W1
If you take the numbers away you can clearly understand how cold/warm it will be with just colour on the old map compared to the newer one:
That's only useful in relative terms, and even then not very. How are you supposed to remember, day-to-day, whether that shade of yellow is 15 degrees or 20?
I agree. Remember that the most important information is clearest - the actual temperature. Black on white. Lovely for anyone suffering from colour blindness, and having to fight against a green map.
If you take the numbers away you can clearly understand how cold/warm it will be with just colour on the old map compared to the newer one:
That's only useful in relative terms, and even then not very. How are you supposed to remember, day-to-day, whether that shade of yellow is 15 degrees or 20?
I agree. Remember that the most important information is clearest - the actual temperature. Black on white. Lovely for anyone suffering from colour blindness, and having to fight against a green map.
IS
The weather maps from the early 00s also showed the same part of Europe - if you were watching in full widescreen. Less on 14:9 and hardly any in 4:3.
Yes, when the first 16:9 forecasts started they had to put something down the right hand side of the screen!
The weather maps from the early 00s also showed the same part of Europe - if you were watching in full widescreen. Less on 14:9 and hardly any in 4:3.
Yes, when the first 16:9 forecasts started they had to put something down the right hand side of the screen!
NG
The weather maps from the early 00s also showed the same part of Europe - if you were watching in full widescreen. Less on 14:9 and hardly any in 4:3.
Yes, when the first 16:9 forecasts started they had to put something down the right hand side of the screen!
Plus they've usually included Benelux countries - I've assumed because the BBC provide BBC One and BBC Two to them officially. (BBC UK and EIRE rights and certain freelance contract agreements for BBC One and Two TX used to include - and may still include - a 'cable supplement' to cover this)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB0IsvJlXVk even in the early days of electronic graphics they were doing this. You can see they include them
noggin
Founding member
The weather maps from the early 00s also showed the same part of Europe - if you were watching in full widescreen. Less on 14:9 and hardly any in 4:3.
Yes, when the first 16:9 forecasts started they had to put something down the right hand side of the screen!
Plus they've usually included Benelux countries - I've assumed because the BBC provide BBC One and BBC Two to them officially. (BBC UK and EIRE rights and certain freelance contract agreements for BBC One and Two TX used to include - and may still include - a 'cable supplement' to cover this)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB0IsvJlXVk even in the early days of electronic graphics they were doing this. You can see they include them
SC
Good point about World. I recall Bail did a nice little exemplar to justify a rant I was having about Newsday straying off onto the sides of the screen. Lots would be chopped off in 4:3.
scottishtv
Founding member
I think the decision to keep graphics 4:3 safe is down to a few things: World still only reaches a lot of people in 4:3 so keeping an entirely separate set of 16:9 safe templates would be a hassle, and the 4:3 safe graphics makes reversioning weather shows for social (9:16, 1:1) a lot easier.
Good point about World. I recall Bail did a nice little exemplar to justify a rant I was having about Newsday straying off onto the sides of the screen. Lots would be chopped off in 4:3.
SC
The biggest change in 2005 was obviously the move away from weather symbols on the map to the actual overlay of forecast rain, with cloud and sun being shown by the different shadows (or lack of) over the map. Didn’t they justify the mud-coloured map on those grounds, that it was easier to contrast the difference in the light (sunny) and dark (cloudy) areas over that colour compared to green? I’m tempted to agree it was…
scottishtv
Founding member
It's nice not to see the scorched land anymore -
...
And here's what we thought on launch day 2005... https://www.tvforum.co.uk/thenewsroom/weather-forecast-14620/page-26
...
And here's what we thought on launch day 2005... https://www.tvforum.co.uk/thenewsroom/weather-forecast-14620/page-26
The biggest change in 2005 was obviously the move away from weather symbols on the map to the actual overlay of forecast rain, with cloud and sun being shown by the different shadows (or lack of) over the map. Didn’t they justify the mud-coloured map on those grounds, that it was easier to contrast the difference in the light (sunny) and dark (cloudy) areas over that colour compared to green? I’m tempted to agree it was…
BA
These new flat maps look awful. They look about 2 decades behind ITV's, and the needless projection method to appease the newspapers (ITV's are tilted and look far better for it - and no complaints) reduces detail, and makes the forecast harder to watch.
Never mind the drop in forecast accuracy for my area...
Never mind the drop in forecast accuracy for my area...
SC
scottishtv
Founding member
This genuine elected representative of the people is
*slightly*
less angry now though:
A decision by the BBC to change the angle of its weather map proves that it has been “misrepresenting the land mass of the UK” for years, an SNP MP has claimed.
Ronnie Cowan, the MP for Inverclyde, said he hoped that the corporation’s change of tack would also lead to it treating Scotland more fairly in its news coverage.
inews.co.uk
A decision by the BBC to change the angle of its weather map proves that it has been “misrepresenting the land mass of the UK” for years, an SNP MP has claimed.
Ronnie Cowan, the MP for Inverclyde, said he hoped that the corporation’s change of tack would also lead to it treating Scotland more fairly in its news coverage.
inews.co.uk
JJ
Juicy Joe
Founding member
How do you tell how dense the rain or snow is on these new maps?? On the old ones, you could see the raindrops more closely packed together and falling faster via the 3D tilt. On these new ones, I'm not so sure. It just shows there is going to be rain or snow, as far as I can tell. But not how heavy it will be?
RK
Dense as in totals or how the intensity of the storms? I am looking at their US forecast and light rain is light blue, regular rainfall is a regular blue and heavy is purplish cover. For snow it was more a matter of it being translucent - the lighter the snow the less intense and when you can’t see the map below it means the snow is coming down heavy.
In the US we generally use the full color spectrum with the darker colors signifying the heaviest rainfall.
How do you tell how dense the rain or snow is on these new maps?? On the old ones, you could see the raindrops more closely packed together and falling faster via the 3D tilt. On these new ones, I'm not so sure. It just shows there is going to be rain or snow, as far as I can tell. But not how heavy it will be?
Dense as in totals or how the intensity of the storms? I am looking at their US forecast and light rain is light blue, regular rainfall is a regular blue and heavy is purplish cover. For snow it was more a matter of it being translucent - the lighter the snow the less intense and when you can’t see the map below it means the snow is coming down heavy.
In the US we generally use the full color spectrum with the darker colors signifying the heaviest rainfall.
SC
scottishtv
Founding member