What makes a good TV ident?

I would personally prefare Sky1's idents to Sky Atlantic's, the main reason being that the 1 is embeded into the footage. It may have not been as difficult to create as the Sky Atlantic idents, but If you took away the Sky Atlantic logo, you wouldn't realise its for a tv channel. I think its important to have the logo as a object in the scene eg
http://www.thisisfive.co.uk/images2010/five_2010_hot_04.jpg
http://www.skyidents.com/resources/restraunt%20f.jpg.opt387x212o0,0s387x212.jpg
http://www.tv-live.org.uk/wb/media/channel4/c42011/c4_2011f.jpg
as opposed to:
http://www.theidentgallery.com/itv2/2008/ITV2-2008-ID-2-4.jpg
http://www.tv-live.org.uk/wb/media/bbcone/2009/bbc1w2009ballroom06.jpg
http://www.tv-live.org.uk/wb/media/bbcfour/001.jpg

I imagine most would disagree that the BBC One idents are not that good, they may have the strong circle theme but that's as far as it goes. I would far prefare the idents if the logo form up was as creative as everything else in the ident. Something like in the Pedal Power ident where the BBC One logo is in the scene as if it was there when filmed not slapped on at the end.

I don't think its about having the logo as an object in a scene. But I think the real secret is that the logo/symbol should be king. Most disliked 'people' idents when they became trendy because in many cases the logo was secondary, or slapped on as an after thought.

What makes a good ident?

One that isn't used very often. No matter how good it is, familiarity breeds contempt.

We've been through this one before, but the whole format of idents used in the UK is awful IMO. Streamed in from a server, a bit of incidental music which is abruptly faded out and spoken over by an announcer, then left open-ended for a second or two before it crashes into the start of the programme. Nasty.

Either fit it into the required space exactly, so it flows into the programme, without voice-over (burning it into the start of the programme would be the preferred option, so it can be professionally mixed) or have some sort of soundless optic over which the announcer speaks.

The current setup just gives the impression of something that is bunged onto the end of the advert/trailer stream to gap-fill before the programme is due to start. And they're using this method to promote their station.

Clueless. The art has gone from continuity. Look back to 1980s/90s BBC1, the mid-1990s Sky 1 idents or the IVC setup of an ITV station to see how it should be done. It's just so lazy and uninspired at the moment -- and that goes for just about all the stations. Identikit.

Isn't that a contradiction?

It is, but they weren't "idents" in the sense we are referring to now. They were optics, a different proposition altogether.

The UK is probably one of a very few countries that has the type of TV idents that we do, most of the world have moved on from the staid format of ident + announcement to introduce a programme.

The technicalities of putting this format to air could be better though, you're right. But it needn't be that way and there are other ways to introduce a TV show


Or just do what the rest of the world does and just have a short sting for the channel/network before each programme... or just flash a logo up at the top of each hour


The style of continuity done by the BBC and ITV in the past was partially dictated by the limitations of the technology. The 'art' was largely making do with what they could and were forced to do - the 'soundless' optic like the BBC1 globe being a very good example. In-vision continuity and on screen clocks too were in part because of technical limitations

You're right of course, but the point I was making was that some stations used the limitations to their own advantage. My local area was a particular case in point -- almost uniquely even for ITV at the time, Tyne Tees took the format of the in-vision announcer and expanded it to the point where the "announcements" weren't really announcements any more a lot of the time. Continuity had a flow to it, announcements would last up to two minutes quite a lot of the time (and not just to cover up mistakes -- these were pre-planned) and the content often had little to do with the programmes around it. This wasn't just working with what you have (TTTV's technology was more or less up to speed with everyone else at the time), this was an often unscripted, connecting with the audience, direct self-promotion be damned attitude to presentation that I have not seen anywhere else.

Now, I am not for one minute suggesting that this uber-cosy, laid-back approach would suit the modern TV world (although it must be said that it worked in the North East for quite a while after "branding" took over elsewhere). But, there has to be a more imaginative approach to doing things than we have now.

As I say, we've been through this one before, but if you're not going to put some effort into continuity, it should, as you say, be abandoned altogether, and be replaced with US-style stings at strategic intervals.

And long may it continue IMO. We have copied enough bad habits from other countries. Why should we lower ourselves to their level?

I've always been a fan of that in a similar way I like live radio DJs to be on the radio talking to the listeners instead of pre-recorded rubbish or looping songs. That's why I've never been fond on pre-recorded CAs. Yeah, it's pretty much required nowadays with 24 hour television and so many channels, but it makes you feel welcome to the channel. This is most noticeable at closedowns when a CA will calmly lead you to bed and wish you a goodnight, whereas most of the time now, it's handing over to some cheap rubbish or, even worse, it's Logo > Slide/Blue screen leaving the viewer alone in a sense.

Indeed.