Will 2010 be broadcast in HD?

[curry]

Has anyone heard if next year is going to be broadcast in HD?

I for one will be very disappointed if F1 doesn't go HD and very surprised that this so called 'mega' sport can't do what lots of other sports have been doing for years.

[Sonic]

Hell yeah!

What the hell did I buy a HD TV with that fancy anti motion blur for? ;)

[pino]

Has anyone heard if next year is going to be broadcast in HD?

I for one will be very disappointed if F1 doesn't go HD and very surprised that this so called 'mega' sport can't do what lots of other sports have been doing for years.

I've watched the entire 09' season in HD, and I expect to do the same next year :D So that's up to your TV and your provider, good luck ;)

[Dave B]

I've watched the entire 09' season in HD, and I expect to do the same next year :D So that's up to your TV and your provider, good luck ;)
Not unless you were at the track or in FOM's broadcast centre, you haven't. There's no HD feed made available to broadcasters, but some show it in upscaled SD on their HD channels. Even the F1 in cinemas was only upscaled.

It took Bernie long enough to go widescreen, so I'm not holding my breath about F1 in HD.

[curry]

I've watched the entire 09' season in HD, and I expect to do the same next year :D So that's up to your TV and your provider, good luck ;)

As stated you have only watched a upscaled SD picture, not HD.

Seriously Bernie, give us HD, they even broadcast marbles in HD these days!

[pino]

Not unless you were at the track or in FOM's broadcast centre, you haven't. There's no HD feed made available to broadcasters, but some show it in upscaled SD on their HD channels. Even the F1 in cinemas was only upscaled.

It took Bernie long enough to go widescreen, so I'm not holding my breath about F1 in HD.

I only know what Sky Italy tells me, and I was told that F1 along with others Sport Disciplines are sent in HD. And for what I can seen picture quality is now amazing.

[DexDexter]

Not unless you were at the track or in FOM's broadcast centre, you haven't. There's no HD feed made available to broadcasters, but some show it in upscaled SD on their HD channels. Even the F1 in cinemas was only upscaled.

It took Bernie long enough to go widescreen, so I'm not holding my breath about F1 in HD.

Maybe Bernie is sceptical about HD since his improved coverage didn't work in the 90s and was out in a couple of years. It was really nice to choose from a variety of incar shots and other cameras.

[markabilly]

there has yet to be a real hd broadcast on speed tv.

they are upscaling it. the last race had what might have been a feed in the area of perhaps edtv of 480, but i doubt 720.

i got fooled early this year, so i started studying up.....easiest way to tell is to flip over to nascar or just watch the commercials, they made it clear.

btw fox has a habit of using 480 because they were going to try to do the four channel into one broadcasts over the air compression......and some of the speed tv as well as other fox broadcasts use this.

watch the bbc shows of the isle of mann TT, and then you can see what u are missing when true hd is done right :up:

in the usa, those telecasts pop up on one of the discovery channels as speed is too busy showing pink and auctions and other crud, to be showing much racing

[Malbec]

I only know what Sky Italy tells me, and I was told that F1 along with others Sport Disciplines are sent in HD. And for what I can seen picture quality is now amazing.

Like others I think your images are upscaled as the footage isn't shot in HD, let alone broadcast as such.

I wonder if there are problems getting HD cameras onboard, they may be larger and more importantly heavier, something the teams may not like particularly since they are often placed far away from the centre of gravity.

[markabilly]

Like others I think your images are upscaled as the footage isn't shot in HD, let alone broadcast as such.

I wonder if there are problems getting HD cameras onboard, they may be larger and more importantly heavier, something the teams may not like particularly since they are often placed far away from the centre of gravity.
actually the hd cameras are about the same size and all as the lens, sensor and chips are about the same.......do not know about the transmitter and battery, if any, , but the difference would be miniscule

examples for consumers
http://www.gadgetboyz.net/review/zx1.html

much larger, but only becuase of the case and stand....take out the camera itself, and u have an excellent videe....

http://catalog2.panasonic.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ModelDetail?storeId=11201&catalogId=13051&itemId=228678&catGroupId=14572&surfModel=AW-HE100&displayTab=S


Even with a moveable body,
9 lbs

http://picturephone.com/products/cameras/sony_brc_z700.html

[Dave B]

Trackside cameras are HD, and some on the onboards are too especially during practice. AFAIK the whole thing is produced locally in HD but the stream isn't released to broadcasters, the only exception being Fuji TV's own (non-FOM) coverage of the Japanese GP.

[Robinho]

i've seen the DTM on ESPN HD and it looked amazing, a;lthough i don't know if that was a proper HD feed or an upscaled SD, when we finally get the proper HD F1 on the BBC HD channel we will be in for a right treat

[curry]

Trackside cameras are HD, and some on the onboards are too especially during practice. AFAIK the whole thing is produced locally in HD but the stream isn't released to broadcasters, the only exception being Fuji TV's own (non-FOM) coverage of the Japanese GP.

That's interesting, I didn't realise that. But surely it must be up to the host broadcaster if they turn up with HD trackside camera's. I wouldn't imagine Bernie has a contract with the broadcaster that requires them to turn up with HD camera's.

Unfortunately until the trackside camera's are broadcast in HD there is no reason for BBC, Speed etc to turn up with HD camera's for there pre and post race shows.

[Dave B]

Apart from Monaco and Japan, there aren't "host broadcasters" any more: all the coverage is provided by FOM (aka Bernievision) and captured in HD.

I think Monaco might even go to FOM next year, which mercifully would mean an end to the long lingering shots of the advertising hoardings on the bridges taking up half the screen.

[Mark]

Well unless Sky in the UK significantly lower their prices for HD, I won't be indulging. HD is great but not worth £10 extra per month IMO.. I think Bernie is keeping full transmission of this service for a rainy day... :)

So true. I would quite like a SkyHD box, but £120 a year is a lot to ask for it.

However, you don't have to subscribe to Sky, you could get a freeviewHD box or tele, and plug it into a feed from your Sky dish and you'll get BBC HD.

I doubt we'll see a return of pay-TV for F1, that failed miserably and I think even Bernie realised free-to-air is the way to go. Those were bad times for F1 coverage, with the world feed significantly degraded to encourage you to take PPV, even when it wasn't available in the UK!

[Robinho]

Well unless Sky in the UK significantly lower their prices for HD, I won't be indulging. HD is great but not worth £10 extra per month IMO.. I think Bernie is keeping full transmission of this service for a rainy day... :)

or get Virgin, no extra a month for the XL Tv package to get HD as well, just the one off for the box, and that you can haggle to about £50.

alternitively Freesat - just a dish and no subscription.

BBC HD available on all of these, and Freeview will (eventually) get HD - thats part of the reason for all the re-tuning going on to clean up the space for HD broadcast.

the world does not end with Sky and Rupert Bloody Murdoch

[UltimateDanGTR]

Perhaps I'll pop down to Curry's on GP day and watch the wonderful HD detail there... :)

but then you'll have to step back out of the way as a fat couple walk past at one point momentarily blocking your view. then some hair-gel ridden useless moron will walk over and try to sell you the tv. and if you decline, you will get sirty looks for the rest of the time. im sorry henners, but your plan isn;t thought through :p :

[CNR]

to solve all arguments about f1 being in HD

http://www.digitalproductionme.com/article-1031-live_targets_worlds_first_f1_hd_broadcast/



The inaugural Abu Dhabi grand prix could also become the sport’s first race to be shown in High Definition according to production services company LIVE.
Officially, the sport’s organisers, led by Bernie Ecclestone, have no plans to offer the 2009 season in high definition. However LIVE managing director and CEO Abdul Hadi Al Shiekh, speaking exclusively to DPME.com, revealed that they hope to produce the Abu Dhabi instalment in HD. If an agreement can be reached it would be a landmark broadcast for the sport.

the hd upscaling would be like the dvd upscaling
http://hometheater.about.com/od/dvdbasicsfaqs/f/dvdbasics12.htm

[Mark]

Well Abu Dhabi wasn't shown in HD as far as I know, so that answers nothing.

[CNR]

Well Abu Dhabi wasn't shown in HD as far as I know, so that answers nothing.

this would have been the first HD race ?

[Mark]

this would have been the first HD race ?

But it wasn't?

[V12]

Sorry for going slightly off topic and asking a more general non-F1 related question, but what's the big fuss about HD?

OK I admit having never watched anything in HD maybe I just don't know what I'm missing, but unlike computer resolution, where you are sat only inches away, is having that extra granularity all that big of a deal for a similarly sized screen when you are usually sat a good few feet away?

Or is it more of a big deal if you're able to afford one of those 30 or 40 odd inch TV screens?

I stand prepared to be corrected, but I'm genuinely curious about this whole thing.

[Dave B]

You're right in that viewing distance plays a part, there's little point having HD if you're too far back so see the detail. The generally accepted rule is to be between 2 - 2.5 times the diagonal screen size back from the screen.

[CNR]

Sorry for going slightly off topic and asking a more general non-F1 related question, but what's the big fuss about HD?

OK I admit having never watched anything in HD maybe I just don't know what I'm missing, but unlike computer resolution, where you are sat only inches away, is having that extra granularity all that big of a deal for a similarly sized screen when you are usually sat a good few feet away?

Or is it more of a big deal if you're able to afford one of those 30 or 40 odd inch TV screens?

I stand prepared to be corrected, but I'm genuinely curious about this whole thing.
2 ways to look at this
1 hd will not be that better on an old tv but if you have a lcd or plasma TV
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_television


For example, 1920×1080p25 identifies progressive scanning format with 25 frames per second, each frame being 1,920 pixels (http://www.motorsportforums.com/wiki/Pixel) wide and 1,080 pixels high. The 1080i25 or 1080i50 notation identifies interlaced scanning format with 25 frames (50 fields) per second, each frame being 1,920 pixels wide and 1,080 pixels high. The 1080i30 or 1080i60 notation identifies interlaced scanning format with 30 frames (60 fields) per second, each frame being 1,920 pixels wide and 1,080 pixels high. The 720p60 notation identifies progressive scanning format with 60 frames per second, each frame being 720 pixels high; 1,280 pixels horizontally are implied.
50Hz systems allow for only three scanning rates: 25i, 25p and 50p. 60Hz systems operate with much wider set of frame rates: 23.976p, 24p, 29.97i/59.94i, 29.97p, 30p, 59.94p and 60p. In the days of standard definition television, the fractional rates were often rounded up to whole numbers, like 23.98p was often called 24p, or 59.94i was often called 60i. High definition television allows using both fractional and whole rates, therefore strict usage of notation is required. Nevertheless, 29.97i/59.94i is almost universally called 60i, likewise 23.98p is called 24p.


2

In broadcasting, digital subchannels are a means to transmit more than one independent program at the same time from the same digital radio (http://www.motorsportforums.com/wiki/Digital_radio) or digital television (http://www.motorsportforums.com/wiki/Digital_television) station (http://www.motorsportforums.com/wiki/Broadcast_station) on the same radio frequency (http://www.motorsportforums.com/wiki/Radio_frequency) channel

if you are after cheap HD just get a tv card for your computer

[Langdale Forest]

HD is pointless.

[DexDexter]

HD is pointless.

Pointless? Could you elaborate a bit? Color TV is pointless as well since you can see the picture in black and white as well. :rolleyes:

[curry]

HD is pointless.


I've got a old black and white TV you can have!

Seriously, sport in HD just looks awesome on the right screen. I think you will find that anyone who has watched sport in HD for a decent period of time would never go back to SD broadcast if they could avoid it.

[markabilly]

Laguana Seca, world feed, used the same cameras as did speed tv, most of which for the last few years have come from a local fox affiliate.

The non-world feed (supprt AMA races) were being shown on HD speed in HD. During the race, they had several breaks where they were talking in the pits. Excellent quality.

meanwhile the upscaled world feed of the race, USING THE SAME CAMERAS, sucked. looked like a vhs recording (by contract, Speed HD had to use the world feed to show the race)

Now somewhere, some folks may be gettting hd (and not or maybe it is enhanced definition) F1 races, but not da usa, although it is now better quality upscaling than what it was.....

worse thing is on the wide screen, they put in big bold red letters almost in the middle


" SPEED"

[DexDexter]

Laguana Seca, world feed, used the same cameras as did speed tv, most of which for the last few years have come from a local fox affiliate.

The non-world feed (supprt AMA races) were being shown on HD speed in HD. During the race, they had several breaks where they were talking in the pits. Excellent quality.

meanwhile the upscaled world feed of the race, USING THE SAME CAMERAS, sucked. looked like a vhs recording (by contract, Speed HD had to use the world feed to show the race)

Now somewhere, some folks may be gettting hd (and not or maybe it is enhanced definition) F1 races, but not da usa, although it is now better quality upscaling than what it was.....

worse thing is on the wide screen, they put in big bold red letters almost in the middle


" SPEED"

Offtopic but SD feed over here is somewhat tolerable but watching old American TV-series which are converted from a NTSC feed into PAL and then broadcast in SD is just impossible. Couple that with a large LCD screen and you're in for a treat. :rolleyes:

[Dave B]

I think the fact that the US is ahead of Europe in embracing HD can be partly attributed to just how awful NTSC is. For the most part, PAL gives decent enough quality that many won't see the point in upgrading.

[Mark]

I think the fact that the US is ahead of Europe in embracing HD can be partly attributed to just how awful NTSC is. For the most part, PAL gives decent enough quality that many won't see the point in upgrading.

Exactly so. Plus as far as I know they never did standard definition wide screen broadcasts in the USA. It's either 4:3 SD(NTSC) or 16:9 HD. I don't know why this is, perhaps the NTSC standard was not of sufficient quality to support a widescreen picture.

Whereas the UK, and Europe too I think, started going widescreen from around 2000 onwards and the 99% of broadcasts on the main channels were totally widescreen by around 2005. With F1 being the notable exception at that point!

We get stuff from America in 16:9 SD but that's mostly either from film or downscaled from HD.

So the point is, in the USA, if you want to have a widescreen picture on your brand new flat screen TV, you have little choice but to go with HD.

[DexDexter]

Whereas the UK, and Europe too I think, started going widescreen from around 2000 onwards and the 99% of broadcasts on the main channels were totally widescreen by around 2005. With F1 being the notable exception at that point!


True, I bought my 28 widescreen TV in 2002 and it weighted about thousand kilos :) It was a big thing at the time, see movies in their real format (which of course it wasn't). These days 28 is tiny.

[Mark]

True, I bought my 28 widescreen TV in 2002 and it weighted about thousand kilos :) It was a big thing at the time, see movies in their real format (which of course it wasn't). These days 28 is tiny.

Yeah, I think everyone had one of those massive 28" widescreen CRT TV's. Back in the early 00's, 28" was a big screen. I remember when we got ours looking at 32" and thinking, wow that's *huge*, it would have been huge too, I doubt the floor boards would have supported it!

These days I have a 32" LCD, which is actually a little small. But 37" would have just been too big for our room.

[markabilly]

Exactly so. Plus as far as I know they never did standard definition wide screen broadcasts in the USA. It's either 4:3 SD(NTSC) or 16:9 HD. I don't know why this is, perhaps the NTSC standard was not of sufficient quality to support a widescreen picture.

Whereas the UK, and Europe too I think, started going widescreen from around 2000 onwards and the 99% of broadcasts on the main channels were totally widescreen by around 2005. With F1 being the notable exception at that point!

We get stuff from America in 16:9 SD but that's mostly either from film or downscaled from HD.

So the point is, in the USA, if you want to have a widescreen picture on your brand new flat screen TV, you have little choice but to go with HD.
because of my irritation with the picture quality, i started investigating all of this. The NTSC standard calls for 525 lines of resolution, the same as used in SD DVDs of a few years back. At the same time, it permits a signal through that can have 525 lines ranging down 200 or less (about the level of VHS tapes)

For various rreasons, having to do with buying cheaper TV cameras with less resolution as well as cheap broadcast facilities and the fact that with a smaller TV, it is difficult to see any differences.....guess what????....the usual broadcast was at the level of VHS quality in the usa.

the "improved " "S-video" that many thought would give them a better picture, actually only provides 410 lines of resolution, but generally had better or smoother image repoduction due to certain filters......

PAL has 625 lines of resolution but a better mechanism for dealing with colors, especially tint, that does not have to be constantly adjusted using manual controls.

Bottom line is that when either PAl or NTSC is done right, it is capable of producing a very high quality picture....but SD in the USA is seldom done right or anything close to it...

Even funnier or sad is how FOX, when the new broadcast standards were being announced ten years ago where one could broadcast 4 programs using one air channel by using reduced data transmission and decreased resolution for each program, went out a bought a ton of systems whose widescreen resolution is less than 525 lines and produces a picture that looks only a little better than upscaled SD so they could stuff four tv shows through the same FCC channel..thereby defeating the very purpose of digital HD Television... :rolleyes:

[Mark]

One thing that is rather pointless is 720p. It's 720 lines vs 625, and sure it's progressive scan rather than interlaced, but it's hardly worth the effort.

[DexDexter]

One thing that is rather pointless is 720p. It's 720 lines vs 625, and sure it's progressive scan rather than interlaced, but it's hardly worth the effort.

I don't know, 720p BBC Earth looked much much better on my 40 LCD compared to DVD version of the same series...

[markabilly]

talked today to someone who says that older systems and sateliites reqiure this reduction in resolution and color due to bandwidth limitations (how much data can pass through at a certain rate)

Depends on how many channels are going through at the same time, more channels, less amount of data rate per channel and worse picture quality per channel

which is why when many watch SD tv, they may be only getting 200 lines of resolution and poor color (regardless of whether it is PAL or NTSC)

SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Dave B]

Bad news, I fear, from Twitter:



LeeMcKenzieF1: To all of you who mention HD...FOM are saying 2011 :-(

:(

[Mark]

boo! Why are F1 always so behind with this sort of thing. Last to get a website, last to widescreen and now last to go HD too.

[Mia 01]

Will we be able to see all the races for free?

[Mark]

Will we be able to see all the races for free?

At least in SD, yes.

[Mia 01]

Will they produce F1 in your TV?

[Mark]

Will they produce F1 in your TV?

I'm not sure I understand your question?

[Mia 01]

I'm not sure I understand your question?

I´m not sure you have seen a F1 broadcast on your telly. Please explain.

[Dave B]

I´m not sure you have seen a F1 broadcast on your telly. Please explain.
I've seen several hundred but I'm still not sure I understand the question. Do you mean "will they produce F1 for broadcast in your country?"

[Mia 01]

I've seen several hundred but I'm still not sure I understand the question. Do you mean "will they produce F1 for broadcast in your country?"

Report here please. I want to see the same race.

[motetarip]

Report here please. I want to see the same race.

Step away from the keyboard...

;)

[ioan]

Step away from the keyboard...

;)

:D

[Mia 01]

Step away from the keyboard...

;)

I´m sending an apology to all, if needed.

I belive the main issue is, watch F1 for free. Here in sweden we have to pay, pay a lot.

[Copse]

Will we be able to see all the races for free?


I belive the main issue is, watch F1 for free. Here in sweden we have to pay, pay a lot.

To clarify that, F1 on Swedish TV is not PPV, but it is only available on the subscription channel Viasat Motor. For those who have some sort of package from a cable or satellite provider already, the cost to get that channel, plus three or so others focussing on other sports is about €10/month. In my opinion, that is a cost, but it is not "a lot". And we get all practices, qualifying, races commercial free and with several re-runs during the week after. Plus GP2 and more. Viasat Sport has an HD channel, built in to the same subscription package for those with the technical ability to receive it. I can't imagine that F1 will not be simulcast there once HD feeds are available. They do that with minority interest sports like the NFL; so surely they'll do it for F1 as well.

To attempt an answer to what I am guessing Mia is asking: No, there is no talk about reviving the old "requirement" from FOM/Bernie that F1 should be broadcast on generally available and essentially "free" channels. It seems that was never official, just something that FOM used to emphasize when negotiating TV contracts. It seems they decided that, at least for smaller markets, it is not that big loss to sponsors that the races aren't available to see for all potential viewers, and that the possibility to get higher fees is more important.

[Mia 01]

To clarify that, F1 on Swedish TV is not PPV, but it is only available on the subscription channel Viasat Motor. For those who have some sort of package from a cable or satellite provider already, the cost to get that channel, plus three or so others focussing on other sports is about €10/month. In my opinion, that is a cost, but it is not "a lot". And we get all practices, qualifying, races commercial free and with several re-runs during the week after. Plus GP2 and more. Viasat Sport has an HD channel, built in to the same subscription package for those with the technical ability to receive it. I can't imagine that F1 will not be simulcast there once HD feeds are available. They do that with minority interest sports like the NFL; so surely they'll do it for F1 as well.

To attempt an answer to what I am guessing Mia is asking: No, there is no talk about reviving the old "requirement" from FOM/Bernie that F1 should be broadcast on generally available and essentially "free" channels. It seems that was never official, just something that FOM used to emphasize when negotiating TV contracts. It seems they decided that, at least for smaller markets, it is not that big loss to sponsors that the races aren't available to see for all potential viewers, and that the possibility to get higher fees is more important.

Thanks for a good clarification!

Yes, it´s Viasat Sport we got. I like their covering of F1 and other motorsport, but it cost us around 20 euro a month.

[curry]

Well it looks like no HD in 2010 as Bernie reckons that not enough broadcasters are interested. Guess they would rather broadcast every other sport in HD :confused:

http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=39947

[CNR]

what is to stop your tv station from upscale to high definition

http://i49.tinypic.com/1z2dbf4.jpg

image taken from a windows vista mediacenter recording

[turismo6]

what is to stop your tv station from upscale to high definition


Up scale is a idea but to get the best picture it really needs to be filmed in HD

[Mark]

What's the point in HD, lets just have upscaled everything...

[Daniel]

what is to stop your tv station from upscale to high definition

http://i49.tinypic.com/1z2dbf4.jpg

image taken from a windows vista mediacenter recording
Thunderbolt, what spec PC have you got? What tuner card have you got etc?

I'm considering buying a tuner card and a nice big hard drive and recording the F1 races and of course other TV as well but I suspect the CPU in Caroline's PC isn't up to it.

[Mark]

As usual F1 lags well behind most other sports. They are talking about football in 3D, *this year* nevermind HD.

[CNR]

Thunderbolt, what spec PC have you got? What tuner card have you got etc?

I'm considering buying a tuner card and a nice big hard drive and recording the F1 races and of course other TV as well but I suspect the CPU in Caroline's PC isn't up to it.


intel dual core 3ghz processor
2 gigs of ram
tuner cards
winfast 1800h
winfast 1000s

http://www.xpmediacentre.com.au/community/index.php

[Daniel]

intel dual core 3ghz processor
2 gigs of ram
tuner cards
winfast 1800h
winfast 1000s

http://www.xpmediacentre.com.au/community/index.php
Thanks :)

What sort of FPS do you get? I've got a 3ghz processor in my PC which I could easily swap in if I upgraded mine *strokes chin*

[curry]

what is to stop your tv station from upscale to high definition

Nothing but we are talking about the year 2010. How long has HD been around now, and one of the most prestigious sports in the world can't produce a HD picture that is used by most sports around the world. As Marks says, the world is moving on to 3D now, it is time F1 caught up with yesterdays technology!

[christophulus]

The BBC has confirmed F1 is being filmed in HD this year.
But Formula One Management is not making the high definition feed available to broadcasters.


So, F1 won't be broadcast in HD, but it will be filmed in HD. But the broadcasters can't have the feed. What?

At least it should be available in 2011..

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2010/03/03/f1-being-filmed-in-hd-this-year/

[SGWilko]

So, F1 won't be broadcast in HD, but it will be filmed in HD. But the broadcasters can't have the feed. What?

At least it should be available in 2011..

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2010/03/03/f1-being-filmed-in-hd-this-year/

I recall a story James Allen ran on his blog last year where, at Monaco, LG were trying out/showcasing their HD cameras. In the tunnel, the frequency/vibrations from the cars caused the HDD's in the cameras to skip sectors, thus corrupting the images.

I guess they want a years worth of practice to 'get it right' before they no doubt up the price by a few squillion.

[Daniel]

I recall a story James Allen ran on his blog last year where, at Monaco, LG were trying out/showcasing their HD cameras. In the tunnel, the frequency/vibrations from the cars caused the HDD's in the cameras to skip sectors, thus corrupting the images.

I guess they want a years worth of practice to 'get it right' before they no doubt up the price by a few squillion.

Sounds like BS to me.

[SGWilko]

Sounds like BS to me.

Bad sectors on disks are not that uncommon Daniel.

[Daniel]

Well yes, but it still sounds like BS. If this equipment is so cutting edge they'd be using SSD's which are completely resistent to vibrations etc etc.

[SGWilko]

Well yes, but it still sounds like BS. If this equipment is so cutting edge they'd be using SSD's which are completely resistent to vibrations etc etc.

Hmmm, how much do you suppose a single TB SSD would cost?

How many would you need per camera for redundancy?

How many cameras per circuit......?

At what point does it become uneconomical?

[Mark]

These are live broadcast cameras, the amount of storage they are going to need to buffer the images before they are sent back to base will be minimal, certainly nothing near 1Tb. In fact we're talking more like single digits of Mb.

[Daniel]

These are live broadcast cameras, the amount of storage they are going to need to buffer the images before they are sent back to base will be minimal, certainly nothing near 1Tb. In fact we're talking more like single digits of Mb.
Rather, hence why I call BS on this :) I actually think that traditional magnetic storage is more than up to the job tbh anyway but it's BS when you consider that fast SSD's can be had for not much these days :)

[Dave B]

AFAIK the on-boards only have a small amount of local storage so that a few seconds are available if the tx fails (eg during a crash), and what little there is is solid state.

By the way, the story linked earlier about the races being produced in HD but not shown seems to have its roots in a blog entry (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2010/03/bbc_hd_hello_to_the_tv_blog_an.html)by the (rather hopeless) head of BBC HD, who says:


No news on F1 is neither good news, nor a reflection of the BBC's desire to have F1 to give you in HD: The events are being filmed in HD (as far as we know) but they are not made available by F1 to broadcasters in HD

[SGWilko]

Sounds like BS to me.

Andrew Barratt, LG's vice president of marketing and global sponsorship, said that evidence of how the technology still needs improving came in Monaco last year when HD cameras trialled there could not cope with the vibrations encountered in trying to film cars through the tunnel, as the recording discs kept skipping frames.

[christophulus]

Bernard has said no to HD until 2012..

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/84448


While Ecclestone says camera technology is now ready for his F1 production coverage to be done fully in HD, he thinks there still needs to be more fans at home able to watch it in HD, plus enough broadcasters ready to distribute it, before the move can be made. That is why he thinks it may well take until 2012 for the circumstances to be right for F1 to switch to HD coverage.

"We don't want to broadcast unless people want it," Ecclestone told AUTOSPORT. "I asked in England, the BBC, about it - how many people can receive it? They said about 20 per cent of the viewers who watch F1.

"Then I want to make sure that what we produce is top quality. Before we start seeing the top-top quality that we want, I would say it will probably be 2012 before we can guarantee it."

[Daniel]

Andrew Barratt, LG's vice president of marketing and global sponsorship, said that evidence of how the technology still needs improving came in Monaco last year when HD cameras trialled there could not cope with the vibrations encountered in trying to film cars through the tunnel, as the recording discs kept skipping frames.
Is there a link to this? If you read the thread there are numerous reasons why this sounds like BS

[markabilly]

Bernard has said no to HD until 2012..

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/84448
WHAT DID HE NOT HEAR OF THE POLL?? :hot:

WHAT a little dirty bestert
:rolleyes: :down: :down: :down:



to make sure that what we produce is top quality

'The day the consumer is truly ready – not saying he is ready – but truly ready, meaning he will pay for it


well what you are producing now is crap

The latter is the real reason!!!!!!!

Think just showed the italian Motogp in HD last week, It was great.

Much of the Lemans 24 hour seemed to be in HD (or so it seemed on Speed TV). The PQ was often excellent, even in low light conditions

as to Sd, those braodacst stations can simply downsclae the picture---which is much easier than the sorry upsclae jobs being done, such as with speed, using the world feed

[SGWilko]

Is there a link to this? If you read the thread there are numerous reasons why this sounds like BS

Sure is, in the post immediately before yours. A FULL read of the article will clear the smell of poopy from your ol'factory nerves in an instant! ;)

[Dave B]

LG are talking spherical objects, there are onboards capable of producing HD feeds in use in other series already. Even if they are having difficulties, FOM could still provide an HD feed of the 95% of the action which doesn't come from onboards.

This is about money, make no mistake, nothing to do with technology. Bernie wants to screw the broadcasters for extra cash for the HD rights, while at the same time teasing with vague promises of 3D.

There is demand right now, and hundreds of thousands of people have invested in HD kit in preparation for the World Cup (although they're out of luck if they watched ITV1 HD last night ;) ). Those people will be expecting broadcasters to provide them with HD sport, and F1 is letting them down.

[Daniel]

Sgwilko. Explain to me how an ssd is affected by vibration?

[SGWilko]

Sgwilko. Explain to me how an ssd is affected by vibration?

I don't work for LG - ask them.

[christophulus]

To be honest the current onboard coverage is pretty lousy, it often cuts out. And the whole TV picture has been dropping in and out all weekend from Canada, so they need to invest in more than just HD cameras if they can't even get SD broadcasting right.

[markabilly]

I recall a story James Allen ran on his blog last year where, at Monaco, LG were trying out/showcasing their HD cameras. In the tunnel, the frequency/vibrations from the cars caused the HDD's in the cameras to skip sectors, thus corrupting the images.

I guess they want a years worth of practice to 'get it right' before they no doubt up the price by a few squillion.
the tv cameras do not have to be hi def.

Most cameras are using a direct feed from the car

and the there are flash drives that work far bettter than discs, that is a stupid joke

[SGWilko]

the tv cameras do not have to be hi def.

Most cameras are using a direct feed from the car

and the there are flash drives that work far bettter than discs, that is a stupid joke

How do you get an HD image from a non HD camera?

Smoke and mirrors should be discarded as an acceptable reposte.

Kool aid - maybe, but unlikely.

[CNR]

http://www.aussiethings.biz/race_cam.html


1979 a team of engineers at Sydney’s channel seven broadcast a car race from a thrilling new angle- from inside one of the racing cars. the Race Cam camera was bolted behind the driver Its picture was transmitted to a helicopter to a overhead and passed to the television station for broad cast to viewers. The race cam was invented by Geoff Healy and is now used to brad cast many different sports


i do not see it costing too much for transmitting race cams
http://www.racecam.com.au/fullyintegratedcameras/


<LI class=imAlign_left>GoPro’s HD Motorsport HERO $439 delivered
GoPro’s HD Motorsports HERO is the world’s highest performance 1080p HD on-board video and still photo camera. Professional quality 1080p, 960p, and 720p HD resolutions record at 30 frames per second (60 fps in 720p). The HD Motorsports HERO easily mounts to any helmet, motorcycle, ATV, car, plane, jet ski, boat, snowmobile or other vehicle. The camera’s quick-release mounting design makes it easy to re-position the camera around your vehicle for professional quality HD video from several angles.[/*:m:2r6sofo5]

[SGWilko]

[quote="Autosport"]The extreme demands of filming F1 in HD scuppered the plans initially, however, when the vibrations and noise in the tunnel resulted in the hard drives in the cameras skipping &#8211]

http://www.autosport.com/features/article.php/id/2875

Na na na na na naaaaaaaaa........

:blowsagreatbigraspberry: ;)

[Daniel]

So what you're saying is that I'm right and that it's basically BS? :rotflmao:

[Dave B]

Translation: LG made a fundamental error and corrected it.

There's really no excuse for F1 not being in HD, other than Bernie's desire to screw more money out of the broadcasters. :\

Any technical excuse is just smoke and mirrors.

[Mark]

Translation: LG made a fundamental error and corrected it.

There's really no excuse for F1 not being in HD, other than Bernie's desire to screw more money out of the broadcasters. :\

Any technical excuse is just smoke and mirrors.

Indeed, several other motorsport series have done it.

[SteveA]

NHRA's been broadcast in HD for years and the forces and vibrations from those cars far exceeds anything in F1.

[Daniel]

Is Sgwilko alright? He doesn't seem to have replied on this thread? :confused:

[SGWilko]

Is Sgwilko alright? He doesn't seem to have replied on this thread? :confused:

I'm fine thanks dear, nice of you to enquire.

Having posted exactly what the 'horses mouth' said, how would you like me to respond?

[markabilly]

How do you get an HD image from a non HD camera?

Smoke and mirrors should be discarded as an acceptable reposte.

Kool aid - maybe, but unlikely.
upscale it....not that big of deal

watch the TT reruns from BBC in hi-def.

Some of the bike cameras were not hi-def so the picture quality was not that good from the bikes, but it was okay

[markabilly]

Is Sgwilko alright? He doesn't seem to have replied on this thread? :confused:
waiting on me to tell him what NOT to think...but i fixed it...u should hear shortly

[SGWilko]

upscale it....not that big of deal

watch the TT reruns from BBC in hi-def.

Some of the bike cameras were not hi-def so the picture quality was not that good from the bikes, but it was okay

No, because upscaling SD is not HD, is it?

[SGWilko]

waiting on me to tell him what NOT to think...but i fixed it...u should hear shortly

Too late billy boi.....

[markabilly]

Too late billy boi.....
not really, all i needed to do was to just start typing....

[SGWilko]

not really, all i needed to do was to just start typing....

And the ideas popped straight in there, eh?