This is a children's show, and yet it carries the same information rate, tone, and delivery as some shows for adults these days. Perhaps the problem with the "dumbing down" of the world is that we insist upon speaking to our children as if they were idiots...
It could be because our attention span is decreasing to the technology being used as a dopamine rush. In the past we didn't get as much dopamine so we could focus which helps us understand and reason better. Nowadays that has gone away in some people.
Felix perhaps it’s just nostalgia but I don’t think they’d go so hard on a technical subject like that. But I haven’t watched any kids TV in years so I wouldn’t really know, let’s be honest.
@@felix2672 Because kids' TV, like everything else, has been dumbed down beyond all recognition - I'm so glad I was born and educated at the time I was.
Within a decade, portable home video cameras were a thing - seems hard to believe this was cutting edge technology as an iPhone can record video (not to tape, of course) from the palm of your hand. I just add that the video quality of this clip from 1972 is very good...well done!!
Amazing tech for its time, but now we can do this on our phones and laptops. I know that progress is inevitable but I much prefer these times. We had three really good tv channels, regional tv that served your region and really cared, and the excitement of early video recorders and CEEFAX/ORACLE.
What 35mm cameras were used in those days by Thames? I know the Arriflex 16BL's were the king of the hill for 16mm filming (notably with Benny Hill). I presume Hill's show occasionally used the Philips LDK-13's in certain scenes of certain sketches? * EDIT: From some pics I saw, especially in 1973-74, Hill was using Arriflex' 35 IIC, as it appears three shows in that series had their filmed inserts at 35mm rather than 16mm. ** I seem to have noticed the Philips LDK-13 in use in the final shot of the "Mervyn Cruddy, Spy Catcher" sketch from Feb. 7, 1974, based on the pic quality and camera movements.
Maybe I'm the only one that thinks this... but the image look of those 70's and 80's (even 90's) cameras were more interesting and fascinating to watch on tv shows and movies than today's modern professional cameras. I'm surprised that with all the technology that we have in 2021 we can't imitate and recreate this same type of film look. Yes, we can try to use filters and do software gymnastics but we can never truly get there 100% percent. The 70's and 80's film look in my opinion it's a magical imaginative look... that captivates a certain emotion and feeling... that other modern looks don't evoke. It's amazing to me that our consumer cameras and iPhones (even pro cameras) with today's technology, can't give us this lost visual art with 100% accuracy. Yes is possible, but you have to work extremely hard to get it just right. My point is that this is not easily available in today's modern era. Such a beautiful fascinating 70's, 80's, 90's film look should be easily available to everybody.
This was very cutting edge technology for 1972, although it certainly wouldn't take a couple of days for the film to be processed! more like an hour or so.
16mm film for TV shows was taken to the lab by motor cycle messengers and back in the editing room within a couple of hours. That's how you saw film of current events on the news.
The notes say 1972. The portable cameras first started being used in 1971 when London Weekend used them on location for the first series of Upstairs Downstairs. As co-ordinator of ITV’s sports output LWT also used them on cup finals. ENG first made an appearance at the smaller ITV stations Westward and Grampian by 1978; trade union refusal to work with such equipment delayed further expansion till the early 1980s.
I would like to know rhe brand of those cameras of British Thames television. Are they German (Telefunken), French (Thomson) or are they made in England? Incredible portable color camera, the shape is uggly, wirdt. But, I wonder, why then TV shows outdoor locations are used cine cameras (16mm I think), and not video camera? Does someone can response me? Greetings from the city of Santiago, capital of Chile.
The camera here is a EMI 2001. They were only made and sold in basically the UK as nobody else wanted them so an NTSC version was never made. EMI were more famous for making records but lost interest in cameras once their contracts to supply had been fulfilled as they were also developing the body 'CAT' scanner which would prove more lucrative. IIRC Using video cameras on location in 1972 was a labor-intensive, cumbersome affair with a large van needed for a generator and to house the videotape machine and was a very poor relation to film with regards to editing, the 16mm camera could be handled by one person and respond immediately to getting a shot whereas a VTR would take time to start up and a shot could be missed in that time.
@@Witheredgoogie Aw, thank you very much for your kindly answering. EMU Odeon here in Chile was very important records company. Also it was Philips, IRT RCA. 😘
Most euros broadcasters at that time used Phillips cameras. The company was born to produce lamps and the tube inside the camera used part of that technology
How I'd love to go back to 1972. Not just because I was young but because the world was not as socially messed up as it is now. (2020). Sure there were horrible things in the 70s (Vietnam war, terrorism and strikes etc) but people knew who they were and _what_ they were. Nowadays, we have microagressions, gender confusion, fragmented community spirit, hatred for our past, internecine social division and racial tension vastly worse than in "the old days". They're were plenty of "no go" areas then but NOTHING remotely like we see nowadays. It's as if we've all drank from a poisoned well and went mad. For any young people reading this, the 1972, without "technology", was happier, more secure and gave young people hope. I was completely non- political until I was in my late 30s. Sadly, 25-30 years ago, the progressives drove a wedge into all branches of humanity. Misguided young people think that the Left are champions of the downtrodden. They aren't. They want power and don't care if they reduce society to ashes, to gain power. Ask anyone who's fled from a socialist regime if socialism works. Right wing politics aren't perfect but are hugely better, safer and more equitable than the alternative. PS. Having lived without smartphones, cheap flights, social media and computers, I can assure everyone, it was no impediment and life was more enjoyable (for the young) than it is now. Technology has benefits, obviously, but the damage it has caused greatly outweighs the advantages. th-cam.com/video/3E3qBZanajo/w-d-xo.html
Susan Stranks....ahhhhh. I was 12 and deeply in love.. Mind you Jenny Hanley (spelling?) I was also deeply in love. Lesley Judd hmm John Noakes ... eh no
No it won't. The TV camera is 625 line PAL color. The 16mm camera could not match it. A 35mm film camera would match or exceed the quality of the TV camera. But the executives would rarely budget for the cost of 35mm film stock.
It’s al depends on the Film and lenses used. It it was 16 mm film 800 ASA the grid was very big. But good 100 ASA Kodak footage was very good. There a few HDTV shows shot in the early 00s and those are really sharper than 576i PAL.
Fascinating to get a proper look at those old TV studio cameras. Great upload, thanks.
Tokiofritz
Susan Stranks is 79 now (2018) - just doesn't seem possible, when you see her as she was in 1972. Sensationally beautiful lady.
2020, she's soon to be 82yo & still doesn't seem possible.
Believe me it’s possible and Sue’s still wonderful.
Really? I was 48 in 2018. Aged just two in 1972, so an awful lot of difference! Too young to understand or remember that period shown here.
This is a children's show, and yet it carries the same information rate, tone, and delivery as some shows for adults these days.
Perhaps the problem with the "dumbing down" of the world is that we insist upon speaking to our children as if they were idiots...
Indeed, and speaking to adults as if they were kids. I honestly believe that it has all been done for a reason. Subtle social engineering.
@shut beak If you're going to wait two years to comment, at least give some effort to looking enjoyable.
@shut beak First impressions win or lose the game. Press that caps-lock key until the light goes out and you'll get a much warmer reception.
Over the years they’ve dumbed down dumb and dumbed dumb that down to even dumber
It could be because our attention span is decreasing to the technology being used as a dopamine rush. In the past we didn't get as much dopamine so we could focus which helps us understand and reason better. Nowadays that has gone away in some people.
Wouldn't get this on kids TV these days. Excellent clip
Why wouldn’t you?
Felix perhaps it’s just nostalgia but I don’t think they’d go so hard on a technical subject like that. But I haven’t watched any kids TV in years so I wouldn’t really know, let’s be honest.
@@felix2672
Because kids' TV, like everything else, has been dumbed down beyond all recognition - I'm so glad I was born and educated at the time I was.
This was Blue Peter on spliffs, all chilled out and no simple talk!
Blue Peter was for the swotty boffins
Twelve year old me was in love with Susan Stranks
Within a decade, portable home video cameras were a thing - seems hard to believe this was cutting edge technology as an iPhone can record video (not to tape, of course) from the palm of your hand. I just add that the video quality of this clip from 1972 is very good...well done!!
Not quite, about 25-30 years after this tech😊
Mick also did a show called Freetime after Magpie ended
And I'm watching this on an iPhone. Ahh technology.
Amazing tech for its time, but now we can do this on our phones and laptops. I know that progress is inevitable but I much prefer these times. We had three really good tv channels, regional tv that served your region and really cared, and the excitement of early video recorders and CEEFAX/ORACLE.
An EMI 2001 which is the one shown was powered up a few years ago and still worked !!!
What 35mm cameras were used in those days by Thames? I know the Arriflex 16BL's were the king of the hill for 16mm filming (notably with Benny Hill). I presume Hill's show occasionally used the Philips LDK-13's in certain scenes of certain sketches?
* EDIT: From some pics I saw, especially in 1973-74, Hill was using Arriflex' 35 IIC, as it appears three shows in that series had their filmed inserts at 35mm rather than 16mm.
** I seem to have noticed the Philips LDK-13 in use in the final shot of the "Mervyn Cruddy, Spy Catcher" sketch from Feb. 7, 1974, based on the pic quality and camera movements.
When Benny Hill sold to the USA the American networks insisted on 35mm film.
@@Ballinalower Benny Hill was sold to America long after it had been made..it depended on the sketch.
Magpie was like Blue Peter for cool kids
Strange you you say that. I came to England from Canada age 11 and found Blue Peter boring but loved Magpie 😊
Susan just turned 86 it’s unbelievable
Phwoar, what a smashing bird!
Sue the ‘real’ alternative to Val.. oh sorry you meant the Magpie!
Maybe I'm the only one that thinks this... but the image look of those 70's and 80's (even 90's) cameras were more interesting and fascinating to watch on tv shows and movies than today's modern professional cameras.
I'm surprised that with all the technology that we have in 2021 we can't imitate and recreate this same type of film look.
Yes, we can try to use filters and do software gymnastics but we can never truly get there 100% percent. The 70's and 80's film look in my opinion it's a magical imaginative look... that captivates a certain emotion and feeling... that other modern looks don't evoke.
It's amazing to me that our consumer cameras and iPhones (even pro cameras) with today's technology, can't give us this lost visual art with 100% accuracy.
Yes is possible, but you have to work extremely hard to get it just right. My point is that this is not easily available in today's modern era. Such a beautiful fascinating 70's, 80's, 90's film look should be easily available to everybody.
They were very saturated because the few color tv had to look very different from bw. Vendors and renters pushed for this profile
You are wanting a vintage look which doesn’t really qualify today😊
This was very cutting edge technology for 1972, although it certainly wouldn't take a couple of days for the film to be processed! more like an hour or so.
16mm film for TV shows was taken to the lab by motor cycle messengers and back in the editing room within a couple of hours. That's how you saw film of current events on the news.
No steadycam back then, just skill. Rolie won a bafta for his camera work.
Steadicams take skill too. The older ones especially.
You are thinking of electornic stabilizers (which do take skill to master)
Steadycams are one of the most difficult cameras to operate.
The Steadicam was invented 1 year later in 1973, but it only became known even after that epic street racing scene in the movie Rock, in 1976.
@@sthigmavideoprodutora8987 Scroll to 3:50 - th-cam.com/video/oayS_OgLvQ8/w-d-xo.html
@@pasamelasal8805it’s mechanical stabilisation and not electronic
This must be about 1974, 1975, because electronic newsgathering cameras came in in the early 80s and replaced film in newsgathering
The notes say 1972. The portable cameras first started being used in 1971 when London Weekend used them on location for the first series of Upstairs Downstairs. As co-ordinator of ITV’s sports output LWT also used them on cup finals. ENG first made an appearance at the smaller ITV stations Westward and Grampian by 1978; trade union refusal to work with such equipment delayed further expansion till the early 1980s.
Great stuff.
I can see this is RCA TK-47, the full size studio colour camera
I would have understood if the EMI 2001 was confused with a Link 110, but the RCA TK-47 has a blue housing.
It’s definitely an emi2001 camera with its box shape but Thames did go RCA in 1980’s
4:20 Thames television invents the Aaron Sorkin "walk and talk".
I remember this as a kid this and why don’t you
Because I was only 1 year old.
@@MrDunkiep I think he means the kids tv show, Why Don't You Just Switch Off Your Television Set And Go Out And Do Something Less Boring Instead.
I think you may have missed the irony that was intended in my comment.😂
@thamesTv do you know the model of the 3rd camera, the one Dave is using? Thank you.
So Kenny Everett took Magpies/Thames unique behind the scenes style and got the "groundbreaking" credit for it?
46 years ago!
Brilliant!
Dave and the sound recordist. Maneuverability!
Directors calling the shots. Brilliant! Absolutely mindblowing.
@@zalibecquerel3463 did you just reply to your own comment?
@@kennarajora6532 I think I was drunk at the time.
Brilliant TV 😀😀
It's "cameras" NOT camera's, unless you're meaning the camera's lens etc. It's plural, so no apostrophe required.
Those were the days when it was fun to overcome !
Sue Stranks, Mick Robertson & Doug Rae.
Simon Lloyd You clearly don't like Magpie so what are you doing here? Take your hate elsewhere.
"280 pounds of brilliant, sophisticated mechanism."
And maybe a thousand £ per pound. 250k I’ve heard per camera.
Love her running around that big camera in her tight top 😂
the 70s when having no bra on was aok for childrens TV.
And flares
It still is. Depending on your climate.
She didn't need one....
@King Brilliant
What went on in the dressing room?
@@pauldunn108 You were told not to ask
I'm sure Blue Peter did the same feature
How can he do with classic leather shoes. The giri instead would be very contemporary today
TV csmera's...what? Why the apostrophe?
It's not spelled csmera
@@4seeableTV It is if you're on a touchscreen & suffering from dermatitus
I would like to know rhe brand of those cameras of British Thames television. Are they German (Telefunken), French (Thomson) or are they made in England? Incredible portable color camera, the shape is uggly, wirdt. But, I wonder, why then TV shows outdoor locations are used cine cameras (16mm I think), and not video camera? Does someone can response me?
Greetings from the city of Santiago, capital of Chile.
The camera here is a EMI 2001. They were only made and sold in basically the UK as nobody else wanted them so an NTSC version was never made. EMI were more famous for making records but lost interest in cameras once their contracts to supply had been fulfilled as they were also developing the body 'CAT' scanner which would prove more lucrative. IIRC Using video cameras on location in 1972 was a labor-intensive, cumbersome affair with a large van needed for a generator and to house the videotape machine and was a very poor relation to film with regards to editing, the 16mm camera could be handled by one person and respond immediately to getting a shot whereas a VTR would take time to start up and a shot could be missed in that time.
@@Witheredgoogie Aw, thank you very much for your kindly answering. EMU Odeon here in Chile was very important records company. Also it was Philips, IRT RCA. 😘
BBC used them until 1991...
Most euros broadcasters at that time used Phillips cameras. The company was born to produce lamps and the tube inside the camera used part of that technology
@@GianniBarberi Philips was a important company manufacturing bulbd here. It is from Holland.
No way a portable color film camera with out a long cable😁 One day no way
Preposterous idea!!
@@kevinbush4300 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤔
Susan Stranks ( great name). Married to Robin Ray.
Blue Peter over on the BBC did a similar item in November 1974, and here is the link - th-cam.com/video/jIxD6LW-JmA/w-d-xo.html
God I fancied her. I believe she was diabetic- as I am now
Oh wow, maybe you've got a chance now!😂
@@MrDunkiep nah mate, she was out of my league then, and no doubt still is. I suppose we could play bingo together in the local old people's 🏠 home
Loike to av ah cuppa' wit dat bird..
Susan Stranks...yeah baby..xxx.mua mua mua
Camera đầu tiên của Đài PTTH Hà Tây thôi :)
How I'd love to go back to 1972. Not just because I was young but because the world was not as socially messed up as it is now. (2020). Sure there were horrible things in the 70s (Vietnam war, terrorism and strikes etc) but people knew who they were and _what_ they were. Nowadays, we have microagressions, gender confusion, fragmented community spirit, hatred for our past, internecine social division and racial tension vastly worse than in "the old days". They're were plenty of "no go" areas then but NOTHING remotely like we see nowadays. It's as if we've all drank from a poisoned well and went mad. For any young people reading this, the 1972, without "technology", was happier, more secure and gave young people hope. I was completely non- political until I was in my late 30s. Sadly, 25-30 years ago, the progressives drove a wedge into all branches of humanity. Misguided young people think that the Left are champions of the downtrodden. They aren't. They want power and don't care if they reduce society to ashes, to gain power.
Ask anyone who's fled from a socialist regime if socialism works. Right wing politics aren't perfect but are hugely better, safer and more equitable than the alternative.
PS. Having lived without smartphones, cheap flights, social media and computers, I can assure everyone, it was no impediment and life was more enjoyable (for the young) than it is now. Technology has benefits, obviously, but the damage it has caused greatly outweighs the advantages.
th-cam.com/video/3E3qBZanajo/w-d-xo.html
It's Blue Peter dialled up to eleven
TV Camera’s what?
Susan Stranks....ahhhhh. I was 12 and deeply in love.. Mind you Jenny Hanley (spelling?) I was also deeply in love. Lesley Judd hmm John Noakes ... eh no
Sarah Greene was a bit of alright, though.
Ahh.....Jenny Hanley! Her beauty and that sexy voice. My schoolboy fantasy.
Imagine if your phone was portable and could do the same thing
Give over, Dave.
Get that apostrophe off the word Camera's please.
I don't remember her...just Jenny Hanley
Hippies
A day when camera will be able to record tape on the fly...
Ah, maybe some day in the future!
Fat shaming the camera man( or camera person) depending on how he identifies on that day. Tut tut.
Hey! 150lbs is not fat!
Where's the damned MUSAK!
Don't wanna pay someone, huh?
*Cameras. Plurals do not require apostrophes. God Almighty. Call yourselves professionals?
That film camera will rape that tv camera in resolution
No it won't. The TV camera is 625 line PAL color. The 16mm camera could not match it. A 35mm film camera would match or exceed the quality of the TV camera. But the executives would rarely budget for the cost of 35mm film stock.
It’s al depends on the Film and lenses used. It it was 16 mm film 800 ASA the grid was very big. But good 100 ASA Kodak footage was very good. There a few HDTV shows shot in the early 00s and those are really sharper than 576i PAL.
the phone has more tech than all of this.