DB
The announcers don't decide how long the idents run for.
That's correct, in fact whilst doing the announcements they have a headphone on with someone in the control room, counting down how much time they have.
(Info courtesy of Duncan Newmarch)
Dan posted:
Joe Havard posted:
Could someone tell me who the name of that female scottish narrator on BBC1 is? She never ever gives the ident a chance to play.
The announcers don't decide how long the idents run for.
That's correct, in fact whilst doing the announcements they have a headphone on with someone in the control room, counting down how much time they have.
(Info courtesy of Duncan Newmarch)
:-(
The announcers don't decide how long the idents run for.
That's correct, in fact whilst doing the announcements they have a headphone on with someone in the control room, counting down how much time they have.
(Info courtesy of Duncan Newmarch)
Well I never! Bit of a coincidence though.
A former member
DialUpBorg posted:
Dan posted:
Joe Havard posted:
Could someone tell me who the name of that female scottish narrator on BBC1 is? She never ever gives the ident a chance to play.
The announcers don't decide how long the idents run for.
That's correct, in fact whilst doing the announcements they have a headphone on with someone in the control room, counting down how much time they have.
(Info courtesy of Duncan Newmarch)
Well I never! Bit of a coincidence though.
MB
The idents have looked to me for a long time to be coming from a composite source rather than a component or RGB source, and have certainly looked like they've come from 1" or U-Matic SP even, not even DigiBeta.
You can see particularly around the red edges (which of course are very noticeable) where you can see that rolling-trellis-like effect caused by a conversion from a composite signal.
I watch everything in RGB so I can tell when the source material isn't/wasn't. Especially as so much composite->RGB conversion these days is so goddam poor. PAL never used to look as bad as it now does via Digital TV. Excessive softening and vertical resolution loss. They should stop trying to 'remove and filter' the sub-carrier artefacts and encode them as if they were true image data - i.e. on areas of high contrast, encode the cross-colouring as like-coloured pixels, rather than encoding a 'smear' of adjacent pixels.
You can see particularly around the red edges (which of course are very noticeable) where you can see that rolling-trellis-like effect caused by a conversion from a composite signal.
I watch everything in RGB so I can tell when the source material isn't/wasn't. Especially as so much composite->RGB conversion these days is so goddam poor. PAL never used to look as bad as it now does via Digital TV. Excessive softening and vertical resolution loss. They should stop trying to 'remove and filter' the sub-carrier artefacts and encode them as if they were true image data - i.e. on areas of high contrast, encode the cross-colouring as like-coloured pixels, rather than encoding a 'smear' of adjacent pixels.
IS
That's been a problem since the idents were introduced. Noggin suggested it could be that they were somehow added through a composite source (sorry if I've got that wrong noggin!). Certainly on close inspection it looks awful.
Isonstine
Founding member
Mark Boulton posted:
The idents have looked to me for a long time to be coming from a composite source rather than a component or RGB source, and have certainly looked like they've come from 1" or U-Matic SP even, not even DigiBeta.
You can see particularly around the red edges (which of course are very noticeable) where you can see that rolling-trellis-like effect caused by a conversion from a composite signal.
I watch everything in RGB so I can tell when the source material isn't/wasn't. Especially as so much composite->RGB conversion these days is so goddam poor. PAL never used to look as bad as it now does via Digital TV. Excessive softening and vertical resolution loss. They should stop trying to 'remove and filter' the sub-carrier artefacts and encode them as if they were true image data - i.e. on areas of high contrast, encode the cross-colouring as like-coloured pixels, rather than encoding a 'smear' of adjacent pixels.
You can see particularly around the red edges (which of course are very noticeable) where you can see that rolling-trellis-like effect caused by a conversion from a composite signal.
I watch everything in RGB so I can tell when the source material isn't/wasn't. Especially as so much composite->RGB conversion these days is so goddam poor. PAL never used to look as bad as it now does via Digital TV. Excessive softening and vertical resolution loss. They should stop trying to 'remove and filter' the sub-carrier artefacts and encode them as if they were true image data - i.e. on areas of high contrast, encode the cross-colouring as like-coloured pixels, rather than encoding a 'smear' of adjacent pixels.
That's been a problem since the idents were introduced. Noggin suggested it could be that they were somehow added through a composite source (sorry if I've got that wrong noggin!). Certainly on close inspection it looks awful.