Live stages I think are available very soon after end.Quote:
Originally Posted by dodge33cymru
Printable View
Live stages I think are available very soon after end.Quote:
Originally Posted by dodge33cymru
Do not waste your money on a service with no respect to the customer...
I'm loathe to ask this, but why does it have no respect for the customer? It looks infinitely better value than the WEC's equivalent offering to me and it's much more logical to spend £30 for a year of recorded content (that I'll download) than on a BT Sport subscription that would cost me literally 30x more?
If the live stages are on demand and at least 480p, then that's all I need to know.
it really depends on your standards, if you are one of those special people who wastes his sad life on mediocre stuff and people then go for it...
but in an era where 4k is soon going to be the main thing and in all sport events 60fps is a standard on tv... if you are willing to pay for some 20fps 420p videos that you cannot even download go ahead and knock yourself out... i find it a farce that they cannot provide at least 720p at 60fps....
I do not care about the price... i would pay 3-5 times the amount if i could get proper footage from cameras mounted on proper spots and if i could download them...
4k and 60fps are the least of the problems of wrc coverage IMHO
wrc+ is a very good way to follow the TV coverage if you want to access it legally. It would be better to be on free TV, but no one is willing to show it for free...
In Belgium RTBF (national TV for French-speaking part of Belgium) will broadcast all powerstages on La Une or La Deux. I don't know if these channels are available in any other countries.
I'd say that both the WRC and WEC are niche - and as such should be trying to get as much coverage as possible. Putting it behind a paywall isn't the most sensible way to go. If you must charge, then make sure you're offering value for money, and the software can handle it.Quote:
Originally Posted by dodge33cymru
At the moment, I'll wait.
I suspect this isn't the usual "spice" post by you. Just to educate you. 30, 60, 120 and so on frames per second is NTSC standard. You're still in the PAL zone. And technically all FullHD broadcast footage is 50fps, it's just interlaced.Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
4K won't be mainstream any time soon, considering that majority of TV channels on this planet are still in SD. Quite a large number of stations are still broadcast in 4:3 aspect ratio. And besides TV cameras cost a fortune (one high-end FullHD TV camera costs $80k, 4K ones start from $100k), so only the filthy rich will upgrade their equipment to 4K. But who will they show the almighty 4K? A minority.
Even when WRC+ is far from perfect, it's a comfortable way to consume the broadcasted material legally and without extra hassle.
If I remember correctly it's available almost immediately after the live broadcasting.Quote:
Originally Posted by dodge33cymru
The onboard video quality on the WRC Youtube page is better (in 1080p) than all onboards on WRC+, which is quite strange since it's from the same cameras.
Surely it must be the video player they are using?
apart from the technical blah blah that we do not care..Quote:
Originally Posted by Franky
WRC+ is crap as it is... its good for bottom feeders and i am sure there are plenty but when you broadcast at crap resolution and crap Fps you do not deserve a penny from proper humans.
i never said that they should broadcast at 4k i said 720p and 60fps or at least as high as those girly nobodies enjoy the F1. In motorsport and sports in general fast frames per second counts, it is not a noire movie of the 50s.
You want everything in slooooo-moooo? Or what's with the damn 50/60 fps. For proper slowmotion you need to be at 100 or 200 fps.Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
Okay, the image quality isn't the best. Your other option is either some shitty pirate stream or TV.
The live stages & daily reviews are good enough with HD quality. The same should be with the onboards, I don't really care about the timing synchronization, than the quality of the videos, that includes the camera position as well. Otherwise the service is good for the money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Franky
Streaming live is a whole different board game to what can be recorded locally with a camera, must rely on a lot of other factors which can be very costly.Quote:
Originally Posted by EightGear
For what it's worth, I think that this service should be available for free; not to save me a few pennies, but to open it up to the viewers that the manufacturers are in this to attract.
As far as I can see, the benefit free coverage could provide would vastly outweigh the relative pittance they will make through WRC+. WEC (another niche series) seems to have made the same decision, much to their detriment.
Then what's the point of TV channels buying the rights, if the same thing is available for free ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by dodge33cymru
WRC+ is just a bonus to the TV rights deal
Actually the live streamed stages are available in HD format and also the daily highlights are also in HD if you have enough fast internet connection. Only the onboards are in poor quality.Quote:
Originally Posted by dodge33cymru
you have some kind of disability to understand simple sentences ??? who talked about slow motion ???Quote:
Originally Posted by Franky
Exactly, while the exact same onboard videos on Youtube are much better.Quote:
Originally Posted by rage82
Then stop talking about high frame rates since that's only useful for slow motion. You get sharp images/frames with a high shutter value. You are talking about minimal motion blur for the action shots.Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nU2_ERC_oEQuote:
Originally Posted by Franky
as you can see these two correlate....
One can easily understand N.O.T. hasn“t seen latest develop on WRC+. Quality is very high and offers so much more than we“ve ever seen in short clips on regular WRC.com site. Well worth money.
A 400 Euro camera with full automatic settings is your benchmark?Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
Please stop
It's very strange because when you are watching the live stream or the daily highlights the onboards are in HD and after that when you compare the same onboards between drivers the quality is bad. Somebody mention the player they are using but that can't be the problem because it's the same player for the other stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by EightGear
The onboard quality is most likely result of heavy compression (low bitrate)
My benchmark is what i see on WRC+ and i do not like it...
I just showed you the video not to pay attention to the camera but that fps counts when it comes to blurring between frames... but i asked too much it seems camera boy.
did they improve on their LIVE onboard camera positons and footage ??? can you download anything ???? that is the only feature that is worth paying...Quote:
Originally Posted by Rallyper
because if i want to see highlights then i can watch them on TV...
Only Meeke's camera was nice at Wales Rally GB, no idea if they changed the rest for 2015 as well or it's all still the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
With higher frame rates the camera by default has a higher shutter count. That's the only connection.Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
I can understand somewhat low bit-rate on some level on 2 drivers side by side comparison with time synchronization and so on, but with sole driver mode it is unacceptable. IMO this is what the real Rally fans want - quality onboards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Franky
not sure if this was asked yet but can wrc+ be got in Ireland ?
I'm pretty sure they're compressing videos to save space on server, otherwise they should spend a fortune to keep all these videos up there.Quote:
Originally Posted by stefanvv
I don't care about fps, my eyes are happy with 30 fps that is how much they could get (if I remember well) and I don't mind if I can't catch the sight of specks of dust. I have no pay TV and want to enjoy some rally looking at live stages, onboards, highlights and interactive maps. wrc+ give me this for 30€/yr and as long as it works it makes me happy.
Oh please, storage servers are not that expensive. Convince someone who doesn't know about computers;)Quote:
Originally Posted by AL14
It was just an assumption as I'm not an expert, I couldn't find any other reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by stefanvv
Well yeah, we should just leave it and enjoy whatever comes anyway:)Quote:
Originally Posted by AL14
NOT, who downloads things? Don't you know about the CLOUD?????
don't you have other sports to bother with in Oz ? kangaroo racing or something ? are you that clueless in everything you do ?Quote:
Originally Posted by GigiGalliNo1
Cloud servers have limited storage and then you have to pay... if you want to store event highlights in HD quality that might be a problem.
Plus you need to have internet to access them...
Local storage costs as well. I've seen plenty of wrc+ onboards on YouTube so downloading is not impossible. Maybe not the original quality, but if someone doesn't have Internet access why would that person care about quality. He probably has some low end laptop that can barely play 480p anyway...
Flash Video Downloader: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/d...iopeeegenkdikp :)Quote:
Originally Posted by N.O.T
or maybe he is traveling with a high end laptop...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mariusz
NOT
You take things so seriously! I don't follow any other sports in Australia... Only WRC.