.
One final thought - virtual reality would be good. It has worked before, and, with the latest technology and true innovation and independent creativity, it could work again. The last thing you want is dozen or so overpaid media design fairies sitting around a table drinking free trade latte and spouting tosswords like 'inclusiveness', 'warm', 'accessible' and the worst one of them all - 'cohesiveness'. Maybe then we would actually see something original, inspiring and 'clever'.
Remember; a camel is a horse designed by a committee.
That being said, the Blue VR look and the 1999 look were designed, justified and exectured by the exact same firm - Lambie-Nairn.
It was when the BBC ditched him and moved towards BBC Broadcast (later Red Bee) around about 2001 along with a seismic shift in BBC attitudes that things started to really fall apart.
I don't hold any blame to Martin for the 2002 BBC One and 2001 BBC Two - the work can only be as good as the design breif and I can't image what PC BS was given too him.
That animation for both Tower and Ticker really was terrible wasn't it?
TOG - ohhh those letters bring me out in a cold sweat to this day!
That and the Live Rendered Titles every hour....
Funny, isn't it.
Whenever the BBC does something new (i.e. a revamp of its news output) some of the people that work at the Beeb come on this forum proclaiming it to be the very best thing since sliced bread and encouraging abuse to be directed at anyone who can see through the uncreative tat that the graphic and studio designers hired by the Beeb present as 'ground-breaking' and 'innovative' - buzzwords that equate to nothing more than a load of old toss.
If the branding and studio designers (the Amelias and Tristans all sitting round a big table at RedBee) actually came up with something original and not an idea nicked from Sky, watered down and then passed off as 'original', we wouldn't have BBC people actually coming on a public forum and slagging off their own branding just a couple of years later!
However, there have been BBC staff slagging off the old blue/glass effect studio used up until about 1998 - which, by presentation standards, was universally liked by presentation fans, viewers and other seasoned designers. But then came the late 1990s and influx of post-grads to the Beeb wanting to 'modernise' and discredit most of what went before as 'pompous' and 'out-of-touch'.
I'd like to see the current load of BBC designers come up with something as sustainable and solid-feeling as the old 1990s blue/glass look. It really was faultless and brilliantly executed. It wasn't messed around with (or 'tweaked') every 12 months, saving the need for the BBC to waste another towns worth of licence fees paying David Lowe and the RedBee brigade to come up with yet another re-hashed and diluted 'revamp' because the one launched a year earlier had dated so fast or the studio was falling apart.
One final thought - virtual reality would be good. It has worked before, and, with the latest technology and true innovation and independent creativity, it could work again. The last thing you want is dozen or so overpaid media design fairies sitting around a table drinking free trade latte and spouting tosswords like 'inclusiveness', 'warm', 'accessible' and the worst one of them all - 'cohesiveness'. Maybe then we would actually see something original, inspiring and 'clever'.
Remember; a camel is a horse designed by a committee.
That animation for both Tower and Ticker really was terrible wasn't it?
TOG - ohhh those letters bring me out in a cold sweat to this day!
That and the Live Rendered Titles every hour....
Funny, isn't it.
Whenever the BBC does something new (i.e. a revamp of its news output) some of the people that work at the Beeb come on this forum proclaiming it to be the very best thing since sliced bread and encouraging abuse to be directed at anyone who can see through the uncreative tat that the graphic and studio designers hired by the Beeb present as 'ground-breaking' and 'innovative' - buzzwords that equate to nothing more than a load of old toss.
If the branding and studio designers (the Amelias and Tristans all sitting round a big table at RedBee) actually came up with something original and not an idea nicked from Sky, watered down and then passed off as 'original', we wouldn't have BBC people actually coming on a public forum and slagging off their own branding just a couple of years later!
However, there have been BBC staff slagging off the old blue/glass effect studio used up until about 1998 - which, by presentation standards, was universally liked by presentation fans, viewers and other seasoned designers. But then came the late 1990s and influx of post-grads to the Beeb wanting to 'modernise' and discredit most of what went before as 'pompous' and 'out-of-touch'.
I'd like to see the current load of BBC designers come up with something as sustainable and solid-feeling as the old 1990s blue/glass look. It really was faultless and brilliantly executed. It wasn't messed around with (or 'tweaked') every 12 months, saving the need for the BBC to waste another towns worth of licence fees paying David Lowe and the RedBee brigade to come up with yet another re-hashed and diluted 'revamp' because the one launched a year earlier had dated so fast or the studio was falling apart.
One final thought - virtual reality would be good. It has worked before, and, with the latest technology and true innovation and independent creativity, it could work again. The last thing you want is dozen or so overpaid media design fairies sitting around a table drinking free trade latte and spouting tosswords like 'inclusiveness', 'warm', 'accessible' and the worst one of them all - 'cohesiveness'. Maybe then we would actually see something original, inspiring and 'clever'.
Remember; a camel is a horse designed by a committee.
Whenever the BBC does something new (i.e. a revamp of its news output) some of the people that work at the Beeb come on this forum proclaiming it to be the very best thing since sliced bread and encouraging abuse to be directed at anyone who can see through the uncreative tat that the graphic and studio designers hired by the Beeb present as 'ground-breaking' and 'innovative' - buzzwords that equate to nothing more than a load of old toss.
You have to expect people to show loyalty to a project they are involved in, so it is only natural they "talk it up".
SecretStar posted:
If the branding and studio designers (the Amelias and Tristans all sitting round a big table at RedBee) actually came up with something original and not an idea nicked from Sky, watered down and then passed off as 'original', we wouldn't have BBC people actually coming on a public forum and slagging off their own branding just a couple of years later!
I agree partially, but these days it is about competing, and that means taking what works, and tweaking it to call your own. Almost all design is derivative of something, I just wish it was more broad deviation and not with such a traceable lineage.
SecretStar posted:
However, there have been BBC staff slagging off the old blue/glass effect studio used up until about 1998 - which, by presentation standards, was universally liked by presentation fans, viewers and other seasoned designers. But then came the late 1990s and influx of post-grads to the Beeb wanting to 'modernise' and discredit most of what went before as 'pompous' and 'out-of-touch'.
Insiders are different to pres-fans, they work with these 'looks' day in day out. I no doubt believe the virtual era was a pain to work with. Pres-fans may like it, but we are a weird lot. I love the old Sky Tombstones and Egg looks, I also like News 24's launch look. I know these wouldn't work in today's society, same as the ghastly 1991-1999 blue glass BBC News look, they come across as aloof (spl) and very "Them and Us". The fact of things is, that society and the world changes more often, and the pace of life is much quicker today than at other times. Keeping up is difficult, and naturally means shorter shelf lives for brands, logos, and graphics. Sky's logo will be 10 years old next year, but it still works and is modern. But look how much has changed for the graphics and channel brandings. Same with the BBC and its 11 year old logo, it still works, but how its used for channels, is always changing.
SecretStar posted:
I'd like to see the current load of BBC designers come up with something as sustainable and solid-feeling as the old 1990s blue/glass look. It really was faultless and brilliantly executed.
That is nostalgia talking, that pompus world of crests, latin verse, orchestrated fanfares are all out of touch in today's world, and as fond as you are of it, graphics will always be designed for tomorrow's audience.
SecretStar posted:
It wasn't messed around with (or 'tweaked') every 12 months, saving the need for the BBC to waste another towns worth of licence fees paying David Lowe and the RedBee brigade to come up with yet another re-hashed and diluted 'revamp' because the one launched a year earlier had dated so fast or the studio was falling apart.
Those were the days the BBC felt above the viewers, and decided what the viewers wanted, it doesn't happen now, they have had to become more humbler, and of the people, for the people.
SecretStar posted:
One final thought - virtual reality would be good. It has worked before, and, with the latest technology and true innovation and independent creativity, it could work again. The last thing you want is dozen or so overpaid media design fairies sitting around a table drinking free trade latte and spouting tosswords like 'inclusiveness', 'warm', 'accessible' and the worst one of them all - 'cohesiveness'. Maybe then we would actually see something original, inspiring and 'clever'.
ITV use virtual reality, and for News at Ten it isn't bad, but it requires more work, and will never feel as tangable and real as a good, well designed set. Few examples of interesting sets are around, five news has one (even if the colours and 'wallpaper' are ghastly) but their prior studio (orange and purple) was interesting and not too busy. A set was once just a backdrop, but now with screens, reports, weather etc, all based in one studio, they have moved into the world of being functional environments, and that's just how it is.
Where have you got blue from, the headlines? I wouldn't look too much into that, it's common for most websites to use blue for links, and remember, the old one did.
Did make me smile though, the way you had the pallette, then that ticker.
Where have you got blue from, the headlines? I wouldn't look too much into that, it's common for most websites to use blue for links, and remember, the old one did.
Yeah, blue from all hyperlinks actually - but it's not a usual blue, more of an aqua, and exactly the same as used in the old ticker!
The old site had more of a dark blue for hyperlinks.
