All the sitcoms I watched in syndication as a young kid in the early 1970's like HILLBILLIES and BRADY BUNCH were all filmed. And then with ALL IN THE FAMILY videotape was introduced and by the end of the decade almost all were videotaped before a studio audience with little or no exterior filming..

Then CHEERS came along and emulating TAXI (one of the few filmed shows from the 1970's) it was filmed and I started noticing after that the some of the more sophisticated sitcoms began to be filmed-even NEWHART abaondoned video after the first season.

Now in 2007 they are all on film again and I feel that's a good thing. There were some outstanding shows shot on video in the 70's but video I always thought looked cheap so the return of film is welcome.

Thoughts?

I feel stupid asking, but just was is the difference between a show being filmed vs. videotaped? I realize looking at the shows, there is an obvious difference. Being a child of the early 70's, I do see what it is you are referring to, but exactly what is the difference? Is it the quality of film being used?

I completely agree! I don't care for how many of the shows from the 70s used videotape with the audience and all, it's sort of tacky. All of the Norman Lear shows did that, which is one thing I never cared for about his shows. Film is much more vivid and the quality looks much better.

Mary Tyler Moore's shows were filmed weren't they?

honestly, I think videotaped shows from the 80's look much better on television. Now if the prints are remastered for DVD, that's a different scenario, but shows like Cheers, Taxi, M*A*S*H, Mary Tyler Moore and other classic shows that were filmed generally seem to be a lot darker in quality and the prints get grainy/dirty much faster compared to the sitcoms that were shot on videotape. 12 year old Friends and Seinfeld reruns that have been well-worn in syndication look older and are grainier and darker than 30 year old Three's Company and Jeffersons reruns that were videotaped. I don't see why film is better?

Mary Tyler Moore's shows were filmed weren't they?
Yes. Except for WKRP and early episodes of Newhart, all of the MTM shows were shot on film.

MTM on DVD looks great though, it just seems in a lot of cases the syndie copies look worse and less taken care of. Though I do agree that videotape was the best bet (and it was also cheaper).

I think film is a better bet these days because people are taking much better care of prints, but that wasn't the case years ago. Like I said to Friendsfan, the example that comes to immediate mind against "filmed" shows from the day was when TV Land aired Rhoda in 2005 on the N@N 20th anniversary special. Rhoda looked so rough and old because the print obviously hasn't been cleaned since the 70's. The second season of Happy Days looked incredibly rough as well.

I can think back to when I was a kid and my family would watch reruns of Laverne And Shirley and Taxi, along with Diff'rent Strokes and One Day At A Time. I remember always thinking "this show is really really old" about L&S and Taxi (this was 1986-1987, so both shows were barely a decade old, less than that for Taxi) while Diff'rent Strokes and One Day At A Time were from the same time period, but were videotaped, and while the early seasons were in the 70's, it never felt as "old" as Taxi and L&S did at the time. (Just to let you know, I was a kid then, I've grown up, I love Laverne and Taxi now, but I'm speaking from a 7 year old's perspective)

I feel stupid asking, but just was is the difference between a show being filmed vs. videotaped? I realize looking at the shows, there is an obvious difference. Being a child of the early 70's, I do see what it is you are referring to, but exactly what is the difference? Is it the quality of film being used?

Don't feel bad about asking...in the simplest terms.

Videotape gives a HARD look.

Film is always GLOSSIER...and it just seemed to give shows a better "pedigree" for lack of a better word.

Don't feel bad about asking...in the simplest terms.

Videotape gives a HARD look.

Film is always GLOSSIER...and it just seemed to give shows a better "pedigree" for lack of a better word.
Thank you. ;) Are soap operas then filmed?

Don't feel bad about asking...in the simplest terms.

Videotape gives a HARD look.

Film is always GLOSSIER...and it just seemed to give shows a better "pedigree" for lack of a better word.
funny how much we disagree on this. I think film gives shows a hard, old look, while video is glossier.

The example that comes to mind is Golden Girls (videotaped) vs. Designing Women (filmed). Both shows aired roughly around the same time and have a lot of mutual fans, but Golden Girls looks a lot less "old" (no pun intended about the ages of the ladies) in 2007 whereas 20 year old Designing Women reruns on TV Land are incredibly grainy and dark. Golden Girls reruns from the same period lack grain and are still bright and look just like they did when I watched it on NBC. The show ended 15 years ago but yet when you watch the reruns, it doesn't feel like you're watching an "old" series, with Designing Women, it feels as old as it really is.

Thank you. ;) Are soap operas then filmed?
Soap operas have always use/used videotape. Though there are also kinescopes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinescope) of some of the older episodes that were shot live before videotape became a regular thing.

Yes, all soap operas are taped. The only thing clouding that now is that "All My Children" is using a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE film-look process to make it look like film. "The City" also used this process a decade ago.

As far as sitcoms go, I don't prefer one type over another. It all depends on what type of sitcom it is. All of the Norman Lear shows from the 1970s...I can't imagine them in film. Same for the MTM shows...can't imagine them in tape. Tape gives it more of a stage look, I think. Film gives it the look of a movie. I really don't favor one or the other.

Oh, but when it's a genre that's ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS been in tape, for the better part of its existence, at least, I want it to stay on tape. I would cry if all soaps, game shows, and talk shows were filmed one day. I would absolutely cry.

Yes, all soap operas are taped. The only thing clouding that now is that "All My Children" is using a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE film-look process to make it look like film. "The City" also used this process a decade ago.

As far as sitcoms go, I don't prefer one type over another. It all depends on what type of sitcom it is. All of the Norman Lear shows from the 1970s...I can't imagine them in film. Same for the MTM shows...can't imagine them in tape. Tape gives it more of a stage look, I think. Film gives it the look of a movie. I really don't favor one or the other.

Oh, but when it's a genre that's ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS been in tape, for the better part of its existence, at least, I want it to stay on tape. I would cry if all soaps, game shows, and talk shows were filmed one day. I would absolutely cry.

Sounds like you're an ABC Soap Person which is good because you wouldn't like the news just out. CBS GUIDING LIGHT and AS THE WORLD TURNS are going to abandon the traditional manor of shooting in January 2008...and shoot in real locations with hand held cameras....no more sets and no more videotape I believe....I'm dreading it because I believe that soaps are the one area where Video tape if better.

Yes, all soap operas are taped. The only thing clouding that now is that "All My Children" is using a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE film-look process to make it look like film. "The City" also used this process a decade ago.

As far as sitcoms go, I don't prefer one type over another. It all depends on what type of sitcom it is. All of the Norman Lear shows from the 1970s...I can't imagine them in film. Same for the MTM shows...can't imagine them in tape. Tape gives it more of a stage look, I think. Film gives it the look of a movie. I really don't favor one or the other.

Oh, but when it's a genre that's ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS been in tape, for the better part of its existence, at least, I want it to stay on tape. I would cry if all soaps, game shows, and talk shows were filmed one day. I would absolutely cry.
Yes, let me say, when I was the AMC fanatic during the 80's, I so loved the look of how it was filmed. So real. Now, it has that horrific look to it that looks so fake and cheesy. I just happened to tune in one day to see how AMC had faired after all these years and I was just appalled at how it now looks. I am so glad I got to see AMC at its best before it took a nosedive.

CBS GUIDING LIGHT and AS THE WORLD TURNS are going to abandon the traditional manor of shooting in January 2008...and shoot in real locations with hand held cameras....no more sets and no more videotape I believe....I'm dreading it because I believe that soaps are the one area where Video tape if better.
They've been using the hand held cameras on ATWT lately in certain scenes and I must say I'm not a fan of that. Especially when they can't hold them right.

But I guess if that's the way to keep both shows on the air, what can we do... it makes me wish the ratings were higher so they wouldn't have to keep slashing the budget.

I guess I'd have to pay more attention to detail to tell the differences, but I think they both look ok in their own rights. Both can look good, both can look bad.

am I the only person who feels like film "ages" more than video? A filmed sitcom from a decade ago looks "older" than a taped sitcom from twenty years ago. You can watch old reruns of Three's Company, The Jeffersons, Good Times and the sort at night on TV Land, and while there are things that are obviously dated about the shows, like the haircuts, fashions, etc...., the series themselves still look bright and clean. Yet a well-worn syndicated print of an old filmed sitcom from the same period can look like (for use of a better word) crap. The prints can look really dirty, grainy, dark and old. Even after 1000 airings, an old Three's Company episode can look exactly the same as it did 30 years ago because videotape doesn't age.

I think filmed shows can look good on DVD, because the prints are generally cleaned up before mastered onto DVD, but yet in syndication it's a different story

am I the only person who feels like film "ages" more than video? A filmed sitcom from a decade ago looks "older" than a taped sitcom from twenty years ago. You can watch old reruns of Three's Company, The Jeffersons, Good Times and the sort at night on TV Land, and while there are things that are obviously dated about the shows, like the haircuts, fashions, etc...., the series themselves still look bright and clean. Yet a well-worn syndicated print of an old filmed sitcom from the same period can look like (for use of a better word) crap. The prints can look really dirty, grainy, dark and old. Even after 1000 airings, an old Three's Company episode can look exactly the same as it did 30 years ago because videotape doesn't age.

I think filmed shows can look good on DVD, because the prints are generally cleaned up before mastered onto DVD, but yet in syndication it's a different story
I agree with you. Three's Company and the other shows you mentioned still look as fresh as they did from the 70's. Having watched those shows in the 70's, I can definitely say the look remains the same (too bad I can't say the same abt the editing :lol:). A show like Bob Newhard definitely has a somewhat old look to it. Maybe it is the station (ALN) but I know even shows like MTM seems not so fresh as far as how it looks.

I agree with you. Three's Company and the other shows you mentioned still look as fresh as they did from the 70's. Having watched those shows in the 70's, I can definitely say the look remains the same (too bad I can't say the same abt the editing :lol:). A show like Bob Newhard definitely has a somewhat old look to it. Maybe it is the station (ALN) but I know even shows like MTM seems not so fresh as far as how it looks.
thank you.

I am curious if the majority of older sitcoms/dramas were filmed in 16mm or 35mm. I ask this because I know the first two seasons of Buffy and the first season of Sex And The City were both filmed in 16mm, and those seasons of the two shows are incredibly grainy, dark, and "old" when you look at them now. Yet when both shows switched to 35mm in Buffy's third season and Sex's second season, the video quality improved greatly and those seasons in question look far "fresher" and are nowhere as dark, grainy or aged looking thna the 16mm seasons that in reality are only a year older.

thank you.

I am curious if the majority of older sitcoms/dramas were filmed in 16mm or 35mm. I ask this because I know the first two seasons of Buffy and the first season of Sex And The City were both filmed in 16mm, and those seasons of the two shows are incredibly grainy, dark, and "old" when you look at them now. Yet when both shows switched to 35mm in Buffy's third season and Sex's second season, the video quality improved greatly and those seasons in question look far "fresher" and are nowhere as dark, grainy or aged looking thna the 16mm seasons that in reality are only a year older.
I wish I could understand what you just posted. :lol: DUH!!! I am not clear, how much of a difference does the "mm" make as far as how the quality of the film ends up looking like?

well, 8mm film is pretty much home video quality. 35mm film is pretty much the standard for cinematic releases (although there was 70mm exceptions for certain huge blockbuster type movies). 35mm is what most shows are filmed at these days, meaning the video quality is pretty much the same as it'd look on a big screen. 16mm film looks lower-budget and quality deterorates a lot faster. The first two seasons of Buffy and first season of Sex And The City were filmed in 16mm, while seasons 3-7 and 2-6 of the same shows were filmed in 35mm, giving it more of a theatrical feel and the video quality is aging much better.

I see, interesting. Thank you for helping me understand that better. I never knew that.