NTSC versus PAL

Yes. Thanks for the correction.

Yes, because you started so late.

The first RCA cameras used vidicons (I think) -- though they might have used image orhticons.

They later had a four-pickup camera that used an image orthicon to generate a perfectly registered (by definition) luminance signal, plus three vidicons.

Local stations weren't immune, either. Some locally produced shows in Dayton, ohio aired from poorly converged cameras in the '70s & '80s

Three 3 inch IO were the ones I remember. Being used for tests long before colour broadcasting started in the UK.

That's a configuration I never saw. The first colour cameras here were all four tube plumblicons. I was taught the colour response of a videcon wasn't suitable.

BTW I'm not surprised your setup engineers had problems - with a mixture of IO and videcon. ;-)

RCA built their TK44 color studio cameras with Vidicons. They changed the model number to TK46 when they switched to Plumicons. Most of the parts were interchangeable, so I used a pair of TK44 cameras for spare modules & as a test jig to keep three TK46 cameras working the way we wanted. The TK44s were used by TV stations for years, but needed brighter studio lighting.

But *they* wanted to sell sets *here*.

Isaac

Iconoscope first, then orthicon, then image orthicon. Vidicons were first used for film chains, and later as the color (as opposed to luminance) pickups in *some* cameras.

Isaac

ve

ore

all > > four tube plumblicons. I was taught the colour response of a videcon > > wasn't suitable. >

I thought TK-44s had plumbs. I _know_ that TK-45s had plumbs as I have a used one from a TK-45. The TK-28 film camera had vidicons but AIUI, the vidicon had its own level non-linearity that was not present in plumbicons (Leddicons for you EEV fans) or Saticons. Vidicons required different electronic gamma to achieve an overall gamma of 2 to 2.2. For a film camera the vidicon issue wasn't as bad as the light levels were much more predicable. You can look at some of the dinosaurs here.

G=B2

There were conversion kits, according to the manuals I had for the

That was why you needed more light in the studio for the Vidicons. It pushed them into a more linear area of operation. The savings on lighting costs and air conditioning quickly paid the conversion costs. The ones we had were from a private studio used a few times a year, to make commercials by an eccentric old man.

Are you saying there were iconoscope colour cameras actually in use?

Videcon monochrome cameras were used for some types of broadcast in the UK for many a year. Gave very nice pictures with enough light - but didn't cope with fast movement well.

Thames TV (the makers of Benny Hill) replaced their venerable EMI 2001 with TK 47 at their Teddington studios. Not much liked by the camera operators as their larger size made some studio shots impossible.

Of course not. I was responding to "The first RCA cameras used vidicons"

-- nothing about color.

But now I think about it, I suppose it's possible that some of the early CBS field-sequential color work was done with iconoscopes -- or even image dissectors...

Isaac