FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[killem2]

HD is overrated anyway.

[killem2]

F1 is in HD in the US, there's nothing like watching the Singapore night race in 1080HP 240HZ.

1) F1 is not HD in the US. They've been shooting it in standard definition. So even if you got an HD Signal, it was an upscaled standard definition picture, which is not HD in any meaningful way - and don't let anybody tell you otherwise.
2) You didn't see it in 1080p even Upscaled, because nobody broadcasts in 1080p, it's too bandwidth intensive. 720p and 1080i are the only HD Formats sent over broadcast.
3) 240Hz, huh? Again. Ain't nobody shooting sports coverage in 240Hz. Try 60.

Fox Sports may have recorded the 2010 montreal GP in HD. But that is the only company I know that goes that far to do so, bad thing with that is, it's american and american broadcasters are fail.

[myownalias]

1) F1 is not HD in the US. They've been shooting it in standard definition.

I thought that everyone got the same FOM feed; so if it's filmed in HD; everyone should get HD; assuming the broadcaster has HD capabilities; I know Speed has a HD channel; at additional cost from the cable TV providers of course. You are right about 1080p; in the US I haven't seen any higher than 720p broadcast over the air!

[What's Burning?]

F1 is in HD in the US, there's nothing like watching the Singapore night race in 1080HP 240HZ.

1) F1 is not HD in the US. They've been shooting it in standard definition. So even if you got an HD Signal, it was an upscaled standard definition picture, which is not HD in any meaningful way - and don't let anybody tell you otherwise.
2) You didn't see it in 1080p even Upscaled, because nobody broadcasts in 1080p, it's too bandwidth intensive. 720p and 1080i are the only HD Formats sent over broadcast.
3) 240Hz, huh? Again. Ain't nobody shooting sports coverage in 240Hz. Try 60.

Fox Sports may have recorded the 2010 montreal GP in HD. But that is the only company I know that goes that far to do so, bad thing with that is, it's american and american broadcasters are fail.

Fox just takes the F1 feed, Speed is a subsidiary of Fox so they didn't do anything different than speed other than show the races time delayed... at noon... when they figured people would have come back from church and would sit down to watch it.

You know, only one of the broadcasters on Speed is an American.

[FRAFPDD]

F1 is in HD in the US, there's nothing like watching the Singapore night race in 1080HP 240HZ.

1) F1 is not HD in the US. They've been shooting it in standard definition. So even if you got an HD Signal, it was an upscaled standard definition picture, which is not HD in any meaningful way - and don't let anybody tell you otherwise.
2) You didn't see it in 1080p even Upscaled, because nobody broadcasts in 1080p, it's too bandwidth intensive. 720p and 1080i are the only HD Formats sent over broadcast.
3) 240Hz, huh? Again. Ain't nobody shooting sports coverage in 240Hz. Try 60.

Fox Sports may have recorded the 2010 montreal GP in HD. But that is the only company I know that goes that far to do so, bad thing with that is, it's american and american broadcasters are fail.

Fox just takes the F1 feed, Speed is a subsidiary of Fox so they didn't do anything different than speed other than show the races time delayed... at noon... when they figured people would have come back from church and would sit down to watch it.

You know, only one of the broadcasters on Speed is an American.

thats why its not popular, who wants to listen to poms talking about the "other" nascar

[EvilGiraffe]

I'm watching practice now and it looks to me like the cameras around the track are doing the HD things, so I'll have to kindly disagree with some of you as I think the picture looks better than before. But I agree with an earlier poster who said that the onboards don't look to be in HD--sad cause I was looking forward to that.

[Gaz]

1) F1 is not HD in the US. They've been shooting it in standard definition.

I thought that everyone got the same FOM feed; so if it's filmed in HD; everyone should get HD; assuming the broadcaster has HD capabilities; I know Speed has a HD channel; at additional cost from the cable TV providers of course. You are right about 1080p; in the US I haven't seen any higher than 720p broadcast over the air!

FOM have only started filming in HD this year i belive.

BBC ONE HD = F1 HD for Tommrow.

[Jensonb]

1) F1 is not HD in the US. They've been shooting it in standard definition.

I thought that everyone got the same FOM feed; so if it's filmed in HD; everyone should get HD; assuming the broadcaster has HD capabilities; I know Speed has a HD channel; at additional cost from the cable TV providers of course. You are right about 1080p; in the US I haven't seen any higher than 720p broadcast over the air!

FOM have only started filming in HD this year i belive.

BBC ONE HD = F1 HD for Tommrow.

Yeah Gaz is correct. The FOM World Feed has not been available in HD in the past, and the cameras shot in SD (I believe the source was 480p). They're now shooting HD (I've heard the native resolution is 1080i), so the World Feed is in HD. As far as I know, every broadcaster now gets the World Feed in HD, and to offer it in SD downscale it. The BBC for example would pipe the World Feed directly onto BBC One HD whilst its SD simulcast (BBC One) is a downscaled simulcast of BBC One HD so it is downscaled as it goes to air for SD viewers. Broadcasters without an HD channel would simply downscale it as it reaches them.

It's possible they're offering both an HD and an SD World Feed, but I don't see the point. Pointless overhead.

[killem2]

Fox just takes the F1 feed, Speed is a subsidiary of Fox so they didn't do anything different than speed other than show the races time delayed... at noon... when they figured people would have come back from church and would sit down to watch it.

You know, only one of the broadcasters on Speed is an American.

And they both sucked. When I started to watch the montreal GP on it, they focused on schumacher like he was something special and by that point in the season it was clear he wasn't anything special that season.

I promptly torrented the bbc 2010 and will never look back.

[bschuler]

First the good news: F1 is in HD in 2011. It was mentioned by the announcers during 2nd testing last night that this is the first full HD F1 event. My feed on RCN in USA is full HD and I can see a clear difference from last year (leaves, dirt or track, etc). It isn't awe inspiring HD.. but it is HD. Also the onboard cameras are still SD sadly. Hopefully better cameras and HD onboard is planned.

Secondly, the history: From what I understand, going HD took so long and was an issue because F1 stupidly let each circuit have it's own camera crews, etc.. This allowed some races to be filmed in HD and some in SD, etc.. then the signals themselves were sometimes upscaled and downscaled before reaching your house. So, for instance, the race may have been filmed in HD, but your local carrier decided to run the SD feed upscaled for their HD channel. So anyone saying they saw a certain race in the past in true HD, just might have, even though chances are rare.. for the most part, you saw an upscaled SD image. A curious note is that the local camera crew issue is always mentioned in the Japan and Brazil races.. because they seem to have the worst crews and the english announcers themselves tend to get ticked off.

Now any of this could be wrong.. but it is my understanding of why it took so long to go true HD.

[Jensonb]

First the good news: F1 is in HD in 2011. It was mentioned by the announcers during 2nd testing last night that this is the first full HD F1 event. My feed on RCN in USA is full HD and I can see a clear difference from last year (leaves, dirt or track, etc). It isn't awe inspiring HD.. but it is HD. Also the onboard cameras are still SD sadly. Hopefully better cameras and HD onboard is planned.

Secondly, the history: From what I understand, going HD took so long and was an issue because F1 stupidly let each circuit have it's own camera crews, etc.. This allowed some races to be filmed in HD and some in SD, etc.. then the signals themselves were sometimes upscaled and downscaled before reaching your house. So, for instance, the race may have been filmed in HD, but your local carrier decided to run the SD feed upscaled for their HD channel. So anyone saying they saw a certain race in the past in true HD, just might have, even though chances are rare.. for the most part, you saw an upscaled SD image. A curious note is that the local camera crew issue is always mentioned in the Japan and Brazil races.. because they seem to have the worst crews and the english announcers themselves tend to get ticked off.

Now any of this could be wrong.. but it is my understanding of why it took so long to go true HD.

Pretty sure FOM TV Jettisoned the local camera crews years ago. As far as I know Japan and Brazil were the only races where FOM TV doesn't have complete control of the pictures. But setting that aside, it's impossible for any broadcaster to have shown a true HD feed, they were being supplied the FOM TV World Feed in Standard Definition, regardless of the quality of the cameras in use.

[Cubejam]

Loving F1 in HD! MASSIVE step forward from the standard crap I had before. But it's a shame the onboard cameras aren't HD.......

btw... Formula 1 has never been broadcast in full 1080p HD until 2011. So there's no way any of you have seen it in full HD before then

[Jensonb]

Loving F1 in HD! MASSIVE step forward from the standard crap I had before. But it's a shame the onboard cameras aren't HD.......

btw... Formula 1 has never been broadcast in full 1080p HD until 2011. So there's no way any of you have seen it in full HD before then

I think the World Feed is 1080i anyway. At any rate, I don't know of any broadcaster who uses 1080p. All the HD channels I know of are 1080i or 720p (Only the former is used in the UK). That being said, I think they may be shooting 1080p - that way they can offer a 1080p Blu-Ray Season Review.

[stonemonkey]

Been thinking of upgrading my service and just been having a look. Atm I'm with virgin and I only want HD tv and broadband, for their best selection of HD channels (only 17) it's gonna cost 30 pounds + 50 pound HD activation fee +21 pounds for their cheapest broadband at 10mb. As well as the activation fee that's twice what I'm paying per month just now for my tv(sd) and bb(2mb). Wonder what sky have to offer.

And why does the pound sign never work on my computers?

[Cubejam]

I was already subscribed to sky and just upgraded but previously we were paying £24 per month standard sky, and decided to go with Sky+HD in my bedroom as well as the other one. So upgraded to HD for £10.25 & multiroom for another £10.25. HD box was free & so was installation. You get a free box if it's your first.

So depending on what package you get it could be around £30 - £40