909 replies to this topic

[ExFlagMan]

Good!

[OO7]

statman, on 23 Oct 2020 - 10:26, said:

some of the track-side cameras zoom in way too much

Yep.  I've been watching races from the 1990 season and also watched part of the 2007 Spanish GP and I'd say the foreshortening caused by the zoom is mostly responsible for the lack of apparent speed of the cars.

[jcbc3]

Removing the bottom of the Red Bull.

[Hellenic tifosi]

Jordan44, on 23 Oct 2020 - 10:24, said:

So in one corner only you cannot make use of any kerbs. Completely inconsistent with how track limits have previously been enforced, and the rest of the track. FIA farce again.

 

Unsurprising.

 

Ridiculus as usual.

[ExFlagMan]

Just need to apply it all round the circuit next.

[krapmeister]

Awesome vortices off the rear wing of Leclerc's Ferrari at the end of the front straight 👍

[jcbc3]

How easy is it to wash Flow Wizz out of your hair? 

[ANF]

Great garage coverage again.

[krapmeister]

It would be quite funny if Stroll's race number was just 1 digit higher.

Oh how we would laugh

Edited by krapmeister, 23 October 2020 - 10:37.

[JonathanProc]

It feels like they're internationally avoiding showing flying laps. So many shots of the garages, out/in laps, random graphs, etc...

[Mercstar]

statman, on 23 Oct 2020 - 10:26, said:

some of the track-side cameras zoom in way too much

Yep, giving me a mild headache. Hopefully they get it sorted over the weekend.

[TomNokoe]

Just as in Mugello I am absolutely infuriated with the coverage.

[OO7]

ANF, on 23 Oct 2020 - 10:37, said:

Great garage coverage again.

It's rubbish, they're not spending enough time showing drivers sitting in their cars in the garages and the backs of heads on the prat perch.

[OO7]

JonathanProc, on 23 Oct 2020 - 10:38, said:

It feels like they're internationally avoiding showing flying laps. So many shots of the garages, out/in laps, random graphs, etc...

The practice sessions have been getting worse and worse unfortunately.  I think it's part of a move towards the "entertainment" aspect rather than the sport itself.

[TomNokoe]

Expecting a bigger jump than usual on softer tyres if the drivers' comments are anything to go by.

[Lights]

Mercstar, on 23 Oct 2020 - 10:39, said:

Yep, giving me a mild headache. Hopefully they get it sorted over the weekend.

 

The zoom is intentional, so we can only get used to it.

 

They don't want to show you what's going on or how fast the cars are, they want you to see the sponsors.

[ARTGP]

The elevation change on this circuit is....a lot.

[thegamer23]

Some camera angles are good (last corner), others are way too zoomed in.

Similar thing with Mugello

And too much garage coverage as always

[ARTGP]

It's a bit of a sham that Sky still can't pronounce "Sergio"...

 

Sir-G-o  is not it....

[Pimpwerx]

They should improve the camerawork over the weekend. First time at this circuit.

[krapmeister]

I must be getting old, because I remember when people used to say the reason F1 loses the sense of speed on TV is because of the camera angles of the cars was not tight enough - the reason for which was because they wanted to show all the trackside advertising.

Now they tighten up the camera shots on the cars and the reason they do this is because they want you to see the sponsors on the car (advertising) and you lose the sense of speed.

LMAO they can't win 🤣

Edited by krapmeister, 23 October 2020 - 10:51.

[w1Y]

Been watching for 10 moms and haven't seen a single lap

[krapmeister]

w1Y, on 23 Oct 2020 - 10:51, said:

Been watching for 10 moms and haven't seen a single lap

What unit of time is a mom and how long is that in mins?

Genuine question

[Risil]

krapmeister, on 23 Oct 2020 - 10:50, said:

I must be getting old, because I remember when people used to say the reason F1 loses the sense of speed on TV is because of the camera angles of the cars was not tight enough - the reason for which was because they wanted to show all the trackside advertising.

Now they tighten up the camera shots on the cars and the reason they do this is because they want you to see the sponsors on the car (advertising) and you lose the sense of speed.

LMAO they can't win

 

Mm. My own suspicion is that the cars are heavier and suspensions much more sophisticated, so the cars no longer look like they're about to fly off the track and explode into a million pieces. That's a big difference compared to 20 years ago.
 

[TomNokoe]

Ferrari Hards again second run

[Jovanotti]

TomNokoe, on 23 Oct 2020 - 10:39, said:

Just as in Mugello I am absolutely infuriated with the coverage.

Yup. Just tuned in. Stupid banter, check. Garage coverage while there are cars out lapping, check. Ffs.

[OO7]

krapmeister, on 23 Oct 2020 - 10:50, said:

I must be getting old, because I remember when people used to say the reason F1 loses the sense of speed on TV is because of the camera angles of the cars was not tight enough - the reason for which was because they wanted to show all the trackside advertising.

Now they tighten up the camera shots on the cars and the reason they do this is because they want you to see the sponsors on the car (advertising) and you lose the sense of speed.

LMAO they can't win

It needs to be balanced between the car and the background.  Too much zoom and you can't see the background so there's little to no reference for that sense of speed.  Zoom out too far and the cars become dots.

Edited by OO7, 23 October 2020 - 11:01.

[Goron3]

The last corner looks much quicker than I thought it would.

You know...it's a shame we have so much practice. The track looks difficult at the moment. Would love to have seen a format like Imola next week.

[Jovanotti]

Must be a great track to drive.

[PayasYouRace]

Ellios, on 22 Oct 2020 - 20:55, said:

Tenuous link but hopefully can squeeze this in here

That’s weird because in contemporary accounts 1986 was considered the year of the “Gang of Five” with Rosberg in the other McLaren being the fifth. Though he was wasn’t in the title fight he was one of the front runners.

[ArchieTech]

Risil, on 23 Oct 2020 - 10:53, said:

Mm. My own suspicion is that the cars are heavier and suspensions much more sophisticated, so the cars no longer look like they're about to fly off the track and explode into a million pieces. That's a big difference compared to 20 years ago.
 

Yeah I definitely think the lack of that skittishness affects the perception of the car being on the edge.

 

Also things like the onboard cameras being quite stabilised now as well as the type of lens, it all adds to the effect of the cars looking serene but not always fast.

Edited by ArchieTech, 23 October 2020 - 11:02.

[thegamer23]

They're missing all the fast laps.

Usual crap coverage

[OvDrone]

*F1 cars finally at Algarve*

 

Sky: We know exactly what would make this even better - JOHNNY HERBERT

[TomNokoe]

Not many improvements. Fickle Pirellis.

[krapmeister]

RIC slowly working himself up to speed.

Surprised OCO isn't quicker though, seeing as this is a low grip track and also a track that neither of them haved raced an F1 car on before - so no inherent track knowledge advantage to RIC.

[TomNokoe]

Mercedes trading purple sectors and we're watching ****ing Stroll in 14th

[absinthedude]

OO7, on 23 Oct 2020 - 10:28, said:

Yep.  I've been watching races from the 1990 season and also watched part of the 2007 Spanish GP and I'd say the foreshortening caused by the zoom is mostly responsible for the lack of apparent speed of the cars.

 

Try going back further. By today's standards the cars in the 60s were really slow but they don't look slow because the cameras/lenses used were far less sophisticated than those used today. Also CCD sensors with very fast shutter speeds took over in the 90s (Imola 1990 had one such camera in the broadcast) and that creates less sense of speed than the old tube cameras with slower shutter speeds. 

[ARTGP]

TomNokoe, on 23 Oct 2020 - 11:10, said:

Mercedes trading purple sectors and we're watching ****ing Stroll in 14th

 

It's a Mercedes though 

[thegamer23]

TomNokoe, on 23 Oct 2020 - 11:10, said:

Mercedes trading purple sectors and we're watching ****ing Stroll in 14th

I can't believe how bad it is.

It seems they're doing it on purpose 😂

[OO7]

I don't think any of the Merc fastest laps have been shown.

[Peat]

ArchieTech, on 23 Oct 2020 - 11:01, said:

Yeah I definitely think the lack of that skittishness affects the perception of the car being on the edge.

 

Also things like the onboard cameras being quite stabilised now as well as the type of lens, it all adds to the effect of the cars looking serene but not always fast.

 

AT least they're not doing the FormulaE thing of continually zooming the roll-hoop cam. 

Yet. 

[ANF]

T13 seems similar to T5 at Mid-Ohio. The rear seems to get very light and there's a lot of opposite lock.

[FrontWing]

OO7, on 23 Oct 2020 - 11:11, said:

I don't think any of the Merc fastest laps have been shown.

I've turned off, disgusting coverage.

[OO7]

absinthedude, on 23 Oct 2020 - 11:11, said:

Try going back further. By today's standards the cars in the 60s were really slow but they don't look slow because the cameras/lenses used were far less sophisticated than those used today. Also CCD sensors with very fast shutter speeds took over in the 90s (Imola 1990 had one such camera in the broadcast) and that creates less sense of speed than the old tube cameras with slower shutter speeds. 

Cheers, I'll have to take a look into that.  I think there are many contributory factors, but believe the prime culprit is the zoom.  One of the main offenders is the Spa crane shot at Les Combes, looking down the kemmel straight.  I've seen pregnant sloths in rem sleep looking faster.

[OO7]

FrontWing, on 23 Oct 2020 - 11:13, said:

I've turned off, disgusting coverage.

They got one guys, they got one!.  Everyone, a libation for our fallen hero.

 

FrontWing, I don't remember what race weekend exactly, but I came so close to doing the same because it was seriously pissing me off and almost making be dizzy with the constant switching around.  I've never felt like that before, in all my years of watching, so I get where you're coming from.

Edited by OO7, 23 October 2020 - 11:24.

[absinthedude]

OO7, on 23 Oct 2020 - 11:16, said:

Cheers, I'll have to take a look into that.  I think there are many contributory factors, but believe the prime culprit is the zoom.  One of the main offenders is the Spa crane shot at Les Combes, looking down the kemmel straight.  I've seen pregnant sloths in rem sleep looking faster.

 

As a photographer and film-maker myself (albeit amateur) I concur. There was also a habit from the mid 90s onwards of camera angles being designed as much to show the billboards as the cars. That didn't help either. This year they've tried to make things better, occasionally succeeding. 

[Maikel0230]

14 laps in on the medium and graining on both Merc's. This might look like a two stopper.

Edited by Maikel0230, 23 October 2020 - 11:26.

[OO7]

absinthedude, on 23 Oct 2020 - 11:24, said:

As a photographer and film-maker myself (albeit amateur) I concur. There was also a habit from the mid 90s onwards of camera angles being designed as much to show the billboards as the cars. That didn't help either. This year they've tried to make things better, occasionally succeeding. 

To be fair the Spa coverage (corners) is very good, it's mainly the straights, Kemmel (high shot) and pit straight that are really bad, but watching Senna's 1991 Pole lap there...!  Wow!    Silverstone is also pretty good.

[ANF]

Ocon's something is blowing up. Probably a hydraulic leak.

Edited by ANF, 23 October 2020 - 11:32.

[krapmeister]

OCO with another brake problem?

Edit: nope probably gearbox related

Edited by krapmeister, 23 October 2020 - 11:33.