RH
To be honest i doubt neighbours credits will change at all, it took years for them to be adjusted for the last ECP, and with the programme about to disappear off the BBC within the next 9 months is it really worth it? Plus the show will probably be taking a break in the next couple of weeks for Ascot and Wimbledon, so if a new look is introduced it may be introduced then. The other alternative, is for them to wait until Neighbours has its new look, which should air over here from December, and introduce a new style credits then.
The new look should be here by October... it is launching July 23rd in Australia. Either way I know the show's days are numbered on the Beeb, but 9 months is a long time to have those credits stupidly squashed so I hope they sort it at some point.
LONDON posted:
Rhysey posted:
I have contacted the person responsbible for Neighbours' broadcasts at the Beeb, but she is away until next week so unless they take the initiative, I wouldn't expect to see any change for that show's credits.
To be honest i doubt neighbours credits will change at all, it took years for them to be adjusted for the last ECP, and with the programme about to disappear off the BBC within the next 9 months is it really worth it? Plus the show will probably be taking a break in the next couple of weeks for Ascot and Wimbledon, so if a new look is introduced it may be introduced then. The other alternative, is for them to wait until Neighbours has its new look, which should air over here from December, and introduce a new style credits then.
The new look should be here by October... it is launching July 23rd in Australia. Either way I know the show's days are numbered on the Beeb, but 9 months is a long time to have those credits stupidly squashed so I hope they sort it at some point.
IT
I quite like them! Though they could have used horrizontal scrollers to make full use of the bottom of the ECP, they wouldn't even need to resize that! I can read the credits on most programs on the new ECP.
R2
Well I couldn't and I was sitting rather close to my portable 4:3 television. Admittedly I wouldn't have been necessarily interested in what the credits said but to me it ruins the feel of the programme.
I also think that the BBC are treating us a bit like idiots here. Do they think that we're not capable of reading a TV Guide/ EPG, listening to an announcer at the end of the programme or watching any of the other promos and coming up graphics to know what the schedule is? Is there any need to apply additional images at the end of programmes to support what the announcer is saying? I really doubt that people will be more persuaded to tune in simply because they can see what the announcer is saying at the end of the programme.
dbl posted:
Hmm.. I could read The Apprentice creds. 
Well I couldn't and I was sitting rather close to my portable 4:3 television. Admittedly I wouldn't have been necessarily interested in what the credits said but to me it ruins the feel of the programme.
I also think that the BBC are treating us a bit like idiots here. Do they think that we're not capable of reading a TV Guide/ EPG, listening to an announcer at the end of the programme or watching any of the other promos and coming up graphics to know what the schedule is? Is there any need to apply additional images at the end of programmes to support what the announcer is saying? I really doubt that people will be more persuaded to tune in simply because they can see what the announcer is saying at the end of the programme.
AB
Sorry, I just love the thought of someone hanging on to find out who the Dubbing Mixer on The Apprentice was... and then being disappointed. I thought I needed a life! 
(Only teasing - hope nobody's offended.)
The fact is that credits - other than the cast list and key creative roles like the director - are an indulgence. They somehow became the norm in the film and tv industry in the late 50s/early 60s, largely to help freelance staff. The words "The End" were deemed insufficient.
Now, I don't dispute how they may help some individuals find work but if someone needs to prove they worked on a programme there are plenty of ways of doing this - websites could carry the information or staff could simply be given references.
Within the industry, opinion is split on credits - it largely depends on which area of programming someone works in and whether they give credits. People in news and sport especially tend to treat the indulgences of some other departments with a little ridicule.
However it is a fact that credits are, at best, treated with indifference by most viewers. They simply don't watch, go zapping or make a cup of tea.
With that in mind, I don't see what's wrong with marketing attempting to hold the audience into the next programme. Before someone says that the problem is the number of trails in the junction, most of the zapping is done before the trails get started.
The problem is the way ECPs are sometimes executed. For instance if the programme being promoted clashes with the one which is ending or if there is an obvious change of mood.
Similarly it can be difficult if the end titles are quite visual - you just need to look at BBC4's attempts at ECPs on some archive programmes. (Essentially the same problem as there's always been with announcers interrupting popular signature tunes.)
However anybody who imagines the wider viewing public - or indeed everyone in the TV industry apart from the marketing department - is going to get upset or annoyed about this is harbouring illusions. This is not the equivalent of a DOG on BBC1 or some of the loathing of the Rhythm and Movement idents. Which is not to say that there may not be worthwhile constructive criticism of the way the BBC is now handling its ECPs.
(Only teasing - hope nobody's offended.)
The fact is that credits - other than the cast list and key creative roles like the director - are an indulgence. They somehow became the norm in the film and tv industry in the late 50s/early 60s, largely to help freelance staff. The words "The End" were deemed insufficient.
Now, I don't dispute how they may help some individuals find work but if someone needs to prove they worked on a programme there are plenty of ways of doing this - websites could carry the information or staff could simply be given references.
Within the industry, opinion is split on credits - it largely depends on which area of programming someone works in and whether they give credits. People in news and sport especially tend to treat the indulgences of some other departments with a little ridicule.
However it is a fact that credits are, at best, treated with indifference by most viewers. They simply don't watch, go zapping or make a cup of tea.
With that in mind, I don't see what's wrong with marketing attempting to hold the audience into the next programme. Before someone says that the problem is the number of trails in the junction, most of the zapping is done before the trails get started.
The problem is the way ECPs are sometimes executed. For instance if the programme being promoted clashes with the one which is ending or if there is an obvious change of mood.
Similarly it can be difficult if the end titles are quite visual - you just need to look at BBC4's attempts at ECPs on some archive programmes. (Essentially the same problem as there's always been with announcers interrupting popular signature tunes.)
However anybody who imagines the wider viewing public - or indeed everyone in the TV industry apart from the marketing department - is going to get upset or annoyed about this is harbouring illusions. This is not the equivalent of a DOG on BBC1 or some of the loathing of the Rhythm and Movement idents. Which is not to say that there may not be worthwhile constructive criticism of the way the BBC is now handling its ECPs.