IS
Indeed, they've got to get the ranking correct - comedian - top left, joker bottom - middle, stupid woman - bottom right etc
Col posted:
I'm sure it's been recorded already, but I wonder who the panellists on Blankety Blank will be next week.
It would be great if some of the regular panellists who are still with us from the Wogan/Dawson eras are involved in the show next week - the likes of Mollie Sugden or Lorraine Chase. Would also be nice to see Sherrie Hewson on the panel as well, she was quite entertaining in the Savage era.
It would be great if some of the regular panellists who are still with us from the Wogan/Dawson eras are involved in the show next week - the likes of Mollie Sugden or Lorraine Chase. Would also be nice to see Sherrie Hewson on the panel as well, she was quite entertaining in the Savage era.
Indeed, they've got to get the ranking correct - comedian - top left, joker bottom - middle, stupid woman - bottom right etc
IS
I too noticed the game board cells looked a bit plain compared to the ones used in the Blockbusters era (1983 -1993). They could have represented the original board more closely.
The problem is that the original borad was an actual physical board consisting of projectors. Very dificult to reproduce that in computer graphics
Doubt it, surely the BBC won't allow their globe on ITV1. Since Blankety Blank was made by Thames after it moved from BBC to ITV, I bet we'll see a Thames skyline ident. Not the ideal match - it is the correct Thames ident for when Blankety Blank was hosted by Terry Wogan and Les Dawson late 1970s to mid 1980s, but ages out of date for when Lily Savage's Blankety Blank finally appeared as a series on ITV in 2001.
Of course Lily Savage did a series or 2 of it for the BBC first!
It'll be interesting to see what they'll feature in terms of presenter; Wogan and Dawson are the most well known, the BBC aren't going to withhold archive footage. In terms of title sequence they can't reuse an old one like in th past because the titles feature the guests so they'll most likely reconstruct it.
As for ident-age they probably won't bother, there's little point
Tumble Tower posted:
I too noticed the game board cells looked a bit plain compared to the ones used in the Blockbusters era (1983 -1993). They could have represented the original board more closely.
The problem is that the original borad was an actual physical board consisting of projectors. Very dificult to reproduce that in computer graphics
Quote:
Doubt it, surely the BBC won't allow their globe on ITV1. Since Blankety Blank was made by Thames after it moved from BBC to ITV, I bet we'll see a Thames skyline ident. Not the ideal match - it is the correct Thames ident for when Blankety Blank was hosted by Terry Wogan and Les Dawson late 1970s to mid 1980s, but ages out of date for when Lily Savage's Blankety Blank finally appeared as a series on ITV in 2001.
Of course Lily Savage did a series or 2 of it for the BBC first!
It'll be interesting to see what they'll feature in terms of presenter; Wogan and Dawson are the most well known, the BBC aren't going to withhold archive footage. In terms of title sequence they can't reuse an old one like in th past because the titles feature the guests so they'll most likely reconstruct it.
As for ident-age they probably won't bother, there's little point
TV
I too noticed the game board cells looked a bit plain compared to the ones used in the Blockbusters era (1983 -1993). They could have represented the original board more closely.
The problem is that the original borad was an actual physical board consisting of projectors. Very dificult to reproduce that in computer graphics
As the legends of Flash re-creation like Dave Jefferey have shown, very accurate re-productions of anything can be done on a computer... if you put some time towards it... If a juddery mechanical clock can be reproduced in Flash on a home computer, an accurate re-incarnation of the Blockbusters game board can be done for television.
More critical analysis coming up...!
TVArchive
Founding member
Inspector Sands posted:
Tumble Tower posted:
I too noticed the game board cells looked a bit plain compared to the ones used in the Blockbusters era (1983 -1993). They could have represented the original board more closely.
The problem is that the original borad was an actual physical board consisting of projectors. Very dificult to reproduce that in computer graphics
As the legends of Flash re-creation like Dave Jefferey have shown, very accurate re-productions of anything can be done on a computer... if you put some time towards it... If a juddery mechanical clock can be reproduced in Flash on a home computer, an accurate re-incarnation of the Blockbusters game board can be done for television.
More critical analysis coming up...!
TV
TVArchive
Founding member
(graphics in this post are taken from an analogue 14:9 broadcast)...due to the stupidity that is my current landlord I am still awaiting to see the repeat in 16:9 on ITV2, no doubt more surprises there...
Where to begin for possibly the most anticipated game show as part of this year's marathon...
Positive points...
Dimensions of the Central globe were better this time around, without the idiotic disregard for stretching the company name (or the globe depending on your prefered vision dimesions) that we got last year.
The transition into the main titles was very nice, although the following transition to zoom & crop within the titles looked *shaky* (this transition happened whilst the earth was on screen)
Negative points...
The cut of the titles. I would say this was because of the zoom & crop problem, in that another transition would have had to have been made to ensure the "Blockbusters" logo would have been 4:3 safe and *not* stretched. Without a cut, the transition would have been highly noticeable at any other point of the titles because of the level of action in the graphics.
Jon Tickle's life highlight of being on Blockbusters in 1991, surely there is a copy of this programme that isn't on VHS?
The magnitiude of the inconsistent dimensions of the historical clips. We had the lot, whether it were zoomed, cropped, stretched, 4:3 in 16:9 frame etc.
Only 2 items were 4:3 preserved (coining a new phrase) which were... a Blockbusters bumper to make it 4:3 graphics safe, however I don't recall seeing animated before.
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/1_copy16.jpg
Where was this used? I know it was used as a break bumper in the early series, however this was never animated (unless i'm mistaken?)
... and the original board in pretty much all its glory...
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/2_copy13.jpg
So what was going on with the stretching, and how did it look for original (4:3) viewers... the best example to use has to be the game board itself which clearly shows how badly produced the history element actually was...
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/4_copy14.jpghttp://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/3_copy13.jpghttp://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/5_copy8.jpg
Original broadcast.......................................................14:9 as broadcast..............................................................4:3 zoomed (not even taking in overscan)...
What is so wrong with preserving the original video format in a 4:3 in 16:9 frame format like the other two examples above?
Also, the other method of preservation, the "curtains" syndrome was even used, albeit quite unnoticeable, and quite sucessfully...
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/6_copy3.jpg
What's wrong with using this method for all the clips either? This method was even used in the titles (example to follow) for one of the two times it was shown.
On behalf of the people who don't shout loud enough... PLEASE STOP STRETCHING & CROPPING 4:3 MATERIAL AND PRESERVE IT TO ITS ORIGINAL DIMENSIONS. Thank you.
One question I ask myself... do they do this level of butchering in America to clip shows? I would like to invite the programme makers reading now the right to reply...
The programme itself was too much of a half-hearted effort by media studies luddites to even comment...
Where to begin for possibly the most anticipated game show as part of this year's marathon...
Positive points...
Dimensions of the Central globe were better this time around, without the idiotic disregard for stretching the company name (or the globe depending on your prefered vision dimesions) that we got last year.
The transition into the main titles was very nice, although the following transition to zoom & crop within the titles looked *shaky* (this transition happened whilst the earth was on screen)
Negative points...
The cut of the titles. I would say this was because of the zoom & crop problem, in that another transition would have had to have been made to ensure the "Blockbusters" logo would have been 4:3 safe and *not* stretched. Without a cut, the transition would have been highly noticeable at any other point of the titles because of the level of action in the graphics.
Jon Tickle's life highlight of being on Blockbusters in 1991, surely there is a copy of this programme that isn't on VHS?
The magnitiude of the inconsistent dimensions of the historical clips. We had the lot, whether it were zoomed, cropped, stretched, 4:3 in 16:9 frame etc.
Only 2 items were 4:3 preserved (coining a new phrase) which were... a Blockbusters bumper to make it 4:3 graphics safe, however I don't recall seeing animated before.
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/1_copy16.jpg
Where was this used? I know it was used as a break bumper in the early series, however this was never animated (unless i'm mistaken?)
... and the original board in pretty much all its glory...
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/2_copy13.jpg
So what was going on with the stretching, and how did it look for original (4:3) viewers... the best example to use has to be the game board itself which clearly shows how badly produced the history element actually was...
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/4_copy14.jpghttp://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/3_copy13.jpghttp://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/5_copy8.jpg
Original broadcast.......................................................14:9 as broadcast..............................................................4:3 zoomed (not even taking in overscan)...
What is so wrong with preserving the original video format in a 4:3 in 16:9 frame format like the other two examples above?
Also, the other method of preservation, the "curtains" syndrome was even used, albeit quite unnoticeable, and quite sucessfully...
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/6_copy3.jpg
What's wrong with using this method for all the clips either? This method was even used in the titles (example to follow) for one of the two times it was shown.
On behalf of the people who don't shout loud enough... PLEASE STOP STRETCHING & CROPPING 4:3 MATERIAL AND PRESERVE IT TO ITS ORIGINAL DIMENSIONS. Thank you.
One question I ask myself... do they do this level of butchering in America to clip shows? I would like to invite the programme makers reading now the right to reply...
The programme itself was too much of a half-hearted effort by media studies luddites to even comment...
TV
They didn't have a problem with the BBC1 balloon appearing on the ITV News (complete with strike announcement) as part of coverage of the 2005 BBC strike.
Tumble Tower posted:
Doubt it, surely the BBC won't allow their globe on ITV1.
They didn't have a problem with the BBC1 balloon appearing on the ITV News (complete with strike announcement) as part of coverage of the 2005 BBC strike.
BE
The problem is that the original borad was an actual physical board consisting of projectors. Very dificult to reproduce that in computer graphics
Not sure it would be so difficult really. I mean you could do it in flash quite easily and although they probably didn't use flash for the board last night, by taking a little more care at least with the speed of the flashing 'lights' it would have looked more genuine.
Although not made for TV, the guys at WeDigTV have done a good job with the game board.
Ben
Founding member
Inspector Sands posted:
The problem is that the original borad was an actual physical board consisting of projectors. Very dificult to reproduce that in computer graphics
Not sure it would be so difficult really. I mean you could do it in flash quite easily and although they probably didn't use flash for the board last night, by taking a little more care at least with the speed of the flashing 'lights' it would have looked more genuine.
Although not made for TV, the guys at WeDigTV have done a good job with the game board.
IT
The gameboard wasn't stretched, they added a few blue 'half tiles' to the left and right sides. I love the version of the music they used, much better than the well known version. One thing about this 'ressurection' is that they used the Family Fortunes 'prize' sound. Why couldn't they have just made a buzzer to sound more like the other noises they use on the show like the contestants buzzers for instance. The titles were stretched but the last few frames were redone in widescreen so that the Blockbusters title wasn't stretched.
DM
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/1_copy16.jpg
Where was this used? I know it was used as a break bumper in the early series, however this was never animated (unless i'm mistaken?)
This was at the end of the original Blockbusters title sequence
Where was this used? I know it was used as a break bumper in the early series, however this was never animated (unless i'm mistaken?)
This was at the end of the original Blockbusters title sequence
:-(
A former member
does anyone have a copy of the "original Blockbusters title sequence ""?