A Home cinema forum. HomeCinemaBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HomeCinemaBanter forum » Home cinema newsgroups » UK digital tv
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

F1 or should it be the FU



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old September 14th 09, 11:45 AM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Brian Mc[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 325
Default F1 or should it be the FU

R. Mark Clayton wrote:

: As a license payer I would hope that the BBC would spend some of my fee
: providing F1 in HD for about 24 hours a year (i.e.all of each race).

It's *NOT* up to the BBC! F1 coverage is provided by FOM TV cameras and
facilities (aka "Bernievision") now at all Grand Prix (except Japan where
FOM TV still mix the "World Feed").

There is *NO* HD-feed available to broadcasters - even if FOM TV may be
experimenting internally. Perhaps next season!!!
  #22  
Old September 14th 09, 12:42 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Ivan[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 646
Default F1 or should it be the FU


"Brian Mc" wrote in message
...
R. Mark Clayton wrote:

: As a license payer I would hope that the BBC would spend some of my fee
: providing F1 in HD for about 24 hours a year (i.e.all of each race).

It's *NOT* up to the BBC! F1 coverage is provided by FOM TV cameras and
facilities (aka "Bernievision") now at all Grand Prix (except Japan where
FOM TV still mix the "World Feed").

There is *NO* HD-feed available to broadcasters - even if FOM TV may be
experimenting internally. Perhaps next season!!!


When hopefully there'll be plenty of DVB-T2 Freeview receivers available..
or then again maybe not..

  #23  
Old September 14th 09, 12:46 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Jim Lesurf[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,567
Default F1 or should it be the FU

In article , Peter Duncanson
wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:02:06 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote:


In article , R. Mark Clayton
wrote:



More than watch the PROMs (which is mostly an auditory experience
anyway).


For which they presumably find rights easier and cheaper to obtain.


The Proms are the BBC Proms. The whole thing is a BBC production and has
been since 1927.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/proms/2009/abou.../history.shtml


That was why I wrote "presumably". ahem I guess my deadpan approach may
have passed un-noticed, though. :-)

That said, I did wonder if the non-BBC orchestras, etc, would expect higher
fees for HD TV broadcasts of their Proms. Do they not get more for the ones
on BBC1/2/4 compared with those just on R3?

However I'm happy enough with SD if we could teach all the BBC TV engineers
to not trip over cables when broadcasting live. ;- I'd prefer money to be
devoted to putting *all* the Proms onto BBC4 rather than on a few HD
versions. But I am guilty of the sin of being more interested in the music
than counting the hairs up the leader's nose. :-)

Even better if they finally faced up to realising that Clive Anderson is a
lousy choice as the front-man for the BBC1/2 proms. The BBC4 team are
excellent, but I guess BBC1/2 feel they need 'celebs for the plebs' in the
hope of this making the music 'accessible'.

Alas, Anderson hasn't even learned 'rule 1' for commentators on live
classical music. This is simple enough. When the conductor steps onto the
podium and has the baton, the announcer should SHUT UP.

Anderson seems to work on the basis that "I have all this to say and I'm
damn well going to say it all, even if I have to gabble and crash into the
start of the music!" Maybe he is paid by the word? :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

  #24  
Old September 14th 09, 02:24 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
tony sayer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,132
Default F1 or should it be the FU

In article , Jim Lesurf
scribeth thus
In article , Peter Duncanson
wrote:
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:02:06 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote:


In article , R. Mark Clayton
wrote:



More than watch the PROMs (which is mostly an auditory experience
anyway).

For which they presumably find rights easier and cheaper to obtain.


The Proms are the BBC Proms. The whole thing is a BBC production and has
been since 1927.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/proms/2009/abou.../history.shtml


That was why I wrote "presumably". ahem I guess my deadpan approach may
have passed un-noticed, though. :-)

That said, I did wonder if the non-BBC orchestras, etc, would expect higher
fees for HD TV broadcasts of their Proms. Do they not get more for the ones
on BBC1/2/4 compared with those just on R3?

However I'm happy enough with SD if we could teach all the BBC TV engineers
to not trip over cables when broadcasting live. ;- I'd prefer money to be
devoted to putting *all* the Proms onto BBC4 rather than on a few HD
versions. But I am guilty of the sin of being more interested in the music
than counting the hairs up the leader's nose. :-)

Even better if they finally faced up to realising that Clive Anderson is a
lousy choice as the front-man for the BBC1/2 proms. The BBC4 team are
excellent, but I guess BBC1/2 feel they need 'celebs for the plebs' in the
hope of this making the music 'accessible'.

Alas, Anderson hasn't even learned 'rule 1' for commentators on live
classical music. This is simple enough. When the conductor steps onto the
podium and has the baton, the announcer should SHUT UP.

Anderson seems to work on the basis that "I have all this to say and I'm
damn well going to say it all, even if I have to gabble and crash into the
start of the music!" Maybe he is paid by the word? :-)

Slainte,

Jim


Agree with all of that !.. The proms make the licence fee seem
worthwhile somehow..
--
Tony Sayer


  #25  
Old September 14th 09, 02:31 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Peter Duncanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,124
Default F1 or should it be the FU

On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 11:46:40 +0100, Jim Lesurf
wrote:


Alas, Anderson hasn't even learned 'rule 1' for commentators on live
classical music. This is simple enough. When the conductor steps onto the
podium and has the baton, the announcer should SHUT UP.


Henry Longhurst, the golf commentator, had a similar rule. If the
viewers can see what is happening there is no need for the commentator
to speak. He did some work for a US TV company. His fellow commentators
there were amazed at his suggestion that they did not need to be
chattering continuously. You would get the situation where the crowd at
a golf tournament would fall silent as a player prepared to make a
crucial shot. For the viewers this breath-holding atmosphere would be
totally ruined by a commentator gabbling.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)
  #26  
Old September 14th 09, 02:40 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
larkim
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 197
Default F1 or should it be the FU

On Sep 13, 7:48*pm, "Eric Shune" wrote:
"Eric Shune" wrote in message

...

why did they not put it on the HD channel...


Vimbeldon was broadcast in HD, surely there are more viewers for F1...


But the cameras at the GPs (not provided by BBC) aren't recording it
in HD.

So if there is no HD version, the BBC can't suddenly automagic one
from thin air.

The best they could do would be to us the BBC HD cameras for the
interviews etc, but the actual cameras used for the races are supplied
by FOM and the pictures are sold / syndicated to the BBC and other
broadcasters around the world.

If FOM have got any sense they will bring HD cameras next year, but
this year no HD cameras = no HD feed for broadcasters.

Matt
  #27  
Old September 14th 09, 02:44 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Brian Mc[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 325
Default F1 or should it be the FU

larkim wrote:

: If FOM have got any sense they will bring HD cameras next year, but
: this year no HD cameras = no HD feed for broadcasters.

Rumour has it that they *ARE* HD-cameras - but only for test purposes!

Any HD-feed certainly never leaves the FOM compound!
  #30  
Old September 14th 09, 05:47 PM posted to uk.tech.digital-tv
Brian Mc[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 325
Default F1 or should it be the FU

tvAddict wrote:
: I think you will find that they are HD capable cameras, but are not used
: in HD mode (I think they need an extra plugin to enable it)

The rumours did say they were testing actual HD at some events - perhaps
they will be able to offer it next season!

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2021 HomeCinemaBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.