From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

I've just watched what I think probably the best quality kinescope
transfer I've come across (from 1964 and 1959 - subject matter may not
be to everyone's taste [don't worry, inoffensive]): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNlZEnzbYaM - but it reminded me of
something I've always wondered: given that it was always monochrome
(AFAIK - is there any colour kinescope?), why didn't they underscan -
with appropriate gain, focus etc. - adjustments, so as to get rid of the
lost corners?
The second half of the clip (earlier date, if I understand the notes
correctly; not _quite_ as good picture quality) mostly _has_ lost the
corner effects, but not entirely - it creeps in about 4:24, just at
bottom left, coming and going for the rest of the clip. there's also an
odd banding effect 4:26-4:32.
(Although the dancing looks French and the hairstyles American, the
uploader assures both performances were in K||ln [Cologne].)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 31/12/2025 14:03, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

I've just watched what I think probably the best quality kinescope
transfer I've come across (from 1964 and 1959 - subject matter may not
be to everyone's taste [don't worry, inoffensive]): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNlZEnzbYaM - but it reminded me of
something I've always wondered: given that it was always monochrome
(AFAIK - is there any colour kinescope?), why didn't they underscan -
with appropriate gain, focus etc. - adjustments, so as to get rid of the
lost corners?

An artistic decision to recreate the nostalgic feeling of old material.
The choreography dates from 1964 and 1959. Probably shot on 16mm film
then printed using a shaped gate.

At least whoever put the clip up cleaned the film before it got scanned
and didn't add the all too common "old film" grot.

The second half of the clip (earlier date, if I understand the notes correctly; not _quite_ as good picture quality) mostly _has_ lost the
corner effects, but not entirely - it creeps in about 4:24, just at
bottom left, coming and going for the rest of the clip. there's also an
odd banding effect 4:26-4:32.

1964 for the first dance and 1959 for the second. The banding may be an
AGC glitch in the scanner?
--
Tciao for Now!

John.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 2025/12/31 15:7:29, John Williamson wrote:

On 31/12/2025 14:03, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

I've just watched what I think probably the best quality kinescope
transfer I've come across (from 1964 and 1959 - subject matter may not
be to everyone's taste [don't worry, inoffensive]):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNlZEnzbYaM - but it reminded me of
something I've always wondered: given that it was always monochrome
(AFAIK - is there any colour kinescope?), why didn't they underscan -
with appropriate gain, focus etc. - adjustments, so as to get rid of the
lost corners?

An artistic decision to recreate the nostalgic feeling of old material.
The choreography dates from 1964 and 1959. Probably shot on 16mm film
then printed using a shaped gate.

Ah, you're suggesting it was actually filmed in the first place, i. e.
no kinescope at all. (And then, as you say, trimmed later for "effect".)
That _would_ explain the good quality.

At least whoever put the clip up cleaned the film before it got scanned
and didn't add the all too common "old film" grot.

Oh, indeed. That really irritates, doesn't it!

The second half of the clip (earlier date, if I understand the notes
correctly; not _quite_ as good picture quality) mostly _has_ lost the
corner effects, but not entirely - it creeps in about 4:24, just at
bottom left, coming and going for the rest of the clip. there's also an
odd banding effect 4:26-4:32.

1964 for the first dance and 1959 for the second. The banding may be an
AGC glitch in the scanner?

Could be. I think it was only one angle, so maybe also a camera fault.


So - although it looks like this pair of clips had little to do with
kinescope - my question remains: in the clips that exist that definitely
were kinescoped (e. g. the 195x Carousel and Cinderella), why _did_ they
not underscan to not lose the corners?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()ALIS-Ch++(p)Ar++T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Come on, Pooh," and he walked off.
"Where are we going?" said Pooh.
"Nowhere," said Christopher Robin.
So they began going there.
~A.A.Milne
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2