TV Video Formats?

[Hulk]

What formats was TV recorded in the '50's, '60's, and '70's.

I'm curious. I assume it was shot using magnetic media.

There is such a wide variation in TV quality. Some old stuff looks great while some new programs are truly hideous.

I know a lot of it has to do with production budgets, cameras, lighting crews, etc.. But I'm just wondering if anyone knows how the format has evolved.

- Mark

[Jerry Jones]

I remember using 3/4" tape formats in the 80s.

Those gave way to Betacam SP in the 90s.

I seem to recall some conversations with some grizzled old veterans of video and they told me that video was recorded to one-inch tape formats in the early years.

There's an historical summary here:

http://tinyurl.com/ydnopz

I found it interesting.

Jerry Jones

http://www.jonesgropu.net

[Dr Mordrid]

In the 50's they shot "kinescope" which at best was done by shooting a high rez 5" TV screen synced with a medium format film movie camera & at worst from a TV using small format film at the wrong frame rate, which explains the iffy quality. Kinescope was actually the name of picture tube. AKA: "kine" or "telerecording".

I go back to the late 60's 2" AMPEX 1500/660 tape machines (3.75 in/sec, 2-head helical, 12.5" reel)

[Brian Ellis]

Magnetic recording became mainstream only about 1963 with the Ampex 2" tape machine, a massive console weighing nearly a tonne. Before that, the only practical way was filming a precision monitor with a special machine that ensured the 35 mm or 16 mm film pulldown occurred during the frame synch, although the phosphors used in the monitor were medium persistence, to ensure the image of each frame was integral. The telecine machine used for playback was initially an enormous device with a rotating drum attached to which was one mirror per line. The cathode ray tube scanner arrived in the 1950s and used linear film transport and had two field rasters twice the height of the frame each with a photomultipler tube generating the signal. Of course, this was always monochrome.

Outside broadcasts were inevitably filmed, usually 16 mm with eg Arriflex cameras piloting a Nagra sound recorder, right up to the mid 1970s, when the first suitable ½" tape machines, in a van, could record magnetically in the field, started to become mainstream. However film did continue for another 10 years because a 2-man team could get to events faster than setting up a van. Live outside broadcasting started in the mid 1950s with microwave links but were limited to line-of-sight from the event to the studio in good weather.

Because film was expensive and slow to process most TV broadcasting was live until the Ampex recorder made its debut. Only major happenings were recorded, although the millions of metres of news film formed a valuable historical archive. The sound was mostly transferred from the Nagra to a magnetic stripe on the film during the editing process. Direct stripe recording in the camera never took off seriously, because the quality requirements were such that the camera would be too heavy and bulky (same with optical) and sound editing with either would be almost impossible.

Because of the quasi-mandatory live studio broadcasting, hours were often limited to the evenings, perhaps 4 h/day from 1830 to 2230, especially during the week, at least to start with. News events were often 24 h late because of the time needed to develop and edit the film. Many shows were very low-budget for obvious reasons. Notwithstanding, there were some very good ones. Unpredictable "animals in the studio" shows were popular. Otherwise, much time was filled with B-rated or very old A-rated movies, with doubtful video quality.

[Hulk]

Ah! Great information guys!

Thanks. Very interesting.

How far we've come.

So every show intended for TV that was recorded on magnetic media will forever be a SD product right? Whereas many old movies (films) can be scanned to a high definition format?

Is there right?

- Mark

[paulw]

I seem to remember allot of US TV shows like Star Trek were done with 35mm film and then reduced down to 16mm or tape for airing..

[Brian Ellis]

The Ampex machine shown by Dr M is quite a late model, the last before they went to 1" tape, and was "portable" (still needed 2-4 men to carry it!). Sony pioneered the first truly portable ½" recorder c. 1966-7: weighed about 30 kg, as I remember lugging one about. The video (b/w) quality was execrable, though, and the studios never really liked them, not even for news reporting. I think it was designed more for the prosumer market, as it came with a cam with a ½" plumbicon tube.

I guess no studio today has the means to play 2" Ampex tape. Any archival material was probably transferred to Betamax tape before they were scrapped and thence to digital. In any case, the quality of 40-y-o tape would not be much good, by now, not that the original Ampex was brilliant by today's standards: probably no better than ordinary VHS today. If I remember correctly, the video bandwidth was 2 MHz at -10 dB, which means the horizontal resolution would not be better than ~200 equivalent lines.

Any existing 35 mm (or bigger) cine film could certainly be scanned into HD, possibly even 16 mm, but there would be no point in doing this for film records of TV shows/events.

[Dr Mordrid]

BTW: because of Star Trek's 40th anniversary they remastered the original series and updated many of the effects with modern CGI including the Enterprise itself. They're showing now on the G4 network.