[RossyG]

I just apply my very subjective Doctor Who test. The ones shot on 2-inch tape look noticeably better to me than the 1-inch ones.

As for the people who worked with it, I don’t doubt that it was easier to use. Just as I’d believe modern film makers if they said digital cameras were easier to use and far more versatile than 70mm or IMAX or even 35mm film. But I know what I think looks better.

I was in my late teens and too old to get into the Narnia TV series, but I loved the books so watched a few. I remember the picture quality being very poor. Around that time I’d wanted to get into TV production so paid particular attention to such things and bombarded my godfather who worked at Thames with questions. I remember thinking it looked worse than The Box of Delights despite being made on similar equipment. I think the difference was Box was made in the winter and Lion in the summer. The summer light just seem to make everything fuzzier and harsher. I thought the same about McCoy era Doctor Who, especially Survival which could’ve been great on 16mm film but looked like crap on tape (and not even as good as Tom Baker’s Robot with its OB cameras). One newspaper review at the time said it looked as though the team had bought a camcorder from Dixons and decamped to the nearest quarry.

My advice for buyers of this set is to keep expectations low. And beware of AI.