Magpie-Behind The Scenes October 1972

Behind the scenes of the popular Thames children's show Magpie in October of 1972, featuring the EMI 2001 color camera, the Arriflex 16BL 16mm film camera, and the Philips LDK13 color "backpack" camera.

Category:

Film & Animation

Tags:

• magpie
• behind
• the
• scenes
• 1972
• color

[clemstevenson]

You simply can't get the high grade coal required to run those cameras nowadays.

[callwithcurrentconti]

I'm amazed - I haven't cringed yet. I don't feel patronized. Perfect; I'm learning something from a kids' show that doesn't speak down.

...where have they all gone?

[n1a31y161r]

Susan Stranks. I definitely remember her. Very posh listening to her now all these years later. Never realised it at the time.

[71shoelover]

@clemstevenson Very true. Megapixels are pointless if the sensor is crap.

[clemstevenson]

@71shoelover Megapixels become pointless, if the sensor is crap. I, for one, can't print anything larger than A4 on my laser printer. Indeed, I don't think that my laser printer can reproduce anything at such a high resolution. As a matter of fact, I can see the resolution limitations of my laser printer with a magnifying glass.

[71shoelover]

@clemstevenson Nikon did just that with the D40 DSLR camera. They concentrated on sensor speed and quality rather than just cram the sensor full of pixels. Like Canon the canon 550d

[clemstevenson]

@71shoelover Instead of extra megapixels, it would be better to just to concentrate on the maximisation of sensor speed & quality. In 2011, Hasselblad started shipping a 200 megapixel camera. Yes, 200 megapixel! It's a hellishly expensive camera, and I'd wager that 200 megapixels is better than the fine grain of emulsions used in yesteryear's 120-size roll films.

[71shoelover]

@clemstevenson You are 100% correct. My friend has a camera that can produce 18-megaixel stills. No point at all. Total overkill. I will be keeping my 6-megapixel Nikon D40 Camera until it no longer works.

[clemstevenson]

@71shoelover Very true. I actually don't need more than 3-megapixels tops with a point-and-shoot, although more pixels allow for heavy cropping. I've got one camera that can give me 12-megapixels. That size is a complete waste of memory space. I've got a camcorder that can also produce 14-megapixel stills. No point at all.

[71shoelover]

@clemstevenson I 100% agree with you ,My 6-Megapixel camera Nikon D40 DSLR camera has changable lens at it will PISS ALL OVER ANY 16-Megapixel point and shoot cameras with fixed-focus lens for image quality. The pictures my Nikon D40 DSLR camera produce are up there with the best.

[clemstevenson]

@71shoelover 6-megapixels is more than adequate. But it gets me when people tell me about their 7-megapixel cameras that only have fixed-focus lenses. This guy was mocking my cameras, because they had auto-focus via telescopic lens tubes. He thought that my cameras were really stupid. But he had 7-megapixels of definition, and a fixed-focus plastic lens? That's like using classic Ilford FP4 film in a box brownie.

[clemstevenson]

@71shoelover Yes, I've found info on Wikipedia. The 2001 started off under the prototype title of 2000 (first used by the BBC in 1967, and fitted with vidicon tubes). The 2001 included fourth tube, supplying luminance data. It was re-launched as the 2001 in 1968, the fitted with plumbicon tubes. The BBC acquired some old 2001s from ATV when they purchased the Elstree site. Having inherited more 2001s, the BBC were able to keep the old 2001 cameras going until 1991, through cannibalisation.