planetf1.com

It is currently Sat Oct 20, 2018 9:06 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
 Post subject: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Sat May 27, 2017 7:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 2007
Apilogies to non UK forumites!

Watching the Monaco programme on catch up. How good is the Channel 4 build up? The lap of 'mistakes' with Webber going turn by turn showing how to get it wrong was cool. And the interview with Morinhno in the Red pit was fun.

I don't know, I just don't remember enjoying a build up programme so much. Sky really doesn't have a patch on Whisper Films. I'm going to really be disappointed when it goes to Sky only if nothing changes.

Glad to see Suzie Wolff again too, that may be for other reasons!

_________________
Top Three Team Champions 2017 (With Jezza13)
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Sun May 28, 2017 2:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 8:02 pm
Posts: 139
I normally just watch Sky because I never check which races C4 are showing, but today I happened to start watching on channel 4's pre-race coverage. However I quickly got bored of the extremely frequent ad breaks compared to sky, and the "grid walk" was a chaotic mess of trying to find random people worth interviewing, relative to Martin Brundle who always finds good interviewees. I also often find Coulthard and Webber's banter a bit distasteful at times, with their innuendo and "laddish" conversations.

So I tuned back to Sky for most of the race, but just couldn't stomach Crofty's conspiracy theories about team orders and the usual utter hypocrisy of their coverage of Ferrari compared to their coverage of Mercedes (or specifically Hamilton)

I went back to C4 (which I'm still watching now) and their post race analysis has been so much more professional and fact based rather than the bullshit sensationalism and propaganda from Sky. Still too many ad breaks though.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Sun May 28, 2017 3:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2959
When DC and Webber was talking to those ladies I thought it was so funny what DC about Webber :lol:

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Sun May 28, 2017 3:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 04, 2003 9:24 am
Posts: 106
Location: Australia
For race commentary I think I prefer the F1 app combo of James Allen and Allan McNish.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Sun May 28, 2017 3:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1475
optimisteprime wrote:
I normally just watch Sky because I never check which races C4 are showing, but today I happened to start watching on channel 4's pre-race coverage. However I quickly got bored of the extremely frequent ad breaks compared to sky, and the "grid walk" was a chaotic mess of trying to find random people worth interviewing, relative to Martin Brundle who always finds good interviewees. I also often find Coulthard and Webber's banter a bit distasteful at times, with their innuendo and "laddish" conversations.

So I tuned back to Sky for most of the race, but just couldn't stomach Crofty's conspiracy theories about team orders and the usual utter hypocrisy of their coverage of Ferrari compared to their coverage of Mercedes (or specifically Hamilton)

I went back to C4 (which I'm still watching now) and their post race analysis has been so much more professional and fact based rather than the bullshit sensationalism and propaganda from Sky. Still too many ad breaks though.

I don't think we should complain in the slightest about ad breaks on Channel 4. We are extremely lucky that they decided not to have any during the race when it is live. Remember that Channel 4 is totally free and they have to get their money from somewhere. And yet with sky, to watch all the F1 sessions in a year, from what I worked out, you nearly have to pay £200 the he UK and get 20 1 week passes. Even if I'm wrong with this cost, the fact that they still have adverts is a right pain for the price they charge. I just have to accept the amount Channel 4 have because I think it is brilliant that they are on freeview. The BBC worked out cheaper than Sky too and they were totally add free aswell. The fact that Sky is taking over in 2019 is very annoying IMO. I think their coverage is very poor compared to Channel 4 and overpriced too.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Sun May 28, 2017 3:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1475
Jayman wrote:
For race commentary I think I prefer the F1 app combo of James Allen and Allan McNish.

I think I may have to listen to them and watch sky when it isn't live on Channel 4 because Crofty drives me mad with his off topic nonsense. I think James Allen and Allan McNish are on BBC Radio 5 Live Sports Extra too aren't they?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Sun May 28, 2017 5:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1475
F1_Ernie wrote:
When DC and Webber was talking to those ladies I thought it was so funny what DC about Webber :lol:

There were several funny things them 2 said and heard. I love them 2 presenting this part of the program. DC saying when he saw Rosberg: "Got Nico Rosberg. Some people may remember him being a former F1 driver" :lol:

Then when he spoke to Eddie Irvine, Irvine just said, to the other person he was speaking to that DC was the ugly one from 1999 :]


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 5:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9272
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
When DC and Webber was talking to those ladies I thought it was so funny what DC about Webber :lol:

There were several funny things them 2 said and heard. I love them 2 presenting this part of the program. DC saying when he saw Rosberg: "Got Nico Rosberg. Some people may remember him being a former F1 driver" :lol:

Then when he spoke to Eddie Irvine, Irvine just said, to the other person he was speaking to that DC was the ugly one from 1999 :]

Sounds funny :lol: Which races are C4 covering this year? Think I'll have to try it out the next time. I actually remembered there was another channel showing F1 this weekend and I tried BBC 4 but I guess Channel 4 is another channel?

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 8:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:58 pm
Posts: 1338
Location: London
I will always watch C4 when possible as a cannot stand David Croft as a commentator or the equally asinine Simon Lazenby as a presenter.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 9:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:22 pm
Posts: 1822
The picture quality on channel 4 is atrocious in comparison to sky. This always leads me to using sky for the live race, plus the ability to play with red button and live timings.

Looks like their preshow stuff was fantastic though, Ill try find it on Catch Up.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 9:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:22 pm
Posts: 1822
Sorry, to add..

I do wonder if Sky needs to start shuffling their production teams around. There's an 18 month rule in business where you avoid someone doing something too long as they'll execute but their creativity will be significantly down (18 month being a guide of course, not a concrete rule - everyone is different). Not only their F1, but their other sports coverage is feeling kinda samey which you only really notice when a fresh competitor pops up.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 9:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1475
Covalent wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
When DC and Webber was talking to those ladies I thought it was so funny what DC about Webber :lol:

There were several funny things them 2 said and heard. I love them 2 presenting this part of the program. DC saying when he saw Rosberg: "Got Nico Rosberg. Some people may remember him being a former F1 driver" :lol:

Then when he spoke to Eddie Irvine, Irvine just said, to the other person he was speaking to that DC was the ugly one from 1999 :]

Sounds funny :lol: Which races are C4 covering this year? Think I'll have to try it out the next time. I actually remembered there was another channel showing F1 this weekend and I tried BBC 4 but I guess Channel 4 is another channel?


Baku

Britain

Belgium

Singapore

Malaysia

USA

Abu Dhabi


I think almost all the coverage is better on Channel 4. Especially the pre and post race coverage. On Sky, the practice sessions have recently been a real pain to listen to. It just feels really awkward and uncomfortable. Di Resta often sounds fed up with Crofy's idiotic jokes so much so that he doesn't want to be there. He just goes quiet probably thinking about how annoying Crofty is :lol:

Ben Edwards and Karun Chandhok is simply the best pair of commentates for practice I've heard I think. They virtually never go off topic and sound much more interested in F1 than Crofty does during practice.

They have more adverts than Sky but we have to remember Channel 4 are totally free so they have to get their money from somewhere. But at leased the qualifying sessions and race itself is uninterrupted.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 9:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9272
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
Covalent wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
When DC and Webber was talking to those ladies I thought it was so funny what DC about Webber :lol:

There were several funny things them 2 said and heard. I love them 2 presenting this part of the program. DC saying when he saw Rosberg: "Got Nico Rosberg. Some people may remember him being a former F1 driver" :lol:

Then when he spoke to Eddie Irvine, Irvine just said, to the other person he was speaking to that DC was the ugly one from 1999 :]

Sounds funny :lol: Which races are C4 covering this year? Think I'll have to try it out the next time. I actually remembered there was another channel showing F1 this weekend and I tried BBC 4 but I guess Channel 4 is another channel?


Baku

Britain

Belgium

Singapore

Malaysia

USA

Abu Dhabi


I think almost all the coverage is better on Channel 4. Especially the pre and post race coverage. On Sky, the practice sessions have recently been a real pain to listen to. It just feels really awkward and uncomfortable. Di Resta often sounds fed up with Crofy's idiotic jokes so much so that he doesn't want to be there. He just goes quiet probably thinking about how annoying Crofty is :lol:

Ben Edwards and Karun Chandhok is simply the best pair of commentates for practice I've heard I think. They virtually never go off topic and sound much more interested in F1 than Crofty does during practice.

They have more adverts than Sky but we have to remember Channel 4 are totally free so they have to get their money from somewhere. But at leased the qualifying sessions and race itself is uninterrupted.

Thanks :thumbup:

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 11:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 2007
Ennis wrote:
The picture quality on channel 4 is atrocious in comparison to sky. This always leads me to using sky for the live race, plus the ability to play with red button and live timings.

Looks like their preshow stuff was fantastic though, Ill try find it on Catch Up.


Are you watching on C4 HD? There shouldn't be much of a difference when comparing HD feeds.

_________________
Top Three Team Champions 2017 (With Jezza13)
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 12:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1475
Herb wrote:
Ennis wrote:
The picture quality on channel 4 is atrocious in comparison to sky. This always leads me to using sky for the live race, plus the ability to play with red button and live timings.

Looks like their preshow stuff was fantastic though, Ill try find it on Catch Up.


Are you watching on C4 HD? There shouldn't be much of a difference when comparing HD feeds.

I agree here. Channel 4 HD will either be 1080i or 1080p depending on your TV I think. It will be just the same as Sky accept when they do their 4k coverage. Now that will be much better mut there is no way you can expect a freeview Channel to be that good. Sky Sports F1 HD won't be any Higher than 1080p. So just the same.

Also, something I've noticed when I look as 4k screen TV's in stores is that the image often looks really poor when you see stuff that is just 1080p. So if you usually watch Sky in 4K on a 4K TV, then Channel 4 will indeed look poor on the same screen. But If you just watch the standard Channel 4, the image quality then is much lower still.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 4:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 9:21 pm
Posts: 147
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
optimisteprime wrote:
I normally just watch Sky because I never check which races C4 are showing, but today I happened to start watching on channel 4's pre-race coverage. However I quickly got bored of the extremely frequent ad breaks compared to sky, and the "grid walk" was a chaotic mess of trying to find random people worth interviewing, relative to Martin Brundle who always finds good interviewees. I also often find Coulthard and Webber's banter a bit distasteful at times, with their innuendo and "laddish" conversations.

So I tuned back to Sky for most of the race, but just couldn't stomach Crofty's conspiracy theories about team orders and the usual utter hypocrisy of their coverage of Ferrari compared to their coverage of Mercedes (or specifically Hamilton)

I went back to C4 (which I'm still watching now) and their post race analysis has been so much more professional and fact based rather than the bullshit sensationalism and propaganda from Sky. Still too many ad breaks though.

I don't think we should complain in the slightest about ad breaks on Channel 4. We are extremely lucky that they decided not to have any during the race when it is live. Remember that Channel 4 is totally free and they have to get their money from somewhere. And yet with sky, to watch all the F1 sessions in a year, from what I worked out, you nearly have to pay £200 the he UK and get 20 1 week passes. Even if I'm wrong with this cost, the fact that they still have adverts is a right pain for the price they charge. I just have to accept the amount Channel 4 have because I think it is brilliant that they are on freeview. The BBC worked out cheaper than Sky too and they were totally add free aswell. The fact that Sky is taking over in 2019 is very annoying IMO. I think their coverage is very poor compared to Channel 4 and overpriced too.



ad breaks on Channel 4 make it free. Maybe you should remember that the next time you want to compare them

Or stick with the status quo and pay stupid money per month


The no add thing is part of the contract that you can thank bernie for IIRC

_________________
Then he said to his disciples, “The time is coming when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, but you will not see it. Luke 17 22


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 5:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2959
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
Covalent wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
When DC and Webber was talking to those ladies I thought it was so funny what DC about Webber :lol:

There were several funny things them 2 said and heard. I love them 2 presenting this part of the program. DC saying when he saw Rosberg: "Got Nico Rosberg. Some people may remember him being a former F1 driver" :lol:

Then when he spoke to Eddie Irvine, Irvine just said, to the other person he was speaking to that DC was the ugly one from 1999 :]

Sounds funny :lol: Which races are C4 covering this year? Think I'll have to try it out the next time. I actually remembered there was another channel showing F1 this weekend and I tried BBC 4 but I guess Channel 4 is another channel?


Baku

Britain

Belgium

Singapore

Malaysia

USA

Abu Dhabi


I think almost all the coverage is better on Channel 4. Especially the pre and post race coverage. On Sky, the practice sessions have recently been a real pain to listen to. It just feels really awkward and uncomfortable. Di Resta often sounds fed up with Crofy's idiotic jokes so much so that he doesn't want to be there. He just goes quiet probably thinking about how annoying Crofty is :lol:

Ben Edwards and Karun Chandhok is simply the best pair of commentates for practice I've heard I think. They virtually never go off topic and sound much more interested in F1 than Crofty does during practice.

They have more adverts than Sky but we have to remember Channel 4 are totally free so they have to get their money from somewhere. But at leased the qualifying sessions and race itself is uninterrupted.


I listen to Crofty doing a practice session and you find out what Ted had for breakfast, Hamilton's social life and then an hour discussing something that won't even affect the race but let's just big it up anyway as that's what Sky do best :lol:
Crofty is so so bad I do wounder if Sky keep him on because he gets people talking even if it's not for positive reasons.

I know a lot of people moan that UK coverage is very biased with its views regarding Hamilton which personally I would expect. Some people have got to realise Sky big up any event anyway they can, they get any two football games on a Sunday and call it GRAND SLAM SUNDAY. So in a little bit of a defence of Crofty he has defiantly been on the Sky course of big everything up :lol:

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 6:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1475
F1_Ernie wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
Covalent wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
When DC and Webber was talking to those ladies I thought it was so funny what DC about Webber :lol:

There were several funny things them 2 said and heard. I love them 2 presenting this part of the program. DC saying when he saw Rosberg: "Got Nico Rosberg. Some people may remember him being a former F1 driver" :lol:

Then when he spoke to Eddie Irvine, Irvine just said, to the other person he was speaking to that DC was the ugly one from 1999 :]

Sounds funny :lol: Which races are C4 covering this year? Think I'll have to try it out the next time. I actually remembered there was another channel showing F1 this weekend and I tried BBC 4 but I guess Channel 4 is another channel?


Baku

Britain

Belgium

Singapore

Malaysia

USA

Abu Dhabi


I think almost all the coverage is better on Channel 4. Especially the pre and post race coverage. On Sky, the practice sessions have recently been a real pain to listen to. It just feels really awkward and uncomfortable. Di Resta often sounds fed up with Crofy's idiotic jokes so much so that he doesn't want to be there. He just goes quiet probably thinking about how annoying Crofty is :lol:

Ben Edwards and Karun Chandhok is simply the best pair of commentates for practice I've heard I think. They virtually never go off topic and sound much more interested in F1 than Crofty does during practice.

They have more adverts than Sky but we have to remember Channel 4 are totally free so they have to get their money from somewhere. But at leased the qualifying sessions and race itself is uninterrupted.


I listen to Crofty doing a practice session and you find out what Ted had for breakfast, Hamilton's social life and then an hour discussing something that won't even affect the race but let's just big it up anyway as that's what Sky do best :lol:
Crofty is so so bad I do wounder if Sky keep him on because he gets people talking even if it's not for positive reasons.

I know a lot of people moan that UK coverage is very biased with its views regarding Hamilton which personally I would expect. Some people have got to realise Sky big up any event anyway they can, they get any two football games on a Sunday and call it GRAND SLAM SUNDAY. So in a little bit of a defence of Crofty he has defiantly been on the Sky course of big everything up :lol:

Yes I get fed up about Crofty talking about hot spicy curries and pies With Kravitz. It is really painful to listen too. They sound like they are commentating for a different program. I think sometimes up to 50% of the time, what they are talking about doesn't relate to what is on the screen. You may as well work out what is happening for yourself and have it on mute. Sky need to replace crofty. He's infected Krafitz with his terrible sense of humer too. I used to not mind Kravitz when he was on the BBC but I find him very irritating now. The actuall race is ok but I think Brundle isn't as good as he used to be when he was with Coulthard. He complains and moans about the sport too much about the fact that it used to be better. Lets remember the qualifying format at the start last year. OK, we didn't like it. But vertaully all the commentators did on Sky was moan and moan about how bad it was without telling us what was happening. On Channel 4, Ben Edwards sounded enthusiastic and said what was happening while it was on. It was only after that him and Coulthard evaluated how it just wasn't working out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 7:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2959
TheGiantHogweed wrote:

Yes I get fed up about Crofty talking about hot spicy curries and pies With Kravitz. It is really painful to listen too. They sound like they are commentating for a different program. I think sometimes up to 50% of the time, what they are talking about doesn't relate to what is on the screen. You may as well work out what is happening for yourself and have it on mute. Sky need to replace crofty. He's infected Krafitz with his terrible sense of humer too. I used to not mind Kravitz when he was on the BBC but I find him very irritating now. The actuall race is ok but I think Brundle isn't as good as he used to be when he was with Coulthard. He complains and moans about the sport too much about the fact that it used to be better. Lets remember the qualifying format at the start last year. OK, we didn't like it. But vertaully all the commentators did on Sky was moan and moan about how bad it was without telling us what was happening. On Channel 4, Ben Edwards sounded enthusiastic and said what was happening while it was on. It was only after that him and Coulthard evaluated how it just wasn't working out.


You are spot on with everything. Everytime Crofty goes to Kravitz it takes ages to listen to anything worthwhile after you have to listen to who they have seen, what they are eating which is a common theme and other rubbish. I really like Kravitz but he has got cringe worthy the last few years.

You're right about Edwards and Chandhok, Chandhok obviously knows his stuff and it shows too and is very good in practice sessions. Since C4 have had F1 coverage i have watched them over Sky and will do till they lose the tv rights.

Bring on Baku :thumbup:

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon May 29, 2017 9:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:54 am
Posts: 411
Channel 4 is more entertaining in the build up. It occasionally gets silly but i prefer it to dour Sky coverage

However, Sky is more analytcal

Simon Lazenby can surely be let go of. Has his YTS presenting course not finished yet?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Tue May 30, 2017 7:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:59 pm
Posts: 5199
I'm just curious here, do people think Crofty is that bad because he just is? Or is it that he is actually told to discuss some of the stupid and mundane things he does by Sky themselves? Just thinking of similarities between how WWE commentating and how (even though the results are pre-determined and specific bits are rehearsed) they used to say it as they saw it with minimal script, but now they have entire 4 hours shows fully scripted for them.

I used to go round to a friends to watch the Sky coverage when BBC didn't have it live. But I've never enjoyed it that much even though their coverage was much better than the BBC managed during their last season. I do like the extra analysis in the post race show, but really cannot stand the skypad! It just looks so clumsy and unprofessional to me! Remembering when Brundle used to do better analysis back in 2009 and 2010 on the BBC without the skypad and just using standard editing was much better imoh.

But since c4 took over coverage, I simply don't bother with Sky anymore. I enjoy the c4 coverage so much more that I'm happy to stay off the internet for a few hours on race weekends and just watch extended highlights with them.

Probably a lot down to personal preference.

_________________
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Tue May 30, 2017 7:59 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:22 pm
Posts: 1822
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
Herb wrote:
Ennis wrote:
The picture quality on channel 4 is atrocious in comparison to sky. This always leads me to using sky for the live race, plus the ability to play with red button and live timings.

Looks like their preshow stuff was fantastic though, Ill try find it on Catch Up.


Are you watching on C4 HD? There shouldn't be much of a difference when comparing HD feeds.

I agree here. Channel 4 HD will either be 1080i or 1080p depending on your TV I think. It will be just the same as Sky accept when they do their 4k coverage. Now that will be much better mut there is no way you can expect a freeview Channel to be that good. Sky Sports F1 HD won't be any Higher than 1080p. So just the same.

Also, something I've noticed when I look as 4k screen TV's in stores is that the image often looks really poor when you see stuff that is just 1080p. So if you usually watch Sky in 4K on a 4K TV, then Channel 4 will indeed look poor on the same screen. But If you just watch the standard Channel 4, the image quality then is much lower still.


Yeah, I was watching C4 HD. I was quite surprised to see the difference in picture quality myself. I was watching on a 4K TV, but I don't have the souped up Sky box which enables 4K viewing (which I didn't realise when buying the b*stard Sky box - I chose the 1 with less storage space thinking storage space was the only differentiator) - so expected quality on both channels to be the same.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Fri Jun 02, 2017 2:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 8:06 pm
Posts: 208
Herb wrote:
Are you watching on C4 HD? There shouldn't be much of a difference when comparing HD feeds.


That's like saying there shouldn't be much difference in the video quality between a HD YouTube video and a BluRay disc. Bitrate is a very important component.

The primary reason why 4k Netflix streams look so much better compared to their plain HD streams is primarily increased bitrate the 4k stream enjoys, not the 4x increase in pixels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 8:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2013 9:43 am
Posts: 123
Simon Lazenby always looks like he's coming down from a long night partying & taking blow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2017 12:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 8057
Lord Crc wrote:
Herb wrote:
Are you watching on C4 HD? There shouldn't be much of a difference when comparing HD feeds.


That's like saying there shouldn't be much difference in the video quality between a HD YouTube video and a BluRay disc. Bitrate is a very important component.

The primary reason why 4k Netflix streams look so much better compared to their plain HD streams is primarily increased bitrate the 4k stream enjoys, not the 4x increase in pixels.



Not on the subject of the thread, I know, but I have to ask as it is on the topic I want :D .

Anyone here using a 4k (or or HD) TV as a monitor for a computer?

I tried a full HD a couple of years back and found it was not good enough to sit close to.

I have tried PC to 50inch, but that is not up there, but would a 30inch as been as it is so much smaller, as long as it has a good refresh rate.

My current monitor is an old Samsung T240, so if it is better than that I was thinking of giving it a go and wondered if anyone else had experimented.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1475
moby wrote:
Lord Crc wrote:
Herb wrote:
Are you watching on C4 HD? There shouldn't be much of a difference when comparing HD feeds.


That's like saying there shouldn't be much difference in the video quality between a HD YouTube video and a BluRay disc. Bitrate is a very important component.

The primary reason why 4k Netflix streams look so much better compared to their plain HD streams is primarily increased bitrate the 4k stream enjoys, not the 4x increase in pixels.



Not on the subject of the thread, I know, but I have to ask as it is on the topic I want :D .

Anyone here using a 4k (or or HD) TV as a monitor for a computer?

I tried a full HD a couple of years back and found it was not good enough to sit close to.

I have tried PC to 50inch, but that is not up there, but would a 30inch as been as it is so much smaller, as long as it has a good refresh rate.

My current monitor is an old Samsung T240, so if it is better than that I was thinking of giving it a go and wondered if anyone else had experimented.


Ugh, I couldn't sit close to a TV that size using it as a monitor :lol: I use a 24 inch Dell S2415H for everything now.
I have often found that TVs look pretty bad close up even if you watch 1080p stuff close up weather they are 4k or not. I use my PC monitor and have it connected to multiple devices including both my PC and Freeview HD box where I watch all the F1 on Channel 4 HD. My monitor certainly looks better than my TV downstairs close up. But probably just as good from a distance. This will be because of the difference in size. 24 vs 32. Both 1920x1080 but the pixles look too big close up to my TV. Would be even worse if it was bigger. But even if it is 4k, I can't imagine why anybody would want over 30 inch for a PC monitor. For a TV, size doesn't matter so much if you sit far away from it.

Anyway, back onto the topic, I'm a little disappointed the Canadian GP isn't live on Channel 4. I've always loved this track. It will probably be related to the times they race. I hope Channel 4 will cover it next year though.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 8057
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
moby wrote:
Lord Crc wrote:
Herb wrote:
Are you watching on C4 HD? There shouldn't be much of a difference when comparing HD feeds.


That's like saying there shouldn't be much difference in the video quality between a HD YouTube video and a BluRay disc. Bitrate is a very important component.

The primary reason why 4k Netflix streams look so much better compared to their plain HD streams is primarily increased bitrate the 4k stream enjoys, not the 4x increase in pixels.



Not on the subject of the thread, I know, but I have to ask as it is on the topic I want :D .

Anyone here using a 4k (or or HD) TV as a monitor for a computer?

I tried a full HD a couple of years back and found it was not good enough to sit close to.

I have tried PC to 50inch, but that is not up there, but would a 30inch as been as it is so much smaller, as long as it has a good refresh rate.

My current monitor is an old Samsung T240, so if it is better than that I was thinking of giving it a go and wondered if anyone else had experimented.


Ugh, I couldn't sit close to a TV that size using it as a monitor :lol: I use a 24 inch Dell S2415H for everything now.
I have often found that TVs look pretty bad close up even if you watch 1080p stuff close up weather they are 4k or not. I use my PC monitor and have it connected to multiple devices including both my PC and Freeview HD box where I watch all the F1 on Channel 4 HD. My monitor certainly looks better than my TV downstairs close up. But probably just as good from a distance. This will be because of the difference in size. 24 vs 32. Both 1920x1080 but the pixles look too big close up to my TV. Would be even worse if it was bigger. But even if it is 4k, I can't imagine why anybody would want over 30 inch for a PC monitor. For a TV, size doesn't matter so much if you sit far away from it.

Anyway, back onto the topic, I'm a little disappointed the Canadian GP isn't live on Channel 4. I've always loved this track. It will probably be related to the times they race. I hope Channel 4 will cover it next year though.



About what I thought :thumbup: Stick with the old 24" Synchmaster for as long as it lasts then.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 5:13 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm
Posts: 9272
moby wrote:
Lord Crc wrote:
Herb wrote:
Are you watching on C4 HD? There shouldn't be much of a difference when comparing HD feeds.


That's like saying there shouldn't be much difference in the video quality between a HD YouTube video and a BluRay disc. Bitrate is a very important component.

The primary reason why 4k Netflix streams look so much better compared to their plain HD streams is primarily increased bitrate the 4k stream enjoys, not the 4x increase in pixels.



Not on the subject of the thread, I know, but I have to ask as it is on the topic I want :D .

Anyone here using a 4k (or or HD) TV as a monitor for a computer?

I tried a full HD a couple of years back and found it was not good enough to sit close to.

I have tried PC to 50inch, but that is not up there, but would a 30inch as been as it is so much smaller, as long as it has a good refresh rate.

My current monitor is an old Samsung T240, so if it is better than that I was thinking of giving it a go and wondered if anyone else had experimented.

I use my 55 inch TV as also my computer monitor, but obviously I'm not sitting close to it.

_________________
Räikkönen - Vettel - Bottas
Thank you Nico - You´re the champ!

PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2016: CHAMPION (2 wins, 8 podiums)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Wed Jun 07, 2017 9:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 9:22 pm
Posts: 8057
Covalent wrote:
moby wrote:
Lord Crc wrote:
Herb wrote:
Are you watching on C4 HD? There shouldn't be much of a difference when comparing HD feeds.


That's like saying there shouldn't be much difference in the video quality between a HD YouTube video and a BluRay disc. Bitrate is a very important component.

The primary reason why 4k Netflix streams look so much better compared to their plain HD streams is primarily increased bitrate the 4k stream enjoys, not the 4x increase in pixels.



Not on the subject of the thread, I know, but I have to ask as it is on the topic I want :D .

Anyone here using a 4k (or or HD) TV as a monitor for a computer?

I tried a full HD a couple of years back and found it was not good enough to sit close to.

I have tried PC to 50inch, but that is not up there, but would a 30inch as been as it is so much smaller, as long as it has a good refresh rate.

My current monitor is an old Samsung T240, so if it is better than that I was thinking of giving it a go and wondered if anyone else had experimented.

I use my 55 inch TV as also my computer monitor, but obviously I'm not sitting close to it.


I 'stream' to the big screen, but never having tried a 4k I was wondering about replacing my ageing monitor.
Depending on who you read it is/is not a good idea. I was wondering if any 'normal' people had tried it as opposed to someone making a vid and being technical rather than sensible.

Thanks anyway, I think hang fire a while, it is still working so leave well alone.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 1:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 8:32 am
Posts: 101
crofty is embarrassing and lame as hell, but in truth when has there ever been a genuinely solid and easy to listen to commentator? maybe james allen but he did that weird scream at australia some time ago. maybe now in 2017 he can tone it to modern style.

ben edwards sucks btw


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2017 11:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1475
Well, what is your view comparing Sky's and Channel 4's efforts this year? I may go into more detail later. But my short view on it: Almost all the presenters on Channel 4 are better. The only good ones on Sky are Brundle and Di Resta when he's on the Sky pad. Di Resta and Crofty is the worst combination ever. You can just tell Paul must be thinking he's mad when Crofty has just said something crazy and Paul goes silent for a while. They just don't go together and Sky should sort this out. Crofty and Brundle are better in the race but not as good as DC and Ben Edwards.

Anyone else want to share their views from this year? Just one more year left with 50% of the races live on Channel 4. I hope they continue with a highlights package though.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2017 11:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1804
Ben Edwards is hopeless.

Crofty, Brundle and Coulthard would all work fine in the box together.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:08 pm
Posts: 1213
Here’s the thing: For some people there is a large degree of emotional attachment involved with watching F1 (it’s more than just the analytical/reporting side), and to me that is where Sky falls short. I just don’t get any emotional attachment with the Sky team whatsoever. I think C4 is slightly (or perhaps a lot) better in that respect. But I just don’t feel as close to F1 as I used to.

For those that can remember the BBC (before they lost interest and f##ked it up), with the Brundle/DC pairing, and heaven-forbid even Humphries and Jordan, their enthusiasm, knowledge and obvious enjoyment was infectious, and I thought that era of broadcasting was the best I’ve seen in my 35ish years of watching F1!

As to the question of who is s best? Well I think neither of them are!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 9:22 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2015 8:46 pm
Posts: 376
if both were free you could and probably would argue sky has the better coverage overall. but i have a passionate hatred for sky as a company (even though i do have to 'acquire' sky f1 for half the races). i very much doubt anyone would pay for sky coverage in the uk if c4 had all the races. and people who are spending such a ridiculous amount on sky will have a biased view as they try to justify it to themselves. hopefully after the exclusive sky contract ends in 2021 or whenever it is we can get back to full seasons on free to air. come on liberty


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 10:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1475
GingerFurball wrote:
Ben Edwards is hopeless.

Crofty, Brundle and Coulthard would all work fine in the box together.

Very different opinions here! :-P

Crofty is terrible in practice sessions and just talks about what he ate the night before and when Kravitz joins in everything gets worse. Crofty to me just doesn't sound passionate about what he is commentating on. In a way, I think he often sounds angry like he's just shouting at the screen, even in the race. Although I don't find Brundle and Crofty that bad during the race. Although my preference would be to get rid of Crofty and have Coulthard and Brundle back together for the race and Ben Edwards and Karun Chandhok for practice sessions and qualifying.

We clearly have different view on Ben Edwards. I think he is far better than Crofty. They both make mistakes, but Ben Apologises when he makes mistakes if he gets corrected. Crofty often interrupts who he is commenting with and makes countless mistakes himself. Ben just sounds more interested in what is going on on the screen to me, especially in practice as he hardly goes off topic. Ben Edwards does have that over the top style commentating which I guess could get on some peoples nerves but I've heard some people say he's the closest to Murray Walker in terms of his style.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 10:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1475
Caserole of Nonsense wrote:
if both were free you could and probably would argue sky has the better coverage overall. but i have a passionate hatred for sky as a company (even though i do have to 'acquire' sky f1 for half the races). i very much doubt anyone would pay for sky coverage in the uk if c4 had all the races. and people who are spending such a ridiculous amount on sky will have a biased view as they try to justify it to themselves. hopefully after the exclusive sky contract ends in 2021 or whenever it is we can get back to full seasons on free to air. come on liberty

I do pay for the sessions that are not on Channel 4 now but it is rather annoying on now TV as it often buffers and the picture quality is only 720p. So much for pay TV....

Sky's advertising is incredibly misleading. As on their TV guide on their site has an advert above it saying "only pay for the sports you love - upgrade now" Seriously that should be cheaper than what I currently do which is having buy a week pass of 10 sports channels when I'm only interested in F1 practice 1, 2, 3, qualifying and the race? This is £10.99. So I expected just one Channel to be at leased a little cheaper. But you have to join Sky to get this. There was nothing stating this in the advert? That is £18 to start with then goes up to £20. Then you only need to add £18 for 1 sports Channel. What?! Sorry, but I find their prices just ridiculous and they will loose a huge amount of viewers in 2019. I will have to stick with the better value bunch of 10 channels which seems stupid concidering the other advert is saying only pay for the channel you want. But the image quality is far better on Channel 4HD than NowTV so it is still worse. Sky really need to do better if they want as many people to watch F1 when they take over compared to next year. But I guess they will get what they want which is more people buying their packages and they probebly won't care about the loss of viewers of the sport that will be unwilling to pay which I am sure there will be plenty of.

This will be sad for young viewers who's parents are not interested in F1. As Channel 4 is totally free and you don't even need a TV licence for it as it isn't the BBC and from 2019, they will be unable to watch this sport live any more. I know Sky want money and this is what they will get but IMO, they haven't been very considerate.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 10:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1804
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
GingerFurball wrote:
Ben Edwards is hopeless.

Crofty, Brundle and Coulthard would all work fine in the box together.

Very different opinions here! :-P

Crofty is terrible in practice sessions and just talks about what he ate the night before and when Kravitz joins in everything gets worse. Crofty to me just doesn't sound passionate about what he is commentating on. In a way, I think he often sounds angry like he's just shouting at the screen, even in the race. Although I don't find Brundle and Crofty that bad during the race. Although my preference would be to get rid of Crofty and have Coulthard and Brundle back together for the race and Ben Edwards and Karun Chandhok for practice sessions and qualifying.

We clearly have different view on Ben Edwards. I think he is far better than Crofty. They both make mistakes, but Ben Apologises when he makes mistakes if he gets corrected. Crofty often interrupts who he is commenting with and makes countless mistakes himself. Ben just sounds more interested in what is going on on the screen to me, especially in practice as he hardly goes off topic. Ben Edwards does have that over the top style commentating which I guess could get on some peoples nerves but I've heard some people say he's the closest to Murray Walker in terms of his style.

Edwards might seem more interested in what's going on, the problem is that he doesn't seem to understand what's happening in front of him. He's particularly bad in qualifying where he just seems to be oblivious to what's taking place.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2959
I have Sky but whenever CH4 are showing F1 I am with them. Don’t mind Ben Edwards, anyone is better than Crofty. I really enjoy DC, Webber, Chandhok and presenter Steve Jones is very good. I personally find the whole program enjoyable. I am probably one of very few who actually likes EJ, I just like how honest he is and his don’t hold back attitude when it comes to asking questions.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 11:35 am
Posts: 975
Skys coverage is getting worse as the seasons go by.
Absolutely zero new content this year, except the live coverage of the race weekend.
No new documentaries, or shows.
F1 Show, which was good at first, hidden away on a friday lunchtime.
How can they justify a full channel ?

I have this same complain here every season, but it gets worse and worse.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Channel 4 vs Sky
PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 12:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3142
F1_Ernie wrote:
I have Sky but whenever CH4 are showing F1 I am with them. Don’t mind Ben Edwards, anyone is better than Crofty. I really enjoy DC, Webber, Chandhok and presenter Steve Jones is very good. I personally find the whole program enjoyable. I am probably one of very few who actually likes EJ, I just like how honest he is and his don’t hold back attitude when it comes to asking questions.

Well, I'm not going to comment on Crofty, but a random word generator would have been better than Ben Edwards in yesterday's race.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group