[backstage] Reporting audio oddities to Radio engineers?
Listening to 1Xtra tonight (RAM Takeover on Bailey's show), noted there was a ~1dB discrepancy between L and R channels (L +1dB) on the online stream. Is there any kind of public-facing address or webform which actually eventually gets to BBC engineers so they can investigate any potential dodgy wiring or imbalances in station signal paths? I thought it might've been a dodgy mixer or CDJ interconnect / RCA cable, but as Bailey's show changed the audio imbalance is still present in the stream so it looks like there's something going on further down the signal chain which is affecting the playout signal. Hardly a world-ending problem, but I can hear the off-centre pan! Very annoying. ;-) And yeah, already verified my internal balance and machine settings are fine. Any pointers Beeb insiders? (incidentally - the encoding quality of the dubstep podcast MP3s is dire - listen to Mistajam speaking and all the phasing and artifacts! Link to a sample podcast: http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/1xtra/mistajam/mistajam_20110725-1900a.m p3 The same problem used to happened with iPlayer-encoded MP3s of radio shows before they 'retired' the format... Are the Beeb using some wacko nonstandard encoder for what I can only presume are AAC-MP3 transcodes? ffmpeg can do the same thing with far better quality!) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] OT: Name That Bizarre Sound at the Bottom of the MW Spectrum
I recorded this a while ago (3rd of January 2011) when I was scanning MW and LW bands late at night... as one is wont to do when one is bored. This was at my Dad's old place in Steeple Claydon, picked up right at the bottom end of the MW band: http://chriswoods.co.uk/files/ste-036_strange_mediumwave_signal.mp3 I turn to the UK Radio Frequency Bands website at such moments: http://ukspec.tripod.com/spectrum.html If this is right at the bottom end of MW, it might be the Navtex at 518KHz if your radio can tune that low on MW. [snip] From the document above: 87.34.. Eurosignal paging, to 87.415 (4 x 25kHz channels A-D) heard in UK from Europe. info. Used to be a constant AM tone with pips and doodle-doo noises, as featured in the song Professionnels by Air (Premiers Symptomes), and could be heard on tuners at 87.5 Changed in March 1998 to bursts of FM data. French channel is 87.39 (C) But I'm no ham so others more knowledgeable might be able to step in here. Incroyable! You've nailed the second sound as Eurosignal paging, and you were bang on. After more than a decade, I finally know what it is. It's eery to hear almost the exact same sound emanating from speakers after all these years... Was my explanation that accurate or do you just have ninja Google abilities? I bought 10,000Hz Legend when it first came out, never even heard (or knew they released) an album called Premiers Symptomes. Crikey. Having just reached the end of Les Professionels, I've just realised everyone who ever uses the track only uses the portion which loops the ending guitar riff. Sadly I don't think the first sound is NAVTEX, I played the file back through decoding software (admittedly a poor recording) but it just decoded nonsense characters even without Strict FEC enabled (see screengrab: http://chriswoods.co.uk/files/2011_07_21-frisnit_navtex_wrongsignal.png ) Also the spectral information wasn't focused in the correct band. I may try and tune in tonight though with the old Sanyo boombox radio I have, see if I can pick something up at midnight... Thanks for IDing the mystery FM audio though! - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
[backstage] OT: Name That Bizarre Sound at the Bottom of the MW Spectrum
Sorry this isn't exactly BBC-related, but sure there's enough collective knowledge of radio and bizarre 'broadcasts' to help me identify this mystery sound. I recorded this a while ago (3rd of January 2011) when I was scanning MW and LW bands late at night... as one is wont to do when one is bored. This was at my Dad's old place in Steeple Claydon, picked up right at the bottom end of the MW band: http://chriswoods.co.uk/files/ste-036_strange_mediumwave_signal.mp3 Sorry for poor quality reception, this was the best I could pick it up on the handheld Sony radio I was using. (used an H2 pointed at the speaker!) Anybody have any idea what it is? There's also a very strange broadcast I picked up on 87.5FM in the south of France many years ago which has stuck with me vividly ever since. I never recorded it - used to listen on my walkman when in the car on holiday - but could synthesise it. Was only well receivable in and around the town of Collioure; a repeating pattern of pure sine tones (mostly wavering around two semitones with occasional arpeggios from a lower note), some slight variations in the pattern - the 'sequence' would always end with a 'signoff' note which would sound like one half of a dialup handshake procedure before beginning again. This was in a coastal area with several bays, I was wondering whether it might have been an automated weather buoy / weather station or somesuch similar? If there's any hams or radio buffs who enjoy identifying strange noises and transmissions get in touch on- or off-list :-) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
[backstage] Problem with newsvote BBC email services double opt-in?
A while back I tried to sign up to BBC News updates but the double opt-in doesn't appear to be working for me - I receive the confirm your email message but the confirmation link just takes me to the fire and brimstone 500 error page. Anybody else seeing this? Should it be happening (or has the service been grandfathered in for existing users but not working for new registrations)? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
FW: [backstage] Problems with iPlayer video - how to report?
Resending this as it doesn't appear to have made the list. -Original Message- From: Christopher Woods [mailto:chris...@infinitus.co.uk] Sent: 22 February 2011 13:36 To: 'backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk' Subject: RE: [backstage] Problems with iPlayer video - how to report? Chris, Can't speak for my colleagues elsewhere in radio, but WS doesn't transcode between codecs anywhere in our longform workflow and never has done. I did a quick bit of testing and it appears that WS Listen Again material is only available through /iplayer as 64kbps AAC+, so it all sounds a bit sub-par compared with domestic channels' 128kbps AAC. Perhaps it's ingested in a different way or do you encode internally then deliver to the iPlayer team? I have noticed the PIDs for WS material have a different range (p*** as opposed to b***)... To show you what I mean about the MP3 vs AAC quality difference, here's a quick quality comparison (randomly chose an episode of The Archers, from Radio 4 the other day). The first time is the MP3 encode, the second is the AAC encode (served by default through the Flash player): http://bit.ly/bbciprtest1al (~3.8MB) Even on average speakers you should be able to hear a difference - the MP3 is rumblier, warbly and speech is distinctly less clear with noticeable distortion under the main frequency of the speaker's voice. If you use headphones or good monitors you should be able to clearly hear the inferior quality of the MP3 version. Comparing the two clips spectrally also shows a visible difference, there's less 'cohesion' in the MP3 clip, what appears to be double-encoded noise and the frequency ranges containing the speech energy are less distinct. Neither speech nor musical content comes off well in the MP3 versions - either the iPlayer's using an *AWFUL* MP3 codec (because both the AAC and MP3 files are 128kbps) or the MP3 version is being transcoded from the original AAC source, which would explain a lot. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Problems with iPlayer video - how to report?
Chris, You can find links to service status and a contact form from here: http://iplayerhelp.external.bbc.co.uk/help/using_bbc_iplayer/t ech_report Comments about World Service content do get through to me, so filling in the form does work. Super : Whilst I have your eye as such, are the MP3 versions of iPlayer radio content still transcodes from AAC or are they encoded from the source feed in parallel? I always noticed in the past whenever I used get_iplayer to grab some radio shows for my DAP the MP3 versions (via flashaudio etc) were noticeably poorer quality than the original raw AACs; warbly, burbly sound, what sounded like transcoding artefacts and distortion of the stereo imaging. Has the MP3 encoding workflow for radio programmes changed at all since last year? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Problems with Listen Again on Frontier Silicon radios
Just using belt and braces... But I had issues playing Pick of the pops and Sounds of the 70s on listen again on my Roberts wifi radio. already filed a problem this morning. programmes would stop 5 mins in. Running potp now, but it's only filled the immediate use buffer, rather than letting the packets come thick and fast - Roberts kit prefers 3 or 4 bars of overflow... this happened once before... Seemed to be a router choking iPlayer playout rather than sending the data out quickly. i run a Stream 83i. Hi Alex, what's your ISP, what's your router and what times have you observed these problems happening?
[backstage] Problems with iPlayer video - how to report?
Watching the AV Referendum Speeches there's a LOT of picture sound breakup, looks like a bad OB sat feed. http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00zb198/House_of_Commons_AV_Referendum _Speeches/ To whom should this problem be reported and what's the best way to report technical problems in future if/when this backstage list gets closed? Cheers Chris - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Streaming video on variable bandwidth connection?
-Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Sam Smith Sent: 06 February 2011 20:10 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Cc: friends-of-backst...@pielists.net Subject: Re: [backstage] Streaming video on variable bandwidth connection? something like skype which copes with that well, and then have something at the other end that pushes it out to other places? have run a number of video events across 3G links, and it works relatively well. Although if you're completely offline, it's not going to work that well (backup phone call?) another thing I've found useful is to have a few different phone networks available - one networks dead spot might be next to another network's basestation The T-Mobile / Orange network sharing came in useful for me last weekend... If you're going to consider Skype, also consider Google Chat's video technology (supposedly superior to Skype) and which uses licensed technology from Vidyo. Interesting video with people from Vidyo and conference demonstration with cameras of varying quality: http://pritecho.com/2010/04/vidyo-better-videoconferencing-than-skype/ - I'd imagine that Google's implementation has some kind of adaptive bandwidth management. (Watching the video through, apparently up to 50 people can conference in! some other quite nifty features in their own smallbiz package, but you'd expect it for the price of the package they were using in the demo) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Streaming video on variable bandwidth connection?
I'm trying to work out what technology to use I have no experience in this myself but I've been impressed by the reliability and quality of the LiveU system. Leo Laporte (and co) used it to do walkabout live coverage of CES 2011 and it really held up well, even in the LVCC (where NOBODY can get 3G signal). That said, it was using four 3G cards, one from each major US telco, to load balance! A good chunk of the backpack is just batteries, surprise surprise... Perhaps see if you can find any literature about what hardware they ended up using? There *must* be some, I imagine most of the gear is just OOTB with some very clever coding running the show. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
[backstage] Enabling NVIDIA GPU acceleration on iPlayer videos...
I got a Lenovo IdeaPad S12 netbook with an integrated NVIDIA ION GPU for Christmas :-) It's a 1.6GHz device which I can easily top out the CPU on, but with DXVA support and an HDMI port it becomes an ideal low-cost HTPC substitute for occasional viewing. The first thing I set off to try was the GPU-accelerated 720p and 1080p DXVA support, which works beautifully. With the latest Adobe Flash plugin, YouTube (and a few other sites) also happily play 1080p. However, I can barely manage to play the HQ SD videos on the iPlayer, with even worse results on the HD content - although Flash can (and should) hardware accelerate any H.264 material it renders, for some reason it's not kicking in on the iPlayer vids. If I get_iplayer an HD programme and then play it back in Media Player Classic, it plays beautifully, so GPU horsepower isn't the problem here. Is this a known issue or is there something specific about the coding of the web player? (any insight appreciated) Cheers Chris - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Enabling NVIDIA GPU acceleration on iPlayer videos...
It's proably the h264 decoder of the flash player, it's quite buggy and a bit of a cpu hog, Good news is adobe are making it better all the time, so a lot of the early buggyiness is gone, it's just the cpu concerns that are about, Indeed, 10.2 is much better and regular 1080p plays at 30fps thanks to the NVidia ION GPU acceleration. (I've also tried both the 10.1 beta and the final release as bundled in Chrome). Unfortunately the iPlayer web player doesn't seem to be presenting the H.264 video in a manner in which the ION GPU acceleration can be enabled to accelerate the video decoding, which seems to be the problem here. (given YouTube works perfectly playing 1080p with GPU acceleration and the iPlayer's 720p overwhelms the machine on CPU-only decoding). - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Enabling NVIDIA GPU acceleration on iPlayer videos...
It might not handle Main profile maybe? I'd hazard a guess that YouTube stuff is all Baseline... (though this doesn't explain my MPC would play it all back swimmingly unless there's some transcoding voodoo going on rather than just re-containering) I can assure you that MPC (with either its inbuilt ffmpeg decoder, or using external CoreAVC 2.0) plays back get_iplayer sourced BBC HD content absolutely perfectly, and I specifically download using the --raw flag to avoid any transcoding. The test files themselves remain as-is as .flv files and I can just drop them into MPC, VLC or smplayer (etc) for playback. I'm beginning to wonder if it's the way that the iPlayer web player 'engages' the Flash hardware acceleration (if this is done at all by the developer, as opposed to being purely automatic). Failing that, if there's more than one way to initialise a video decode, I'm wondering if the BBC's using an older method for compatibility purposes, at the expense of hardware acceleration on devices such as mine that would otherwise be able to do it (and can do, as I've proven to myself) I'll deffo go and investigate mythtv and Boxee right now, for some reason I completely forgot to experiment with those already! - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Enabling NVIDIA GPU acceleration on iPlayer videos...
I think the iPlayer app in MythTV or Boxee should let you watch using hardware acceleration. Well, Boxee doesn't want to fully hardware accelerate. The colourspace is squashed, which indicates it's *trying* to use hardware acceleration (the colourspace is being squashed into 16-235, which is a problem on all NVidia cards to do with hardware YUY - RGB conversion, and has been for years) but the CPU usage is still topping out and playback is occasionally jumpy. (Also, it doesn't even have BBC HD in the iPlayer app) Time to go try and compile MythTV... - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Enabling NVIDIA GPU acceleration on iPlayer videos...
get_iplayer doesn't attempt any transcoding of video - it just remuxes the flv into mp4 And also to the suggestion of using python script Kieran... I'm not *quite* that nerdy to pipe my video through mplayer, I usually give up in frustration before getting it working! ;-) I ended up giving XBMC v10 a spin, with the iplayer video add-on and DXVA enabled in the options it works beautifully with BBC HD material. Couple of crashes here and there but that was me taxing the machine a bit too much possibly. Can't get MythTV to even install, I'm using the premade compile by the Australian (linked from the MythTV wiki) but there seems to be no MySQL installation even though his installer should have set it up. To be honest, if XBMC works on an ongoing basis as neatly as it did just now, I'm quite happy with that. (and so is the netbook!) @Anthony - I've noticed that also, my main PC (with a 9800GTX+ in it) has full hardware acceleration support for videos with fullscreen overlays and generally always looks good. But then the quad core would handle software rendering no probs. XBMC's iplayer plugin also streams the live channels and red button along with the on-demand content, and you can force HQ and format preferences wherever available... Loving that! Now to go install the TVCatchup add-on and compare stream quality ;) I know this doesn't solve the problem of why the /iplayer player seemingly can't initialise the hardware for doing the H.264 heavy lifting and I'll keep on investigating in that respect. Been experimenting with Chrome, IE9 and will try Opera later but don't have much hopes without getting hold of a debug version and trying to force some options (and I've not used Flash for a far while so that'll be a nice journey into the unknown). In the meantime, XBMC's the simplest way to get it working - really impressed with how much it's come on since I last used it (which was on a modded Xbox 1st gen). - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] where is the BBC's SVG or scaleable vector graphics content?
Apple devices, both mobile and desktop, still occupy a minority across the deployed userbase (just a disporportionately large mindshare, the Reality Distortion Effect hard at work as always). Android MS still have lion's share of mobile devices worldwide and they're going to be locked in a battle for the next couple of years with new devices, with Apple's stuff receiving just incremental updates. (yes, I know Mobile Safari using the UIWebView class renders SVG) As a 'regular user' I regard Jonathan as an SVG Zealot (in the best possible way!) While I'm all for standards, particularly open ones, implementing SVG would be a painful and problematic migration for the Beeb. And as any fule kno, sites as popular as bbc.co.uk need to conform to a lowest common denominator of accessibility. SVG is *not* a lowest common denominator format. If SVGs need explaining to average web users they're not ready for the big time just yet. IMHO SVG needs 4-5 more years before being accepted as a de facto format to the extent that Flash is. It's reached mass penetration when all mobile handsets' default browsers render SVG in realtime (save one stubborn hardware house, we're almost there now with Flash and that's taken a HECK of a lot of work by Adobe + mobile OS developers). I dislike SVG in this regard due to its bleeding edgeness, it presents a sharp learning curve for me and I'm not a newbie by any means. It's taken long enough to get true cross-browser PNG w/ alpha channel support without having to resort to ridiculous levels of code hackery. Keep on fighting the good fight Jonathan... :-) I think you're pushing at a bricked-up door in the meantime though for a BBC.co.uk rollout. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] where is the BBC's SVG or scaleable vector graphics content?
the one that brings tears to my eyes is animation without a timeline. it must be de facto that one starts with onion-skinning, a score and timeline, but I'm not sure that a timeline-less format would be best. I can get my head round a timeline based animation format quite easily (and indeed when I was younger I did a fair bit of Flash stuff, although I lost interest as ActionScript became more and more technical). Timelines were very useful for ensuring audiovisual synchronisation, although Flash now has vastly superior native multimedia support. the essence of the issue with flash is repurposing, not price. that's tools and content. True, but Adobe, née Macromedia, spent a lot of time and money gradually fleshing out the format to the point where... Well, when was the last time you saw a Director presentation? Flash just does pretty much everything that's needed of developers and designers, albeit with the proprietary caveat. However, it is truly ubiquitous and requires no additional steps to functionality (save maybe a prompted click or two to install the plugin in user-installed browsers). If I was to suggest an IE8 user get SVG going, and they had no experience of installing browser plugins outside of the cocoon of 'mainstream' plugins, where to start? Repurposing is a lesser concern, not that I see an argument against repurposing, I just don't see an argument *for* repurposing, at least outside of the CC arena. All of the BBC's creations are copyright, and SVG is inherently an unprotected format which is editable by anyone. (please correct if inaccurate, this is my perception) Therefore, the diffusion of copyrighted material and availability in SVG are mutually exclusive objectives. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] The Sky at Night BBC1 vs BBC4 editions
-Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of b...@bt Sent: 08 November 2010 14:38 To: BBC Backstage Subject: [backstage] The Sky at Night BBC1 vs BBC4 editions Just a quick question. The BBC4 edition of Sky at Night is 30 minutes long but the BBC1 edition (and repeat on BBC2) is 20 minutes long. Does anyone know why ? I seem to remember TSAN eps have a breakaway segment on location or somesuch similar. Do the BBC4 repeats just have office-based stuff? (simple way would be to play both at once and see where they go out ;-) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] The Sky at Night BBC1 vs BBC4 editions
Do the HD chans come from 2D? -Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of b...@bt Sent: 08 November 2010 18:12 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] The Sky at Night BBC1 vs BBC4 editions Importance: High The easiest solution is just play the 30 minute edition on BBC1 then we can watch the HD version on BBC1 HD. Another solution is to have a simulcast BBC4 (BBC4 HD). There's plenty of bandwidth on the satellite HD transponder - enough for at least 2 more HD channels. - Original Message - From: Christopher Woods chris...@infinitus.co.uk To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Sent: Monday, November 08, 2010 4:54 PM Subject: RE: [backstage] The Sky at Night BBC1 vs BBC4 editions -Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of b...@bt Sent: 08 November 2010 14:38 To: BBC Backstage Subject: [backstage] The Sky at Night BBC1 vs BBC4 editions Just a quick question. The BBC4 edition of Sky at Night is 30 minutes long but the BBC1 edition (and repeat on BBC2) is 20 minutes long. Does anyone know why ? I seem to remember TSAN eps have a breakaway segment on location or somesuch similar. Do the BBC4 repeats just have office-based stuff? (simple way would be to play both at once and see where they go out ;-) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] The Sky at Night BBC1 vs BBC4 editions
Can I have a why oh why? moment. Me too! Why oh why wasn't an automatic channel redirect included in the original Freeview spec? I can think of several use cases for that feature.
RE: [backstage] Test
[mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Ant Miller ping? ...pong - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] 'Project Canvas' to be called 'YouView':
Um, it's not weview, it's YouView, (though no, I'm no fan of the name or the branding) derp. My brain has no excuse for why it did that. I know I thought this originally before my brain decided to replace half the name (perhaps in protest? ;-) but YouView's even worse! Rubbish take off of that YouTube. Ahem. I think it's worth reading clause 1.1... These are terms for using the website and for content provided on You View. There's no claiming of copyright ownership over open source software. But you know how one TCs can be stretched to cover the service (and where the service comprises STB access, it can be deemed to fall under the same terms). Everything seems to require you to agree to abide by terms and conditions of usage these days, even flipping spanner sets from BQ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] 'Project Canvas' to be called 'YouView':
Yeah, and I *love* the way that the jv is kicking the foss community in the teeth over tc... The least they could do is give something back! Actually, correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't they got to make the source code available? I've already been on the phone to them about possibly opening the stack so homebrew kit could receive and make use of the environment... The foss community could even help. This bit? All copyright, trade marks, design rights, patents and other intellectual property rights (registered and unregistered) in and on YouView.com and YouView Content belong to YouView and/or YouViews licensors. Please respect copyright. If they intend for that to cover the entirety of FOSS contribs, that's particularly cold. Not a fan of what's being done there at all. What I dislike almost as much is this revelation in that previously linked article: The seven partners in the project have each committed to contribute £4.5 million per year over the next four years to fund the platform, much of which will be spent on marketing. It doesn't need marketing to death, it needs a rock solid, intelligently designed and truly innovative UI and 'experience' (getting floaty now) to make it stand out from the noise. This project needs to excel and I fear it won't if much of the funding from the various parties ends up being spent on bus adverts and stupid Flash banners. They need to put their money in, leave it to experts to come up with the innovations and then let it simmer instead of hawk it and each want a piece of the pie (to the inevitable detriment of the entire project). Also WeView was a poor choice of name don't ye think? From a syllabic approach (sorry, I'm a linguist), TV is just about universal. SeeSaw wasn't great but still has some cross-linguistic compatibility. We and View can be quite complex syllables to pronounce if you don't speak much English and it evokes existing brands too much (Wii, Freeview etc). WeV just sounds stupid if you use the abbreviated form. (Would it become 'watching the Welly'?) Everybody's just going to call it on demand anyway, if they don't stick with Canvas... I quite like Canvas, particularly the concepts it evokes (plus it's a good name to 'say')
[backstage] iPlayer intuitive shortcuts (was: regional news - footage available online?)
Whilst (hopefully) people have their eye on iPlayer stuff, is there any chance we can get the sensible redirects added back to the iPlayer? i.e. bbc.co.uk/iplayer/radio1 bbc.co.uk/iplayer/bbcone bbc.co.uk/iplayer/bbc3 Etc... Each channel still has its own page with its own URL, It's always how I've entered the site and it's a really nice feature. Well it would seem that my local news, 'South Today', has started being available in iPlayer since 7th September :-) Thanks to whoever made that happen! BTW: Seems that other weekday regional news programmes have also started appearing. Best Regards Phil - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Google Instant method?
On 11/09/2010 09:26, Brian Butterworth wrote: They covered it all here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0eMHRxlJ2c Brian Butterworth Bit of a con in parts. I thought the search for a woman in the museum was fake. Amusingly enough I was trying out Google Scribe only a month or so before Google Instant was rolled out (http://scribe.googlelabs.com/), it's essentially identical tech sans search box. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Google Instant method?
On 11/09/2010 09:26, Brian Butterworth wrote: They covered it all here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0eMHRxlJ2c Brian Butterworth Bit of a con in parts. I thought the search for a woman in the museum was fake. Amusingly enough I was trying out Google Scribe only a month or so before Google Instant was rolled out (http://scribe.googlelabs.com/), it's essentially identical tech sans search box. Well and the results. Google Instant isn't the easy autocomplete bit, it is the provision of instant results. Of course, and the results ;-) It's a nice show-off feat nonetheless, although the Beeb News article about how clever design is 'making us stupider' did chime with me to an extent. What will really be impressive is when they manage to get it native in HTML5 for Android phones, that's their next step, I think that's the problem this particular solution will fit with more than desktop usage (I actually craft my desktop search queries quite specifically based on past experience of Google's engine)
RE: [backstage] regional news - footage available online?
Regions output online is somewhat hit and miss. For example an album launch I was involved with was covered on BBC London evening news - a 3/4 minute VT segment which I finally managed to beg a copy of on DVD and it was completely different from the accompanying video which ended up in a Flash player accompanying the Online articles about the album launch. (Interestingly the audio was dual mono - ambient sound on L channel and overdubbed narrator on R channel? Not sure if that was a snafu by the offline editor, but it was a very deliberate thing to do - be interested to know if that's how News archives ENG material for the double whammy of preserving a clean ambient track for B Roll or just so they can readjust the narration...) However I've seen local articles reproduced in full on the site - perhaps ours was different because there was so much footage taken live at the launch they had enough to do several videos, but I don't often see entire VTs transcoded to the web for inline players. Shame, because I quite like watching the Regions stuff (still tune in to BBC1 South sometimes for the regional news from where I used to live for a long time). I bet it'd be a workflow nightmare trying to get it all ingested properly though. Shame the BBC London news isn't encoded after the main national news broadcasts any more though, it was nice being able to watch after the main broadcast ended on the iPlayer. -Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Anthony McKale Sent: 23 August 2010 10:27 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] regional news - footage available online? Locla radio should be on iplayer -http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/radio Enjoy the link while you can Ant On 22/08/2010 12:10, Phil Lewis backst...@linuxcentre.net wrote: Hi Jim, I believe you can often find the local news for up to one day after on the local BBC site for that region. Last time I checked (incidentally for exactly the same reason as you) it was some awful wmv or real stream in very low or extremely low quality. Local news doesn't appear on iPlayer AFAIK. No idea about redux. I personally would love to see local news on iPlayer. best Regards Phil Lewis On Fri, 2010-08-20 at 12:29 +, jim tonge wrote: Hi all. As the Blast tour moves around the UK, myself and my colleagues are frequently interviewed on local TV news and radio. There was a very funny appearance by a colleague yesterday I'd love to get the broadcast of... I'm pretty sure local news isn't accessible through Redux, right? Anyone got any idea how I can get access to this footage either internally or externally? Ta, Jim - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Anthony Mckale, Senior CSD Mob : 07912981657 Internal Phone : (02 776) 64470 BBC FMT Children's, TVC East Tower, Floor 1, Room E164 - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] regional news - footage available online?
That's pretty standard for news packages - the studio output will then be mono'ed before it hits the transmission chain. And you're quite right, it's for archiving purposes. It seems a bit lowest common denominator, doesn't it - surely in this day and age it would be preferable to encode at the very least LCR audio for a clean - stereo - track and discrete VO. Though would I be far off the mark if I wagered that some broadcasters' workflows are almost carved in stone? :D (and what about planning ahead for when news broadcasts go to 5.1? To me that step is inexorable - at that point even recent archive materal is going to sound dated even if it's just upmixed to stereo once the de facto is LCRSLSRLFE (even if the surround chans are only used in VT segments - will be VERY nice when they're reporting on sports events). Incidentally you wouldn't believe how long it took me to get a useable stereo mix from the DVD supplied with only two pieces of very awkward video software on a Mac. If only I'd had a PC with Nuendo, Vegas or Premiere, I would've been done in 20 minutes - instead it took me a couple of hours of VERY lateral thinking, demuxing and transcoding... Bloody Macs, good for nothing ;-) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Freeview HD Content Management
What does this mean for consumers in real terms? is pretty important -- that's why I wrote the guardian article (can't think of a better way to refer to that piece, sorry). The Grauniad recital =D I'll get my coat - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Freeview HD Content Management
A HUGE aside here, but still relevant given the previous discussion of the traditional royalty share model and how it favours the labels. I work for a (fairly small) indie label - from witnessing this model in action I feel I have to stick up for the label given that I see the model working (or sometimes not so well) on a daily basis! Where we've done deals with artists in the past, they've almost always been a 50/50 arrangement - the artist receives 50% of net royalties. Where a label fronts recording costs, these can easily become £6-10,000 for an album session. Even an EP session can be upwards of £1,500 although these figures are a little pessimistic (though not unrealistic). (We actually designed, built and owned studios for ten years until 2001 but the project haemorrhaged money.) With regards to CD pressing, a 1,000 run will cost around £800 including full colour print in a basic jewel case. The AP1/AP2a MCPS licence costs another amount on top. When getting your CDs pressed, add in other things (Super Jewel cases, slip / O-cards, digipaks or gatefolds with high quality card / fancy posters) and you can easily top the 1k mark, not even counting the artwork design costs. Of course, discount comes with with bulk, but almost nobody except the Big Four do 1k discs in a pressing. (To put things in perspective: when SyCo have done the X Factor Finalists CDs, they press up 10,000 of EACH finalist's recording of the song - and shred the losers' copies when the winner is announced!) To put stuff into distro with someone like Universal, you have your line costs simply to have the title listed on their system - monthly recurring, per title - then handling costs, despatch costs, salesforce costs (even though really the only people they sell into are HMV now, and from last year they've stopped guaranteeing racking in all but the top 6 or so stores in the UK, it's a joke). You can't sell your discs through at full retail, you have your wholesale (Dealer) price. We've sold albums through at £6.65 and I've later seen them in a London HMV for £12.99. Oh, and did I mention that supermarkets and stores like HMV *DEMAND* what they call a file discount of up to 40% just to take stock? (which is on a non-negotiable sale or return basis with up to a six month returns period.) If you end up in a position where you don't sell stock through into shops, it usually costs less for your distro to SHRED your discs than it does to send it back to you! Ridiculous. The costs are stacked against the labels at all points - incredibly frustrating. And that's even before you begin to contemplate any plugging, promo, advertising, miscellaneous online, merch, booking agent / gig costs... Or even an advance for the artist! But it gets better... So, this figure of 63% which the old techdirt article might quote as truth where valid for major labels (who might also own distribution, management, publishing and studios under the same roof), the model quickly falls apart as soon as focus on a smaller label. I used to think the whole model was bullshit and the artists got shafted, but if anything it's level pegging - smaller labels have just as tough a time as artists as the risk to them to fund any new release is proportionally WAY larger. Also, the techdirt article works on the basis of the artist receiving a 20% royalty - this is dismal, and the artist should be smacked for agreeing to such a pitiful rate like the chumps they probably (hypothetically) are. Take one of our real world iTunes scenarios - from a 79p purchase, iTunes immediately keeps about 32p. For UK and most worldwide sales, this also includes the royalties which the label's obliged to pay (in the UK, to the MCPS-PRS Alliance). However, the USA requires the selling party to pay the mechanical on each sale (an arse-about-tit form which has arisen from the disconnected Collection Agencies - Harry Fox Agency being the incumbent on Mechanicals and ASCAP, BMI and SESAC on the Performance royalties - which adds yet another level of complication. From what's left (47p), you halve the resulting amount on a 50/50 deal. Neither the label nor the artist gets much for their work. On some artists whom we've purely done digital distribution for (on a rolling licence agreement), we give the artist 80% of net. As you can imagine, we get virtually nothing - and our income's directly tied to their success, so we have an interest in seeing them do well. It's a tough environment to be in. For receiving US/Canadian/Mexico/European/Australasian payments, we first have to receive the currency and have the bank convert it to GBP. Of course, we can't get the Interbank rates, nobody but the banks get those - so more money's immediately lost in conversion. The larger labels will have sweetheart deals with their banks (or almost certainly have accounts in each relevant territory) so this isn't so much of a big deal, but the amount of administration just scales inordinately. If you deal with
RE: [backstage] Audio levels on iPlayer material (again)
-Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of David Tomlinson Sent: 09 July 2010 09:34 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Audio levels on iPlayer material (again) Christopher Woods wrote: I posted a while back asking about why iPlayer videos start loud then get quieter a few seconds later... A Normalisation stage post encoding ? The problem is definitely introduced when the material's encoded by Red Bee / the Beeb. Nothing on my system is doing that, I have a proper audio interface with nearfield monitors + sub running off XLR :-) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Audio levels on iPlayer material (again)
I wasn't aware that Christopher [Woods] works for the BBC ...Neither was I ;-) I think I misinterpreted context of your comment, didn't notice the tongue in cheek second line (sorry!) Hopefully it's something relatively simple to fix and it's just an overeager preset default... Hardly the end of the world but it's such an obvious fault I'd be remiss to not point it out. (PS - any Beeb employees with an eye on the internal vacancies, any jobs in the Mailbox going for things like postproduction / editing for National / Regions? Been a longtime goal of mine to work for BBC radio at some point) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
[backstage] Audio levels on iPlayer material (again)
I posted a while back asking about why iPlayer videos start loud then get quieter a few seconds later... It's hard to hear with most materal, but this programme exhibits the effect beautifully: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00kntl1/The_Birth_of_British_Music_Han del_The_Conquering_Hero/ Listen to how the limiter suddenly kicks in after 1/2 seconds, bringing the overall gain down. The audio level at the start is fine, whereas afterwards it's just too quiet. Cue needlessly having to crank the gain on the computer to compensate. the It seems pointless having to constantly ride the gain when playing a new piece of footage - and it can often deafen you if you have your speakers or headphones turned up to an appropriate level from watching a previous programme! Could this be looked at by someone in the iPlayer team responsible for encodes? Seems like a very odd, pointless oversight and it's affected every video I've watched for at least six months, if not longer. Ta :-) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
[backstage] Anybody know about this?
Just searched for Beryl Bainbridge BBC Four Documentary in Google, and amongst results this popped up: BBC - BBC Four Programmes - Beryl's Last Year 24 Mar 2010 ... Novelist Dame Beryl Bainbridge makes a record of her life, convinced she is about ... BBC Four: Audio Interviews - Beryl Bainbridge (1934 - ... www.bbc.co.uk.news-channel.org/programmes/b007mw91 - Cached Notice the dodgy URL? Going to it yields a 503 error. A whois on the domain reveals it's registered to one Carl Andersson (of Advancen Pty Ltd) in Australia. Anybody know if this is this a legit beta mashup which has found its way into Google or is it something a little more nefarious? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
[backstage] Squelchy audio on iPlayer HD programmes
I've noticed that Doctor Who and Doctor Who Confidential episodes for the past several weeks have had the characteristic 'bubbly' or 'warbling' audio that comes with either 1 encoding step or slightly dodgy first generation audio encoding. The problem manifests itself particularly in reverb tails, sibilance (e.g. Amy Pond saying 'ssh' at 24:36) or quiet passages or sections with strings or woodwind in the backing music, (e.g. in the music from 24:17 in http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00spgsf/hd/Doctor_Who_Series_5_Vincent _and_the_Doctor/ ) It's quite distracting and detracts from my viewing experience (and I'd imagine others). most frustrating is that it's not always been there. Unfortunately I don't know anybody specific in the iPlayer team who deals with quality assurance stuff, can someone in the know please forward it on? Cheers Chris - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Ian
If he's compus mentis please pass on all of our best wishes! :-) _ From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Ant Miller Sent: 18 May 2010 14:27 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Ian Hi Tim, I'm up in mcr tomorrow, travelling up tonight actually. Let me know if there's anything I can bring up- probably nothing much I can do, but if there's anything. You up to see him later? a
RE: [backstage] Ian Forrester
Dear All As you may have heard Ian Forrester was taken ill last week and is now recuperating in Hope Hospital in Salford. [snip] (I'd imagine on all of our behalves) thanks for the update Rain; we're all eager to hear any good news as Ian gets better so where appropriate please keep us updated if/when possible. Chris - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Re: BBC iPad application usability
More on this at http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/Usability-expert-faults-iPad-user- interface-calls-it-whacky/1273592091 I take everything Nielsen preaches with a LARGE bag of salt. When he makes his own site usable I might pay more attention to his proclamations ;)
RE: [backstage] iplayer brokenness?
A friend of mine reported over twitter they were getting buffering issues, they didnt say if it was on live, or not... Oop, just got the non-working content message on this week's Fab Groove: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00ry8vj/Fabio_and_Grooverider_11_04_20 10/
RE: [backstage] iplayer brokenness?
-Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of backst...@gorge.org Sent: 10 April 2010 22:01 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] iplayer brokenness? Hi, Trying to watch and listen to progs on iPlayer, everything says this content does not seem to be available except Over The Rainbow, where the 10 second bit saying the show is recorded and not to phone in works, before it breaks as the show is about to start. Can't find anything that DOES work. Some major mistake? I watched Dr. Who S31E02 off /bbchd about an hour ago with no problems... Just tried Dr. Who Confidential (SD), worked fine first time. Are you perhaps having problems reaching the CDN? Try tracerouting to these IPs: 92.123.95.8 92.123.196.20 92.123.154.11 92.123.153.157 88.221.181.115 92.123.153.81 I'm on Be, so I'm not discounting that these IPs are ones I get directed to as part of a Be-specific peering arrangement. Not very familiar with how Akamai manages its network assets, but you may be getting pointed to different IPs which could be being affected by a problem which the nodes above aren't suffering from - but it's working perfectly for me across both telly and radio on-demand this minute. If there was a problem earlier I missed it :) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Any more DEB reading footage from today on iPlayer?
That wasn't the first time the poor old dears got IP and IP mixed up, I heard it on @R4Today some days ago. Shows a lot about where their minds are. Yes, but what happens when they debate other technical issues? Medical, military, etc. None of us are experts in all fields None of us are setting government policy, influencing public opintion or writing laws in the fields we're inexpert in, though. I hope. Whilst watching the DEB proceedings, I felt the urge to have some kind of big red button on my table connected to a massive klaxon and a laser display board just above the Speaker's Chair. So much waffle and intervention/counter-intervention not much was actually said that was sensible, relevant and concise. Oh well, democracy in action... I only wish I could vote 'out of constituency' as such so I could place my local government vote for one of the clueful MPs. I'm stuck with Gisela Stuart and Clare Short :( - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Any more DEB reading footage from today on iPlayer?
-Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Ian Forrester Sent: 07 April 2010 14:10 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Any more DEB reading footage from today on iPlayer? I don't think this is a conspircy (so you can take off the foil hat :) Its sounds like a error, or something went on longer than expected. Will forward to the iplayer team and see if we can't get the rest somehow. Cheers. Also, on the HoC footage from last night - http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00rzk4b - the programme won't actually start streaming (just looks like it begins to buffer, fails, then retries immediately ad nauseum). Also, on the /parliament schedule page the listed schedule doesn't line up at all with the evening's proceedings. Presume the latter is due to late changes to the order of business... - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Any more DEB reading footage from today on iPlayer?
-Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Phil Lewis Sent: 08 April 2010 15:31 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Any more DEB reading footage from today on iPlayer? On Thu, 2010-04-08 at 15:04 +0100, Christopher Woods wrote: Cheers. Also, on the HoC footage from last night - http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00rzk4b - the programme won't actually start streaming (just looks like it begins to buffer, fails, then retries immediately ad nauseum). Maybe it's just your connection or the CDN flash server the your browser is directed to? It seems to work perfectly fine on iplayer and my usual iplayer recording utility. Might have been - just tried from work (Easynet connection) and it's worked fine. Same from home connection (Be Pro). On contemplation, it didn't even play the BBC Parliament ident... Perhaps there was something wrong with the preroll? Anyway, working now. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] TODAY: Digital Economy Bill Flashmob, 5pm [Manchester]
For all interested parties: the ORG is also encouraging people to phone their MPs today, and there's ads appearing in the Grauniad and the Times (funded by donors to their last rush fundraising campaign). Go to the 38degrees site to find your MP's phone number if you fancy giving them a call! http://www.38degrees.org.uk/deb-call-your-mp -Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Tim Dobson Sent: 01 April 2010 02:43 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] TODAY: Digital Economy Bill Flashmob, 5pm [Manchester] Whilst the practicalities of the Digital Economy Bill, may seem like a complete joke, sadly this email is no April Fools Prank. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] TODAY: Digital Economy Bill Flashmob, 5pm [Manchester]
-Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Stephen Jolly Sent: 06 April 2010 11:51 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] TODAY: Digital Economy Bill Flashmob, 5pm [Manchester] How did the flashmob go, out of interest? +1 - any photos from the event? Listening to live debate of the DEB on BBC Parliament right at the moment... - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] TODAY: Digital Economy Bill Flashmob, 5pm [Manchester]
Just seen some on Facebook as well. I'm just off to the shop to pick up a Grauniad to see how my tenner looks on print ;) Austin Mitchell (and surprisingly, a few other Labour MPs) are talking a lot of sense about the DEB. Shame it'll just get pushed through the wash-up almost irrespective of MPs' (and public) opinion :( - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] TODAY: Digital Economy Bill Flashmob, 5pm [Manchester]
I'm hoping they'll do the right thing and kill the bill. Nope - just voted to send it to the committee stage tomorrow. The eyes have it, the eyes have it. RT @rhodri: And that was that, folks. The ayes have it. Chuckling in the chamber. That's democracy, folks. #debill And now they all head (back?) off to Strangers for the subsidised pints ;) The irony I found with Wishart's apparent stance on this is that he's in a band, and has been in a few prior to this. Up until now I was under the impression that he was broadly in favour of doing *something* but that he took issue with the way certain amendments were almost overreaching their mandate (if such a thing is possible). I'm now worried he might not be considering how damaging sections of the Bill could potentially be to artists and bands who don't have the advantage of prior exposure. Oh well, the hashtags will be busy for a while yet tonight methinks... - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
[backstage] Any more DEB reading footage from today on iPlayer?
(directed firstly towards iPlayer-knowledgeable Beeb staff but is an open question) Frustratingly only the first hour or so of today's House of Commons coverage is available on the iPlayer's primary entry for today, with no more footage forthcoming it would seem. (current episode: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00rzjy6/House_of_Commons_06_04_2010/ ) I've also seen the DEB's dedicated entry on the DemocracyLive site: http://news.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/hi/house_of_commons/newsid_8597000/85971 25.stm - but again, it's only a 2 hour stream from the start of the DEB debate. Today's debate lasted for well over six/seven contiguous hours - right up until 10pm from approx. 3pm (after the 10 Minute Rule first reading). Particularly given the importance of this Bill, might we be able to watch the whole of the first debate online eventually or is it never going to show up? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Why are iPlayer SD programmes encoded at funky resolutions?
What bothers me is whether it's actually the most efficient way of encoding - does the equipment doing the capture have the ability to extract the true square pixel 'quality' from the nonsquare 'broadcast' pixels, thus resulting in a dimensionally larger, but equal quality, video... Or is the quality still being lost because the the encoder can't actually transcode the full quality and ends up extrapolating interpixel data? If the latter is true (which I hope it's not), if the dimensions are mostly due to legacy and there's no real advantage to be gained, is there still an argument against encoding at a smaller WxH resolution (e.g., 720x404) which might make better use of the available bits? (thinking aloud again) _ From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Ian Forrester Sent: 30 March 2010 11:24 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Why are iPlayer SD programmes encoded at funky resolutions? I had wondered about this myself a while ago. So use to the underground scene of resolutions, it always seems strange when looking at others methods of distribution's choice of rez. Although I think Brian might be right about the aspect ratio Secret[] Private[x] Public[] Ian Forrester Senior Backstage Producer BBC RD North Lab, 1st Floor Office, OB Base, New Broadcasting House, Oxford Road, Manchester, M60 1SJ _ From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 29 March 2010 08:38 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] Why are iPlayer SD programmes encoded at funky resolutions? Isn't it because of the difference in pixel shapes between TVs and monitors? On TV, 16:9 in 720x576 the pixels are 1:1.89, on a computer monitor the pixels are 1:1. 832x468 is therefore the profile nearest the desired output of 1:1.89? http://www.ukfree.tv/fullstory.php?storyid=1107051225 On 29 March 2010 01:19, Christopher Woods chris...@infinitus.co.uk wrote: I've noticed for a while that the HQ iPlayer stuff (not the HD) is encoded at 832x468. (recent example: Australian F1, or pretty much every single high quality iPlayer video you look at). No complaints about the actual PQ, just really curious as to the technical decisions that led to this target output res. Is it some convoluted compromise to do with broadcast Pixel Aspect Ratios and square pixel conversion for H.264 encode or is there some other reason? Part of me always gets angsty not seeing 720x404 as the resolution if I measure whatever I'm watching ;) All insight appreciated... - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
[backstage] Why are iPlayer SD programmes encoded at funky resolutions?
I've noticed for a while that the HQ iPlayer stuff (not the HD) is encoded at 832x468. (recent example: Australian F1, or pretty much every single high quality iPlayer video you look at). No complaints about the actual PQ, just really curious as to the technical decisions that led to this target output res. Is it some convoluted compromise to do with broadcast Pixel Aspect Ratios and square pixel conversion for H.264 encode or is there some other reason? Part of me always gets angsty not seeing 720x404 as the resolution if I measure whatever I'm watching ;) All insight appreciated... - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] BBC News online stream quality drop?
This was my logic - if they're using 48kbps AAC, why not use AAC+ to squeeze that bit more out. It's only speech anyway so it's not like transients or harmonics really come into play that much ;) -Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Kieran Kunhya Sent: 26 March 2010 00:59 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC News online stream quality drop? And now the H.264/AAC workflow is in place... How about bumping the audio up to AAC+? AAC at 128kbps should be transparent provided the encoder is up to scratch. Making it AAC+ would probably keep the audio the same quality or perhaps reduce it slightly in my opinion because the algorithms it uses have to guess the higher frequencies. AAC+ is really designed for lower bitrates. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] BBC News online stream quality drop?
Hurray, great news :) I did suspect that the News stream might be slightly lower to accommodate higher viewer levels but I didn't want to sound stupid suggesting it. Glad to know that it wasn't just me going crazy seeing a quality difference. Is there any chance of ever getting an HQ feed of BBC News? It'd be perfect for a toggleable player (like the F1 livestreams) And now the H.264/AAC workflow is in place... How about bumping the audio up to AAC+? I'm the worst kind of viewer ;) _ From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of John O'Donovan Sent: 25 March 2010 18:35 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] BBC News online stream quality drop? The stream has always been 368Kbps with 320K video and 48K audio. We recently upgraded all news sport encoders to h.264 video and aac audio and one of them is had a glitch and fell back to default encoding settings rather than the optimised ones we use. Should be fixed now. Some of the other streams you see at 500K have a 128K audio stream so the video quality is not that different. The video is going up to 500K but the reason it has been lower is so that it can be served reliably to the largest possible audience. Cheers, John O'Donovan Chief Technical Architect BBC Future Media Technology (Journalism) BC3 C1, Broadcast Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London http://news.bbc.co.uk/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/weather/ _ From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 24 March 2010 12:12 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC News online stream quality drop? It could be because the News stream gets a lot of views on Budget day? On 24 March 2010 12:05, Christopher Woods chris...@infinitus.co.uk wrote: The quality on that is the same as if you click directly via the BBC News web site. As PMQs is on now, go look at the BBC News version of the Parliament feed and then compare it with BBC Parliament's quality: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/playlive/bbc_parliament/ N24: 368kbps (48kbps). BBC Parl: 500kbps. Don't understand the drop, if it was due to a costsaving drive surely it'd be adjust to be about 300kbps or below. (Difference is currently ~132kbps) _ From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 24 March 2010 11:18 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC News online stream quality drop? There's another version of the BBC News channel at http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/playlive/bbc_news24/ On 24 March 2010 11:01, Christopher Woods chris...@infinitus.co.uk wrote: Noticed in the past week there's only a 384kbps stream of BBC News via the web site - it looks rubbish, jerky video and low quality audio. Better quality on TVCatchup. Does anybody know if this downgrade is permanent? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
[backstage] BBC News online stream quality drop?
Noticed in the past week there's only a 384kbps stream of BBC News via the web site - it looks rubbish, jerky video and low quality audio. Better quality on TVCatchup. Does anybody know if this downgrade is permanent? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] BBC News online stream quality drop?
The quality on that is the same as if you click directly via the BBC News web site. As PMQs is on now, go look at the BBC News version of the Parliament feed and then compare it with BBC Parliament's quality: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/playlive/bbc_parliament/ N24: 368kbps (48kbps). BBC Parl: 500kbps. Don't understand the drop, if it was due to a costsaving drive surely it'd be adjust to be about 300kbps or below. (Difference is currently ~132kbps) _ From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 24 March 2010 11:18 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC News online stream quality drop? There's another version of the BBC News channel at http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/playlive/bbc_news24/ On 24 March 2010 11:01, Christopher Woods chris...@infinitus.co.uk wrote: Noticed in the past week there's only a 384kbps stream of BBC News via the web site - it looks rubbish, jerky video and low quality audio. Better quality on TVCatchup. Does anybody know if this downgrade is permanent? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
RE: [backstage] BBC News online stream quality drop?
It's been like it for a few days now... _ From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 24 March 2010 12:12 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC News online stream quality drop? It could be because the News stream gets a lot of views on Budget day? On 24 March 2010 12:05, Christopher Woods chris...@infinitus.co.uk wrote: The quality on that is the same as if you click directly via the BBC News web site. As PMQs is on now, go look at the BBC News version of the Parliament feed and then compare it with BBC Parliament's quality: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/playlive/bbc_parliament/ N24: 368kbps (48kbps). BBC Parl: 500kbps. Don't understand the drop, if it was due to a costsaving drive surely it'd be adjust to be about 300kbps or below. (Difference is currently ~132kbps) _ From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 24 March 2010 11:18 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] BBC News online stream quality drop? There's another version of the BBC News channel at http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/playlive/bbc_news24/ On 24 March 2010 11:01, Christopher Woods chris...@infinitus.co.uk wrote: Noticed in the past week there's only a 384kbps stream of BBC News via the web site - it looks rubbish, jerky video and low quality audio. Better quality on TVCatchup. Does anybody know if this downgrade is permanent? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/ -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002 -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
RE: [backstage] RE: BBC Flash video and deinterlacing - is this really the best we can get?
Who said we were deinterlacing to 25p? :-) Looks like 12p for sports programming ;) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] RE: BBC Flash video and deinterlacing - is this really the best we can get?
Don't TV Catchup have both a low- and high- quality streams, where the HQ ones are interlaced? Not aware of multiple streams - only ever watch at the highest possible quality :) However, it certainly doesn't look like it's been encoded as interlaced (which would make absolutely NO sense whatsoever).
RE: [backstage] Video on Demand Dissertation Survey
Is that all? I like to know where my responses will be used, how or if they will be anonymised, and if there is anything at all sensitive, some kind of mention that that they have been educated on the ethics of survey usage. When I undertook my BSc dissertation I was obliged to fill out and comply with a code of ethics with regards to the collection of personally identifiable data (and even how I undertook surveys or primary research), so I wouldn't be overly concerned with this. I used to get a bucketload of SurveyMonkey requests forwarded to my University account by various lecturers and project supervisors! My right eye is twitching a little at the sight of 'an survey' though... - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] A quick Dolby E question
From that document Flipfactory only seems to support 16/20 bit modes. I've tried both SoundCode and Surcode and they are only 16/20 bit as well. Huh, I (thought I was) reliably informed SurCode could handle 24. Well, if that lot doesn't work I suspect you're talking Dolby-only hardware if you want full 24bit codec support. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] A quick Dolby E question
-Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Kieran Kunhya Sent: 27 February 2010 02:25 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] A quick Dolby E question A teeny bit off-topic but I'm sure there are people on the list that know the answer. Does 24-bit Dolby E actually exist? If so what produces it? SurCode's stuff can produce 24-bit Dolby-E iirc. Also AJA cards can work with Dolby-E but you have to do it right to preserve the metadata. Telestream's FlipFactory (a bit like also allows decoding and encoding of Dolby-E if you configure your 'factory' correctly, PDF at [1]. Wikipedia:Dolby_E also mentions that SoundCode from Neyrinck supports the format. [2] (FWIW I don't work with it myself, just powergoogling + asking some video editing friends) [1] http://www.telestream.net/pdfs/app-notes/app_FF_DolbyE.pdf#9 [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolby_E - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] indefinitely live BBC archive?
why can't the BBC make some programmes available all the time? Rights, dear boy. And kids, in their limitless quest to just get what they want now, care not one bit for that most wonderfully complex of one-word answers. Then again, most regular people don't care either. ;) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] BBC iPlayer for Apple TV
Generally if you take the p*** I'll get shouted at and I'll ask you nicely to close the service/script/prototype :) of course breaking the backstage licence will you a heavy knock at the door :) Publishing some definitions might help :) The first rule about the Backstage Licence is that we don't talk about the Backstage Licence. In all seriousness, I find it sad that semantics continues to play a far larger role in all of these discussions/arguments/politics between the BBC as broadcaster, BBC as service provider, general viewing public and rightsholders. Simile time: trying to control, or fighting against, cross-platform consumption, usage on previously unconceived platforms and/or unexpected adaption of the service to new forms of consumption is like swimming against a rip tide. Either it's available everywhere legally and someplaces illegaly or nowhere legally and everywhere illegally. It's the rightsholders' choice. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] BBC iPlayer for Apple TV
Excellently put. What made me more sad was that I felt I needed to state the obvious :( I wish I could be a fly on the wall in a meeting between the Beeb and controlling rightsholders / contract negotiators for the current iPlayer programming. There must be some serious long-term powerplays going on, combined with fear of the unknown (just like Warner pulling out of ad-supported music citing lack of faith) - but TV's always survived better than music because (I think) it's not been entirely commoditised just yet. The old Powers That Be are in danger of outmoding themselves though with their pseudo-scarcity approach... ... As I say this, I may or may not be torrenting Episode 8 of 24 S08. Why must I wait a week to see it?! By that point, all the buzz around each episode has died down, my friends in the States are already onto the next week's episode and if I go on any of the forums all I'll get is spoilers completely ruining the whole thing for me. Ridiculous. That said, I often watch the Colbert Report - including the pre- and post-roll adverts - on the official web site. They're not very annoying, they work with the way the show's divvied up (pre-existing ad breaks, just shorter ads for online streams) and I like to think it's helping them finance the show. However, to do this I have to use a US proxy as DUE TO RIGHTS ISSUES the content is not directly available to UK viewers (and FX, the UK channel which shows TCR, has no on-demand streaming on their own site for its UK viewers). Spot the fail. Who's losing out here? (given the many alternative means to acquire newteevee, it's likely not the tech-savvy viewers) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] H.264
Surprised nobody posted about this already :) From the MPEG LA: MPEG LA announced today that its AVC Patent Portfolio License will continue not to charge royalties for Internet Video that is free to end users (known as Internet Broadcast AVC Video) during the next License term from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2015. Products and services other than Internet Broadcast AVC Video continue to be royalty-bearing, and royalties to apply during the next term will be announced before the end of 2010. Full release at: http://www.mpegla.com/Lists/MPEG%20LA%20News%20List/Attachments/226/n-10-02- 02.pdf So how does this affect the Beeb? Because effectively licencepayers are paying for the iPlayer service as part of the portfolio even though its usage doesn't require a licence... Or has the BBC always paid licence fees for the use of the codecs? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] H.264
Nothing changes - H.264 for Internet Broadcast has been free, but was due to require a paid license as of this year. MPEG-LA have extended the free period for 5 years. (The BBC probably _does_ have a license for the AVC family, but it wouldn't affect this). Any idea why the MPEG-LA did this then? Seems to be quite an about-turn given everyoen was bracing for enforced commercial licensing... - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] BBC RD Move- Video
Possibly- the specific file formats we need to encode to to upload to iplayer are pretty standard, but the way we make these films is using a 3rd party editor (he's great by the way). Delivering finished films from his home edit suite to us is proving maddeningly unreliable- a combination of his home internet connection, a Mac I think I see his problem. ;) ducks and runs But seriously, how old is the Mac? I noticed some older Macs at my old Uni had problems with a couple of my USB sticks, although they were USB2.0 and everything-else-compatible. Just seemingly refused to work. Likewise, the inbuilt Superdrive on the MBP I'm currently using at work (to control my PC at home through VNC :P) just epic fails to read some DVDs, and it can't burn DVD+DLs either. On the latest available firmware, all system updates applied and running 10.5.8. Never managed to figure out the problem, ended up having to use an external Lite-On and occupy one of its two precious USB ports. (At least with PCs I can successfully diagnose most problems, I can't fathom the reason for why half of the problems I have with Macs even come about in the first place!)
RE: [backstage] BBC RD Move- Video
On the basis of no information at all, I'm guessing that the USB drives in question might have been formatted NTFS, or something. Fingers crossed their editor guy's using NTFS-3G :) (which, for those who use it, just got a premium commercial counterpart release with some nice fixes as Tuxera NTFS for Mac OS X) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] BBC RD Move- Video
just epic fails to read some DVDs, and it can't burn DVD+DLs either. That will probably be because it is a DVD-R drive - during the DVDR format wars Apple was on the DVD-R team so didn't support DVD+R till drives came with both. Urgh, really? I completely forgot about that, I wasn't on the DVD burning bandwagon until after the +/- war had pretty much resolved itself. The MBP I use at work is one of the first-gen Intels (MBP1,1). - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] iPad
-Original Message- From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Jim Tonge Sent: 30 January 2010 22:55 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] iPad On 30 Jan 2010, at 22:39, Alex Mace wrote: FUD. Nothing so grandiose, simply ignorance! :) Can any of those browsers be set to the device default? From the looks of the Macworld article, I don't think you would *want* to set any of the six browsers they review as default! For example, in the first paragraph: I didn't get very far before I ran into the first limitation-none of the eight browser's would open my family's password-protected Web site. I don't know why, but it seems that sites that use the standard Apache access controls can't be accessed from a third-party browser. What's the point in using a third-party browser if (seemingly due to the SDK) it can't even perform as well as the original included browser? And the Google Voice app still hasn't been permitted on the App Store, it's still in a state of perpetual review (which is why Google just sidestepped it in the end to make their HTML5 web app at m.google.com/voice). Apple are still being nefarious. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] iPad
I think it is more about conflation / coalescence / convergence on one device. The more one can consume, interact and communicate on one platform, the better, I think. Ultimately there will always be two parallel markets: the walled garden and the open, communal one. Google and Apple are two powerhouses large enough to keep their own product portfolio going almost indefinitely without one winning over the other. I'll always prefer the more open of the two (but to be honest I'd rather not buy a product from either of them, I like buying and building my own when it comes to computers :) Apple will forge ahead and broker deals with the major publishing houses largely due to inertia; the ubiquity of their iPod and iTunes has really helped with that. However, they won't be top dog forever, and once the next-gen open standards are more mature and there's mechanisms in place for people to go direct to the publishers (in a fairly consistent way) for electronic media, that will cannibalise 'marketplace' style revenue to an extent. That said, the curated shop / marketplace experience will always hold sway with the 'just want it to work' segment of the userbase, so the lightbulb moment will only happen for most users when someone/some company manages to devise a definitive, cross-platform and platform-agnostic marketplace which works well for all involved (and offers better returns than the iTunes / iBookshop platform!) This in turn will come about through market forces, amount of supporting third-party hardware etc, because Apple will do their darndest to stop that from happening! Everyone's still playing the wait-and-see game.
RE: [backstage] Users just want video to work. You Mozilla people are such idealists?
On 27 Jan 2010, at 08:31, Mo McRoberts wrote: that's a good point: I wonder how much of the broadcast output *is* encoded in real-time? all of it? I believe so. Not unless they've changed their previous policy of ingesting popular / headline shows prior to their airing, then making them availably almost immediately after broadcast has ended (shows such as Top Gear etc) I'm sure a Beeber detailed all of this on the list previously, I can dig through archives to find it if people cba to look for it themselves ;) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Users just want video to work. You Mozilla people are such idealists?
That's on-demand content, not broadcast. The two are encoded via separate systems. Were we not talking about the iPlayer videos?... derp sidles off - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] iPad
-Original Message-
From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk
[mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Mo McRoberts
Sent: 27 January 2010 22:38
To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk
Subject: [backstage] iPad
So, what does everyone think?
(disclaimer: I generally hate Apple stuff with a passion, but I can
appreciate good hardware design like the next nerd)
First impression: not a gamechanger or paradigm shifting device. A good
start, and a cohesive one (expect nothing less from the Fruit) but it needs
at least two revisions (cf. iPhone - iPhone 3G - 3GS) before it's
something I'd accept as a mature, well-rounded piece of hardware (walled
garden platform aside). Hardly an 'appliance' as Leo Laporte generously
called it earlier (think he was drinking the Kool-Aid inside the Moscone
Center RDF). In essence, it's a pretty iPod Touch XL with the latest OS
update...
Good points:
. best-in-class multitouch implementation
. iWork Lite (cue iLife Lite, GarageBand Lite, Logic Lite down the road)
. nice weight (1.5lb)
. range of sizes, for a massive memory jump the price hike isn't huge (but
once again they've been cheeky with the pricing tiers)
. rolling contract with ATT (in the US) for data, $30 gets you 'unlimited'
and $15 gets you 250Mb (both 3G packages) - will be interesting to see if it
brings data plans down when it's released in the UK
. IT USES USIM/MICROSIMS! Europe-friendly for once OOTB.
. They've really nailed some of the UI issues I've had with other eBook
readers / handheld media devices, in the typical Apple way
Some technical shortcomings:
. The display (same size as the Kindle DX iirc) only has a resolution of
1024x768, so not even 720p. Epic fail.
. The composite out requires the Apple TRRS cable, which is helpfully wired
opposite to other TRRS composite cables
. NO MULTITASKING!
. No camera
. one HUGE bezel
. No Flash support OOTB ('missing plugin' when Jobs went to a web site
during techo demo... snicker)
. only windowed or up-ressing for iPhone apps? Urgh. (though this is largely
due to historical hardcoding of screen graphics I'd imagine)
The price will cannabalise eBook readers to an extent. (not as much as it'll
cannabalise their Air sales though!) It puts the publishers and
manufacturers at conflict immediately, particularly if you're a company with
both electronic book and hardware manufacture divisions. REALLY like that
you can just spin your bookshelf round to get to the store, a wonderful
little touch for encouraging impulse buys. (NB: I would never buy an eBook.
I'm dead tree media all the way, natch)
Was surprised at lack of announcement with major video content provider,
kinda expected something like that when one of the Disney execs was observed
in the audience. After the dust's settled, you'll have the usual
frustrations: unable to install third party apps without jailbreaking, no
Skype without attaching an external camera, the usual walled garden closed
loop approach Apple is renowned for. I find that intensely frustrating and
increasingly contradictory in an area where they're clearly angling
themselves to become the de facto hardware provider for 'casual' household
computing.
wrt video, unless Safari dramatically supports it in an update, we'll be
stuck at the start line because there's little change of Apple refreshing
their codec support when they have that lovely closed loop of iTunes /
iBookstore / App Store, never mind better HTML5 implementation. It'd take
the approval of a Firefox app to make that happen.
... That microlight had a rather porcine pilot, dontcha think?
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Users just want video to work. You Mozilla people are such idealists?
There should have been another sentence in my post, sorry. Yes, xvid being divx backwards is a geeky joke. Of course DivX ;-) in itself was a sly homage to a doomed-to-fail industry attempt :D And before XviD, once upon a time its parent was called Project Mayo... Remember that heady time of multiple competing codecs, MS-MPEG4 ASP, DivX ;-), XviD, 3ivX... How did we all manage before ffdshow? ;)
RE: [backstage] The browser wars, reloaded?
The need to support IE6 brings out that kind of reaction in me, too. Hopefully sometime next year all the internal users who bump up IE6's market share in our stats will have migrated to something made this century and we might just be able to start thinking about dropping it There's no need to support IE6. I don't even consider IE6 backward competibility when I design web sites, nor do I care if people don't like that. Even Microsoft has been pushing new browser versions at them for a few years now via Windows Update, more fool them if they don't keep their machine current. IE6 : IE7 :: NN9 : Firefox (yes I appreciate that for corporate users sometimes they're tied to IE6 - they need more clueful IT departments imho) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] The browser wars, reloaded?
Hopefully it'll leave Firefox well and truly in the bin where it belongs. Must admit I always preferred IE for everyday use (and advocated it very strongly for non-geek users), but I'm an absolute Chrome convert. It. Just. Works. And its Javascript engine is blisteringly quick. I have to use a MBP at work (first gen Intel) - Chrome is FAR faster than Safari (unsurprisingly) or Firefox (which 'feels' bloated on OSX). Chrome just feels right for OSX, I'm really glad they finally pushed out a stableish beta. (Has anyone else noticed this OSX Chrome bug: click on a download link from a site like sourceforge, wait for the modal dialog prompt to display, then either click on the link again or just continue surfing in a new window. After a few seconds Chrome freezes... Download thread tieing up the other threads?) Still, Chrome * on OSX so far. It renders faster, loads faster and has some nice little UI finishes like tabs which slide in and out of existence, cross-window drag and drop tabs, that unified search/address bar which quickly grew on me... - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] The browser wars, reloaded?
There's no need to support IE6. I don't even consider IE6 backward competibility when I design web sites, nor do I care if people don't like that. You wouldn't win any points round here for that attitude, I'm afraid. There isn't anyone here who *wants* to be supporting IE6, I assure you... Of course :) However imho as long as designers continue to meekly defer to clients and their requests to support completely obsolete browsers, the longer it takes to design a good web site, the more costly it becomes and the more complicated it is to maintain - it's really in nobody's best interests. We've collectively been far too wet behind the ears about it for a long time. The customer is not always right. (and this comes from someone who's both a web designer and, wearing his other hat, a (frustrated) client of 'professional' web designers!) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] The browser wars, reloaded?
(I can type faster than the browser can open a new tab? in 2009? are you kidding me?) I found that my IE7/8 tabs started loading WAY fster as soon as I went into Accelerators/BHO options and disabled the Java Quick Start. By turning that one thing off I reduced tab load times from 5-10 seconds to around 3/4 of a second. Not perfect but a vast improvement! - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] The browser wars, reloaded?
I'll be sure to tell the Secretary of State for Health that when he can't use the next release of www.nhs.uk on his office PC. The DoH's still using IE6?! - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] The browser wars, reloaded?
Along with many other central government departments - yes. For reasons outlined very well by Phil in his last reply. It's your money we spend. Santa Claus on a motorbike! It's about time some of that money is allocated to a sitewide browser upgrade :( Can't it just be lumped onto the Capita spend for the central database? It seems to have a blank cheque already - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] The browser wars, reloaded?
You're clearly well-versed in the economics of large distributed government IT infrastructures and DH IT projects to boot. But of course, I'm Joe Public! It's My Money! Your advice will be highly valued, I'm sure. Happy to provide it. Also available for daily on-site consultancy - my fee structure is functionally identical to the current ratecard for onsite SAP consultants ;) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] The browser wars, reloaded?
Ah, but that is the very point of the internet. The very point of IP. The very design. The net was designed to work even if nukes were dropped on the world. No central control means network survival. ...Until one of only two core LINX routers has a senior moment or Google decides to bork its routing ;) (cf. last week's massive disruption and recent intercontinental slowness courtesy of the Almighty G) The UK still relies on a surprisingly small number of backbone carriers, and it seems that the UK internet infrastructure is still amazingly brittle. My impression is that ja.net is still more resilient than the public IP space by virtue of just how many HE nodes there are throughout the UK - and the fact that CERN also uses it for GRID). I'd put my money on the Universities having intersite connectivity longer after the public WWW going down 8)
RE: [backstage] Is this BBC Homeplug product legal?
Usually one wire, singular. With HomePlug I can have ethernet wherever there is a power point, and I do move them around now and then. Can I cast my vote for a 20m CAT5 cable under the carpet, up the stairs, to a discreetly placed gigabit switch on the landing / in the study? You still only use one power socket, way better throughput and far less annoying to our radio ham friends =) and everyone likes ducting CAT5, right? Those flat CAT5 cables look like they could do the trick nicely, but I'm more a fan of the 'just wind it around the banister' method ;) turn your network infrastructure into additional decoration! - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Google Wave
2009/11/27 Tim Dobson li...@tdobson.net Brian Butterworth wrote: Hi folks, I have some Google Wave invites left .. please let me know if you would like one. I also have 16 left. If you'd like one, you're welcome. I wouldn't get excited though. I'm still not really impressed by it. It can be really nice if you have a few friends who also have it, conversations move from just being gimmicky fun to actually being quite engaging if you start to use its multimedia features. However, I'm unsure as to its usefulness as a business tool just yet - I'm open to persuasion though as long as it's actually justifiable ;)
RE: [backstage] Good news for mashups - Ordnance Survey maps to go free online
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/nov/17/ordnance-survey-maps-online The online maps would be free to all, including commercial users who, previously, had to acquire expensive and restrictive licences at £5,000 per usage, a fee many entrepreneurs felt was too high. About time too. Some interesting discussion of these developments happening on the OSM-talk list (from what it seems, it's not fully free (as in speech), more like a subset of the information with the possibility of more being made available at a later date if the right people prod the OS enough ;)
RE: [backstage] iPlayer on Freesat in November.
No obvious statement that it can play the upcoming Freeview HD content but I presume that this is the plan. I'm not sure where they're going to get DVB-T2 chipsets from... TI/RadioScape make them don't they? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door
I do wonder what the point of all this is. I know sometimes circumstances complicate matters, but from the POV of a viewer the Beeb shouldn't be beholden to the rightsholders. I certainly don't want to see a repeat of the same kind of infighting witnessed in the States over the Broadcast Flag. Any additional complexity in the act of broadcasting the channel to its viewers is just worthless in the long run and a waste of license fee contributions. Is BBC HD going to be broadcast 100% in the clear (both video metadata) or are all of the interested parties going to end up having to speak to the Trust and Ofcom about this? (just curious) _ From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Nick Reynolds-FMT Sent: 03 October 2009 10:23 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door i do get this strange sense of deja vu _ From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Jeremy Stone Sent: 02 October 2009 20:19 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door Oh its just like the old days :) Jem Stone Communities Executive | BBC Audio and Music O7966 551242 | twitter: @jemstone | jem.stone [at] bbc.co.uk. - Original Message - From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Sent: Fri Oct 02 20:12:04 2009 Subject: Re: [backstage] The BBC is encrypting its HD signal by the back door Rob Myers wrote: On 02/10/09 19:17, Nick Reynolds-FMT wrote: People on this list may be interested in this latest blog post: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/10/freeview_hd_copy_protecti on_a.html The first commenter is far more worth reading than the original post - http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/10/freeview_hd_copy_protection_a .html?ssorl=1254509384 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/10/freeview_hd_copy_protection_ a.html?ssorl=1254509384ssoc=rd ssoc=rd http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2009/10/freeview_hd_copy_protection_a .html 2. The DTV is not serving the public if it introduces unnecessary controls and complexity into the standards process. Requiring secret codes to decompress the data stream is excluding free and open source software (just like the content scrambling system excluded open source DVD players). The ability to revoke or otherwise impose sanctions on the consumer electronics industry, including retrospective disabling of products and impose restrictions on functionality. After all that is it's intent. 3. To whom ever the DTLA is responding it is not the public. As indicated above, it is about giving the content industries control. 4. It will apply to HD devices without a HDMI output, another overly complex standard that will raise the cost to consumers due to the addition of encryption etc, which restricts the devices it will 'trust'. 5. The BBC's cosy negotiation with rightholders and secretive consultations amounts to us neglecting our responsibilities and a desire to slip this process through quietly This point we take most seriously. Above all else, we are a public organisation funded by the Licence Fee and have committed ourselves to greater transparency and openness because we believe that this is an obligation we have to our audience And yet you are looking to sophistry and an abuse of language to subvert the legal requirement to broadcast an unencrypted signal. It is clear that if you need a secret key to uncompress the broadcast stream rather than using a public standard which anyone can implement, then you are de facto engaged in encryption just like the Content Scrambling System. In my view this is a breach of the legal requirement to broadcast an un-encrypted signal. Any collusion by Ofcom's part, would not void the intention and letter of the law. nick.reyno...@bbc.co.uk How would the cause of audiences be served if the BBC refused to deal with content vendors and as a result audiences could not access that content? As usual it's a difficult balancing act. No it is a blatent breach of the law - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
I totally agree about the Freeview logo. When I was a kid you could get Cooper Black[1] in Boots The Chemist dry transfer lettering (poor man's Letraset). Everytime I see it I just think of the layouts I did at school using a typewriter (before the school has a printer) and Cooper Black. I've even got some it in a box of old things somewhere. Does anyone like the BBC HD logo? It's amost right - that two-tone effect they have on the joined verticals of the HD always looks like pixelation or an encoding flaw to my subconscious mind, which then makes me focus on it and wastes that valuable viewing time ;) and it must be using far more bits to encode the difference when they could just be using a solid black fill for the whole thing. Seems a bit wasteful and quite distracting to be honest. BBC HD dog needs to be done away with completely 100% of the time, imho. I've laboriously tuned to the BBC HD channel myself and should I have a bout of sudden-onset amnesia, I always have the EPG to remind me. Otherwise I always know exactly which channel I'm watching. (yes, I'm a fan of DOGless TV!)
RE: [backstage] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
Moreover, you just *know* that within months of any broadcast flag implementation, the more creative technological tinkerers will have subverted the flag entirely using commonplace/free equipment and software. Like region coding, broadcast flags really are an exercise in stupidity and corporate backslapping. The Beeb should be pointing to what happened with the Broadcast Flag in the States as the perfect case study! The US TV industry hasn't imploded as a result of the Broadcast Flag requirement being dropped, and the world continues to turn in a regular fashion. Why are rightsholders so scared of fully engaging with technology? Metaphor of closing the stable door after the horse has bolted and subsequently gone on to win the Grand National comes to mind. Further reading http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/06/dtv-era-no-broadcast
RE: [backstage] License to Kill Innovation: the Broadcast Flag for UK Digital TV?
I think that there's going to be a lot of unhappy freeview HDTV owners wondering why the TV they have recently bought isn't picking up the new HD channels when they're launched (especially as the TV was probably sold as HD Ready). Prime opportunity to flog another STB / CAM to correctly display broadcast flagged content on pre-BCF-compatible displays? Do I hear the usual suspects (Panny, Alba, Sony, Humax etc) getting in line for tender as I speak? ;)
RE: [backstage] BBC iPlayer - encoding from broadcast rather than master tapes
I thought most TV programmes that can be taken from master tapes are. I've never seen anything recorded off air on iPlayer, and no credit squeezes myself - even for programmes broadcast live. I just had a look at last nights Lottery draw for example and there was nothing on that, nor on Sunday's THe Big Questions. I have noticed credit squeezing / VOs on creds in the past, although this practice seems much reduced nowadays. (still notice it very occasionally though, often on factual programming / current affairs stuff which I presume can only realistically be encoded from live). However, the BBC bug's still there on all programming, in the top-left corner - how come this hasn't been removed yet? Seems a bit pointless when the video's surrounded by appropriate branding already (and wasting precious encoding time rendering the overlay ;)
RE: [backstage] You Tube to drop support for IE6
Large parts of the UK government still use IE6 unfortunately. Especially unfortunate if you happen to be a member of that community :-( For shame, maybe they'll have to do some real work for once ;) IE6 should die a slow and painful death. Lack of comprehensive support for widely used aspects of various web languages, necessitating kludgey workarounds to make things render at least moderately close to how the designers want them to look. It's just plain rubbish. IE6 has lived long past its sell-by-date and should be comprehensively dumped! There's really no excuse for corporates to not update to IE7 or IE8. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] You Tube to drop support for IE6
IE6 should die a slow and painful death. Yep. The main reason www.nhs.uk still supports it is because of all the internal users who have it - many of them senior stakeholders for whom the standard argument about obsolescence wouldn't wash. It's just disgraceful really. Maybe the argument should be made that not upgrading from IE6 is patently unsafe security practice? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] New Blog in beta
Any more feedback on the beta BBC Backstage site? http://www.welcomebackstage.com Don't forget you can now finally comment and ping the new site, even the RSS works as expected. Oooo, purdy. Like that new logo! Wishing I'd thought of that (I had an idea down the same lines but it was horribly inferior). However, the top bar - where it says use our stuff to build your stuff... The menu overlaps. (This is in IE7.) +1 kudos for stripping www from the URL! I HATE that bloody prefix. - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] New Blog in beta
Oh my, don't ever look at it in IE6 :) I completely forgot transparent PNG's are not supported still! Scary stuff IE7 supports alpha chans, and I'm using 7 (but if you're using alpha channel PNGs then they're not showing correctly on the site for some reason... Are they 24-bit?)... They will work in 6, there's been lots written about the hacks to make them work in 6 and 5.5 - http://apptools.com/examples/png-transparency/ as a starting point (or some choice Googling: http://is.gd/repl) - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] New Blog in beta
Also, there's a couple of bits you've missed... feed:http://welcomebackstage.com/feed/; ? Never seen feed: prefixing an RSS feed :P And the top strapline is STILL overlapped by the dropdown menu. Also, if you wipe your mouse cursor up and down the Prototype menu, it behaves peculiarly (sometimes closes itself). Invisible div oddity? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
[backstage] F1 not appearing in iPlayer?
As the new F1 season approaches I'm eagerly looking forward to the various coverage. I'm a little bemused to see that things like Friday's Practice (which is available to view in full on the Beeb's F1 portal) is not available to watch via iPlayer. Is there a reason for this? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
RE: [backstage] Google Streetview ... UK at last
I bet you've never queued outside there though to watch an episode of Two Pints being filmed! (and then proceeded to trace your route back to the car park on the other side of the main road... 16 quid to park for about five hours! twilight robbery.) _ From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Andrew Bowden Sent: 19 March 2009 09:44 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: RE: [backstage] Google Streetview ... UK at last Is it rather tragic to be scanning Wood Lane in the hope that you're in a photo just because you passed the car when it was stuck in traffic? I guess so. _ From: owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk [mailto:owner-backst...@lists.bbc.co.uk] On Behalf Of Brian Butterworth Sent: 19 March 2009 08:42 To: backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk Subject: [backstage] Google Streetview ... UK at last http://tinyurl.com/bbcgooglesm About time, really. Great with the built in compass on my G1.And now for some live data overlays? -- Brian Butterworth follow me on twitter: http://twitter.com/briantist web: http://www.ukfree.tv - independent digital television and switchover advice, since 2002
[backstage] 1Xtra, Radio1 and Radio 4 currently off-air on iPlayer landing page for a few minutes?
How come they sometimes show this? (like they were just around 7pm) The TV-Anytime XML feeds have listings but the iPlayer front page wasn't showing them correctly. However, upon reloading the page a couple of minutes later, it was fine. Each station's respective pages on the iPlayer site showed correct now playing information. Was I just unlucky enough to catch the page during the o' clock changeover? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
[backstage] Radio 4 DAB problems?
... I couldn't hear any problems with Radio 4 today, but ironically I've only been listening via FM (quips could be made at this point but I'll hold off for another time ;). I just heard the broadcast apology regarding the issues that they've apparently been having with the DAB broadcast, and I'm curious as to what they were - anybody with some technological insight care to shed some light on what they were? - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/backstage@lists.bbc.co.uk/
