datvman Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 I expected this to be blurrvision, dotcrawl, 4:3 shyte NTSC style quality. But.. Its widescreen Is 50Hz PAL Colour is great Picture is crisp Compression is quite low (but noticeable) Overall, 9.5/10 for PQ. Very nice and very happy.
ozasis Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 Far better than foxsports... but that was expected...
Neon Kitten Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 When you titled this thread "Super 8 Cricket" I came in fully expecting to learn of some obscure match on the subcontinent broadcast from an 8mm home movie source
mello yello Posted March 27, 2007 Posted March 27, 2007 When you titled this thread "Super 8 Cricket" I came in fully expecting to learn of some obscure match on the subcontinent broadcast from an 8mm home movie source That would be Fox Sports How interesting to be able to compare apples with apples for once. Same game, same broadcast supplier, same commentary, yet such a stark difference in overall picture quality. I wonder which channel they are watching in North Ryde
McDigital Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 G'day, Here's some screen caps from Channel Nine's coverage from the host studio to the action http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/6687/20...27232919nn0.jpg http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/3873/20...27232939ue6.jpg http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/9775/20...27232945bk4.jpg Then it was over to the coverage, with some graphics over feed graphics. Then it was all up to the host broadcaster http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/6381/20...27233011lw7.jpg http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4499/20070327233120py8.jpg (Not quite sure what this was all about, with no games completed) http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/3653/20...27233210rv2.jpg http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/4168/20...27233531wr2.jpg http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/9623/20...27234224hq4.jpg http://img148.imageshack.us/img148/6241/20...27234307rl6.jpg http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/9286/20...27234515qm3.jpg http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/1600/20070327234616oy1.jpg http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/655/20070327235021vg9.jpg http://img248.imageshack.us/img248/9928/20...27235057uu5.jpg Here i've tried to example every aspect of the graphics they show. For those wondering about the palm trees on the scorebar. They were animated through the whole match. The match is still in progress as I speak, with the West Indies still to bat tonight. I assume that Channel Nine will scrap Quizmania to show this, as this would be a last minute shuffle of the program guide, there are currently no guides online saying that anything is scrapped in favour of the conclusion of this match
ozasis Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4499/20070327233120py8.jpg (Not quite sure what this was all about, with no games completed) I think it was just an extremely daft way of channel 9 trying to explain that the top four in the super 8 table go through to the semi's. Surely people are smart enough to work that out if they're just simply told? I don't think there was really need for a visual of the table from them.... lol
Hosko Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 I wonder which channel they are watching in North Ryde It would look identical at North Ryde as they are up stream of the head end.
MattWinter Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 The PQ wasn't that much better than fox sports - noticable, but barely.
shawnkemp Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/4499/20070327233120py8.jpg (Not quite sure what this was all about, with no games completed) May have been answered by now, but points carry through from the previous round e.g. Australia beat South Africa, so Australia carries through 2 points and SA 0.
keiron Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 I expected this to be blurrvision, dotcrawl, 4:3 shyte NTSC style quality. But..Its widescreen Is 50Hz PAL Colour is great Picture is crisp Compression is quite low (but noticeable) Overall, 9.5/10 for PQ. Very nice and very happy. Yeah...the PQ was pretty good The graphics were a bit over the top Overall, a lot better than I was expecting.
mello yello Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 The PQ wasn't that much better than fox sports - noticable, but barely. Well considering one is FREE and the other you have to PAY for which one do you think represents value for money? Not Foxtel
tegregg Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 Well considering one is FREE and the other you have to PAY for which one do you think represents value for money?Not Foxtel Depends whether you want to watch an advert after every over or stay with the game I suppose!! When talking value for money you have also forgotten to mention that channel 9 are only showing a very select number of games versus every game in the tournament....now thats what I call value for money!
McDigital Posted March 28, 2007 Posted March 28, 2007 Depends whether you want to watch an advert after every over or stay with the game I suppose!! When talking value for money you have also forgotten to mention that channel 9 are only showing a very select number of games versus every game in the tournament....now thats what I call value for money! Theoretically, there's 2 games on tonight. One is a shortened match due to yesterdays weather over there So, Fox Sports would be broadcasting both I would assume, or if they have filled up, go across to MainEvent. Channel Nine has the coverage of the Australia v West Indies match tonight from 11:30pm Eastern Time, I presume it's live nationwide as well
mello yello Posted March 29, 2007 Posted March 29, 2007 Depends whether you want to watch an advert after every over or stay with the game I suppose!! When talking value for money you have also forgotten to mention that channel 9 are only showing a very select number of games versus every game in the tournament....now thats what I call value for money! As far as he adverts go I found they both went to an ad break at the same time. No I meant it gave us a snapshot of the difference in quality from what we pay for to what we can get for free...of the same live broadcast. You only have to look at the NRL as well. The Nine broadcast games are far superior picture quality to the Fox Sports ones. Apple vs Apple and Nines Apple looked far shinier. Why cant Foxtel do that? Thats where the value for money comes in..we are paying for an inferior product which can be improved if they wanted to....therefore ..not very good value for money is it?
tegregg Posted March 29, 2007 Posted March 29, 2007 As far as he adverts go I found they both went to an ad break at the same time.No I meant it gave us a snapshot of the difference in quality from what we pay for to what we can get for free...of the same live broadcast. You only have to look at the NRL as well. The Nine broadcast games are far superior picture quality to the Fox Sports ones. Apple vs Apple and Nines Apple looked far shinier. Why cant Foxtel do that? Thats where the value for money comes in..we are paying for an inferior product which can be improved if they wanted to....therefore ..not very good value for money is it? While I agree with you on the PQ with FTA being a far superior picture the unfortunate fact is that the general person prefers quantity over quality. Given current bandwidth constraints the lower PQ on Foxtel is something I suppose we have to put up with if we want the programs. I for one would prefer fewer channels and better PQ. Unfortunately I think I am in the minority on this one. The only answer would be to vote with my feet which I'm not prepared to do as 80% of my viewing now comes via Foxtel. So while I prefer a better PQ, I still feel there is value for money in the fact that you get to see full tournaments (eg world cup cricket) rather than just the odd game here and there.
mello yello Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 Well I think this thread can put to rest one of the excuses that Foxtel and Austar use when people complain of PQ on certain sports broadcasts..and that is the all too frequent one of ... "...we are limited to the quality of the feed received from the Host Boadcaster" FTA Nine just had exactly the same feed, exactly the same content yet the Foxtel version was significantly poorer. I think this thread should be referred to whenever anyone hears that one again
norpus Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 Well I think this thread can put to rest one of the excuses that Foxtel and Austar use when people complain of PQ on certain sports broadcasts..and that is the all too frequent one of ..."...we are limited to the quality of the feed received from the Host Boadcaster" FTA Nine just had exactly the same feed, exactly the same content yet the Foxtel version was significantly poorer. I think this thread should be referred to whenever anyone hears that one again Get a decent video processor mello and you won't be quite so unhappy
mello yello Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 Get a decent video processor mello and you won't be quite so unhappy I know youre joking norpus.. ..but Foxtel are the ones who should get decent video processing All Im saying is that they should not be able to get away with the fob-off that they use when they blame the source feed for their poor bitrate. ..and that they have the hide to charge top dollar.
Hosko Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 Actually 9's feed has an extra hop in it so technicly should look worse then Fox Sports
Recommended Posts