[WRC] News & rumours (part IV) 2016

[Franky]

Technology has become smaller, cheaper and more portable and I dont see cost as an excuse...

And the stages are all being filmed anyway, so its just a question of showing the pictures live not recorded.

Sorry for the massive off topic that's about to follow.

Fast Eddie, don't confuse the consumer and professional video equipment. Yes, the technology has become lighter and a bit cheaper but it still costs a fortune for the ordinary person.

So what's the cost of equipment. HD broadcast cameras cost north of 50k USD and that's the camera body only. Very cheap lenses are between 5-10k USD. ENG type lenses go up to 83k USD. Studio box lenses can cost over half the price of a WRCar. So that's camera cost. Now the outside broadcast unit. If it's a small one, then those are usually in a van. Those used vans cost more than 20k GBP and majority of them are SD only. For HD you are looking at least 40k GBP. Bigger units that support 10 or more cameras are somewhere between 500k and 1,5 million GBP. Now you can imagine that if some company has invested in such equipment, they want to earn the cost back and also profit. So it won't be cheap in the end and this is just the equipment.

Yes, you can use prosumer camcorders for broadcast but the quality is not the same and also different cabling is used.

[Googol]

Making live pictures from the middle of a forest is still not so easy nor cheap. But it's still quite hard to understand how many small cycling races can produce 1-2 hours live while top level WRC events can barely do that.

[Fast Eddie WRC]

Making live pictures from the middle of a forest is still not so easy nor cheap. But it's still quite hard to understand how many small cycling races can produce 1-2 hours live while top level WRC events can barely do that.

An example I was also thinking about.

So its not hard to do its just a question of whether they really want to do it.

And if they dont with the five WRC teams and new 2017 cars they never will...

[Franky]

Yes, put a cameraman on a motorbike on a rally stage!

Guys, come to your senses with your conclusions. If your suggestion is to broadcast more stages just from the helicopter camera, then that won't attract more new fans. That will mostly work on the hardcore fans only. And even that is money, money, money.

[big_sw2000]

That's true. Most road racing video is from a few motor bikes in amongst the peloton. But cant we have a few static cameras. With incar in between.
Its been done before with the IRC, so surly WRC can sort something.


Steve

[Googol]

Yes, put a cameraman on a motorbike on a rally stage!

In cycling there are a few static cameras like in rallying. There is no point to cover whole (long) stage with static cameras as you can't use much of them anyway. Then while in cycling there are motorbike cameras, rallying has incar cameras (which don't even need 2 people to operate). And the technic needed to move the images from motorbikes and incar cameras should be roughly the same.

[Mirek]

Afaik Eurosport in IRC used the same team and equipment which was normally used for Tour de France and other cycling races. If I remember well the main challenge was to transmit the signal from static cameras and low flying helicopters in the mountains. They used a high-flying aircraft as a signal transmitter. Anyway most of the expenses were payed by event organizations and local ASNs.

[seb_sh]

Yes, as far as I know the most expensive part is the need for a helicopter or airplane with equipment constantly flying overhead to receive the signal from the static and on-board cameras and retransmit it. Compared to a "stadium sport" where you just need a van parked outside. Another issue is sometimes the signal is bad due to forests or mountains or the aircraft cannot fly due to weather. However I think such problems can be reduced by choosing the stages carefully. Another interesting option that has appeared recently is to use drones; they could also be used for aerial shots closer to the ground with less danger than a helicopter.

For sure someone smart who understands rallying can choose 1 good stage per day to transmit and for sure it's technically possible. The only question is if it's financially viable; and for that it's actually great news that they have expanded their broadcast to more countries because it means more money. Hopefully they use the money to improve the package and increase it's value rather than going into someone's pocket.

[Fast Eddie WRC]

To be honest we have to admit the real 'problem' with rallying on (live) TV is that it is just one car at a time, not a race.

The general public just see it as a car driving along a track/road and dont get excited as they dont see any actual competition. (They tried a few years ago showing a car with another as an overlay on the same piece of road but that just didnt catch on.)

So I suppose this is why the cars themselves have to be made to to look and sounds as exciting and extreme as possible (a la 2017), to excite the viewer on their own...

[big_sw2000]

I believe it to be as simple as going back to daily highlight program, with maybe a live stage here and there.

Through the 80s Top Gear rally report was brilliant on the BBC, half hour a night, maybe an hour, somehow much more entertaining than todays crap.
Also you often had a top gear rally live stage. Normally one of the spectator friendly stages such as Blenhem Palace. Much beeter than the spectator friendly stuff now. Used to be shown on a sunday afternoon on the BBC, sometimes during Grandstand. I mean if it could be done then, surly with technology now, it has to be easier


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oS0bWtsv_b4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gJjx30vm64

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Z5YrwuC_ss

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqRvVmJmxV4


Steve