209 replies to this topic

[clef]

Isn't it about time the F1 world feed was provided in widescreen?

F1 is supposed to be the most advanced sport in the world using cutting edge technology, and it's still done in 4:3!

Surely the F1 audience is more likely to have a widescreen TV than the general population.. I'm sure I'm not the only frustrated viewer.

Has anyone heard anything about when the switch might occur? Anything about it in the press ever?

[windsok]

FOM still does not control production for all the races, I suspect we will not see improvments like widescreen until FOM has taken over production of all races.

[HP]

What's wrong with 4:3?

I wouldn't mind having BernieVision back..

[clef]

That seems like a lame excuse though.. they could do it for the races they can, or somehow mandate it must be widescreen from the races that do their own.

[Ross Stonefeld]

Why? I dont have widescreen, I dont think most people do.

[V10 Fireworks]

Originally posted by windsok
FOM still does not control production for all the races, I suspect we will not see improvments like widescreen until FOM has taken over production of all races.

and Channel Ten presented their 2003 Melbourne GP in widescreen for their local broadcast before cropping it and sending it off for world feed, and FOM presented the 2004 Melbourne GP in 4:3 Does this seem right to you?

You might not have a WS TV but TV should be made in WS it's the convention, most of it is, even Jill's weather report filmed on location is on widescreen on most networks for example....





If the analog TV feed switches between 4:3 and cropped widescreen does it matter, isn't it better that the digital broadcast is presented in widescreen where possible? Most broadcasters use only widescreen equipment for sports broadcasts do they not, FOM no different presumably, so you may as well send out a WS feed?

[V10 Fireworks]

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
Why? I dont have widescreen, I dont think most people do.

Because it's conventional that television is made and broadcast in widescreen in the year 2006?

Why the hell broadcast it in 4:6 that's stupid.

[Milt]

Originally posted by V10 Fireworks




Because it's conventional that television is made and broadcast in widescreen in the year 2006?

Why the hell broadcast it in 4:6 that's stupid.

Sorry, but 'conventional' TV is still made, and broadcast, in 4:3
Take a look at the 2006 Olympics for proof.
That's current, definitely big budget, and it's sports oriented.

Just because you bought a screen that is more suited for watching movies, with your new DVD player, that doesn't mean the rest of us should follow your lead.

[Menace]

Originally posted by Milt
Sorry, but 'conventional' TV is still made, and broadcast, in 4:3
Take a look at the 2006 Olympics for proof.
That's current, definitely big budget, and it's sports oriented.

Just because you bought a screen that is more suited for watching movies, with your new DVD player, that doesn't mean the rest of us should follow your lead.

Yeah sure. I'm watching the Olympic coverage at 16:9 HD format... you sure it's still native 4:3?

[pacwest]

That's funny, I watched the Olympics tonight in High Definition widescreen.

I agree. I would pay $20 to watch F1 in hi-def feed right to my pvr.

[TAB666]

Originally posted by HP
What's wrong with 4:3?

I wouldn't mind having BernieVision back..

amen to that. Miss the good old days with amazing BernieVision

[clef]

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
Why? I dont have widescreen, I dont think most people do.

It won't affect those who don't.. normal analog broadcasts can be 4:3 but for digital it should be 16:9 (and those with 4:3 can centrecut.. just like every other show on TV).

I watch tennis, cricket and other motor racing in widescreen here in Australia.. F1 is very much behind.

[kamix]

Hey lets take it one step at a time here in Australia and go for live broadcasts before widescreen digital

[jb_128]

What's the deal about widescreen? Hardly anyone has a widescreen TV here in Germany and broadcasts are always 4:3. 16:9 TV's have been available for years but nobody bought them.

Broadcasting in widescreen would technically only make sense if the actual camera equipment was recording in widescreen. I doubt this is the case and I wouldn't see much point in doing so. HDTV F1 on the other hand would be great but in Europe HD just isn't available yet.

[fuz]

I would gladly pay to see F1 in HD format

[jb_128]

Originally posted by clef


It won't affect those who don't.. normal analog broadcasts can be 4:3 but for digital it should be 16:9 (and those with 4:3 can centrecut.. just like every other show on TV).

I watch tennis, cricket and other motor racing in widescreen here in Australia.. F1 is very much behind.

Well it depends on the aspect ratio of the source material. If the cameras are recording in 4:3 you are losing image inforomation when they crop it to 16:9. If it is recorded in 16:9 then 4:3 users will lose image information due to cropping. In Germany all TV shows are prooduced in 4:3.

[jb_128]

Some demos of what HDTV F1 could be like can be found here.

ftp://dvdcenter.hu/HDTV/

(Forma1_HDTV_promo_1080i_part1.ts and Forma1_HDTV_promo_1080i_part2.ts)

To view them you can use Nvidia Purevideo or VLC Player or any other HDTV/MPEG2 combos. You will need a powerfull system to watch them smoothly.

[Menace]

I cant say I would ever buy a non HDTV again. Even though the amount of channels is limited (20 or so on my Comcast Digital right now) 1080i simply looks stunning! I too, would willingly pay $20/month for 1080 Broadcast of F1!

[Dudley]

Originally posted by jb_128
What's the deal about widescreen?

What's the deal with colour TV?

[jb_128]

Originally posted by Dudley


What's the deal with colour TV?

A colour picture contains more information than a black and white image and is truer to the type of images we observe in nature.

Now please explain to me why 16:9 is automatically superior to 4:3. I'm not saying it's worse but the advantages are not obvious to me.

[bystander31]

Originally posted by jb_128

Now please explain to me why 16:9 is automatically superior to 4:3. I'm not saying it's worse but the advantages are not obvious to me.

A widescreen picture contains more information than a 4:3 and is truer to the type of images we observe in nature.

Its pathetic that Formula one isnt in digital widescreen. Really really really pathetic.

[Piif]

Originally posted by jb_128
What's the deal about widescreen? Hardly anyone has a widescreen TV here in Germany and broadcasts are always 4:3. 16:9 TV's have been available for years but nobody bought them.

If that's true, then Germany is pretty far from say Finland. The CRT-televisions are practically extinct, all that are sold are plasmas and lcd's. And they are of course, 16:9 models. As were the "normal" crt televisions for some 8 years before them.

Hey Germany! It's 2006, not 1996.

[jb_128]

Originally posted by bystander31


A widescreen picture contains more information than a 4:3 and is truer to the type of images we observe in nature.

Its pathetic that Formula one isnt in digital widescreen. Really really really pathetic.

The amount of information has nothing to do with the aspect ratio. Any aspect ratio can have any amount of information. The camera that does the filming puts the information there.

The second part may be true though. If you look out straight in front of you the field of vision does indeed seem to be larger horizontally than vertically. Still this can't be generalized. A game of football for example would probably be better to watch on a wide screen wheras a game of tennis or an F1 onboard shot would probably be best viewed on a tall screen.

[jb_128]

Originally posted by Piif


If that's true, then Germany is pretty far from say Finland. The CRT-televisions are practically extinct, all that are sold are plasmas and lcd's. And they are of course, 16:9 models. As were the "normal" crt televisions for some 8 years before them.

Hey Germany! It's 2006, not 1996.

Here are the most popular LCD/Plasmas sold at our most widespread electronics retailer.

http://www.mediamark...hp?gid=127&kb=1

As you can see the two most popular are 4:3.

I cetainly know more people with 4:3 TV's than 16:9. And the ones who have 16:9 watch TV shows in a terribly distorted "stretched to 16:9 view" since the shows are produced and broadcast in 4:3.

[kar]

I think going forward most people are going to be having HD/WS TVs.

We have a ws tv at home and it's kind of ludicrous that the adverts for the ITV F1 are in widescreen, while the main event itself is in 4:3 letterbox.

It's frustrating because F1 is something that puts itself forward as one of the most technologically advanced sports in the world, all the while tv coverage of it is in old tech 4:3.

There's an LG ad that's always on before the F1 coverage starts on ITV, 'part of the itv experience' apparently. Well if you splashed out on one of those nice LG plasmas, you'd be wasting your money because roughtly half the screen real estate would be blank.

It sucks.

[rayyu882]

Originally posted by jb_128

The second part may be true though. If you look out straight in front of you the field of vision does indeed seem to be larger horizontally than vertically. Still this can't be generalized. A game of football for example would probably be better to watch on a wide screen wheras a game of tennis or an F1 onboard shot would probably be best viewed on a tall screen.

That's not really true! If you seen the coverage of NASCAR here in the state with 16:9 in 1080i HD, you will see a picture far greater then the current F1 coverage. Alot more to see and the picture are extremely detail! In pure Resolution alone is no comparsion, you're talking 480i vs 720p or 1080i!

[rayyu882]

Originally posted by jb_128


Well I'm no expert on sales but I cetainly know more people with 4:3 TV's than 16:9. And the ones who have 16:9 watch TV shows in a terribly distorted "stretched to 16:9 view" since the shows are produced and broadcast in 4:3.

It's true that currently 480i 4:3 TV channels still outnumber 16:9 HD channels, but 16:9 HD is what the future is heading. Here I heard by 2009 all major channels will broadcast in 16:9 either in 720p or 1080i resolution.

[kar]

Originally posted by jb_128


Well I'm no expert on sales but I cetainly know more people with 4:3 TV's than 16:9. And the ones who have 16:9 watch TV shows in a terribly distorted "stretched to 16:9 view" since the shows are produced and broadcast in 4:3.

Not exactly, most modern big screens auto detect the aspect ratio of the broadcast it's receiving. Our TV resizes the picture to 4:3, which means like when you watch a 16:9 DVD on a normal tv, you get black borders, but rather than at the top and bottom, they are at the sides.

It effectively means that half the screen real estate of your £1200+ TV is sitting blank.

Of course if it really pisses you off you can force it to scale the image to 16:9, but as you say it looks horrid. We also don't have the benefit that 4:3 users have of simply being able to scale and crop to get a normal picture.

[jb_128]

Of course HD is way superior to non HD. All HD means though is high resolution. Widescreen is not automatically tied to a high resolution.

What I am saying is:

WS vs non-WS: Meh.
HD vs non HD: brilliant.

[jb_128]

Originally posted by kar


Not exactly, most modern big screens auto detect the aspect ratio of the broadcast it's receiving. Our TV resizes the picture to 4:3, which means like when you watch a 16:9 DVD on a normal tv, you get black borders, but rather than at the top and bottom, they are at the sides.

It effectively means that half the screen real estate of your £1200+ TV is sitting blank.

Of course if it really pisses you off you can force it to scale the image to 16:9, but as you say it looks horrid. We also don't have the benefit that 4:3 users have of simply being able to scale and crop to get a normal picture.

What you say makes sense. But you are not saying WS is better than non-WS. All you are saying is that you particular TV prefers to be fed WS (no black bars). In the same way a 4:3 screen prefers a 4:3 signal (no black bars).

16:9 vs 4:3 is IMO more a question of compatability than picture quality.

I guess it's a bit of a hen/egg question. If broadcasters buy equipment to record and broadcast in 16:9, consumers will buy 16:9 screens. If consumers buy 16:9 screens, broadcasters will invest in 16:9.

In Germany it just hasn't worked out for 16:9, nothing to do with being technically behind. Digital TV has been here for over a decade. HDTV is of course a different matter. Europe has got some catching up to do. One advantage of being late though is that improved technology can be used. The HDTV channels that are slowly starting to pop up now use H264 instead of MPEG2 like in the USA.

At the end of the day though all the technology in the world won't be worth a lot if the broadcasters arn't prepared to give their streams the bitrate they need, which is a big problem with digital TV now. The picture quality is often horrendous due to low bitrates.

[kar]

Well I never thought WS would be better until I experienced it. I watch a lot of Ice Hockey in WS and it's great you see more of the action at once.

Watching sport on a widescreen just, for me anyway, feels so much more immersive. I guess it is a subjective thing, but I find it hard watching most things in 4:3 now, even on a proper 4:3 TV.

But the problem here isn't the either/or. F1 can very easily be broadcast most of the time in both formats without drama, the question is why is a sport that generates a HUGE amount of its income from TV, providing such a lacklustre TV experience for its fans. If you don't like WS and have a 'normal' (although I don't know if normal is the right word anymore since if you go to a tv store anywhere you'll see almost strictly 16:9 tvs these days) tv then you'll get an appropriate pciture anyway. If you're an F1 nut, like most of us, have a bit of disposable cash for a flash plasma why shouldn't you get a picture that makes the most of current technology.

Really, the sport makes a huge amount of money, the sport is all about bleeding edge technology. How damn hard, really, would it be to offer it's broadcasting partners a decent ws/hd feed with which to offer F1 fans on their TVs. That way _everyone_ is happy!

[kar]

Originally posted by jb_128
Some demos of what HDTV F1 could be like can be found here.

ftp://dvdcenter.hu/HDTV/

(Forma1_HDTV_promo_1080i_part1.ts and Forma1_HDTV_promo_1080i_part2.ts)

To view them you can use Nvidia Purevideo or VLC Player or any other HDTV/MPEG2 combos. You will need a powerfull system to watch them smoothly.

Thanks for that link. I output them from my computer to the TV and oh my god!!

If we could get that from ITV/Ecclestone, I think my eyes might pop out ;D

[SeanValen]

I think f1 in HIGH DEFINTION is the next step.

Widescreen I would prefer, perhaps Bernie vision should back with a widescreen channel because majority of the world is gonna take a long time, to catch up with the rash of technnology and they cannot be excluded as viewers.


High Definiition F1 on a HD tv, would look awesome, the speed, the cars, almost twice as much resolution as normal resolution, the detail would be pinsharp.


When you look how much tv coverage misses out on cornering, you see the close up of the car, and not really of it entering and exiting corners, the camera angels need to be placed in new ways, then you'll get to see the benefit of widescreen with f1 more.

[jb_128]

Well Bernie was one of the first to jump onto the digital TV bandwagon in 1996 but it didn't work out. I wonder why it was so expensive. If F1 digital was too expensive then what will HD be like?

[jb_128]

Originally posted by kar


Thanks for that link. I output them from my computer to the TV and oh my god!!

If we could get that from ITV/Ecclestone, I think my eyes might pop out ;D

Indeed, those clips really make you want it, don't they?

[kar]

Definitely. I'm gonna send an email to ITV and ask em what the go is, maybe if enuff people bitch about it we may get some goodies. Worst case, at least we can find out wtf it is 4:3 only, and what the future may hold for WS HDTV.

[jb_128]

Keep us informed if you get any replies.

[kar]

This is a copy of the email I sent to itv using their contact us form at itv-f1.com (sent it to itv talkback).

Part of the ITV F1 experience apparently is an LG Plasma screen. It's pretty good advertising, it's stuck in my head, but for a pretty bad reason. See I have a widescreen TV, and I know that the ITV F1 experience on a widescreen TV isn't the best, and a fancy LG plasma is only going to make that fact even more obvious.

I was discussing this with some other F1 fans earlier today who similarly have bought nice WS/Digital/HDTV setups to get their F1 fix only to be surprised that the only widescreen coverage they are going to see on a Sunday afternoon is that during ad breaks.

I'm curious why the F1 isn't in widescreen. I'm sure it's not of ITV's choosing, but how is it that a sport that makes a lot of its money from TV broadcasters such as yourselves only offering shoddy 4:3 ratio pictures? I have friends in Australia who told me that domestically they got ITV commentry, but widescreen/hdtv pictures because their channel 10 were handling the race. Meanwhile for foreign consumption a stripped down 4:3 (normal format) picture was beamed out.

Surely F1 as the pinnacle of world motorsport, a sport that is all about bleeding edge technology could provide its fans with a broadcast that takes advantage of 21st Century TVs. HDTV / WS / Digital these are things that would make F1 far more engrossing to watch, I just don't understand why something basic like widescreen isn't offered, even when it seems it is available!

Thanks for any insight you could give me, particularly why there isn't WS, and if there is any hope for the near future.

Cheers!
Aaron.

[clef]

F1 in widescreen is win-win for all.

If you don't have a widescreen TV you won't notice any difference. If you do, you get widescreen. How can anyone complain?

Edit: thankyou Kar for the email.. look forward to a response!

[jb_128]

Originally posted by clef
F1 in widescreen is win-win for all.

If you don't have a widescreen TV you won't notice any difference. If you do, you get widescreen. How can anyone complain?

Edit: thankyou Kar for the email.. look forward to a response!

It really depends on the technology used to produce the content. There can be no win/win, either 4:3 or 16:9 screen owners will be at a disadvantage unless the 16:9 and 4:3 streams are created seperately in parallel.

But TBH I don't really know a lot about the cameras and encoding technologies used, maybe someone here can enlighten us? Are the cameras digital? Where does the digitalizing take place? At what resolution? What native aspect ratios do the cameras have? Do they use anamorphic lenses? etc

[jonpollak]

Is it me or was this topic covered by the #2 post by windsok?
Bullshit IN means Bullshit out.

There is NOTHING worse than watching a stretched 4:3 picture...
specially one with any movement in it...like Car Racing!!!!

Lets get FOM doing all the races first.
Then maybe have a big AV manufacturer provide FOM (free of charge) with HD equipment and use it as a promotional tool for their product.
Jp

[miniman]

Originally posted by jonpollak
Is it me or was this topic covered by the #2 post by windsok?
Bullshit IN means Bullshit out.

There is NOTHING worse than watching a stretched 4:3 picture...
specially one with any movement in it...like Car Racing!!!!
Jp

I'd say this topic was resolved on #26 post.

Any broadcaster of F1 should be required to make both versions available so that those with wide format HDTV could enjoy a superior experience and those with conventional sets wouldn't see any degradation of service.

This is already common in the States where all networks, most sports channels and a few others like Discovery Channel and PBS make both versions available

[Scorg]

Here in the UK Sky show as much sports as it can In WS. You get Football, Cricket, A1GP all in WS. Thats just the ones ive noticed thus far anyway. BBC even shows sports in WS when it can as well, Including the olympics

[dnbn]

There is a big advantage to 16:9 over 4:3 and it is not because of HD. The positions of our eyes evolved to prefer the horizontal dimension. There is much more horizontal motion in racing (and most other sports and activities). I watched some races in both versions and it's incomparable (and the WS versions were not HD).

Regarding the equipment. I doubt if any network in the developed world does not have wide-screen cameras. Actually I suspect that FOM, with their lack of investment during the last several years, is the one who is behind.

Source in 16:9 can still be broadcast in 4:3 by chopping the sides, as long as the cameramen make sure to zoom in enough to contain the most important video content within the 4:3 frame. It does not compromise the 4:3 viewers (actually it compromises a little bit the 16:9 version). The cameras just need markers on their displays, and they do have them.

[prty]

I downloaded those samples, and can't believe how good the quality is. It's like a high resolution picture... except it's moving. I'd love to watch F1 with that technology, in the case I can afford a HD TV. But what I already have is a WS one, and would like to have the option of viewing F1 with it properly.

[Ronin]

I think it would be fantastic to see these races in HD and I'd definitely pay the money to see it. Though here in the states I'm watching most of the races on The Speed Channel which doesn't currently offer an HD feed.

As someone who works in the biz I can tell you that if the cameras they are using were manufactured in the past few years they are almost certainly HD capable. No one is dropping any kind of bank these days on cameras that can't do 1080i. The only issue would be that the onboard pictures and some other non-manned cameras (non-HD) may appear "windowboxed" on a 16:9 screen. Most HD channels handle this by simply adding a netwok logo to fill the right and left sides of the screen when they cut to those cameras.

[windsok]

The fundamental problem though is that FOM still do not control production for all the races. A series as high profile as F1 can not be feeding a 16:9 HD signal for one race, then a 4:3 for the next race, the customers would complain, as they would expect the same coverage level for all races.

From the image quality from Japan in 2005, it looks like the production company there has not even upgraded to digital equipment yet.

I hope FOM gain control of all production soon. This is a cool post that shows how F1 could look in widescreen - http://www.ten-tenth...93&postcount=29

[Cojayar]

Originally posted by jb_128
What's the deal about widescreen? Hardly anyone has a widescreen TV here in Germany and broadcasts are always 4:3. 16:9 TV's have been available for years but nobody bought them.

Go and have a look at Saturn or Media Markt or whatever electronic shop in your neighbohood and you'll see they only sell 16:9 TV sets and a couple of ultra-cheap 4:3 ones. 16:9 is the present, 4:3 the past. HD (of course in 16:9) the future.

If you prefer you can check the main German TV channels at around 21:30 and check that lots of them are in 16:9 (now watching DSDSS in 16:9).

[Menace]

Originally posted by rayyu882


That's not really true! If you seen the coverage of NASCAR here in the state with 16:9 in 1080i HD, you will see a picture far greater then the current F1 coverage. Alot more to see and the picture are extremely detail! In pure Resolution alone is no comparsion, you're talking 480i vs 720p or 1080i!

[Menace]

Originally posted by windsok
The fundamental problem though is that FOM still do not control production for all the races. A series as high profile as F1 can not be feeding a 16:9 HD signal for one race, then a 4:3 for the next race, the customers would complain, as they would expect the same coverage level for all races.

From the image quality from Japan in 2005, it looks like the production company there has not even upgraded to digital equipment yet.

I hope FOM gain control of all production soon. This is a cool post that shows how F1 could look in widescreen - http://www.ten-tenth...93&postcount=29

Excellent demonstration for those who havent had the privilage to view (especially Sports!) in 16:9 HD.