HD : BBC Parliament coming to BBC2.

[Horizon]

Chris, what's your opinion on the cost issue/repeat fees issue if the BBC brought all its programming inhouse again, as it used to be? Do you think that would help to reduce costs, make no difference?

I'm coming at this not necessarily from a "lets repeat primetime schedules at night" point of view, although I would quite like to see this, but rather from a lets have +1 channels.

I was very unhappy when the BBC dropped its plans for BBC1 +1 and didn't really get their reasoning for doing so.

---------- Post added at 17:35 ---------- Previous post was at 17:33 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris

Final thought, I don't know what it's like on Freeview but Freesat carries a national variant of bbc2 in HD, so anyone watching BBC parliament at 4am on bbc2, on satellite at least, will be able to see it in HD.

Which of course was Richard's original point and something I would like to see.

My guess is it would be cheaper, because when they commission big ticket shows from outside companies (Life on Mars, for example) they bankroll the production but then only get first run and iplayer for a limited time. If they wanted to show it again they would have to buy the rights from the production company. That is necessarily going to be more expensive than paying repeat fees direct to the performers (though probably simpler, as you need to get permission from the performers as well).

It won't happen though. The stipulation that the BBC must source a proportion of its original content out-of-house has been in its royal charter for decades now and has been riotously successful at growing tv production expertise in the uk. Nobody is about to change that.

[Chris James]

For the second time, Parliament is not transmitted in HD.

Originally Posted by Chris James

For the second time, Parliament is not transmitted in HD.

Yes, but at least some of its content is produced in HD. If it is simulcast on an HD stream then whatever had been produced in HD will show in HD.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Chris

Because I never said it was unaffordable - I simply pointed out that there was a cost that most people don't appreciate (repeat fees) whereas simulcasting current affairs content does not have that cost. The cost issue is nothing to do with breaking the bank. It's simply a matter of priorities. They choose not to spend money on repeating entertainment shows overnight in order to have more money for content at times of day when viewing figures will be higher. If the decision was cost neutral, and they thought they would serve more viewers, and they thought it would pass a public service value test, then they might decide to repeat their entertainment content overnight. But they haven't done that.

Your problem, as always, is that you find it hard to process the fact that different businesses, just like different people, have different priorities. Just because 5USA's business priority means funds are available to run repeats of its entertainment content overnight, it does not follow that the BBC's priorities are the same and their business decisions will be similar. Just because 5USA's business model aligns with your idea of what a broadcaster should be doing overnight, it does not follow that all of them must.

Final thought, I don't know what it's like on Freeview but Freesat carries a national variant of bbc2 in HD, so anyone watching BBC parliament at 4am on bbc2, on satellite at least, will be able to see it in HD.

Every platform now has BBC2 HD.

Originally Posted by Chris James

For the second time, Parliament is not transmitted in HD.

It isn't, but BBC Parliament doesn't only show material originating from the Palace of Westminster.

I'm pretty sure that the American Presidential footage will be in HD.

[Horizon]

Originally Posted by Chris James

For the second time, Parliament is not transmitted in HD.

Got that, but BBC Parliament has programmes that are not shown elsewhere. So if they did do coverage of the US elections and it wasn't already carried by the BBC News channel, there is a opportunity to see BBC Parliament's coverage in HD if it were shown on BBC2 after hours.

BBC Parliament also shows stuff from Hollyrood (Scotch parliament), Welsh Assembly, NI Assembly, European Parliament and sometimes court. It's not just Westminster. I don't know if they still show C-Span stuff too, they used to.

[ozsat]

It is only carrying one hour of highlights each night - not the whole night!

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Starting 5/9/16, BBC2 will be carrying BBC Parliament programming overnight.

Not sure if this is a simulcast, a selection of their programmes or whilst the US Presidential elections are on.

This will also give them the opportunity to show material in HD.

Thoughts?

[tweetiepooh]

Never see the point of getting all content in HD. Partly because our 28" CRT TV doesn't do HD but much content isn't improved anyway. And HD fills the Tivo too much.

Our parliament doesn't warrant HD (some parliamentarians shouldn't be seen in that much detail), the Thai one does as it can have much more action :P

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh

Never see the point of getting all content in HD. Partly because our 28" CRT TV doesn't do HD but much content isn't improved anyway. And HD fills the Tivo too much.

Our parliament doesn't warrant HD (some parliamentarians shouldn't be seen in that much detail), the Thai one does as it can have much more action :P

You might change your view if you had a 49" screen!

[Horizon]

...yep, I used to have the same view as "tweetie" (change of username?) until I got a larger HD tv. Basically you need HD content, otherwise it looks awful.

It's a great shame that all our old tv shows were not filmed on 35mm film, unlike American shows.

[tweetiepooh]

Were looking at a 150" screen but wife wouldn't let me spend the 700k :P

Can't see us replacing TV until this one breaks and then given our budget and room size would go smaller and better quality. Don't want the TV to dominate. New features would be nice though.

Originally Posted by Horizon

...yep, I used to have the same view as "tweetie" (change of username?) until I got a larger HD tv. Basically you need HD content, otherwise it looks awful.

It's a great shame that all our old tv shows were not filmed on 35mm film, unlike American shows.

The film stock has deteriorated quite badly in some cases, and restoration is an expensive process that is reserved for the few jewels in the crown that justify it (Star Trek, for example, where every excuse to reissue the whole thing on the latest portable media is welcomed with open wallets).

Once the BBC started archiving on videotape (as opposed to wiping tapes for re use and archiving only select episodes on film), their future was secured. You'll never see Fawlty Towers in HD, but it can at least be replayed whenever required without the recoding medium going off.

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by Chris

Once the BBC started archiving on videotape (as opposed to wiping tapes for re use and archiving only select episodes on film), their future was secured. You'll never see Fawlty Towers in HD, but it can at least be replayed whenever required without the recoding medium going off.

Unfortunately videotape is also subject to deterioration with time especially if badly stored*. Re-recording to new tape is subject to reduction of quality too. Only storing digitally with minimum compression on HDDs or SSDs is the secure media and even then duplicate copies are a must.

* Variations of temperature and humidity cause the tape pack to move against itself on the reels which results in magnetic "Print through" which can eventually render the tape unplayable. Same applies to video cassettes. including domestic formats.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by heero_yuy

Unfortunately videotape is also subject to deterioration with time especially if badly stored*. Re-recording to new tape is subject to reduction of quality too. Only storing digitally with minimum compression on HDDs or SSDs is the secure media and even then duplicate copies are a must.

* Variations of temperature and humidity cause the tape pack to move against itself on the reels which results in magnetic "Print through" which can eventually render the tape unplayable. Same applies to video cassettes. including domestic formats.

As well as the problems that you mention, there is also the cost and storage space to think about.

Also, I used to assume that archiving only had to be done once, but as technology moves on and new technology in time becomes obsolete, it has to be done repeatedly.

Some people transferred their vinyl first onto CD's and then onto their computers, but how long before they will need to do it again? I also assume that the quality will decrease each time.

I recently asked someone who worked on the comedy programme 'George And Mildred' as to why there were artefacts all over the place, particularly on Yootha Joyce's hair and clothes.

He explained that the process above has led to the repeats on ITV3 suffering from this and that they were not originally transmitted as they are today due to rigourous quality control.

There is quality loss whenever the content is played out from an analogue source to another analogue source. It is possible to copy from digital to digital without loss of quality, provided lossy compression hasn't been involved.