[Stuart Wright]

BBC News - Film directors launch campaign for correct TV settings

[Trollslayer]

And AVF is credited at the start.

[Palladio]

[Welsh Whirlwind]

Many congratulations to the team for bring this issue to the attention of the media and public.

[Freedom810]

A nice SEO boost to the site

[M1DLG]

I'd be surprised if Scott know it all Wilkinson isn't behind this. The settings on a TV are subjective and objective and if the directors think that they can dictate how we set our TV's then they have no idea about what suits us the viewer. It's not just about how the artist paints the picture, it's also how the eye see's the picture. If they think that they should have that much control over it, then I'd just as soon not watch their films, it's not as if there has been much worth watching in the last 30-40 years, the best films were made in the 30's-70's, then everything was CGI'ed to death and the skill in film making was taken away too. Now directors want to force 3D on to us, yet it really is a load of tack, and if you complain about it then you are a subversive who doesn't want to conform, and in another forum the idea of allowing directors to control the TV settings overriding our personal preferences has come up before, disabling the controls and forcing 3D or high contrast or whatever on to us, or disabling the picture if you changed it - I'd sooner buy an old black and white tube TV and only watch that instead, at least the picture will be sharp. Perhaps the solution would be to have a set of test bars on the DVD/Blu-ray suggesting how you could set up your TV for the directors choice of settings if you wanted, but set to let you skip over it if you wanted, or even better to have it as an optional menu to that bit of video, so you don't have to see it at all.

[Stuart Wright]

Who is Scott Wilkinson? If you want to know who is behind this campaign, have a listen to this podcast.

I don't think the directors want to dictate to anyone how they set up their TVs. But they would probably like people to at least 'know' that TV's are not set up correctly out of the box and that their picture quality can be improved with a bit of tweaking.
It's not about what suits the viewer, either. It's about making people aware that there is an agreed set of standards that movies are mastered to and that *if* people want to watch movies the way the moviemaker intended them to be viewed, then TVs (and projectors) can be relatively easily adjusted so that they are closer to those standards.

Where did you get the idea that anyone is forcing 3D or high contrast on us? I'd be interesting to read where anyone is attempting that.

Originally Posted by M1DLG

Perhaps the solution would be to have a set of test bars on the DVD/Blu-ray suggesting how you could set up your TV for the directors choice of settings if you wanted, but set to let you skip over it if you wanted, or even better to have it as an optional menu to that bit of video, so you don't have to see it at all.

That's exactly what we have with THX certified DVDs and Blu-rays. Except it's not the director's choice, it's the correct standard. Perhaps you should follow our campaign, where we state that in Step 3.

[Keith Hurst]

Superb stuff Stuart, well done to you and the team

KH

[Furnace Inferno]

Originally Posted by M1DLG

I'd be surprised if Scott know it all Wilkinson isn't behind this. The settings on a TV are subjective and objective and if the directors think that they can dictate how we set our TV's then they have no idea about what suits us the viewer. It's not just about how the artist paints the picture, it's also how the eye see's the picture.

Perhaps you prefer your trees and grass to look like neon green signposts and people like they have fallen into a vat of fake tan?

It's funny that you talk about art and yet ignore the fact movies are an art form with the director being the artist. If you were unable to see a particular painting and someone took a picture for you but adjusted the settings on their camera which changed the intensity and shades of the colours because it made it stand out, thus not making it an accurate representation of the content, would you be happy with that?

[small763021]

I think everyone needs to get a grip and "worry" about something else instead of wether or not their TV has the correct colours.
Maybe the 50% who have the "wrong" settings are just less sad and happy with the picture as it is?
Obviously they are wrong though and we feel the need to dictate to them.

[Phil Hinton]

Originally Posted by small763021

I think everyone needs to get a grip and "worry" about something else instead of wether or not their TV has the correct colours.
Maybe the 50% who have the "wrong" settings are just less sad and happy with the picture as it is?
Obviously they are wrong though and we feel the need to dictate to them.

Nobody is asking you to 'worry' about anything or change your TV picture if you don't want. These are guides and a campaign to raise awareness, nobody is being forced to do anything.
If you like the picture on your TV and you are not curious to see if it can be improved then just ignore the guides.

[Keith Hurst]

Originally Posted by small763021

I think everyone needs to get a grip and "worry" about something else instead of wether or not their TV has the correct colours.
Maybe the 50% who have the "wrong" settings are just less sad and happy with the picture as it is?
Obviously they are wrong though and we feel the need to dictate to them.

Woooof... harsh one.

I reckon many here were not dictated to to go out and buy Blu-rays. I reckon the fact that they have a shed more detail in them was more than sufficient to speak for themselves.

I, like most other people here, don't 'worry' about our TV setttings. This is for a number of reasons... in the main we have them set correctly, and when they were not set correctly (usually out of the box) it was not a worry just more like a "meh.. better spend an hour or so dealing with that"

Re the 50% who have the wrong settings... are they sad? Some are and some are not, but it's not because of picture settings. Most of the people I know who do not have their picture set 'correctly' have usually come down to my house at whatever point and commented on how better my telly picture looks over theirs, they then go back and try a few tweaks on their own. The remainder of the people admit themselves that my picture is better looking, more natural, but at the end of the day they can't be arsed changing their settings. That's their choice.

Ultimately, no one needs to get more or less of a grip, be sadder or happier than anyone else... but there is nothing wrong with letting people know what settings to tweak to get the best out of your system. Their choice if they take it or not. Hardly a dictatorship!

KH

[small763021]

I just dont think this is in ANY way shape or form worthy of being on the news.

[Phil Hinton]

Originally Posted by small763021

I just dont think this is in ANY way shape or form worthy of being on the news.

Well the BBC did.

[chippyteaforme]

Having tried watching the Dynamic mode on my dad's Samsung LCD, I'd not be surprised if getting people to set their TVs up properly led to a reduction in burned out retinas. How ANYONE could enjoy watching a TV in that mode is beyond me!!!

On a serious note, congrats on getting this campaign endorsed, and I think it's a bloody good idea

Originally Posted by small763021

I just dont think this is in ANY way shape or form worthy of being on the news.

Was it actually on 'the news'? I apologise if it was (and I missed it!), but there's a difference between the News at Ten, and the Technology News section of the BBC website.

I do feel it deserves TV coverage, so if it hasn't been on TV yet, why not?

[Keith Hurst]

Originally Posted by chippyteaforme

I do feel it deserves TV coverage, so if it hasn't been on TV yet, why not?

Try here... September 20 - Steve Withers tells BBC World News about PicturePerfect

KH

[roymunsen]

Originally Posted by M1DLG

it's not as if there has been much worth watching in the last 30-40 years, the best films were made in the 30's-70's, then everything was CGI'ed to death and the skill in film making was taken away too

***?

I don't recall No Country For Old Men being CGI'd to death. Was It the bad guy's haircut? Bloody good CGI if it was.

[namuk]

Originally Posted by small763021

I just dont think this is in ANY way shape or form worthy of being on the news.

well it makes a change of death and Destruction even mp's buying a light bulb for 20 quid and tax rises ect ect, well the usual misery news unless thats what you want to see.

[ldoodle]

Surely the easiest answer is for mfrs to remove Vivid and/or Dynamic modes from their sets, as what's the point in building something in to a product if people shouldn't be using it?

[Palladio]

Originally Posted by ldoodle

Surely the easiest answer is for mfrs to remove Vivid and/or Dynamic modes from their sets, as what's the point in building something in to a product if people shouldn't be using it?

Not sure the large stores will like that. With the lighting they generally have you need Dynamic mode to see some sort of picture. Plus I'm guessing that it would probably help people who have visually impaired sight.

[kosch]

Awesome work guys!!!