UK
Sadly not, they really need to, especially with the rights they’ve now got and may be about to get.
Have they got 50/60fps streaming yet? 25/30 is pretty dreadful for sport.
Sadly not, they really need to, especially with the rights they’ve now got and may be about to get.
BM
BM11
I'm not sure WTA pulls in great numbers on BT Sport - especially in those weeks when the action is half way round the world - but it will leave a gaping hole in the schedules week in week out.
At the end of the day, if you're a tennis fan you're going to go looking for the coverage anyway outside of Wimbledon so it doesn't really matter where it is because people will find it.
Improvements have been to Prime's ATP coverage since last year and having both tours in the same place is brilliant especially when it comes to combined events, and they will presumably have the multi-court coverage at WTA events that in the end never came to fruition on BT.
It'll be interesting to see if BT keep up their commitment to WTA in its final few months or if we will start to see more reliance on world feed commentary and perhaps not sending a team out to Shenzhen for the Finals as they have done to Singapore in the past.
Remember when Sky lost ATP that Mark Petchey left before their coverage ended and now he's a regular voice on Prime.
At the end of the day, if you're a tennis fan you're going to go looking for the coverage anyway outside of Wimbledon so it doesn't really matter where it is because people will find it.
Improvements have been to Prime's ATP coverage since last year and having both tours in the same place is brilliant especially when it comes to combined events, and they will presumably have the multi-court coverage at WTA events that in the end never came to fruition on BT.
It'll be interesting to see if BT keep up their commitment to WTA in its final few months or if we will start to see more reliance on world feed commentary and perhaps not sending a team out to Shenzhen for the Finals as they have done to Singapore in the past.
Remember when Sky lost ATP that Mark Petchey left before their coverage ended and now he's a regular voice on Prime.
WTA tennis also probably leans female in audience (unlike a lot of sport) which is not as advertiser friendly (As female audiences are easier to reach)
DV
HDR to launch as a payable extra in time for the new season, but will be available for the UEFA CL Final publicly.
'@BT is launching a #4K High Dynamic Range (#HDR) service on its BT Sport app – the first multi-sport HDR service in the world. It will launch for the new football season. Ahead of the launch, @btsport is streaming the @ChampionsLeague final in #HD HDR - https://t.co/lKokF6yrug pic.twitter.com/EBlUKXFmkg
— Broadcast Sport (@broadcast_sport) May 21, 2019
LL
UHD/4K is the resolution of the picture, how many pixels are on the screen. HDR is about the brightness and dynamic contrast, supposedly to give a more vibrant and realistic picture (or in layman's terms, whiter whites and blacker blacks).
LL
4K and HDR are intended to run side-by-side, in the same way HD and 3D once co-existed, one doesn't get replaced by the other. The only problem, once you've found the right 4K TV, HDR comes with its own faff, different formats like HDR10 and Dolby Vision, making sure the screen can get bright enough to generate an HDR effect good enough, finding out one source only supports one HDR format and not the one your TV supports... Even as someone who considers himself a tech geek, I find it a pain in the arse.
MI
If only there was a spokesperson who BT could use who had experience of such taglines who also likes his football?
This reminds me of washing powder. You get told the latest version gives you the brightest colours, only for a year later for a new version which you must buy because the previous new version they deem to be sub-par.
If only there was a spokesperson who BT could use who had experience of such taglines who also likes his football?
NG
HDR isn't about brighter pictures - it's about more detail in the brighter and darker bits of your picture, no more bleached out bright bits, no more crushed dark bits. If your display is properly set-up the brightness of the picture should be the same. (Though lots of people with HDR displays just push their SDR pictures into the HDR range to make them retina-burningly-bright, but still SDR clipped)
Arguably 1080p50 HDR is a much bigger improvement than 2160p50 SDR. Better pixels are better than more pixels IMO.
noggin
Founding member
If only TV's had a brightness control.
HDR isn't about brighter pictures - it's about more detail in the brighter and darker bits of your picture, no more bleached out bright bits, no more crushed dark bits. If your display is properly set-up the brightness of the picture should be the same. (Though lots of people with HDR displays just push their SDR pictures into the HDR range to make them retina-burningly-bright, but still SDR clipped)
Arguably 1080p50 HDR is a much bigger improvement than 2160p50 SDR. Better pixels are better than more pixels IMO.
MA
HDR isn't about brighter pictures - it's about more detail ....
Indeed. It’s similar to people hearing a radio station without any audio processing, and complaining it’s too quiet
If only TV's had a brightness control.
HDR isn't about brighter pictures - it's about more detail ....
Indeed. It’s similar to people hearing a radio station without any audio processing, and complaining it’s too quiet