Am I alone in this, or does anyone else think TV channels should introduce some kind of symbol, similar to Channel Four's red triangle warning they had in the 1980s, so people with epilepsy know when to tune away from a channel? Because someone may come into a programme in the middle of it and may have missed the warning by the CA or newsreader.
Or would this be a bad idea because it would lose viewers? I don't have epilepsy myself, but I do think this would be a good idea.
If introduced and it was forgotten and a sufferer subsequently had a major attack then all hell would break loose. Best to leave to an informal verbal warning where thought appropriate.
Epilepsy affects about 0.5% of the population, and fewer than 5% of those people have photosensitive epilepsy. Of those with photosenstive epilepsy, a proportion struggle to watch TV at all because of the inherent flickering of the picture. That leaves only a very small proportion of the viewing population for whom such a system would prove beneficial.
The biggest incident in British TV history of triggering photosensitive epilepsy is believed to be the Olympic 2012 promotion footage - which affected only eighteen people.
These days there should be no need for any warnings or announcements before non-live programmes as all pre-recorded programmes broadcast on mainstream channels will have to be Ofcom compliant, and this pretty much requires a Harding FPA certificate. The Harding FPA is a machine/test algorithm that detects flashing sequences (and other patterns) that are likely to trigger photosensitive reactions. If you fail this your programme is deemed to have content likely to be problematic, and you have to re-edit (in some cases re-shoot) to be compliant and be allowed to transmit.
All BBC archive content is also Harding FPA tested when it is transferred from the older analogue formats to a digital format, so shows made before testing was introduced are tested on transfer, and repeats or re-use of dodgy sequences can be avoided.
Thus all pre-recorded shows should no longer ever need an announcement - they shouldn't ever cause a problem. (This is because many people don't know they are photosensitive - so warnings aren't a catch-all)
The exception is live content (such as news conferences on news channels, pop concerts covered live etc.) and then announcements should be given DURING the programme not just at the beginning if at all possible (as there is no guarantee a viewer will see the pre-programme announcement), and also as-live repeats and fast-turnaround news and similar items that may not have time to be tested and re-edited. Again - better to warn just before the offending sequence if you know about it, rather than in the programme intro.
The question should be what event triggered channels to start giving so many flashing image warnings? I think it only started around the late 90s or early 21st Century.
Do we have more flashing images now than we did in the 80s?
The question should be what event triggered channels to start giving so many flashing image warnings? I think it only started around the late 90s or early 21st Century.
Do we have more flashing images now than we did in the 80s?
There were a number of cases of kids being hospitalised as a result of flashing sequences on TV in the 80s (particulary in Japan?) I believe, and modern production techniques allowed more "flashy" sequences to be created (fast cutting, sped up motion etc. can all be problematic), and modern TV cameras were clearer and allowed flashing sequences to be captured (older cameras were laggy and weren't as able to capture some stuff that causes problems).
Research also linked certain patterns and flashing frequencies to fitting in some people - and the whole industry became more aware of the dangers that certain stuff could pose.
These days the only warnings should be on news items (or similar live shows), or live event coverage. No recorded shows that are produced well in advance should require a warning.
Its been my experience for the last decade or so for "strobe and/or flashing lights will be used in this performance" signage to be displayed in theatres for almost all productions - despite there often being little or no chance of anyone prone to the condition having a seizure triggered. I can't recall the specific hertz (flash rate) for strobes, but its way faster than I've ever had cause to design for a show, but I'd still make sure there's a sign up.
It's almost a little unfair, as some may be dissuaded from attending the performance - but its not for me or anyone else to take a risk on someone else's behalf. Lighting fixtures (aside from traditional strobes) have advanced a lot in the last 10-20 years - high powered moving heads with mechanical shutters can create stroboscopic effects, as well as instantly reactive LEDs, which flash away as fast as you like.
I can understand why its taken so seriously in TV - you don't really want someone having an accident on your hands if a simple warning could prevent it.
Rather than a DOG it might be possible to use an MHEG effect similar to the Press Red ones, for all content warnings, which appear for a short time after changing channel, for the benefit of people who missed the start of the programme and the continuity announcement.
Rather than a DOG it might be possible to use an MHEG effect similar to the Press Red ones, for all content warnings, which appear for a short time after changing channel, for the benefit of people who missed the start of the programme and the continuity announcement.
The point is that all mainstream shows shouldn't need an apology (they're pre-tested and edited so as not to be a problem), and the shows that do won't know in advance that they do. Implementing MHEG stuff requires some pre-planning, which is not possible.
Its been my experience for the last decade or so for "strobe and/or flashing lights will be used in this performance" signage to be displayed in theatres for almost all productions - despite there often being little or no chance of anyone prone to the condition having a seizure triggered. I can't recall the specific hertz (flash rate) for strobes, but its way faster than I've ever had cause to design for a show, but I'd still make sure there's a sign up.
It's almost a little unfair, as some may be dissuaded from attending the performance - but its not for me or anyone else to take a risk on someone else's behalf. Lighting fixtures (aside from traditional strobes) have advanced a lot in the last 10-20 years - high powered moving heads with mechanical shutters can create stroboscopic effects, as well as instantly reactive LEDs, which flash away as fast as you like.
I can understand why its taken so seriously in TV - you don't really want someone having an accident on your hands if a simple warning could prevent it.
3Hz and faster from memory are the effects that can cause problems in flashing terms. (In a 25Hz system, 3 shots shorter than 9 frames with significant luminance changes between them would be a problem)
However tracking past railings on a sunny day, showing a moving stars and stripes US flag etc. can also be problematic.
3Hz and faster from memory are the effects that can cause problems in flashing terms. (In a 25Hz system, 3 shots shorter than 9 frames with significant luminance changes between them would be a problem)
However tracking past railings on a sunny day, showing a moving stars and stripes US flag etc. can also be problematic.
Indeed, 'real life' is full of potential hazards. Street lamp bulbs that are on their way out, car headlights through crash barriers, sun through railings on a sunny winter day (in fact the latter made me feel so uncomfortable the other day, I had to look sideways as I walked along). Surely something that inherently flickers like a TV screen should be considered to be a photosensitive hazard at all times, to flag the possibility it rather like having your car tell you on start up that you could kill yourself if you (or even someone else) is not careful ?
The point is that all mainstream shows shouldn't need an apology (they're pre-tested and edited so as not to be a problem)
And yet we probably hear "Mark Austin's report contains flashing images" in the news more than anywhere else, even though the VT reports are all pre-recorded too; and yet on the rolling news channels they don't warn of flashing images every time they cross live to a press conference.