JO
The standards across the board are now so bad in general, I'm no longer even surprised such a thing was allowed on air. That screengrab literally did not even raise anything more than a "meh, looks about right for them". But I think that particular award has to go to the indescribably bad BBC channel promotion straps they used to put out before the move to BH.
Oh and I urge you not to view BBC2.
Has anyone spotted this end board for Our World current airing on BBC News?
http://up.metropol247.co.uk/bbcme/Our%20World.jpg
Genuinely the worst piece of graphic design I've seen on the news channel. Can't believe someone genuinely thought this was good enough to be put on air.
http://up.metropol247.co.uk/bbcme/Our%20World.jpg
Genuinely the worst piece of graphic design I've seen on the news channel. Can't believe someone genuinely thought this was good enough to be put on air.
The standards across the board are now so bad in general, I'm no longer even surprised such a thing was allowed on air. That screengrab literally did not even raise anything more than a "meh, looks about right for them". But I think that particular award has to go to the indescribably bad BBC channel promotion straps they used to put out before the move to BH.
Oh and I urge you not to view BBC2.
DO
I'm not sure I'd describe that as design. It'd would rightly get panned if someone posted it in the Gallery.
But - the text is 75% of normal height - i.e. what you'd get if you took a 4:3 image and squished it into a 16:9 frame - it looks rushed, by someone who didn't have access to the correct templates, so they just bodged it without looking at the end result - but it could also be the messed up result of a badly set up template that wasn't checked.
Genuinely the worst piece of graphic design I've seen on the news channel. Can't believe someone genuinely thought this was good enough to be put on air.
I'm not sure I'd describe that as design. It'd would rightly get panned if someone posted it in the Gallery.
But - the text is 75% of normal height - i.e. what you'd get if you took a 4:3 image and squished it into a 16:9 frame - it looks rushed, by someone who didn't have access to the correct templates, so they just bodged it without looking at the end result - but it could also be the messed up result of a badly set up template that wasn't checked.
DB
What happens when someone doesn't have the correct template and gets rushed to air.
What happens when someone doesn't have the correct template and gets rushed to air.
03
What happens when someone doesn't have the correct template and gets rushed to air.
BBC NC has the most inconsistant slates of any channel. I'm currently hating the promo for what's coming up during the day on the news channel. I'm no specialist in broadcast graphics, but surely a template can be readily available for VT editors to just edit the text and export at the end of the VT?
What happens when someone doesn't have the correct template and gets rushed to air.
BBC NC has the most inconsistant slates of any channel. I'm currently hating the promo for what's coming up during the day on the news channel. I'm no specialist in broadcast graphics, but surely a template can be readily available for VT editors to just edit the text and export at the end of the VT?
CR
On the overnights I've noticed that the News Channel seems to be keeping its own ticker for a lot longer. Whilst previously for the simulcast they took the BBC World News ticker (unless I'm horribly wrong), with the much shorter headlines, past 2am it's still definitely the UK ticker as it has headlines of UK interest that are not world news, and the UK get in touch details. Is this just a case of not updating the ticker overnight instead of using the World ticker, or something else?
DA
Is the picture quality on HARDtalk always this bad, or am I imagining things? Particularly the close-up of the interviewee - looks like it's been upscaled or converted from NTSC (I'm watching on Freeview SD).
And someone didn't do their research:
"They cut out part of your pancreas."
"No, no they didn't."
And someone didn't do their research:
"They cut out part of your pancreas."
"No, no they didn't."
DF
Looks like an old repeat since it's coming from TC7 - I don't think Sarah Montague still presents HardTalk either.
Is the picture quality on HARDtalk always this bad, or am I imagining things? Particularly the close-up of the interviewee - looks like it's been upscaled or converted from NTSC (I'm watching on Freeview SD).
And someone didn't do their research:
"They cut out part of your pancreas."
"No, no they didn't."
And someone didn't do their research:
"They cut out part of your pancreas."
"No, no they didn't."
Looks like an old repeat since it's coming from TC7 - I don't think Sarah Montague still presents HardTalk either.
