Do the BBC not consider 16mm up to HD standard anyway?
I always presumed that's why the Royle Family switched to Super 35 later on
That may as well be, but if the programme was filmed using 16/35 mm film and later assembled and edited on videotape, it would be impossible to upscale it into true high definition.
Well, I meant the later episodes that were broadcast in HD (although I think all of the specials 2006 onwards were shot on 35).
If the film stock still exits presumably they could remaster it for HD like a lot of shows have done in the past few years, Inspector Morse, Friends, The X Files, Seinfeld (and I think Seinfeld was shot on 16mm?)
Did it switch to 35mm? Though I admit I wouldn't know. I just assumed it was 16mm as that tended to be what British TV used.
It was always a hunch, but the beginning of the 'The New Sofa' outtakes seems to confirm it, unless it's just a mock up or something and I'm completely wrong. But the specials certainly look a lot different than the original series does. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3_AVLQdGBQ
I guess it's possible then, if they wanted to keep using film rather than use HD video then they'd have had to have gone to 35mm for it to be suitable for HD.
Unless I'm mistaken, the "2-perf" it mentions is a way to cut down on the high cost of film by having a smaller image area (2 perferations high rather than the usual 4- I think some shows, particularly in the US, have used 3-perf as well, as it's roughly 16:9 in shape)- and you end up with a picture much wider than 16:9 on the negative too! I think the 16:9 area of that would still be bigger than 16mm frame- so obviously more suitable for HD.
Last edited by james-2001 on 9 July 2016 12:24am - 4 times in total
Unless I'm mistaken, the "2-perf" it mentions is a way to cut down on the high cost of film by having a smaller image area
I'm having a lightbulb moment right now. I've always imagined film to be sort of pre-divided into frames. It never occured to me that it was just one long exposable strip, and the frames you see, with their rounded off corners, are solely down to the camera and lens
If the film stock still exits presumably they could remaster it for HD like a lot of shows have done in the past few years, Inspector Morse, Friends, The X Files, Seinfeld (and I think Seinfeld was shot on 16mm?)
I'm unsure what it was filmed on but all episodes of Seinfeld have been shown on Sky Atlantic in 16:9/HD, which gives me the impression it was shot on film. Even though when it was shown first time round in the 1990's you'd have thought they were shot on tape.
If the film stock still exits presumably they could remaster it for HD like a lot of shows have done in the past few years, Inspector Morse, Friends, The X Files, Seinfeld (and I think Seinfeld was shot on 16mm?)
I'm unsure what it was filmed on but all episodes of Seinfeld have been shown on Sky Atlantic in 16:9/HD, which gives me the impression it was shot on film. Even though when it was shown first time round in the 1990's you'd have thought they were shot on tape.
Friends was certainly shot on film, and I'm pretty sure Seinfeld was too.
You can tell just by watching they were on film, not on tape.
Funny when it comes to using tape on US sitcoms, there were loads of US sitcoms shot on video on the 70s and 80s, but then during the 90s it seemed to die out, I think the last new taped sitcoms in the US began around 1996 and had all ended by around 2002 (and even then they only seemed to be the "youth" sitcoms that Trouble showed). Whereas over here doing sitcoms "video look" still seems to be the standard, even though we could have filmised them/shot them at 25p.
I'm not sure if there's ever been any UK studio sitcoms done entirely on film. The only filmed "laugh track" sitcoms I can think of (Last Of The Summer Wine from 1992, The Detectives and the first 2 series of Chef!- the third series was on video) were done without an audience then shown to one later.
Do the BBC not consider 16mm up to HD standard anyway?
For a long time Super 16 wasn't approved for use as an acquisition format for BBC HD commissions. This caused no end of complaints from DoPs and producers who wanted to produce on film (rather than shoot electronically) but didn't have the budget for 35mm.
The BBC worked with some production teams to develop a workflow using 2 or 3-perf 35mm (which is cheaper than the standard 4-perf) - and I think "The 39 Steps" was shot on 35mm this way. (After all - the cost of film production is largely based on the amount of film that you physically use and process - which is why 16mm is cheaper than 35mm, and why 4-perf is more expensive than 3-perf, and 2-perf cheaper still)
However more recently the BBC are allowing Super 16 to be used for HD acquisitions - but with some caveats about light levels and stock used. (Super 16 can suffer badly from film grain noise in low-light - and noise is the enemy of compression...)
Quote:
Though that didn't stop them doing it with Pride & Prejudice.
Apples and Oranges. Pride and Prejudice was commissioned for SD broadcast (not HD). The remastering in HD was an attempt to deliver the highest quality result possible from an existing archive production. You can't compare this with decisions taken when commissioning HD productions. (The results of the remaster are great - but that doesn't mean you'd chose the same workflow for a new commission)
I'm pretty sure the Debbie McGee episode wasn't the first one, but I may be wrong.
The BBC Genome listings seem to completely disagree with what's on Wikipedia, so not sure if that's the production order or what's on the DVDs.
It looks as if, assuming Radio Times was correct at the time, the Debbie McGee ep was the first to transmit. Either way I'm not surprised they didn't use the "other" first episode given a certain guest, and how an incident during the recording of it was the subject of a court case a few years back.
Just watching my DVD box set and the Debbie McGee ep was episode two (the first episode had a clear introduction to the series)
