sports broadcast in india vs AUS,ENG,RSA

Status
Not open for further replies.
M@crosoft

M@crosoft

The Weather Man !
Forerunner
Stupid question..but gotta ask it anyways

all of u must have noticed a poorer broadcasting(not standards but quality) of sports in india as comapared to australia ,england and south africa --picture quality wise

if u watch a match between india-srilanka being played in the sub-continent simultaneously with a match between england -pakistan being played in england..... u'll certainly notice a picture quality difference between the two...

is it all about the quality of the broadcasting camera's?

and if it is ...how come BCCI don't have it in india atleast if not in the whole subcontinent?

if not BCCI then whose responsibility is to have them installed?

money shouldn't be a concern:no:

your turn-
 
^^ yeah i have also noticed this,the picture quality of england vs pakistan matches are much better than india vs srilanka. dont know the reasons for it, may be inferior cameras??
 
Its not the picture quality, its the stadiums. There is a big difference between international and subcontinent stadiums.
 
Top class equipment is used for cricket in India too. The IPL is a very fine example. That said, there is also the background thingie that comes into picture. Did you notice a match at the Mohali or Eden looks better than the matches in the other stadia? Doesn't mean they get special machinery. It is just that the grounds there look much better than the others, thereby lending a 'nicer' feel to the end product.
 
forget bout the stadia's

think of the grass ...we can say england has better grass in their stadiums ...but it's not so...

u take a look at grass anywhere in this world with the camera used by news reporters ...u'll find all of em lookin damn same

it's not only bout cricket ...u watch sunfeast open and then switch to wimbledon or us/australian/french open ---any difference?..yes and it's a massive difference and shamefull i suppose in a country who has no money problems atleast :no:

are we considered stupids or many of us really do not feel the difference ?

Its not the picture quality, its the stadiums. There is a big difference between international and subcontinent stadiums.
Click to expand...

dude IPL 2 was in south africa( int./domestic matches in south africa have better quality pictures than india)......i was eager to take a look at the picture quality then but to my NO surprise ,it was like any match in india:( camera's were taken downunder from india
 
There is some phenomenon called white fog/smog/cloud over asia resulting in overall reduction in visibility and hence one feels the picture quality is lower.
Recent editions of cricket series were shot and broadcasted in HD and some matches in IPL were in available in 3D. Rest assured the equipment was not inferior.
Its the better overall clearer air outside of asia.
 
how bout indoor sunfeast open?^^

and why the air is not so clear over developing countries only?:P

formula one goes evrywhere around the world including various asian spots ...quality remains just the same :no:

zimbawe and south africa are neigbouring right?

u notice the quality there.....zimbawe's got much poorer
 
Bluffmaster said:
Its not the picture quality, its the stadiums. There is a big difference between international and subcontinent stadiums.
Click to expand...
Legendary reply.

Pure Awesomeness.

Leave alone the picture quality, the content beamed is entirely different.

Starting right from the way they design the scorecard (the hideous blue and golden one, compared to what nations like Australia, England use) to the incessant commercials which deny any highlight/comment. Its just plain ridiculous.

Not to mention the nincompoops we have for experts who appear during the fourth umpire chit chat show.

At times i find myself watching dull matches from England just for the comments they have from Bumble and Gower.

If given a choice i would rather watch transmission by Sky channel over the stupid Neo.
 
i didn't got anything^^

areee

take the ipl 2 in RSA !

the picture quality was poor because RSA men weren't given the chance to broadcast the shit....,MAX did it and did it poorly !

forget bout the advertisement boards and stands ..that's acceptable and understandable ..but still the picture quality is dull in the sub-continent and i don't find anyone here giving convincing opinions over the issue:no:
 
Arey yaar i mean its not just one aspect, its all round failure on this front.

Even if the picture quality was just about bearable, the package is nothing to be looking forward to either.
 
Man Its not the equipment or anything, its just the atmoshperic conditions+less greener grass and to a lesser extent the bad stadia. The atmosphere over europe is very clear. Have you seen something called DUST in england? try remember. its just not there. Everything looks so clear coz of that. All people who have been to Europe tell me this all the time ie, everthing is freakin clear, picturesque.
 
if you knew Sahara cup which took place between ind/Pak in Canada. Didnt you see the quality poor?

it was all dark there and all the camera men,technicians, and equipment was from canada. (the technicians used to cover baseball matches). as was told by harsha bhogle.

its just the combination of ambience,light etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom