-

Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Question for buyers of post-1980 shows.


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
26 replies to this topic

#1 of 27 OFFLINE   Mark To

Mark To

    Supporting Actor

  • 574 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 23 2004

Posted March 31 2004 - 04:09 AM

I'm just very curious about this so I'd be interested in getting some responses. Do the people, and there seem to be many of them, who foam at the mouth for all of these post-1980 shows, want these things because the DVD format is better quality than tape or because they never taped the shows to begin with. My other question is, if you wanted these shows, why didn't you tape them when they were on? I collect TV shows. I've been collecting for about 25 years. Any show that's been on in that time, if I wanted to have it in my collection, I have taped perfect quality on SP speed with a high grade tape. While it would be nice to get some of these on DVD so as to save me time transferring them myself, there are hundreds of shows prior to the taping era which I would like to get uncut and not off of old, faded or worn out film prints. Unfortunately, I didn't have the option to record these shows in their original form. People in the post-1980 era did with those shows.

#2 of 27 OFFLINE   Scott Kimball

Scott Kimball

    Screenwriter

  • 1,500 posts
  • Join Date: May 08 2000

Posted March 31 2004 - 04:34 AM

Quality. Convenience. Space.

The quality of a VHS or SVHS off-air tape can't touch the A/V quality of DVD. Simple as that. Anamorphic video (when appropriate) and 5.1 surround are not an option on tape.

Not to mention the commercials... even if you cut them out while recording, the transition is rarely smooth.

Convenience: direct access via DVD is obviously an advantage... not to mention the issue of storage space. Storing approximately 170 episodes of a 7 year run of an hour-long series at SP on VHS takes mucho shelf space.

I do have some series on tape that I recorded. As soon as they are available on DVD, I will buy the DVD.

-Scott

#3 of 27 OFFLINE   Sean.S

Sean.S

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 185 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 19 2004

Posted March 31 2004 - 04:46 AM

The increased video quality, the lack of commercials, extras such as commentary and deleted scene, the ease of placing them on the shelf, storage space, cool boxes, etc. Posted Image

#4 of 27 OFFLINE   Rob Mac

Rob Mac

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 123 posts
  • Join Date: May 27 2001
  • Real Name:Rob
  • LocationOntario, Canada.

Posted March 31 2004 - 04:54 AM

Old non-remastered washed out scratched film prints, tape blips and dropouts, tape stretching over the years, extra edits for more commercial time, bleeding colors, Lo-Fi sound...GIVE ME DVD.
Rob Mac

#5 of 27 OFFLINE   Eric F

Eric F

    Screenwriter

  • 1,810 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 05 1999

Posted March 31 2004 - 05:05 AM

No Commercials.

Newer shows like B5, Stargate SG-1 and Smallville are available 16:9 anamorphic with surround sound.

That's enough for me.

#6 of 27 OFFLINE   Anthony Hom

Anthony Hom

    Supporting Actor

  • 893 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 24 1999

Posted March 31 2004 - 05:27 AM

I have recorded shows when they were in network and edited the ads out. Shows like Simpsons, Murphy Brown, Newsradio, 3rd Rock from the sun, Star Trek DS9 & TNG, Empty Nest, Roseanne, and even syndicated re-runs like WKRP, Bob Newhart show, Odd Couple, Get Smart.

While the quality is not as sharp as DVD, there is one thing you cannot do on a DVD (unless you have a carousel). You can watch 6-8 non-stop hours of one show without commercials. Its quite an experience. In know the show in EP is not as sharp, but if you like the content so much, the quality doesn't have to be the sharpest.

#7 of 27 OFFLINE   Jason Seaver

Jason Seaver

    Lead Actor

  • 9,306 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 1969

Posted March 31 2004 - 05:48 AM

Well, mostly from not having taped the shows to begin with. Aside from being a little on the young side to have done so, it's tough to know from the start which are keepers, and I've got enough VHS tapes full of I-don't-know-what to contemplate starting a collection for everything.

And, even for the few series I do have complete (or nearly so) on VHS, I would prefer them on a sturdier, better-looking format.

Plus, maybe it's hopelessly naive of me, but I sort of think that if I'm going to be keeping a copy that I can watch at any time, the people who made it should get paid for it.
Jay's Movie Blog - A movie-viewing diary.
Transplanted Life: Sci-fi soap opera about a man placed in a new body, updated two or three times a week.
Trading Post Inn - Another gender-bending soap, with different collaborators writing different points of view.

"What? Since when was this an energy...

#8 of 27 OFFLINE   Scott Kimball

Scott Kimball

    Screenwriter

  • 1,500 posts
  • Join Date: May 08 2000

Posted March 31 2004 - 05:57 AM

Quote:
You can watch 6-8 non-stop hours of one show without commercials. Its quite an experience. In know the show in EP is not as sharp, but if you like the content so much, the quality doesn't have to be the sharpest.


Umm... no offense, but... yuck!

-Scott

#9 of 27 OFFLINE   Deb Walsh

Deb Walsh

    Stunt Coordinator

  • 210 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 01 2004

Posted March 31 2004 - 07:01 AM

In the early part of the 1980s, I only had one VCR available, and I had to share it with my roommate. She ended up with some shows I loved, but she lives on the other side of the country, and she dumped all her tapes when she got married. So the recordings I watched in the early '80s simply don't exist any more (and they weren't offered to me, otherwise I would have snapped 'em up!). In addition, if two shows were up against each other, I had to choose which one got taped. Some shows I never heard of back then, too. Or kept forgetting to tape.

Nowadays, I have multiple recorders (VHS, Beta and DVD), and great reception with satellite. I still upgrade to DVD when shows I've recorded come out on the format. I want clean copies with no commercials, maybe some extras, and close captioning (which a lot of '80s material did not have - captioning was on-screen in the early days, and TV with caption decoders didn't really start happening until the '90s).

There's also the fact that tape degrades over time. My tapes have lasted longer than they were originally supposed to, but I can see some quality loss. Magnetic fields have always been an issue for tapes - I don't think that's true for DVDs? Or am I wrong on that?
Deb Walsh (debwalsh@aol.com)
http://www.debwalsh.com/press/

#10 of 27 OFFLINE   Anthony Hom

Anthony Hom

    Supporting Actor

  • 893 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 24 1999

Posted March 31 2004 - 08:28 AM

Quote:
Umm... no offense, but... yuck!

-Scott



I can agree with that to a certain extent, but to clarify, I do not normally sit and veg for 6 hours on one show, but if I have to do house work, a hobby, or do work stuff at home, it acts as a fireplace, and I can choose to watch at times.

#11 of 27 OFFLINE   Casey Trowbridg

Casey Trowbridg

    Lead Actor

  • 9,209 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 22 2003

Posted March 31 2004 - 09:36 AM

1. Better quality media that lasts longer.
2. Shows that come out unedited or even have footage added back in.
3. Space reasons, DVD seasons take up less of it than video taped seasons
4. I can get them in order of production, or in the order they aired simply by going to an episode list. Sometimes this is really important if they showed something out of its production order and therefor it made less sense.
5. I was too young to tape everything in the 80's and just don't feel like doing it today.

#12 of 27 OFFLINE   Mark To

Mark To

    Supporting Actor

  • 574 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 23 2004

Posted March 31 2004 - 05:45 PM

1. Better quality media that lasts longer.
Hopefully. They said tape wouldn't last and I have tapes that are 25 years old that are beautiful without any dropouts.

2. Shows that come out unedited or even have footage added back in.
Shows are only edited in syndication not on their original network run. Complete is complete. I haven't heard of any shows being made longer than they originally were.
3. Space reasons, DVD seasons take up less of it than video taped seasons

You get no argument from me here. You ever try storing 10 or 20 thousands tapes. Not easy.

4. I can get them in order of production, or in the order they aired simply by going to an episode list. Sometimes this is really important if they showed something out of its production order and therefor it made less sense.

This I don't really relate to as just about every show I care about had self-contained episodes and it didn't matter if you watched episode 90 followed by episode 10. That whole concept of every series having continuing stories is a recent (bad) idea. As for order, if you taped them as run on the network, you got them in order.

5. I was too young to tape everything in the 80's and just don't feel like doing it today.

Well, I guess I had the advantage of being old enough to tape what I wanted. Unfortunately the majority of the shows I really like are from the 60s not the 80s. So with a few exceptions like Moonlighting, The Wonder Years, The Equalizer, etc., there wasn't much worth taping IMO.

#13 of 27 OFFLINE   Casey Trowbridg

Casey Trowbridg

    Lead Actor

  • 9,209 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 22 2003

Posted March 31 2004 - 07:21 PM

Quote:
Shows are only edited in syndication not on their original network run. Complete is complete. I haven't heard of any shows being made longer than they originally
were.

Friends for one. Another instance I like to use is that sometimes they get to put stuff back in that they wanted to include but couldn't due to time constraints. Usually this comes in a deleted scenes section but sometimes as in the case of friends, its inserted right in to the episode. Even though shows are not edited until they hit sindication, they still must be edited for time. As an example, the Simpsons episodes on the air today are shorter than they were a few years ago, because of commercials and Fox airing more of them.

As for the order of the episodes, take a show like Saved by the Bell. First let me say that SBTB is not what I'd call a great or even a good show, but a purchase for me because it was so cheesy and sometimes I'm in to that sort of thing. Anyway, when NBC first aired the series, they did it out of order, and it wasn't even close. How would you feel for instance if you watched a TV show for a few weeks, and then saw an episode where 1 of the characters first moves to the town where the series is set and tries to make friends with the kids at school even though the week before he was already their good friend? That's pretty much what NBC did with Saved by the Bell, and unfortunately this problem was *not* corrected for the DVD release.

That really has nothing to do with Mark's question, which is a great 1 BTW, but I did want to be able to mention it again.

#14 of 27 OFFLINE   Yee-Ming

Yee-Ming

    Producer

  • 4,330 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 04 2002
  • Real Name:Yee Ming Lim

Posted March 31 2004 - 07:50 PM

Just about all the reasons I'd cite have already been mentioned. For me, in particular I'd highlight the fact that my family didn't get a VCR until 1984/5, and also back then even VHS tapes weren't very cheap, and as a teen you can't exactly ask your parents to be shelling up mucho dinero on lots of blank tapes.

I only ever "kept" one series: ST:TNG. Which I was happy to replace with DVD the moment they came out, for the usual quality, space, convenience etc reasons. Also they look nice, compared to a wall of crummy assorted VHS tapes of various brands, packaging/labels etc. Funny thing, once when on holiday I came across a rubber-stamp of the ST:TNG logo (as seen on the opening credits) and I wanted to buy it for use in making uniform labels for my collection; I forgot to buy it, and in retrospect I'm probably too lazy to have bothered even if I'd bought it. So there. Posted Image

#15 of 27 OFFLINE   Gary Seven

Gary Seven

    Screenwriter

  • 1,437 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 15 2003
  • Real Name:Gaston
  • LocationLake Worth, Florida

Posted April 01 2004 - 06:27 AM

I've taped many shows in the 80s and 90s. They will hold me over until their release on DVD or some other format in the future.

Why would I spend money to replace these tapes? Like the majority of people here, fidelity is of primary importance, in both audio AND video. It is why I have vested 20,000 dollars into a home theater/audio center. The additonal benefits like storage, commentaries and extras are icing on the cake.

#16 of 27 OFFLINE   John Berggren

John Berggren

    Producer

  • 3,245 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 17 1999

Posted April 01 2004 - 07:15 AM

Quote:
That whole concept of every series having continuing stories is a recent (bad) idea. As for order, if you taped them as run on the network, you got them in order.

I think it's unfair to say that continuing stories on television is a bad idea. Television is a special medium in that you CAN have continuing storylines. Aside from sitcoms, the majority of what I enjoy most is of a continuing nature. Some more than others.

Stargate SG-1 is a "continuing" series that you can enjoy individual episodes of, but if you watch them in order, you get a greater story.

Babylon 5, Alias, and 24 all work as continuous stories only. These are excellent programs with excellent writing. I can't imagine suggesting that they are "bad" simply because they continue from week to week.

If a show was completely stagnant, I'd be disinterested in it. As it is, most programs, even of the most episodic nature grow and change as the weeks and years go on. As a result, having them in order is ideal.
Support the fight against Multiple Sclerosis as I ride in the 2007 MS 150 in New Bern this September.

Be a Widescreen Advocate

#17 of 27 OFFLINE   John Berggren

John Berggren

    Producer

  • 3,245 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 17 1999

Posted April 01 2004 - 07:25 AM

So far as reasons to buy DVDs rather than tape from television is concerned:

1) I now have my last VCR. I probably won't get another just to watch the tapes I have now.

2) Station ID logos. I hate the bugs that are being broadcast today. DVD takes them away.

3) Squished Credits/tags. The annoying practice of popping up an ad or a news lead during the closing of a show.

4) Audio over credits. The equally annoying practice of announcing the next program while the credits roll.

5) No commercials - clean edits with fade to black

6) Scene Access, Episode Access

7) Clarity. 16x9. 5.1 Surround Sound.

8) Space.

9) No scheduling conflicts - I don't have to worry that 24 is on at the same time as It's All Relative is on at the same time as Frasier.

10) No hassle - someone has "taped" them all for me and arranged them in a box for easy consecutive viewing.
Support the fight against Multiple Sclerosis as I ride in the 2007 MS 150 in New Bern this September.

Be a Widescreen Advocate

#18 of 27 OFFLINE   Casey Trowbridg

Casey Trowbridg

    Lead Actor

  • 9,209 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 22 2003

Posted April 01 2004 - 07:33 AM

Another reason I like buying these shows on DVD, is that unless I had many different setups back then, I could only tape one show at a time, what if there were 2 shows on competing networks I wanted? I can't tell you how many shows I've discovered because of their DVD release. I never caught King of Queens on TV, but I bought season 1 on a whim and really enjoy it, so now I watch regularly. Basically, it allows me to explore something I hadn't seen before. I must admit I'll only do this if the price is right, I wouldn't blind buy a TV show that cost $100 or something like that, but $25 was reasonable enough.

#19 of 27 OFFLINE   Chris^B

Chris^B

    Auditioning

  • 11 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 30 2004

Posted April 01 2004 - 07:38 AM

I don't watch "television". I don't have cable. Don't receive local channels. Don't have any interest in it. When I did have it all, I would become a mindless zombie. I'd rather spend my time doing something good. So, my wife and I decided to just stick with a VHS and DVD player and limit our watching to tv to an hour or two a week (sometimes much less than that). It's odd, but we really like it.

So, just to give a different reason, that's ours.

#20 of 27 OFFLINE   Mark To

Mark To

    Supporting Actor

  • 574 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 23 2004

Posted April 01 2004 - 08:25 AM

"I don't watch "television". I don't have cable. Don't receive local channels. Don't have any interest in it. When I did have it all, I would become a mindless zombie. I'd rather spend my time doing something good. So, my wife and I decided to just stick with a VHS and DVD player and limit our watching to tv to an hour or two a week (sometimes much less than that). It's odd, but we really like it.

So, just to give a different reason, that's ours."

So, what exactly do you do with your time? I don't watch television either, in the traditional sense. I record shows to watch at my convenience, forwarding thru commercials. Even if I happen to be home when something I watch is on, I will do something else. I won't spend 1 hour of my time to watch 42 minutes of program with 18 minutes of crap. Best invention: DVD hard drive (and TIVO). Haven't seen a commercial in years.


Back to TV on DVD and Blu-ray



Forum Nav Content I Follow