BBC says no HDTV from FOM in 2009

[Chaparral]

The cameras are peanuts compared to the networking, storage, cutting, editing and beaming it over the satellites.

It starts with the in car data bus, the wireless thransmission to the fiber optic cables that catch the in car footage, the helicopter transmissions, the directing suite necessary to mix the 300 camera feeds and then upload it to satellites to run around the globe. We are talking 20 times the bandwidth for each and every system involved in the chain before the bloody thing even comes down from a satellite for you. It is a huge investment without doubt. But the old bugger will have to depart from the money at one time and right now the old system looks really tacky.

You keep missing the point - 90% of people or TARPS (target audience reached per set) do not have a HD set (and thats globally). Networks globally are not interested in HD motor sport full stop as it doesnt rate and certainly makes no sense with Ecclestones fees and the costs that are involved - get over it its not going to happen in the short to medium term - end of story.

[alexbarwell]

OK chaps, my game. The majority of big OB companies including BBC, NEP Visions, Telegenic, BowTie, Carlton etc have fully functional HD trucks capable of producing 1080 line HD (720 is a lame duck honestly) from 24-50 frames/sec, some up to 5 years ago and the big footy matches are covered with these so the kit is out there. FOM were also kitting-up in areas for HD about 3 years ago. The methodology is much the same requiring the same effort to rig and de-rig. HD kit has been adopted widely as, to help the take-up of equipment a lot of it will also work at, and produce SD material as well. Cameras, vision mixers, edit suites, uplinks, infrastructure. BBC studios refitted after many years now have HD capable vision mixers even in some news studios because they are the same price.

[jddh1]

Check out what Luca di Montezemolo said about HD in his description of the 4 Ss. Here's the full quote with that HD bit in bold:

"Stability means not changing the rules every six months or every year. We need to plan ahead and the spectators remain puzzled by too many changes. Seriousness, because you need a lot to be able to deal with difficult moments: we need to stay united and humble, without ever giving the impression that we're divided. Spectacle means attention to the circuits' layouts, to enable overtaking, to the sporting rules, but also to the use of new technologies such as the internet, high definition and much more that you can introduce in this field. Sustainability, because no company can stay alive if costs and earnings don't balance."

Seems like FOTA will demand HD programming. Let's see.

[WhiteBlue]

Yes, Luca knows how to make a point. Both IPTV and HDTV are opportunities which need embracing for F1 to grow. If Bernie is too old and tired someone els should do it. Some years ago he had not missed the opportunities. But he gambled on pay TV 10 years ago and lost a ton of money. He should not always go from one extreme to the other. First he gambles and now he dithers.

[WhiteBlue]

Yes, Luca knows how to make a point. Both IPTV and HDTV are opportunities which need embracing for F1 to grow. If Bernie is too old and tired someone els should do it. Some years ago he had not missed the opportunities. But he gambled on pay TV 10 years ago and lost a ton of money. He should not always go from one extreme to the other. First he gambles and now he dithers.

[Miguel]

I think HDTV at 720p is a necessity. 1080i creates artifacts while interpolation and 1080p needs more broadband than TVs are made to work with. In part it's due their obstination to use bloody old outdated MPEG-2 instead of any decent codec. H.264 does need quite a decent processing power, but I believe today silicon is faster than bandwidth.

But someone might be crazy at me, after stating that HDTV is a necessity. I say that because NASCAR offers HDTV, and probably the champIRL too. They are F1's competitors. They offer some close racing, and are trying to expand (or at least they were before the crisis). So even though per se HDTV is not a necessity (Hakkinen on Schumacher is very impressive in youtube too), F1 is in an arms race. And they can't say "but our engines are more powerful" anymore. I mean, NASCAR drivers seem much closer to the fans than F1 since the 70s or so.

In short, I want a ton of hindsight interviews with engineers, lots of politically incorrect chat by the drivers and I want to download "Mad Max spanked again" from the internet. Heck, those little ladies did to Max what every F1 fan desired for the last 10 years! Of course, creative TV broadcast (and I mean creative, not like a drug trip) and telemetry that resembles somewhat believable.

[pete555]

I thought that F1 was already shot in HD it's just that the feed is not made available to broadcasters.(until bernie works out how to charge for it).

This is where fota have a bit of leverage they could demand the feed is released so that their sponsors are clearer to view.
For what its worth, I think that an HD broadcast would attract a fair few viewers.

[MattF1]

Only the Japanese GP is shot in HD, and this is for the local feed only. The myth that F1 is shot in HD comes from F1 in Cinema being advertised as being in HD although it is only upscaled from SD.
But your general point is right, pete555, as the equipment isn't that expensive and most likely it is Bernie stalling in order to make more cash.

[Chaparral]

I think that an HD broadcast would attract a fair few viewers.

Pete555 - I hear you and Wb and everyone else (but) reality in TV is ratings - and however we may be passionate about our (loosely termed sport) it doesnt rate full stop - the Americans have a slightly different scenario as its more part of their culture and Im led to believe it sees some 70 million viewers per race with NASCAR - whilst we on the various continents struggle to watch it early morning or in this case here late night (after 11 pm) - so HD isnt a priority with TV networks nor in fact viewers and as I said earlier - 90% of households do not have HD - no one cares - especially the networks in BCE's fees and demands - thats life.

[WhiteBlue]

Perhaps that is true of Australia. It is certainly not true of pay TV viewers in Europe who have high percentages of flat screen TVs and are receiving most other high profile sports in HD. Thdey certainly feel that FOM are underperforming compared to soccer or even the Discovery Channel which we get at 20 times the bandwidth Bernie is putting up there. If he insists on Mpeg2 instead of H.264 he should at least provide the signal at bandwidth that matches the best in class (6-8 Mbit/s).

[xpensive]

I think that one should not be careful not to confuse Europe with Germany, in the Scandinavian countries for examle, HDTV broadcasting is still not such a big thing.
People are very careful to buy "HDready" or even "FullHDready-1080" screens, yes, but I believe that's prestige more than anything else.

Like other things you have rather little practical use for, such as a 400 hp station-wagon to drive your kids to school. My neighbour's wife uses an M5T for that very purpose...d**n him!

[alexbarwell]

720P is not supported by much pro kit (Panasonic and JVC with real complications, all others often involving end-stage conversion). System/studio cameras are available offering 1080/50P for high def, high framerate. The compression systems are largely independant of the number of lines/pixels, but more governed by framerate - simple compression will drop framerate as dropping every 2nd frame will halve the datarate without affecting the definition. Long GOP systems are fine in certain cases but introduce a terrible latency making handling very difficult in a live situation (particularly equipping on-board wireless for HD).

[Miguel]

Rant mode:

I really don't understand the HD mess. Well, I know what each number is supposed to mean, but I can't understand how a group of grown-up engineers decided to implement so many formats in the 21st century. 720p is not too much of a jump from DVD resolution. 1080i and 720p are similar, and each has an advantage in certain situations. And 1080p is too much for broadcasting. And then we have a mess.

I think that the reason why many people have at least 720p TVs in europe is becasue now even low-range Tvs are HD. Buying it for the sake of HD is a waste of money. First of all, 1080p won't be used unless you have Blu-Ray. Furthermore, many stuff isn't broadcast in HDTV in my country, and you have to pay quite a hefty premium in order to get it. And last but not least, the jump from DVD quality to HDTV quality is unimportant. The geeks in us notice it, but that's being a measurebator, as Ken Rockwell says.

Come on! How long did the DVD need to kill off VHS? And that is a huge step in durability, content and quality. My family only finally switched to a DVD player when we could no longer find VHS videos to rent.

Back to formula 1:

I'd rather see Suzuka 2005 in SD than Valencia 2008 in 1000080000p at a thousand frames per second. But Bernie had better do something to offer a better product in all aspects than the competitors.

[vyselegend]

720p is not too much of a jump from DVD resolution.

I beg to disagree. For most people, going from their old CRT to a brand new HD ready set has been a step in another world, especially with the top end of the HD ready market, with efficient electronic chipset for optimal upscaling / downscaling.

While on the other hand, I don't see such a revolution in going to full HD from a good HD ready TV (bear in mind that most of the good HD ready TV paving (tube? don't know the word) is not 720p but a bit higher(which means by the way that a downscaled 1080p input is looking better than a 720p signal, if the chipset is good enough)

My point is, a bottom end 1080p TV sucks in comparison of a top end 720p model (because of scintillating, poor upscaling and such phenomenas), while their prices are mostly in favor of a top quality HD ready system.

I think 1080p should only become the standard when LED technology will be affordable for the greatest number. AND when most of the signals will be natively Full HD, because for now this is quite ridiculous, TV isn't broadcast in Full, and 80% of PS3 games are natively 720p too.


All that to say that IMHO 720p is the good compromise, more feasible, allowing for a greater impact on families etc... Especially in the context of the crisis, Full HD as a standard should wait for at least two years.

[Miguel]

Hello vyselegend,

Thanks for your hindsight. Although I do have an HDTV at home, I must admit I haven't watched any native 720p or better video there. However, as you mention, that TV (37 inch Philips that cost a pretty decent amount of money one year and a half ago) has a brilliant upscaling engine. It's terrific being able to read the small print in TV adverts, and I agree that a good upscaling engine (probably using Lanczos interpolation) makes wonders. However, the model we bought was available in 720p and 1080p and I advised my parents to get the 720p model. I don't think spending an extra 300€ in 1080p would have been worth it.

BTW: Standard quality of broadcasting in Spain is plainly speaking crap. Even DTV refuses to broacast in 16:9 480p. Do you get any free HD content in France?