Zolder - the race

[jonovision_man]

Surprisingly few post-race comments!

From what I saw it looked really good. Natural terrain road course, can't complain about that. I didn't get a good look at the crowd but it seemed to be insinuated that it was quite good.

Junky-mania! :D

Wilson passing two cars in one corner - awesome!

Wilson giving the positions back before I could finish saying it was awesome - not so awesome!

jono

[Insomniac]

The race was pretty ho-hum. I ended up skipping through parts of it since I watched F1 live (not that that race was much better).

Didn't help that the announcers didn't know any more than the viewer. People would be in different positions with no indication why. Coverage was pretty poor.

:thumbup: to Junky though. After that disaster of a first pit stop when he came in 4th, it was good to see him still work the strategy to finish second. If you need any more proof that it's a ride buyer's series, it's that he is driving for DCR.

[devilmaster]

flipping back and forth was very interesting to see.

F1 - more or less has wide camera shots, while CC was all in close near to the track. Figuring that the Europeans would know how to film a race better, I was dissapointed to see that CC still needs someone who can run the show on the TV side and desperately.

Missing the last lap battle for 2nd place was inexcusable.

Was the race really that boring? I couldn't say for sure because you couldn't see much with camera angles that only allow one car in frame in certain turns. :irked:

It went around in chat - were we watching in PAL format? If thats standard, then I feel bad for Euro race fans if that's what racing always looks like.

[Insomniac]

flipping back and forth was very interesting to see.

F1 - more or less has wide camera shots, while CC was all in close near to the track. Figuring that the Europeans would know how to film a race better, I was dissapointed to see that CC still needs someone who can run the show on the TV side and desperately.

Missing the last lap battle for 2nd place was inexcusable.

Was the race really that boring? I couldn't say for sure because you couldn't see much with camera angles that only allow one car in frame in certain turns. :irked:

It went around in chat - were we watching in PAL format? If thats standard, then I feel bad for Euro race fans if that's what racing always looks like.

The PAL format is actually higher resolution but a slightly lower frame rate. I doubt it had anything to do with that. That's not responsible for terrible directing and horrible camera positions/angles/zoom. Not to mention the terrible quality. But despite all that, I think the race was boring regardless.

[jonovision_man]

I don't think it was so much PAL, but rather converting from PAL to NTSC. They do something funky for live stuff, like repeat a frame or drop a frame or something like that. I remember the broadcast from Brands one year looking the same, ie. like crap.

There must be some way around it, F1 always looks good. But there was something just off about the broadcast.

And dm you're right about the tight shots, it was really tough to keep track of!

But the race itself? Pretty decent from what I saw... last dozen laps anyway. :D And the track looked great. If the promoter is willing to have them back and foot the bill, then ChampCar should be back. Only next time don't schedule it opposite F1!

jono

[jonovision_man]

Here 'ya go:

http://www.videointerchange.com/pal_secam_conversions.htm


In the case of converting PAL (625 lines @ 25 frames/sec) to NTSC (525 lines @ 30 frames/sec) it can be seen that every second 100 lines must be dropped and 5 additional frames must be created. Less expensive converters simply drop 100 lines equally spaced through each frame to reduce the 625 line PAL down to NTSC's 525 (that's pretty easy !) To create the 5 additional frames, they just sample and repeat a single frame, then repeat the process 5 times per second, thus effectively "adding" 5 frames. This simple algorithm is fast, inexpensive and works like a charm..... UNLESS that is, there's ANY MOTION. Consider that if the image is static, then no one notices the repeating frames. You could have taken a single frame of PAL, lop off 100 lines and repeat the very same frame 30 times each second and you'd still have a perfect conversion. Actually, most of the inexpensive consumer converters employ this technique.

Video however, is a dynamic medium. Add the element of motion, and suddenly the 5 repeating frames each second start to stick out like a sore thumb. The effect is called "Judder" ..... the greater the motion difference between frames, the greater the apparent judder (the name is sort of play on the words jitter and stutter). Overcoming judder requires a much more sophisticated means of first measuring the nature of motion within the material, and then employing more sophisticated algorithms to dynamically produce in real time a correct motion compensated output. Things are now starting to get a lot more complex and expensive.


Unless you use a crap broadcaster, then they stay cheap and it just looks like crap. :p

jono

[opinionated ow]

flipping back and forth was very interesting to see.

F1 - more or less has wide camera shots, while CC was all in close near to the track. Figuring that the Europeans would know how to film a race better, I was dissapointed to see that CC still needs someone who can run the show on the TV side and desperately.

Missing the last lap battle for 2nd place was inexcusable.

Was the race really that boring? I couldn't say for sure because you couldn't see much with camera angles that only allow one car in frame in certain turns. :irked:

It went around in chat - were we watching in PAL format? If thats standard, then I feel bad for Euro race fans if that's what racing always looks like.

it is definately not PAL causing your issues, it could well have been piss poor satellite linkage. PAL is imho visually superior to NTSC (and yes I can say that because I have compared the two).

[pchall]

It went around in chat - were we watching in PAL format? If thats standard, then I feel bad for Euro race fans if that's what racing always looks like.

I've seen enough PAL standard color TV coverage of races over the last three decades to be able to tell you that over the air in Germany it looks better than US standard color.

PAL format videotapes when converted to US standards often look murky and dark. The more money you pay for the conversion, the better the results. I used to bring back studio conversions of German TV mini-series and made for TV movies for my sister and they always looked great. But when I've had PAL videotape (like six hours taped off the air by a cousin of the Berlin Wall coming down) converted by a US photo/video shop the results were always murky and dark. Could they have been stupid enough to use only a PAL feed converted to US for the live broadcasts and not gotten the best results? Something was obviously wrong since when US networks spend tens of millions to broadcast the Olympics live from Europe and Asia the picture always looks great.

[stroker]

:thumbup: to Junky though. After that disaster of a first pit stop when he came in 4th, it was good to see him still work the strategy to finish second. If you need any more proof that it's a ride buyer's series, it's that he is driving for DCR.


Are there any Sonny's Bar-b-ques in Yurp?

:D

[nrc]

I was ready to declare it the dullest race of the season but the last 20 minutes saved it. Pity they couldn't jump back to show Junky finish second.

[robot9000]

it is definately not PAL causing your issues, it could well have been piss poor satellite linkage. PAL is imho visually superior to NTSC (and yes I can say that because I have compared the two).

Its the converstion from PAL. Some frames are dropped while others are inserted. I liked it - had that '70's look. Groovy Baby :cool:

Ya gotta start reading ALL the posts in a thread ;)

[Accipiter]

Their biggest crime was taking a widescreen feed and cropping it into full screen resulting in fuzzy blown-out video.

[Gnam]

I wish they would have showed a wide angle replay of Wilson passing Bruno. It would have been nice to find out what happened during the race, rather than reading about it later.

http://www.champcarworldseries.com/News/Article.asp?ID=12140

I think they planned to use the onboard cameras for a good chunk of the coverage. They even had a new rear wing side camera on Wilson's ride. But, the clouds prevented their use around the whole circuit and cut down the available shots the director had to work with.

[TU Homer]

Seemed to me that the director wasn't from ESPN, nor did they have a clue who the drivers were. The close-up shots were interesting had they used them occassionally. They were so close, that I couldn't follow the action effectively. Coupled with the crap on-boards, and the broadcast suffered. However, I did catch some very good racing, and I suspect there was good racing throughout; had the production been US based or at least familiar with our series.

I watch a lot of Euro sports between soccer and racing. Cheap productions look like crap. Watch a EPL or other Euro premier soccer league game. Watch any F1 race or MotoGP race. They look great. But, lower-tier motorcycle races look like crap, as did the CCWS race. Methinks it is the satellite network more than the signal or even conversion.


-TU

[Andrew Longman]

I was ready to declare it the dullest race of the season but the last 20 minutes saved it. Pity they couldn't jump back to show Junky finish second.

Agreed.

Can't comment on the blurry pic, but will give them slack on the poor on-boards since the ceiling was low and the copters couldn't get altitude.

However, aside from the mentioned poor direction, the guys in the booth apparently didn't have live timing and scoring. They couldn't tell us if Junky got P2 for quite some time and several times during the broadcast they were confused about who was where.

[cameraman]

They were probably working off of Race Director which wasn't particularly functional.

Pretty much a lowest bid bit of tv production.

[Robstar]

Its the converstion from PAL. Some frames are dropped while others are inserted. I liked it - had that '70's look. Groovy Baby :cool:

Ya gotta start reading ALL the posts in a thread ;)

OOW: He has a point ;)

[Hard Driver]

Wasn't a particularly interesting race. Although I would say that the track itself was too narrow and opportunity for passing seemed very limited. There were obviously faster drivers who could not pass, so the race turned into a parade. The pit lane certainly looked mighty narrow too. Probably a better track for a formula Mazda race than Champcar.

[NismoZ]

I was struck by how the F-1 parade looked much like the Zolder parade only more spread out. Qualifying often seems to be the real race in both series.:(

[jonovision_man]

I was struck by how the F-1 parade looked much like the Zolder parade only more spread out. Qualifying often seems to be the real race in both series.

You mean other than SB's late on-track pass on Junky for the lead and the win? :p

What about Wilson picking up two places on one corner... :eek: And giving them back. :) I don't have the positions handy, but seems like almost everyone swapped a place or two after that last restart.

Disclaimer - I missed most of the first 70% of the race. :) Maybe that's the trick.

jono

[Hard Driver]

You mean other than SB's late on-track pass on Junky for the lead and the win? :p

What about Wilson picking up two places on one corner... :eek: And giving them back. :) I don't have the positions handy, but seems like almost everyone swapped a place or two after that last restart.

Disclaimer - I missed most of the first 70% of the race. :) Maybe that's the trick.

jono

Could be, because the first 70% was a fuel economy run. You definitely caught the best part.