EMI 2001 Broadcast Camera Training Video (BBC) Part 1

[pal625line]

I have tried to download this video ten times. It fails every time, why ?

[Decenium]

@pal625line

Just use something like keepvid, that should work.

[pal625line]

Earlier this year I emailed an retired BBC VT engineer via the web site VT oldboys. It was regarding what I thought was some sort of Cross talk taking place when loud noise took place with a studio scene. Dads Army episode the 'Deadly attachment' a machine gun is used in studio. The result was horizontal lines rather similar to Quad Equalization or line pairing with UHF analogue sporadic reception. Apparently the sound energy rattles the valves in the camera ! hence the effect.

[slievebearnagh]

@pal625line

Yes, it's true. I think it's probably more accurate to say that the effect was the result of the (picture) tubes vibrating, rather than any valves. It happened quite often in high level sound environments such as rock concerts or even at motor racing. The effect is called "Microphony".

[tvcams]

If my eyes don't deceive me, I think the guy speaking is John Henshall who was then a cameraman. I suspect this is Lime Grove? I think the comment about being a terrible presenter is very unfair. With no presentation training or skills, I think he delivers an enormous amount of useful information over a very short period.

[dippey]

@tvcams Yes you are correct on both counts, John informs me that it was recorded in Studio E at Lime Grove.

Yes I have to agree with you re the negative comment on John's presentational skills, in John's words ' In fact it was my first experience in front of camera'. Well in my opinion it was job 'Well Done' from someone who was more used to being behind the camera.

[cinneadboy2]

Thank you, I love Cameras.

[GanEdenAustralia]

Hes a terrible presenter

[BBT609]

How heavy are those cameras? Like just to adjust it to size, and to lower it on the pedestal?

[AidanLunn]

@BBT609 Not very. If you're so interested in cameras, you should know that the air pressure inside the pneumatic pedestal can be adjusted to support the weight of the camera, so pedding up or down won't be too difficult with beasts like these.

[BBT609]

@AidanLunn Just lifting the camera( it off the pedestal ) would need four to six guys to carry it.

[AidanLunn]

@BBT609 I know - I was the one who told you that on another video

[BBT609]

@AidanLunn hahaha. Cameras are very interesting pieces of equipment. What in the cameras then had changed now?

[AidanLunn]

@BBT609 Practically all of the technology has changed. Valves (tubes to you Americans) have long gone (these things used E88CC tubes in the head amplifier stage), and plumbicon pickup tubes went out of fashion with broadcasters about 20 years ago, jut as with Vidicons, Orthicons, Leddicons, Saticons, etc.

They now have some fangled thing called auto-focus, they have image stabilization technology, they don't even need film or tape to record to! Plus many more changes!!!

[AidanLunn]

@AidanLunn *just as

[PeowPeowPeowLasers]

@AidanLunn only amateurs use autofocus.

[AidanLunn]

@PeowPeowPeowLasers I know, hence my use of the word "fangled"

[thealchemist1111]

I enjoyed reading these comments. If anyone is interested in the watch, it's an Omega Speedmaster. Would love to know the date of manufacture.

[gmaildotcom]

@thealchemist1111

The watch is a Speedmaster Mark II, an updated version of the original Speedmaster featuring a cushion case  and a glass crystal. It was manufactured between 1969 to 1971, I believe.

[thealchemist1111]

@gmaildotcom Thank you for the reply. 4 months is not a long time to wait for detailed information.

[gmaildotcom]

@thealchemist1111 Seach for "Omega Speedmaster "Mark" Series of Chrongraphs" on google and see the first result on the chronomaddox website for more detailed information.

[BANGERS68]

i fucking love this vid...thank you so mutch my freind

[porty2001]

To see what pictures a 2001 is capable of, have a look at some of the latest (1970's) doctor who dvd releases. These have been mastered from the original quad transmission tapes so have none of the inherent loss from multiple copying.

[JohnnyTheWolfLupino]

Amazing what you can find on here, probably the best of the plumbicon cameras, an advanced design for the mid 60's.

[matsui2001]

@JohnnyTheWolfLupino It was indeed an advanced camera for the mid 1960,s.

They were YEARS ahead of there time. The only let down was the lack of ACT Anti Comet Tail. It would have been perfect if it had ACT.

[AidanLunn]

@matsui2001 They were out of date by 1970, seeing as most cameras of the early 70s could produce an image equally as good with three tubes.

[matsui2001]

AWESOME.. I wonder how many of the amazing EMI-2001 Cameras still exist.

I loved these They were used right up until July 1991. (They were being phased out in most studios by the mid 1980,s) Thames TV got rid of there EMI-2001,s in 1986.

I think about 650 of these were made.

[joecox1990]

@matsui2001 Yes but Teddington Studios didn't get rid of their 2001's till 1982. They were replaced with RCA TK-47's.

[AidanLunn]

@joecox1990 My dad, an engineer for Yorkshire TV went to see an episode of Benny Hill recorded in 1986. Thames were still using them then!

The BBC kept using them until 1991.

Thames, like all other broadcasters, gradually replaced them studio by studio, beginning their EMI disposal program in 1984 and finishing it around 1987/1988.

The BBC started such a project in 1976, when they ordered their first Link 110s to replace 2001s in TV Centre studio 6.

[matsui2001]

@AidanLunn Yes that is true. I still think the EMI-2001 was the a classic and ahead of its time.

They would have been perfect if it had not been for the nasty comet tail they seemed to produce.

[AidanLunn]

@matsui2001 All tube cameras produced comet tails, not just EMI 2001s.

I actually liked the comet tails. I feel they add to the programme.

[matsui2001]

@AidanLunn. Very true all tube cameras do produce comet tail. But when you look at the quality of the image modern studio camera's produce, And then look at the quality of the image's produced in the 1970's that were recorded onto 2 inch quad VT Film. It apears washed-out and lifeless. Even the first EMI-2001 replacement camera's such as Link 125's etc..When watched now look very poor quality.

[AidanLunn]

@matsui2001 VT is not film. They're two entirely different formats.

Part of the reason for the difference in picture quality will be compression as they copy the content to modern, digital formats. the other reason will be that those cameras were adjusted to look good on TV sets of the time, and not modern TV sets, even recent-ish CRT sets.

[matsui2001]

@AidanLunn You sure know your stuff Sir.

[joecox1990]

@AidanLunn Yeah, comet tails are awesome!

[RealitiesOfFantasy]

@joecox1990 I agree!

[likeluisTV]

@AidanLunn @matsui2001 Even eyes produce “comet tails”. Put something in front of you in front of a light bulb, then, start moving the object (without looking at the light bulb) and you’ll see a comet tail.

[AidanLunn]

@likeluisTV I know, but seeing as eyes don't use thermionic vacuum tube valves, then they're not included in my comment as I wasn't talking about eyes, which are biological.

I was talking about a box of electronics which takes television pictures ;)

[likeluisTV]

@AidanLunn I used to see that “comet tail” in some old videos and always wanted to know why they were there. I thought they were produced by the tape. I’d would like to know if there are some of these cameras still around (not in use, but still working).

[joecox1990]

@AidanLunn Sorry, man. It's what I read on a Benny Hill fansite. But in a screenshot from one episode, there was an RCA TK-47 in the shot. That's what I'm going off of.

[AidanLunn]

@joecox1990 Ah, 1981 was when Thames started their conversion project from EMIs to RCAs and other cameras. not 1984 (mis-type, I use the stacked numbers on the right of the keyboard).

They still finished their conversion project in 1988, though. or so I've been told. As they did it studio by studio - the BH episodes made between 1981 and 1988 would have been made with a mix of cameras as they would have one model of camera in one studio, another model in another studio etc.

[toresbe]

Fascinating historical document!

You know, I really wish I could have tried to operate one of those some time. A real shame functional tube cameras are so impermanent.

[pinkfloydeffect]

Not very smooth speaking but awesome video! Thanks for sharing