ABC TV logo changes

R

Ross Herbert

Guest
It seems that there must have been sufficient complaints (I did anyway) from the
public regarding the new ABC1 and ABC2 logo for them to make some changes.

The following text is the reply received from the ABC.

Thank you for your further email regarding the new watermarks which were
introduced on ABC1 and ABC2 on 8 February.


The ABC regrets that you do not like the new watermarks and find them
too intrusive. The ABC has received extensive feedback about the new
watermarks and has published a response to viewer correspondence here:
http://abc.net.au/contact/s2162880.htm


As the response explains, as a result of audience feedback, a number of
changes have been made to the watermarks since their introduction on 8
February. All parts of the watermarks have been made more transparent:
the opacity of the blue and yellow boxes has been lowered from 50% to
40%, and the opacity of the white graphics within these boxes ('ABC1',
'ABC2' and the Lissajous curve logo) has been lowered from 100% to 70%.
Additionally, the size of the watermarks has been reduced to make them
less prominent.


Please be assured, your comments have been noted and conveyed to ABC TV
management so that they are aware of your feedback. Thank you for taking
the time to write.


Yours sincerely


ABC Audience and Consumer Affairs
http://abc.net.au/tv/
 
"Ross Herbert" <rherber1@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:l8ncr3dg92grebgfdsr3h0stssu8s4d6uf@4ax.com...
<snip trivial changes>

Please be assured, your comments have been noted and conveyed to ABC TV
management so that they are aware of your feedback. Thank you for taking
the time to write.
Click to expand...
No they haven't, or they would remove them entirely!

MrT.
 
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 11:51:26 +1100, "Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote:

:
:"Ross Herbert" <rherber1@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
:news:l8ncr3dg92grebgfdsr3h0stssu8s4d6uf@4ax.com...
:<snip trivial changes>
:
:> Please be assured, your comments have been noted and conveyed to ABC TV
:> management so that they are aware of your feedback. Thank you for taking
:> the time to write.
:
:No they haven't, or they would remove them entirely!
:
:MrT.
:


Now, who is being cynical :)

Somehow, I doubt they have even made the changes they say they have, because I
haven't noticed much of a change in the obtrusive nature of the new logos.

I can't see why they don't simply use the old watermark lissajous figure with a
1 or 2 after it as appropriate. After all, everyone recognises the lissajous
figure as meaning ABC. There is abolutely no need to put the text ABC1 in the
log at all. Does SBS have any text with their logo? No, because they know
everybody recognises it as meaning SBS.

I notice that Perth chan 2 news still uses the old watermark logo.
 
Ross Herbert wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 11:51:26 +1100, "Mr.T" <MrT@home> wrote:


:"Ross Herbert" <rherber1@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:l8ncr3dg92grebgfdsr3h0stssu8s4d6uf@4ax.com...
:<snip trivial changes

Please be assured, your comments have been noted and conveyed to
ABC TV management so that they are aware of your feedback. Thank
you for taking the time to write.

No they haven't, or they would remove them entirely!

MrT.



Now, who is being cynical :)

Somehow, I doubt they have even made the changes they say they have,
because I haven't noticed much of a change in the obtrusive nature of
the new logos.
Click to expand...
I noticed last night that the logo was more transparent - particularly the
white parts which were previously opaque. Having a large, 2-colour, 2-part
watermark is still bloody annoying.
 
On 17/02/2008 13:05 Ross Herbert wrote:
I can't see why they don't simply use the old watermark lissajous figure with a
1 or 2 after it as appropriate. After all, everyone recognises the lissajous
figure as meaning ABC. There is abolutely no need to put the text ABC1 in the
logo at all. Does SBS have any text with their logo? No, because they know
everybody recognises it as meaning SBS.
Click to expand...

I entirely agree. Now that it's been discussed here, I'm noticing
it more than I did before.


Bob
 
"Russ"
I noticed last night that the logo was more transparent - particularly the
white parts which were previously opaque. Having a large, 2-colour, 2-part
watermark is still bloody annoying.
Click to expand...

** It is particularly distracting when the ABC are showing one of their
"movie classics" in B&W - the patch of blue ( or orange on ABC 2) sticks
out like the proverbial dog's balls.

Also, sometimes the logo disappears off the edge when viewing in 4:3 - so
only annoys those with STBs.

It is also not seen for long periods on ABC2, during music videos etc.

What the HELL is the need to CONTINUOUSLY show the damn silly logo ????




....... Phil
 
On 17/02/2008 13:43 Phil Allison wrote:
** It is particularly distracting when the ABC are showing one of their
"movie classics" in B&W - the patch of blue ( or orange on ABC 2) sticks
out like the proverbial dog's balls.

Also, sometimes the logo disappears off the edge when viewing in 4:3 - so
only annoys those with STBs.

It is also not seen for long periods on ABC2, during music videos etc.

What the HELL is the need to CONTINUOUSLY show the damn silly logo ????



...... Phil
Click to expand...

We all managed to work out which channel we were watching from 1956
until now and I've never had someone come up to me in a pub and say,
"Wanna buy a hot DVD of Enough Rope?", so I can't see any need for the
stupid thing at all.

Probably the ABC's MD saw the small logos on Seven etc and thought
"Gee, we've gotta have one of those - but bigger and more obtrusive so
people really take notice!".

The URL to send your objections is:
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/abctv/contact.htm



Bob
 
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 15:24:51 +1100, Bob Parker <bobp.deletethis@bluebottle.com>
wrote:

:On 17/02/2008 13:43 Phil Allison wrote:
:>
:>
:> ** It is particularly distracting when the ABC are showing one of their
:> "movie classics" in B&W - the patch of blue ( or orange on ABC 2) sticks
:> out like the proverbial dog's balls.
:>
:> Also, sometimes the logo disappears off the edge when viewing in 4:3 - so
:> only annoys those with STBs.
:>
:> It is also not seen for long periods on ABC2, during music videos etc.
:>
:> What the HELL is the need to CONTINUOUSLY show the damn silly logo ????
:>
:>
:>
:> ...... Phil
:
:
: We all managed to work out which channel we were watching from 1956
:until now and I've never had someone come up to me in a pub and say,
:"Wanna buy a hot DVD of Enough Rope?", so I can't see any need for the
:stupid thing at all.
:
: Probably the ABC's MD saw the small logos on Seven etc and thought
:"Gee, we've gotta have one of those - but bigger and more obtrusive so
:people really take notice!".
:
: The URL to send your objections is:
:http://www.abc.net.au/tv/abctv/contact.htm
:
:
:
:Bob

In my complaint to the ABC I said almost those exact same words but added that
it appeared to be an attempt by one (it might have taken a whole team) of their
graphics design artist trying to show off his/her newly acquired skills to the
whole world. , "Hey. look at what I can do. Aren't I clever."
 
On 18/02/2008 12:03 Ross Herbert wrote:
In my complaint to the ABC I said almost those exact same words but added that
it appeared to be an attempt by one (it might have taken a whole team) of their
graphics design artist trying to show off his/her newly acquired skills to the
whole world. , "Hey. look at what I can do. Aren't I clever."
Click to expand...

Me and others have sometimes wondered if that was the motivation for
the childish cartoons on the front of some SC projects ...
 
"Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:61plbgF207ai1U1@mid.individual.net...

: What the HELL is the need to CONTINUOUSLY show the damn
silly logo ????
:
:
:
:
: ...... Phil
:
It's to denote copyright material and stop people unlawfully
using it!

And you recon you're the legal eagle!?

TT
 
TT wrote:
"Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:61plbgF207ai1U1@mid.individual.net...

: What the HELL is the need to CONTINUOUSLY show the damn
silly logo ????
:
:
:
:
: ...... Phil
:
It's to denote copyright material and stop people unlawfully
using it!

And you recon you're the legal eagle!?

TT


How well do you think it works ?
Click to expand...
 
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:04:45 +1100, Bob Parker <bobp.deletethis@bluebottle.com>
wrote:

:On 18/02/2008 12:03 Ross Herbert wrote:
:>
:> In my complaint to the ABC I said almost those exact same words but added
that
:> it appeared to be an attempt by one (it might have taken a whole team) of
their
:> graphics design artist trying to show off his/her newly acquired skills to
the
:> whole world. , "Hey. look at what I can do. Aren't I clever."
:
:
: Me and others have sometimes wondered if that was the motivation for
:the childish cartoons on the front of some SC projects ...

A stupid, silly idea which trivialised the serious and practical nature of a
once good magazine. I think that it was just SC making the cartoonist for The
Serviceman pages do more work and fill up more space - for the same pay, of
course....

I have ceased buying SC on a regular basis now.
 
Ross Herbert wrote:
:
: Me and others have sometimes wondered if that was the motivation for
:the childish cartoons on the front of some SC projects ...

A stupid, silly idea which trivialised the serious and practical nature of a
once good magazine. I think that it was just SC making the cartoonist for The
Serviceman pages do more work and fill up more space - for the same pay, of
course....

I have ceased buying SC on a regular basis now.
Click to expand...

I wonder if Tektronix and Fluke would sell more high-end instruments
if they put cartoons on the front of them? :-\

I've still got a subscription to SC but I'm wondering if there's
much point in renewing it. Nothing in it interests me any more, though
Jim Rowe still does some serious projects.
 
"atec77" <atec77nospam@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:fpaqg9$fhg$1@aioe.org...
: TT wrote:
: > "Phil Allison" <philallison@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
: > news:61plbgF207ai1U1@mid.individual.net...
: >
: > : What the HELL is the need to CONTINUOUSLY show the
damn
: > silly logo ????
: > :
: > :
: > :
: > :
: > : ...... Phil
: > :
: > It's to denote copyright material and stop people
unlawfully
: > using it!
: >
: > And you recon you're the legal eagle!?
: >
: > TT
: >
: >
: How well do you think it works ?

About as well as DRM, Macrovision and the scary FBI warnings
etc ;-)

Realistically though it would stop (deter) someone from
recording material, burning to DVD and then onselling the
discs to shops, market stalls, online etc. It is only proof
of copyright ownership - that's all.

For private use there is absolutely no deterrent what so
ever.

Cheers TT
 
"Ross Herbert" <rherber1@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:k2vhr35nv063lhruo7jl97gtbldsogd722@4ax.com...
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:04:45 +1100, Bob Parker
bobp.deletethis@bluebottle.com
wrote:

:On 18/02/2008 12:03 Ross Herbert wrote:
:
:> In my complaint to the ABC I said almost those exact same words but
added
that
:> it appeared to be an attempt by one (it might have taken a whole team)
of
their
:> graphics design artist trying to show off his/her newly acquired skills
to
the
:> whole world. , "Hey. look at what I can do. Aren't I clever."
:
:
: Me and others have sometimes wondered if that was the motivation for
:the childish cartoons on the front of some SC projects ...

A stupid, silly idea which trivialised the serious and practical nature of
a
once good magazine. I think that it was just SC making the cartoonist for
The
Serviceman pages do more work and fill up more space - for the same pay,
of
course....

I have ceased buying SC on a regular basis now.
Click to expand...
I think it's a potentially a good mag, but opening the inside cover
invariably reveals a Jaycar advert for trivial junk (like they were selling
at Wyong) and detracts from their original position and SC's position as
serious electronics mag.
 
"David L. Jerkoff "

Actually I've found myself in a rather interesting position. I've got
a cool new project I'm looking at getting published, and normally it's
no-brainer .....
Click to expand...


** Well, ain't that the truth.




........ Phil
 
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:36:14 +1000, Ross Herbert <rherber1@bigpond.net.au>
wrote:

I have ceased buying SC on a regular basis now.
Click to expand...



I went to five newsagents this week and I can't find Silicon Chip
in any of them, it seems there's not enough sales, at least that's what
the last Newsagent said when I asked him specifically for it.
 
"TT" <TTencerNOmorespam@westnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:13rhqc6ge6f63c5@corp.supernews.com...
: What the HELL is the need to CONTINUOUSLY show the damn
silly logo ????

It's to denote copyright material and stop people unlawfully
using it!
Click to expand...
And yet the commercial channels just put their logo over the top when they
use any other channels materials without permission. You often see the old
logo remains still showing.
So if it doesn't stop the commercial channels, what use is it ???????????

MrT.
 
On Feb 18, 2:54 pm, Bob Parker <bobp.deletet...@bluebottle.com> wrote:
Ross Herbert wrote:
:
: Me and others have sometimes wondered if that was the motivation for
:the childish cartoons on the front of some SC projects ...

A stupid, silly idea which trivialised the serious and practical nature of a
once good magazine. I think that it was just SC making the cartoonist for The
Serviceman pages do more work and fill up more space - for the same pay, of
course....

I have ceased buying SC on a regular basis now.

I wonder if Tektronix and Fluke would sell more high-end instruments
if they put cartoons on the front of them? :-\

I've still got a subscription to SC but I'm wondering if there's
much point in renewing it. Nothing in it interests me any more, though
Jim Rowe still does some serious projects.
Click to expand...
Actually I've found myself in a rather interesting position. I've got
a cool new project I'm looking at getting published, and normally it's
no-brainer, I'd just go to SC. But this time I've also thought about
going to another mag like Elector in order to potentially reach a
bigger audience.
Hmm, what to do...

Dave.
 
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 13:35:55 +1100, Bob Parker
<bobp.deletethis@bluebottle.com> wrote:

On 17/02/2008 13:05 Ross Herbert wrote:

I can't see why they don't simply use the old watermark lissajous figure with a
1 or 2 after it as appropriate. After all, everyone recognises the lissajous
figure as meaning ABC. There is abolutely no need to put the text ABC1 in the
logo at all. Does SBS have any text with their logo? No, because they know
everybody recognises it as meaning SBS.


I entirely agree. Now that it's been discussed here, I'm noticing
it more than I did before.


Bob
Click to expand...
Actually it is the SBS logo used during their news that caused burn-in
on our plasma. The right hand portion (max white) is naturally the
worst, with the other couple to the left of it still having left
burns.

Not surprisingly asking them to tone the logo down like they do with
some of their other programs hasn't had a result. Though I suppose no
response is a result .......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top