Quote from ATC Quicksilver :

I thought the whole coverage was excellent today, they didn't really miss a trick, any action that was missed was quickly followed up with several replays and all the battles got good air time, not just the front runners or the home favourites.

The BBC doesn't really have anything to do with that, though.

Every channel in the world gets the same pictures from the "FOM" or whatever it's called, no?

I'm sure that at every race the 'home broadcaster' aka BBC takes control of that sort of thing.

Oh well, then RTL talked shit as usual.

Quote from CSF :

I'm sure that at every race the 'home broadcaster' aka BBC takes control of that sort of thing.

FOM produces the world feed at each race apart from Monaco and Japan.

Hmmm that never used to be the case with ITV... oh well I bow to wikipedia Boothy.

Quote from zeugnimod :

Oh well, then RTL talked shit as usual.

No it's true that the live feed is the same for all broadcasters watching. Sometimes the broadcaster can get control of different replays and stuff though.

There are actually more than one feed that FOM produces - there's a few onboards for the local TV companies to choose from. The only channel I know have done that would be Premiere, whereas the rest have just gone with the main one. Here you can watch them online for a fee.

On the BBC you can choose feeds.

I loved jake's comment when they talked to horner straight after the race. He said something like "marks getting the champagne although he might not want to share it with you" hahaha

Quote from ATC Quicksilver :

I thought the whole coverage was excellent today, they didn't really miss a trick, any action that was missed was quickly followed up with several replays and all the battles got good air time, not just the front runners or the home favourites. I know you critise the BBC Intrepid, but for me the BBC show other channels how quality live sport coverage is done, and I'm so happy we don't have to put up with ITV anymore.

My objection to the BBC is about the fact we have a state broadcaster in the UK that has a heavy political bias, and which also monopolises the market prohibiting independent companies from making money.

You know what? I think ITV did an absolutely superb job with F1 considering it cost you, and me £0. ITV actually did improve from the BBC coverage when it bought the rights. Many forget this. Yes the adverts were an absolute nightmare but this is a price to pay when you compete against state broadcastors who aren't dependant on revenue steams.

Also consider that ITV4 broadcasts the whole BTCC programme and historically has had a fantastic partnership with British motorsport over the years I wouldn't be too snobbish against them! Again it was ITV who broadcast Champions of the Future on Saturday on a prime time slot during 1996-1997. A massive gamble, but it showed their commitment to grass roots motorsport. The BBC have their jewel, don't care much for anything else.

No old ladies were threatened by suits to pay up for a TV tax, oh I mean 'licence', to pay for all the ITV coverage. Nope, good ol' ITV provided it for free to the viewer! So let's get some perspective.

Also, as someone has already pointed out, it's FOM who control all the actual footage of the race, not the BBC.

I'll admit much of the BBC's coverage is very well done, but that's not the point. With the internet advancing and other media resources providing just as good in-depth analysis it won't be long before TV is redundant anyway. The World GT championship broadcasts online for free now. Won't be long for other series to follow.

Quote from Intrepid :

blah blah blah

You really need some new material now.

Well done Mr Webber , well done indeed.

Any comments Tristan?

re jake best thing i saw was in the reprt on the auitosport awards with steve ryder saying jake was making it look too easy after jim rosenthall had done his best to make the job look completely impossible !

Quote from RedBullGivesYouWings :

Red Bull gives you wings. At least, it does if you're Vettel

Haha, I totally missed this joke until now. Like it.

why dont we get f1 in hd?

they put shitty golf on it instead...

im sure f1 is recorded in hd?

Quote from BreadC :

why dont we get f1 in hd?

they put shitty golf on it instead...

im sure f1 is recorded in hd?

For the millionth time FOM does not produce HD.

They will soon though. (Next couple years)

Read an article on Autosport about it. They also considered 3D...

They said they wouldn't consider it until at least 2012 because not enough people have the ability to watch it in HD.

I read that HD onboard cameras aren't yet capable of operating under the endured by F1 cars, and that F1 don't want SD to be mixed with HD as it will make the SD shots look crappy. Don't know if that's true though .

Quote from ATC Quicksilver :

They said they wouldn't consider it until at least 2012 because not enough people have the ability to watch it in HD.

I think FOM are already testing 3D onboard/outboard cameras which suggests they are probably seeing the market for HD be superseded by the 3D market. Not that Bernie overly cares about the market because that's not where he gets his money from.

I'd be more than satisified with HD track cameras and sd onboard, would hardly notice a difference tbh.

Adding on to what intrepid said about bernie's revenue, why should he fork out money on HD equipment and the increased broadcasting costs when he makes his money off advertising and the rediculous amount tracks have to pay + other things.

3D is a rubbish gimmick. HD is a far better thing to go for.

Bernie is too old to know what is HD, unless it means "Harrass Dollars"

Quote from DejaVu :

I'd be more than satisified with HD track cameras and sd onboard, would hardly notice a difference tbh.

Adding on to what intrepid said about bernie's revenue, why should he fork out money on HD equipment and the increased broadcasting costs when he makes his money off advertising and the rediculous amount tracks have to pay + other things.

I am not sure if Bernie makes much money on advertising. He makes money selling rights to broadcasters and tracks. Quite a large chunk of that is state subsidised. He can charge large amounts because states tend to inflate prices quite largely. What's an extra few million to an organisation not motivated by profit? It nearly meant we lost a British GP. Anyway I digress.

On the 3D. Agreed it's a rubbish gimmick! But gimmicks sometimes have a tendency to be quite successful. Though I can't wait for the backlash when they find out how many people either

1. Can't see 3D
2. get headaches watching 3D