"This report DOES contain flash photography"

What's currently on the box
Post Reply
User avatar
Bernie
D-MAC
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 9:49 pm

"This report DOES contain flash photography"

Post by Bernie »

This announcement about every five minutes on BBC News DOES start to make me go bonkers. Why don't they just say at the beginning that all BBC News programmes may contain flash photography and leave it at that? I wonder what proportion of the population is both susceptible and concentrating enough for it to be important?

B

User avatar
Beaker
625 lines
Posts: 275
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 11:22 pm

Re: "This report DOES contain flash photography"

Post by Beaker »

It always sounds like boasting to me.....:o)
If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One!

Mike S
D-MAC
Posts: 725
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 8:05 pm

Re: "This report DOES contain flash photography"

Post by Mike S »

Bernie wrote:I wonder what proportion of the population is both susceptible and concentrating enough for it to be important?
500,000 people in the UK have epilepsy according to the NHS website.

I agree about the 'DOES' intonation though.

Brian F
D-MAC
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: "This report DOES contain flash photography"

Post by Brian F »

Beaker wrote:It always sounds like boasting to me.....:o)
Yes I always add mentally "But most of the photography is quite mundane "

User avatar
Ross
D-MAC
Posts: 646
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 11:06 am

Re: "This report DOES contain flash photography"

Post by Ross »

Out of interest, have the photographers outside a première or notorious court case ever triggered an epileptic fit in celebrities or passers-by?

Or does it being on telly at 50fps make it more likely to happen in viewers?

User avatar
Nick Cooper 625
D-MAC
Posts: 965
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 8:42 am
Location: Hither Green, London
Contact:

Re: "This report DOES contain flash photography"

Post by Nick Cooper 625 »

Ross wrote:Out of interest, have the photographers outside a première or notorious court case ever triggered an epileptic fit in celebrities or passers-by?

Or does it being on telly at 50fps make it more likely to happen in viewers?
It seems that photosensitive epilepsy can be triggered in the "real world" (e.g. by strobe lights), but video displays can even affect those with epilepsy that is non-photosensitive.
"Moral indignation is jealousy with a halo." [Wells]

Brian F
D-MAC
Posts: 500
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: "This report DOES contain flash photography"

Post by Brian F »

When using a strobe light in an amateur play I was advised when I enquired from a trade association that it is normally flashes at the rate of 7 per second (or very near to that) that were thought to cause problems.

Lone Dog
405 lines
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 9:43 am

Re: "This report DOES contain flash photography"

Post by Lone Dog »

Just leafing through the TV guide today, I notice a couple of films on C5 are edited for flashing images - Chicken Little and Spider-Man 3 (which is also edited for violence). I thought warnings were given beforehand, but now it seems they are editing films for it.

GarethR
HD
Posts: 1160
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:18 pm

Re: "This report DOES contain flash photography"

Post by GarethR »

That's the only way for broadcasters to cover their arses, really. A warning is only useful if you actually see it and act on it, and it only needs a single person to miss a warning and be affected by flashing images.

We've mentioned it before, but AFAIK the titles of both Cheggers Plays Pop and Dick Barton: Special Agent would be rejected for broadcast today due to the speed of the flashing colours. There are probably plenty of other examples too.

Gallunach
405 lines
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: "This report DOES contain flash photography"

Post by Gallunach »

Lone Dog wrote:Just leafing through the TV guide today, I notice a couple of films on C5 are edited for flashing images - Chicken Little and Spider-Man 3 ....
How come that apparently wasn't a problem when they were in the cinema or especially released to DVD .

Are they widening the guidelines all the time ?

GarethR
HD
Posts: 1160
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 7:18 pm

Re: "This report DOES contain flash photography"

Post by GarethR »

Gallunach wrote: How come that apparently wasn't a problem when they were in the cinema or especially released to DVD .
Cinema and home video have no regulations about flashing images. Broadcast TV does.

User avatar
Roll ACR
625 lines
Posts: 233
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2012 5:11 pm
Location: Winchester

Re: "This report DOES contain flash photography"

Post by Roll ACR »

It is a service to those who are susceptible, and as with "if you don't want to know the score, look away now." It at least warns them specifically when they need to avert their gaze. But the "DOES" is not only preposterously intoned, it's totally superfluous. What's wrong with "this report contains flash photography/flashing images". It's like when they lead into a live inject or a special report by saying "so and so joins me now live FROM Kuala Lumpur..." The least important word in the sentence gets treated to the spotlight. It's the modern affectation of newscasters, the Alan Partridge factor. In order to sound like a proper journalist or newscaster I have to talk like a twit because everyone else does. Never happened in Gordon Honeycomb's day.

Mike S
D-MAC
Posts: 725
Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 8:05 pm

Re: "This report DOES contain flash photography"

Post by Mike S »

GarethR wrote: We've mentioned it before, but AFAIK the titles of both Cheggers Plays Pop and Dick Barton: Special Agent would be rejected for broadcast today due to the speed of the flashing colours. There are probably plenty of other examples too.
One that immediately springs to mind is the 'Stop the Film' segment of the Monty Python Blackmail sketch, which even makes me feel a bit wobbly.

(Thinking about it now, I'm curious what they shot it on, and how they achieved the effect. It looks like standard 16mm film underneath it all. YouTube can't quite handle it, so the clip looks considerably less strobey that it does on TV.)

Post Reply