What idiot is in charge of televising the Olympics?!

Joined
25 Jan 2004
Messages
6,317
Reaction score
4
Country
United Kingdom
OK, a bit of a rant post here. I am sure that many of you will appreciate where I am coming from, but there will be many who won't understand my beef.

Every time I have tried to watch events happening at the Olympics, on TV, the picture is all narrow and square. I have these thick black bars down the sides of my screen. I thought maybe my TV was broken, but as it turns out, the problem is not in my TV.

It turns out, that some idiot thinks that in 2004, it is acceptable to make only a ye olde 4:3 aspect ratio feed available to the BBC. Yes, I have all kinds of "smart" modes on my TV, but I refuse to watch in anything other than the source's native ratio. I don't want weightlifters 33% fatter, and swimmers 33% taller.

Next time you are in a TV shop, or the electronics department of a department store, count how many TVs of 21" or larger are NOT widescreen. Hint: you could count them on your fingers, even if you have been convicted of theft in Afghanistan... TWICE.

Now, I am not sure who exactly the fault rests with. Perhaps in Greece widescreen hasn't caught on yet (I know in the US that square screens are still in the vast majority, there are even HDTV standards for them). I assume that the host nation provides TV coverage (otherwise there would be far too many camera crews). Perhaps there should be a stipulation that the host country must have modern equipment in future.

Last week the BBC announced it will produce all of its programming in high-definition by 2010, and is already starting the migration. Is it too much to ask that the ERT (the Greek equivalent) get some new cameras?!

I would like to apply this rant to almost ALL of the 200+ channels on Sky, who buy programmes that definitely have a 16:9 version available yet see fit to broadcast in that dodgy 14:9 "not square, but not widescreen either" ratio. They buy many of them from the BBC and ITV, and increasing numbers of US programmes are in widescreen.

Furthermore, BAH! :mad:
 
Sponsored Links
Quote Aussie source :-
..... This time, digital television enthusiasts are going to be disappointed if they think they will be watching the Olympics in the widescreen format. The official Greek broadcaster will be sticking with the original 4:3 format designed for conventional CRT (cathode ray tube) sets.
"That is a great pity," says Tim O'Keefe, managing consultant at Digital Broadcasting Australia.
"Consumers and retailers love big events like the Rugby World Cup, football finals and the Olympics, which have all been screened in widescreen by Australian broadcasters.
"Unfortunately, the Olympics host broadcaster has made a decision not to invest in cameras that supply widescreen images.
"The only coverage in widescreen will be the opening and closing ceremonies."
This is a step back in technology time for the Olympics after the Seven Network invested substantially in cutting-edge digital technology for the Sydney Games.
"If America's NBC had wanted widescreen, the Greeks would have done it," O'Keefe says, referring to host broadcaster, the Athens Olympic Broadcasting organisation.
"Most American viewers are still on the 4:3 format, so there is no strong demand. However, I have had it confirmed that the Beijing Games will definitely have widescreen television coverage." ...........


Bought the 'wega' for this spectacle !! Oh well, the cricket was good anyway !!

P
 
See, this is exactly what I thought would have happened. Didn't think someone would write a proper article on it though! :LOL:

I looked up this article, it seems that Greece does currently have widescreen services (a digital channel called "Seven"). Which makes the decision even more retarded!

Throughout the world, widescreen TVs have become the norm for new TV purchases. Last person I know to have bought a square set, 2 years ago, was adamant he didn't want a widescreen. 6 months later when he bought a DVD player he was pi**ed off that he hadn't got a widescreen.

Thus, there are large numbers of people all around the world wondering why the heck the picture has had the sides cut off. I have never heard anyone complain about widescreen broadcasts on a square set. In countries where the technology hasn't taken off they could just transmit a panned and scanned version.
 
Sorry Adam, on this occasion I disagree with you. I can think of 2 family members and at least 6 friends whose houses I have spent time in in the last week. That's 9 households (including my own). How many widescreen TV's? Just one (not mine). I appreciate that it will, at some point, become the standard, but at this moment 4:3 is still the norm.
 
Sponsored Links
With the financial situation the way it is in television these days and the many new formats fighting for supremacy, companies that don't have vast resources are tending to hold back with commiting to any one system and getting caught out, HDTV seems to be on a revival from the eighties when it very nearly kicked off over here with Sony being a front player trying to sell their goods to the BBC who at the time decided not to go with it after producing a series called the "Ginger Tree" in collaboration with the Japanese broadcaster NHK using Sony's HDTV cameras, The rumour going round at the time was that because the pictures were so good they showed up the tape joins and repairs in the set too easily and that sets would cost more to make and build if the cameras were to pick up all the bits that the normal ones didn't :) I'm sure it was the exhorbitant cost of the system that scared the beeb off in the end what with Producer Choice and the accountants looming around the corner at the time.
 
Doesn't apply to me... :cry:

I bought my first new large 4:3 telly just before the prices fell on widescreen... :confused:

Mrs MMJ stipulates that I cannot replace a perfectly good telly... :(

Women just don't get it...

Tho after I bought 5.1 DVD she was a convert to that :idea:

Mmmmmm :evil: Time to water that plant on top of the telly!!!!! :D
 
ninebob said:
Sorry Adam, on this occasion I disagree with you. I can think of 2 family members and at least 6 friends whose houses I have spent time in in the last week. That's 9 households (including my own). How many widescreen TV's? Just one (not mine). I appreciate that it will, at some point, become the standard, but at this moment 4:3 is still the norm.

Ah, but those are TVs people bought a while back. I was talking about the TVs in the shops. Seriously, go into Dixons and ask for a 28" square TV. See what they say! :LOL: The market isn't really there anymore because the widescreens would be the same price as their square equivalents. A 28" Sony Wega now starts at about £400-450, and you can buy lesser-branded widescreens from around £250.

I'm not saying "S*D the people with 4:3 TVs!" because the beauty of widescreen equipment, such as DVD players and digiboxes, is that they all offer a panned and scanned 4:3 mode (i.e. the sides are chopped off). So no-one loses out.
 
Fortunately on Digital Satellite, They've been broadcasting in the proper 4:3 setting. Not the case for freeview. I have a 4:3 telly in the bedroom with freeview. I have it set for widescreen because I like to watch films in their original aspect, etc. However, the BBC's been broadcasting in 16:9 mode, and putting black bars down the side - end result being a get a little rectangle of picture surrounded by blackness. So I have to go into the menu, switch it to 4:3 pan and scan. Really annoying. Plus it's a waste of bandwidth. Most of the times I can't be bothered and just stick it on analogue. Which also means getting up and turning the aerial around to the other transmitter for a better picture...
 
This looks like a might have to go to colour soon then........
 
There's some good definition, i.e. two good points in Sharron Davies's favour.
 
Thus, there are large numbers of people all around the world wondering why the heck the picture has had the sides cut off.


There are even more people wondering where their next meal is coming from.

I have never heard anyone complain about widescreen broadcasts on a square set.

You should listen to me sometime. I paid good money for my 14" screen (only one telly here) and some toady keeps cutting off the top and bottom. :cry:
 
planenut said:
There's some good definition, i.e. two good points in Sharron Davies's favour.

Refixed a tad high I would have thought ;) .... But those awful fingernails :cry:
She should have been awarded the Gold medal instead of silver, in her day, the gold medallist was later found to be drug fuelled .. I think there was a campaign at some stage .. came to naught.

Anyone see Phelps the Swinner !! confirming that he had covered about 40 miles during his weeks medal haul ? Now that is true greatness, not just one stroke but pulling many !! Bit like comparing car racing drivers of today and yesteryear ... The old 'uns were masters of their craft across a wide range of vehicles... So 'greatness' not so easy to attain today !!
BTW Phelps will be 23 at next Olys ... awsome !! A credit to his sport and country.
P
 
oilman said:
You should listen to me sometime.

EH?! WASSAT?!

Sorry, I am half-deaf from my super-duper surround sound so I can't hear the rantings of square-screen viewers ;)
 
just another point

on digital [freeview] channel 701 and 702 during events like
wimbledon olympics ect tend to show additional programs
not being show at the same time on bbc1 or 2

big all
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top