"pinnerite" <pinnerite@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:20211224222055.84cb82e611d2f9185ebeb60f@gmail.com...
> You just reminded me of the first colour TV that I ever saw and it was in
> 405 lines. I think it was during the 1956 Radio Hobbies Exhibition at
> Alexandra Palace. It used a round RCA tube with top and bottom masked and
> three chassis on each side in a radiogram style wooden cabinet. Only
> stills were transmitted (presumably from Cystal Palace) but the colour was
> superb.

Would that have used PAL or NTSC? I think the UK (maybe just BBC) were
seriously considering NTSC as the UK's colour standard at one stage.

"williamwright" <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote in message
news:j2mfjaFcdksU3@mid.individual.net...
> On 24/12/2021 10:28, The Other John wrote:
>> Spot wobble was applied to the scans to make the lines touch each other
>> to
>> eliminate line structure.
>
> Oh I remember spot wobble. You could adjust it.

I presume it was a very high frequency (compared with the line frequency)
sine wave added to the vertical scan coils.

As a child I remember dismantling an old 405-line TV (minus its tune and EHT
circuitry) that my grandpa was getting rid of. And that had loads of pots
and switches on the back - horizontal and vertical hold, H and V linearity,
height, width, focus, spot wobble - in addition to the user controls for
brightness, volume and tuning on the front.

On 24/12/2021 23:01, NY wrote:

> As a child I remember dismantling an old 405-line TV (minus its tune and
> EHT circuitry) that my grandpa was getting rid of. And that had loads of
> pots and switches on the back - horizontal and vertical hold, H and V
> linearity, height, width, focus, spot wobble - in addition to the user
> controls for brightness, volume and tuning on the front.

We used to put a dot of white paint at the top of each preset so we
could get things back to normal when the customer had twiddled.

Bill

On Fri, 24 Dec 2021 23:01:02 +0000, NY wrote:

> I presume it was a very high frequency (compared with the line
> frequency)
> sine wave added to the vertical scan coils.

Yes, I think one of the film recorders I worked on used 10MHz, but it's
nearly 60 years ago so I could be mis-remembering.

--
TOJ.

On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 13:19:50 +0000, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-59599741
>
>How do they 'colourise' a black and white recording? Is this a manual
>process or is it automated. I assume you would need to tell the
>computer what each colour is supposed to be. How would the operator
>know?
>
>I think I read once (with Dad's Army) that the black and white
>recording contained hidden colour information for the export version.
>Could this have happened here too?
>
>Also, I see the recording dates from 1970. I thought the main
>channels moved to colour in 1969, so why was it not recorded in
>colour, or maybe it was in colour with the tape found in the attic a
>B&W archive?

I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some irregular
varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this indicates
the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than film moving
vertically.
The credits showed individual attributations for colour recovery,
video restoration and audio restoration. So not colourisation as used
in 'They Shall Not Grow Old' from WW1 b&w film. The colour in that was
rather pale and not all areas were covered, and skin tones tended to
be all the same.
I guess the source was b&w film of the colour TV signal, and recovery
involved picking up the subcarrier dot pattern. Perhaps that explains
the yellow banding due to limiting of the white level causing the dot
pattern for yellow to be attenuated.
--
Dave W

"Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:0t7fsglku28fbgpoleiqhbunsbjtnmalkt@4ax.com...
> I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some irregular
> varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this indicates
> the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than film moving
> vertically.

Or maybe the streaking was on the original master VT, before it was played
back to be film-recorded. I imagine that any noise/dropouts that made it
onto the film recording would then be badly decoded by the colour-recovery
software. I'll watch it some time. I looked at a bit of my recording and the
results looked pretty damn good.

On Sun, 26 Dec 2021 10:58:35 -0000, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:

>"Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:0t7fsglku28fbgpoleiqhbunsbjtnmalkt@4ax.com...
>> I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some irregular
>> varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this indicates
>> the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than film moving
>> vertically.
>
>Or maybe the streaking was on the original master VT, before it was played
>back to be film-recorded. I imagine that any noise/dropouts that made it
>onto the film recording would then be badly decoded by the colour-recovery
>software. I'll watch it some time. I looked at a bit of my recording and the
>results looked pretty damn good.

I thought the results were good. I looked at the history and as far
as I could make out M&W was first shown on BBC2 as the UK's only
colour channel, then later shown on BBC1 for the wider audience. This
suggests it was made as 625 lines. I wonder if this improves the
quality now, but I also wonder how it was shown on BBC1. Maybe the
film was used for BBC1?

On 26/12/2021 12:21 pm, Scott wrote:

> "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>> "Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>>> I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some irregular
>>> varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this indicates
>>> the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than film moving
>>> vertically.
>
>> Or maybe the streaking was on the original master VT, before it was played
>> back to be film-recorded. I imagine that any noise/dropouts that made it
>> onto the film recording would then be badly decoded by the colour-recovery
>> software. I'll watch it some time. I looked at a bit of my recording and the
>> results looked pretty damn good.
>
> I thought the results were good. I looked at the history and as far
> as I could make out M&W was first shown on BBC2 as the UK's only
> colour channel, then later shown on BBC1 for the wider audience. This
> suggests it was made as 625 lines. I wonder if this improves the
> quality now, but I also wonder how it was shown on BBC1. Maybe the
> film was used for BBC1?

The recovered programme was apparently first broadcast in 1970.

By then, BBC1 and ITV were being broadcast on UHF 625 lines colour
(though also still on VHF 405 lines).

I am assuming that the monochrome 405 line signal was derived on the fly
from the 625 line material.

On Sun, 26 Dec 2021 15:28:13 +0000, JNugent <jennings&co@fastmail.fm>
wrote:

>On 26/12/2021 12:21 pm, Scott wrote:
>
>> "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>> "Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>> I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some irregular
>>>> varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this indicates
>>>> the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than film moving
>>>> vertically.
>>
>>> Or maybe the streaking was on the original master VT, before it was played
>>> back to be film-recorded. I imagine that any noise/dropouts that made it
>>> onto the film recording would then be badly decoded by the colour-recovery
>>> software. I'll watch it some time. I looked at a bit of my recording and the
>>> results looked pretty damn good.
>>
>> I thought the results were good. I looked at the history and as far
>> as I could make out M&W was first shown on BBC2 as the UK's only
>> colour channel, then later shown on BBC1 for the wider audience. This
>> suggests it was made as 625 lines. I wonder if this improves the
>> quality now, but I also wonder how it was shown on BBC1. Maybe the
>> film was used for BBC1?
>
>The recovered programme was apparently first broadcast in 1970.

Ah, you're right. I think colour came to BBC1 and the ITV stations in
1969. It's only the archive film that was black and white.

In article <j2rg0dFasp8U1@mid.individual.net>, JNugent
<jennings&co@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On 26/12/2021 12:21 pm, Scott wrote:

> > "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> >> "Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> >>> I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some
> >>> irregular varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this
> >>> indicates the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than
> >>> film moving vertically.
> >
> >> Or maybe the streaking was on the original master VT, before it was
> >> played back to be film-recorded. I imagine that any noise/dropouts
> >> that made it onto the film recording would then be badly decoded by
> >> the colour-recovery software. I'll watch it some time. I looked at a
> >> bit of my recording and the results looked pretty damn good.
> >
> > I thought the results were good. I looked at the history and as far as
> > I could make out M&W was first shown on BBC2 as the UK's only colour
> > channel, then later shown on BBC1 for the wider audience. This
> > suggests it was made as 625 lines. I wonder if this improves the
> > quality now, but I also wonder how it was shown on BBC1. Maybe the
> > film was used for BBC1?

> The recovered programme was apparently first broadcast in 1970.

> By then, BBC1 and ITV were being broadcast on UHF 625 lines colour
> (though also still on VHF 405 lines).

> I am assuming that the monochrome 405 line signal was derived on the fly
> from the 625 line material.

Yes, it was.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

In article <48ngsghpu19fpfpj4tpgteur6ctqpr3npo@4ax.com>,
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Dec 2021 10:58:35 -0000, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:

> >"Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> >news:0t7fsglku28fbgpoleiqhbunsbjtnmalkt@4ax.com...
> >> I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some irregular
> >> varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this indicates
> >> the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than film moving
> >> vertically.
> >
> >Or maybe the streaking was on the original master VT, before it was played
> >back to be film-recorded. I imagine that any noise/dropouts that made it
> >onto the film recording would then be badly decoded by the colour-recovery
> >software. I'll watch it some time. I looked at a bit of my recording and the
> >results looked pretty damn good.

> I thought the results were good. I looked at the history and as far
> as I could make out M&W was first shown on BBC2 as the UK's only
> colour channel, then later shown on BBC1 for the wider audience. This
> suggests it was made as 625 lines. I wonder if this improves the
> quality now, but I also wonder how it was shown on BBC1. Maybe the
> film was used for BBC1?

There were electronic beasts called Standards Converters. Before the time
BBC 1 started on 625 lines there was one on the output of the BBC1 control
rooms, TV Centre ran on 625 throughout.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 26/12/2021 15:28, JNugent wrote:
> On 26/12/2021 12:21 pm, Scott wrote:
>> "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>> "Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>> I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some irregular
>>>> varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this indicates
>>>> the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than film moving
>>>> vertically.
>>
>>> Or maybe the streaking was on the original master VT, before it was
>>> played
>>> back to be film-recorded. I imagine that any noise/dropouts that made it
>>> onto the film recording would then be badly decoded by the
>>> colour-recovery
>>> software. I'll watch it some time. I looked at a bit of my recording
>>> and the
>>> results looked pretty damn good.
>>
>> I thought the results were good.  I looked at the history and as far
>> as I could make out M&W was first shown on BBC2 as the UK's only
>> colour channel, then later shown on BBC1 for the wider audience.  This
>> suggests it was made as 625 lines.  I wonder if this improves the
>> quality now, but I also wonder how it was shown on BBC1.  Maybe the
>> film was used for BBC1?
>
> The recovered programme was apparently first broadcast in 1970.
>
> By then, BBC1 and ITV  were being broadcast on UHF 625 lines colour
> (though also still on VHF 405 lines).
>
> I am assuming that the monochrome 405 line signal was derived on the fly
> from the 625 line material.

In general, how did they do that?

--
Max Demian

"Scott" <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:48ngsghpu19fpfpj4tpgteur6ctqpr3npo@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 26 Dec 2021 10:58:35 -0000, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>
>>"Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:0t7fsglku28fbgpoleiqhbunsbjtnmalkt@4ax.com...
>>> I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some irregular
>>> varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this indicates
>>> the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than film moving
>>> vertically.
>>
>>Or maybe the streaking was on the original master VT, before it was played
>>back to be film-recorded. I imagine that any noise/dropouts that made it
>>onto the film recording would then be badly decoded by the colour-recovery
>>software. I'll watch it some time. I looked at a bit of my recording and
>>the
>>results looked pretty damn good.
>
> I thought the results were good. I looked at the history and as far
> as I could make out M&W was first shown on BBC2 as the UK's only
> colour channel, then later shown on BBC1 for the wider audience. This
> suggests it was made as 625 lines. I wonder if this improves the
> quality now, but I also wonder how it was shown on BBC1. Maybe the
> film was used for BBC1?

Did BBC2 get colour before the UHF versions of BBC1 and ITV? I thought all
channels were upgraded to colour at the same time for any given transmitter.

I've seen 625-line film recordings of programmes, dating from after 625 was
introduced and used for the master version (inevitably, since the programmes
were made in colour). The definition was pretty good. Those are the film
recordings which have been successfully colour-recovered. Somewhere I saw a
side-by-side comparison of a colour VT against a B&W film recording that had
been colour-recovered. The colour VT was better in terms of subtlety of
colour and geometry, but the film recording wasn't too bad if you allowed
for slight parallelogram and barrel distortion because the camera wasn't
quite centralised and the CRT didn't have a flat face. Colours were a little
bit cruder, with patches where the hue and/or saturation varied slightly
over something which the colour VT showed was constant hue and saturation.

"Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:zq2dnQA2LJLYCFX8nZ2dnUU78T2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
>> I am assuming that the monochrome 405 line signal was derived on the fly
>> from the 625 line material.
>
> In general, how did they do that?

I've heard it said that some 405-line output was produced by pointing a 405
camera at a TV screen displaying the 625 version ;-) A TV version of film
recording.

I wonder how it was done analogue-electronically, in the days before
digitisation and mathematical adding of varying proportions of corresponding
pixels on adjacent (*) 625 lines.

ITN had DICE "Digital Intercontinental Conversion Equipment"
https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co34403/dice-digital-field-store-standards-converter
in 1973 so I imagine similar technology (without the extra hassle of
frame-rate interpolation) could have been used for 625->405 conversion.

(*) Having de-interlaced so you were combing adjacent lines rather the
adjacent-odd or adjacent-even, and then re-interlaced afterwards.

In article <zq2dnQA2LJLYCFX8nZ2dnUU78T2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, Max Demian
<max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> On 26/12/2021 15:28, JNugent wrote:
> > On 26/12/2021 12:21 pm, Scott wrote:
> >> "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> >>> "Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >>>> I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some
> >>>> irregular varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so
> >>>> this indicates the source was video tape moving horizontally rather
> >>>> than film moving vertically.
> >>
> >>> Or maybe the streaking was on the original master VT, before it was
> >>> played back to be film-recorded. I imagine that any noise/dropouts
> >>> that made it onto the film recording would then be badly decoded by
> >>> the colour-recovery software. I'll watch it some time. I looked at a
> >>> bit of my recording and the results looked pretty damn good.
> >>
> >> I thought the results were good. I looked at the history and as far
> >> as I could make out M&W was first shown on BBC2 as the UK's only
> >> colour channel, then later shown on BBC1 for the wider audience. This
> >> suggests it was made as 625 lines. I wonder if this improves the
> >> quality now, but I also wonder how it was shown on BBC1. Maybe the
> >> film was used for BBC1?
> >
> > The recovered programme was apparently first broadcast in 1970.
> >
> > By then, BBC1 and ITV were being broadcast on UHF 625 lines colour
> > (though also still on VHF 405 lines).
> >
> > I am assuming that the monochrome 405 line signal was derived on the
> > fly from the 625 line material.

> In general, how did they do that?

50 years ago , I could have told you in precise detail. I maintained the
things.

Simply, a tv line was sampled 576 times - the sample was fed into a
capacitor. That capacitor was read at a slower rate (equivalent to the 405
line rate) and that gave the ourput at the new standard.

> -- M

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

In article <sqa5ts$thm$1@dont-email.me>, NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> "Scott" <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:48ngsghpu19fpfpj4tpgteur6ctqpr3npo@4ax.com...
> > On Sun, 26 Dec 2021 10:58:35 -0000, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >>"Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> >>news:0t7fsglku28fbgpoleiqhbunsbjtnmalkt@4ax.com...
> >>> I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some
> >>> irregular varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this
> >>> indicates the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than
> >>> film moving vertically.
> >>
> >>Or maybe the streaking was on the original master VT, before it was
> >>played back to be film-recorded. I imagine that any noise/dropouts that
> >>made it onto the film recording would then be badly decoded by the
> >>colour-recovery software. I'll watch it some time. I looked at a bit of
> >>my recording and the results looked pretty damn good.
> >
> > I thought the results were good. I looked at the history and as far as
> > I could make out M&W was first shown on BBC2 as the UK's only colour
> > channel, then later shown on BBC1 for the wider audience. This
> > suggests it was made as 625 lines. I wonder if this improves the
> > quality now, but I also wonder how it was shown on BBC1. Maybe the
> > film was used for BBC1?

> Did BBC2 get colour before the UHF versions of BBC1 and ITV? I thought
> all channels were upgraded to colour at the same time for any given
> transmitter.

At source BBC2 (1 July 1967) got colour before BBC1/ITV (November 1969).
The relay station building programmes was in full swing (70 sites per year)
so some areas might well have got all 3 at the same time, if served by a
relay.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On Friday, 24 December 2021 at 10:46:23 UTC, Scott wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Dec 2021 08:24:54 -0000, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
> <bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >That would seem to be a daft thing to do if they had been recorded on tape
> >to start with. Some very old recordings from that time will still play as
> >long as somebody still has the working machines somewhere.
> > Brian
> I think it was the cost of the tape that was prohibitive.

Sony did reel to reel recorders and I remember using one (probably CV series with 1/2" tape) during training in 1978, but AIUI the BBC mostly used Sony https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-matic.

The problem was not just the [high] cost, but the bulk - at one hour per tape they soon filled up the available storage space.

Of course these days you can get an hour's SD video on a micro SD card the size of my little finger nail and weighing <0.3g

jIn article <sqa5tt$thm$2@dont-email.me>,
NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> "Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:zq2dnQA2LJLYCFX8nZ2dnUU78T2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
> >> I am assuming that the monochrome 405 line signal was derived on the
> >> fly from the 625 line material.
> >
> > In general, how did they do that?

> I've heard it said that some 405-line output was produced by pointing a
> 405 camera at a TV screen displaying the 625 version ;-) A TV version of
> film recording.

That was the way we got monochrone pictures from Europe and (with different
equipment) from the USA and Japan.

> I wonder how it was done analogue-electronically, in the days before
> digitisation and mathematical adding of varying proportions of
> corresponding pixels on adjacent (*) 625 lines.

> ITN had DICE "Digital Intercontinental Conversion Equipment"
> https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co34403/dice-digital-field-store-standards-converter
> in 1973 so I imagine similar technology (without the extra hassle of
> frame-rate interpolation) could have been used for 625->405 conversion.

DICE was a 3rd generation machine. The BBC had, prior to that, created 2
different machines, the second of which (Field Store Standard Converter)
saw BBC Research Department get a Queen's Award to Industry. It was used
initially for the Mexico Olympics.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On 26/12/2021 04:16 pm, Max Demian wrote:
> On 26/12/2021 15:28, JNugent wrote:
>> On 26/12/2021 12:21 pm, Scott wrote:
>>> "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>>> "Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>>> I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some irregular
>>>>> varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this indicates
>>>>> the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than film moving
>>>>> vertically.
>>>
>>>> Or maybe the streaking was on the original master VT, before it was
>>>> played
>>>> back to be film-recorded. I imagine that any noise/dropouts that
>>>> made it
>>>> onto the film recording would then be badly decoded by the
>>>> colour-recovery
>>>> software. I'll watch it some time. I looked at a bit of my recording
>>>> and the
>>>> results looked pretty damn good.
>>>
>>> I thought the results were good.  I looked at the history and as far
>>> as I could make out M&W was first shown on BBC2 as the UK's only
>>> colour channel, then later shown on BBC1 for the wider audience.  This
>>> suggests it was made as 625 lines.  I wonder if this improves the
>>> quality now, but I also wonder how it was shown on BBC1.  Maybe the
>>> film was used for BBC1?
>>
>> The recovered programme was apparently first broadcast in 1970.
>>
>> By then, BBC1 and ITV  were being broadcast on UHF 625 lines colour
>> (though also still on VHF 405 lines).
>>
>> I am assuming that the monochrome 405 line signal was derived on the
>> fly from the 625 line material.
>
> In general, how did they do that?

I am sure that someone will be able to answer, but I can't give a
suitably detailed response.

On Sun, 26 Dec 2021 16:40:27 -0000, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:

>"Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
>news:zq2dnQA2LJLYCFX8nZ2dnUU78T2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
>>> I am assuming that the monochrome 405 line signal was derived on the fly
>>> from the 625 line material.
>>
>> In general, how did they do that?
>
>I've heard it said that some 405-line output was produced by pointing a 405
>camera at a TV screen displaying the 625 version ;-) A TV version of film
>recording.
>
>I wonder how it was done analogue-electronically, in the days before
>digitisation and mathematical adding of varying proportions of corresponding
>pixels on adjacent (*) 625 lines.
>
>ITN had DICE "Digital Intercontinental Conversion Equipment"
>https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co34403/dice-digital-field-store-standards-converter
>in 1973 so I imagine similar technology (without the extra hassle of
>frame-rate interpolation) could have been used for 625->405 conversion.
>
>(*) Having de-interlaced so you were combing adjacent lines rather the
>adjacent-odd or adjacent-even, and then re-interlaced afterwards.

Why not use the archive film rather than the 625 line tape? How would
the quality compare. (I realise this would not work for the news and
other live broadcasts.)

On Sun, 26 Dec 2021 17:10:52 +0000 (GMT), charles
<charles@candehope.me.uk> wrote:

>In article <sqa5ts$thm$1@dont-email.me>, NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>> "Scott" <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:48ngsghpu19fpfpj4tpgteur6ctqpr3npo@4ax.com...
>> > On Sun, 26 Dec 2021 10:58:35 -0000, "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> >>"Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>> >>news:0t7fsglku28fbgpoleiqhbunsbjtnmalkt@4ax.com...
>> >>> I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some
>> >>> irregular varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this
>> >>> indicates the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than
>> >>> film moving vertically.
>> >>
>> >>Or maybe the streaking was on the original master VT, before it was
>> >>played back to be film-recorded. I imagine that any noise/dropouts that
>> >>made it onto the film recording would then be badly decoded by the
>> >>colour-recovery software. I'll watch it some time. I looked at a bit of
>> >>my recording and the results looked pretty damn good.
>> >
>> > I thought the results were good. I looked at the history and as far as
>> > I could make out M&W was first shown on BBC2 as the UK's only colour
>> > channel, then later shown on BBC1 for the wider audience. This
>> > suggests it was made as 625 lines. I wonder if this improves the
>> > quality now, but I also wonder how it was shown on BBC1. Maybe the
>> > film was used for BBC1?
>
>> Did BBC2 get colour before the UHF versions of BBC1 and ITV? I thought
>> all channels were upgraded to colour at the same time for any given
>> transmitter.
>
>At source BBC2 (1 July 1967) got colour before BBC1/ITV (November 1969).
>The relay station building programmes was in full swing (70 sites per year)
>so some areas might well have got all 3 at the same time, if served by a
>relay.

We were on a main transmitter and one of our neighbours got a colour
TV right at the start. The problem was people kept turning up at the
door asking to see it.

On Sat, 25 Dec 2021 23:02:13 +0000, Dave W <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
>On Thu, 23 Dec 2021 13:19:50 +0000, Scott
><newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-59599741
>>
>>How do they 'colourise' a black and white recording? Is this a manual
>>process or is it automated. I assume you would need to tell the
>>computer what each colour is supposed to be. How would the operator
>>know?
>>
>>I think I read once (with Dad's Army) that the black and white
>>recording contained hidden colour information for the export version.
>>Could this have happened here too?
>>
>>Also, I see the recording dates from 1970. I thought the main
>>channels moved to colour in 1969, so why was it not recorded in
>>colour, or maybe it was in colour with the tape found in the attic a
>>B&W archive?
>
>
>I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some irregular
>varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this indicates
>the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than film moving
>vertically.
>
>The credits showed individual attributations for colour recovery,
>video restoration and audio restoration. So not colourisation as used
>in 'They Shall Not Grow Old' from WW1 b&w film. The colour in that was
>rather pale and not all areas were covered, and skin tones tended to
>be all the same.
>
>I guess the source was b&w film of the colour TV signal, and recovery
>involved picking up the subcarrier dot pattern. Perhaps that explains
>the yellow banding due to limiting of the white level causing the dot
>pattern for yellow to be attenuated.
Sorry, I should have said b&w tape.
--
Dave W

On Sun, 26 Dec 2021 15:28:13 +0000, JNugent <jennings&co@fastmail.fm>
wrote:
>On 26/12/2021 12:21 pm, Scott wrote:
>
>> "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>> "Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>> I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some irregular
>>>> varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this indicates
>>>> the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than film moving
>>>> vertically.
>>
>>> Or maybe the streaking was on the original master VT, before it was played
>>> back to be film-recorded. I imagine that any noise/dropouts that made it
>>> onto the film recording would then be badly decoded by the colour-recovery
>>> software. I'll watch it some time. I looked at a bit of my recording and the
>>> results looked pretty damn good.
>>
>> I thought the results were good. I looked at the history and as far
>> as I could make out M&W was first shown on BBC2 as the UK's only
>> colour channel, then later shown on BBC1 for the wider audience. This
>> suggests it was made as 625 lines. I wonder if this improves the
>> quality now, but I also wonder how it was shown on BBC1. Maybe the
>> film was used for BBC1?
>
>The recovered programme was apparently first broadcast in 1970.
>
>By then, BBC1 and ITV were being broadcast on UHF 625 lines colour
>(though also still on VHF 405 lines).
>
>I am assuming that the monochrome 405 line signal was derived on the fly
>from the 625 line material.
The credits said 1971
--
Dave W

"R. Mark Clayton" <notyalckram@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:783e60a2-2ee1-4816-8f2d-02ca35521dben@googlegroups.com...
> On Friday, 24 December 2021 at 10:46:23 UTC, Scott wrote:
>> On Fri, 24 Dec 2021 08:24:54 -0000, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
>> <bri...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >That would seem to be a daft thing to do if they had been recorded on
>> >tape
>> >to start with. Some very old recordings from that time will still play
>> >as
>> >long as somebody still has the working machines somewhere.
>> > Brian
>> I think it was the cost of the tape that was prohibitive.
>
> Sony did reel to reel recorders and I remember using one (probably CV
> series with 1/2" tape) during training in 1978, but AIUI the BBC mostly
> used Sony https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-matic.

I thought broadcasters tended to regard U-Matic as an ENG format for
portable cameras and camcorders, but never used it for static
stupid/location recording when the higher quality of 2" Quad or the various
helical 1" formats was needed.

> The problem was not just the [high] cost, but the bulk - at one hour per
> tape they soon filled up the available storage space.
>
> Of course these days you can get an hour's SD video on a micro SD card the
> size of my little finger nail and weighing <0.3g

You can get a damn sight more than one hour of broadcast video on modern
micro-SD card. I've got 32 and 64 GB cards, and 128 and maybe 256 are
available. Broadcast video is at about 1.2 GB/hour (*) for SD and about 1.5
GB/hour for HD (5x as many pixels, but H264 is more efficient coding than
MP2). I'm not sure what the native bit-rate of an HD master is, though -
probably quite a lot more than that).

(*) Assuming modern (not archive from analogue) "clean" video, on BBC 1/2/4.
ITV is a *lot* lower - about 0.6 GB/hour. BBC material from PAL analogue
videotape is around 4-5 GB/hour because the noise added by the analogue
process and the PAL artefacts doesn't compress so well. Obviously MP2 and
H264 can be compressed as much or as little as you like, but the same degree
of compression and therefore same file size produces more compression
artefacts with a noisy source than a clean source, so the BBC wind th ebit
rate up.

On 26/12/2021 11:24 pm, Dave W wrote:

> JNugent <jennings&co@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> On 26/12/2021 12:21 pm, Scott wrote:
>>> "NY" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>>> "Dave W" <davewi11@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>>> I've just watched this - it was very good. I did notice some irregular
>>>>> varying horizontal banding on yellow stage cutains, so this indicates
>>>>> the source was video tape moving horizontally rather than film moving
>>>>> vertically.
>
>>>> Or maybe the streaking was on the original master VT, before it was played
>>>> back to be film-recorded. I imagine that any noise/dropouts that made it
>>>> onto the film recording would then be badly decoded by the colour-recovery
>>>> software. I'll watch it some time. I looked at a bit of my recording and the
>>>> results looked pretty damn good.
>
>>> I thought the results were good. I looked at the history and as far
>>> as I could make out M&W was first shown on BBC2 as the UK's only
>>> colour channel, then later shown on BBC1 for the wider audience. This
>>> suggests it was made as 625 lines. I wonder if this improves the
>>> quality now, but I also wonder how it was shown on BBC1. Maybe the
>>> film was used for BBC1?
>
>> The recovered programme was apparently first broadcast in 1970.
>> By then, BBC1 and ITV were being broadcast on UHF 625 lines colour
>> (though also still on VHF 405 lines).
>> I am assuming that the monochrome 405 line signal was derived on the fly
>> from the 625 line material.
>
> The credits said 1971

There were two M&W shows repeated on Christmas Day:

(a) The Christmas Show from 1971* (the one with Andre Previn, Shirley
Bassey and Glenda Jackson) and

(b) the previously "lost" show from 1970. The blurb on the iPlayer page
says it was first TX on 8th October 1970. This was the one found in an
attic (and which featured Kenny Ball's Jazzmen as guest artistes).

The lost & recovered 1970 edition didn't have an original (C) date (it
wasn't the custom at the time), but added captions credited the
restoration technical people and added a (C) date of MMXXI.

[* I remember that we were watching TV in my little Highgate flat on the
evening of Christmas Day 1971, but distinctly remember seeing the movie
"Oklahoma!" on LWT. It must have been ITV 'cos we only had 405 line TV,
so no BBC2.]