TH
The reason it ends slightly right of the screen in SD is because it's 4:3 safe, whereas in HD it doesn't need to be because all HD televisions are 16:9. Personally I find the 2006 ticker atrocious - the simplistic, minimal ones used today are very functional and work with the channel's objective of becoming a serious news channel.
If you changed the TOTH you would need to change most of the other graphics, surely? The blue bars presentation that were introduced in 2010 are central to the TOTH and most of the other on-screen graphics.
In my opinion the 2006 used graphics ( Ticker and bars ) were the best. The ticker and bars of today are too simple and everything is written in capital letters plus what annoys me is that they end in the left center of the screen ( unless you are watching in hd) . But the blue backgrounds of today are far better than the previous ones.
The reason it ends slightly right of the screen in SD is because it's 4:3 safe, whereas in HD it doesn't need to be because all HD televisions are 16:9. Personally I find the 2006 ticker atrocious - the simplistic, minimal ones used today are very functional and work with the channel's objective of becoming a serious news channel.
I'm not, I really like the current graphics. What I meant was, the changed TOTH and something new maybe.
If you changed the TOTH you would need to change most of the other graphics, surely? The blue bars presentation that were introduced in 2010 are central to the TOTH and most of the other on-screen graphics.
SK
The reason it ends slightly right of the screen in SD is because it's 4:3 safe, whereas in HD it doesn't need to be because all HD televisions are 16:9. Personally I find the 2006 ticker atrocious - the simplistic, minimal ones used today are very functional and work with the channel's objective of becoming a serious news channel.
If you changed the TOTH you would need to change most of the other graphics, surely? The blue bars presentation that were introduced in 2010 are central to the TOTH and most of the other on-screen graphics.
As in this http://tvnewsroom.co.uk/news-events/sky-election-coverage-08-2998/
In my opinion the 2006 used graphics ( Ticker and bars ) were the best. The ticker and bars of today are too simple and everything is written in capital letters plus what annoys me is that they end in the left center of the screen ( unless you are watching in hd) . But the blue backgrounds of today are far better than the previous ones.
The reason it ends slightly right of the screen in SD is because it's 4:3 safe, whereas in HD it doesn't need to be because all HD televisions are 16:9. Personally I find the 2006 ticker atrocious - the simplistic, minimal ones used today are very functional and work with the channel's objective of becoming a serious news channel.
I'm not, I really like the current graphics. What I meant was, the changed TOTH and something new maybe.
If you changed the TOTH you would need to change most of the other graphics, surely? The blue bars presentation that were introduced in 2010 are central to the TOTH and most of the other on-screen graphics.
As in this http://tvnewsroom.co.uk/news-events/sky-election-coverage-08-2998/
SK
I really can't comprehend that! I think it is absurd that skynews shows a newswall backdrop of the top story at the ToTH for only 4 seconds instead of showing the skynews logo which looks better on the newswall and leads to an important identification with the channel. The "Live from the skynewscentre" voiceover was also important .Then they axed the proper coming up sequence. And they should let other presenters like ( Paula middlehurst and martin stanford ) present more important shifts. I also can't comprehend the decision of removing the isle, they could at least use it for sportsline with a nice newswall backdrop..
So the 2 sky news logo showings at the toth and the this is "sky news" voiceover is not enough sky news branding?
My message to Sky is don't tinker. Everything in general is fine. I criticised their move last year to bring uniformity to programming but I think its been quite a good move. The graphics are fine - well ahead of BBC's and ITV's so there is no need for a change. I'd like to see double headed presentation but it's a luxury that shouldn't be comprimised for other important elements. Sky have very little improvements to make as everything they are doing is exemplary. Their quality of journalism is second to none, their presentation is brilliant and their content has improved in the last few years. Keep up the good work is what I say.
I really can't comprehend that! I think it is absurd that skynews shows a newswall backdrop of the top story at the ToTH for only 4 seconds instead of showing the skynews logo which looks better on the newswall and leads to an important identification with the channel. The "Live from the skynewscentre" voiceover was also important .Then they axed the proper coming up sequence. And they should let other presenters like ( Paula middlehurst and martin stanford ) present more important shifts. I also can't comprehend the decision of removing the isle, they could at least use it for sportsline with a nice newswall backdrop..
So the 2 sky news logo showings at the toth and the this is "sky news" voiceover is not enough sky news branding?
SK
I really can't comprehend that! I think it is absurd that skynews shows a newswall backdrop of the top story at the ToTH for only 4 seconds instead of showing the skynews logo which looks better on the newswall and leads to an important identification with the channel. The "Live from the skynewscentre" voiceover was also important .Then they axed the proper coming up sequence. And they should let other presenters like ( Paula middlehurst and martin stanford ) present more important shifts. I also can't comprehend the decision of removing the isle, they could at least use it for sportsline with a nice newswall backdrop..
So the 2 sky news logo showings at the toth and the this is "sky news" voiceover is not enough sky news branding?
in my opinion a clearly defined skynews logo on the newswall looks better than a mess of unclear pictures on the newswall. They did it so great from 5/2010 until 4/2011 . Why change it when it used to be better?
My message to Sky is don't tinker. Everything in general is fine. I criticised their move last year to bring uniformity to programming but I think its been quite a good move. The graphics are fine - well ahead of BBC's and ITV's so there is no need for a change. I'd like to see double headed presentation but it's a luxury that shouldn't be comprimised for other important elements. Sky have very little improvements to make as everything they are doing is exemplary. Their quality of journalism is second to none, their presentation is brilliant and their content has improved in the last few years. Keep up the good work is what I say.
I really can't comprehend that! I think it is absurd that skynews shows a newswall backdrop of the top story at the ToTH for only 4 seconds instead of showing the skynews logo which looks better on the newswall and leads to an important identification with the channel. The "Live from the skynewscentre" voiceover was also important .Then they axed the proper coming up sequence. And they should let other presenters like ( Paula middlehurst and martin stanford ) present more important shifts. I also can't comprehend the decision of removing the isle, they could at least use it for sportsline with a nice newswall backdrop..
So the 2 sky news logo showings at the toth and the this is "sky news" voiceover is not enough sky news branding?
in my opinion a clearly defined skynews logo on the newswall looks better than a mess of unclear pictures on the newswall. They did it so great from 5/2010 until 4/2011 . Why change it when it used to be better?
CR
I really can't comprehend that! I think it is absurd that skynews shows a newswall backdrop of the top story at the ToTH for only 4 seconds instead of showing the skynews logo which looks better on the newswall and leads to an important identification with the channel. The "Live from the skynewscentre" voiceover was also important .Then they axed the proper coming up sequence. And they should let other presenters like ( Paula middlehurst and martin stanford ) present more important shifts. I also can't comprehend the decision of removing the isle, they could at least use it for sportsline with a nice newswall backdrop..
So the 2 sky news logo showings at the toth and the this is "sky news" voiceover is not enough sky news branding?
in my opinion a clearly defined skynews logo on the newswall looks better than a mess of unclear pictures on the newswall. They did it so great from 5/2010 until 4/2011 . Why change it when it used to be better?
I understand that we're all here to discuss presentation, but I think you're going a bit too far. In fact, I could even go as far to say that you're as bad as Brekkie, except you're not asking for standing presenters, although, as the newswall is 'never used to potentional', I would say it won't be too long before that.
My message to Sky is don't tinker. Everything in general is fine. I criticised their move last year to bring uniformity to programming but I think its been quite a good move. The graphics are fine - well ahead of BBC's and ITV's so there is no need for a change. I'd like to see double headed presentation but it's a luxury that shouldn't be comprimised for other important elements. Sky have very little improvements to make as everything they are doing is exemplary. Their quality of journalism is second to none, their presentation is brilliant and their content has improved in the last few years. Keep up the good work is what I say.
I really can't comprehend that! I think it is absurd that skynews shows a newswall backdrop of the top story at the ToTH for only 4 seconds instead of showing the skynews logo which looks better on the newswall and leads to an important identification with the channel. The "Live from the skynewscentre" voiceover was also important .Then they axed the proper coming up sequence. And they should let other presenters like ( Paula middlehurst and martin stanford ) present more important shifts. I also can't comprehend the decision of removing the isle, they could at least use it for sportsline with a nice newswall backdrop..
So the 2 sky news logo showings at the toth and the this is "sky news" voiceover is not enough sky news branding?
in my opinion a clearly defined skynews logo on the newswall looks better than a mess of unclear pictures on the newswall. They did it so great from 5/2010 until 4/2011 . Why change it when it used to be better?
I understand that we're all here to discuss presentation, but I think you're going a bit too far. In fact, I could even go as far to say that you're as bad as Brekkie, except you're not asking for standing presenters, although, as the newswall is 'never used to potentional', I would say it won't be too long before that.
SK
I really can't comprehend that! I think it is absurd that skynews shows a newswall backdrop of the top story at the ToTH for only 4 seconds instead of showing the skynews logo which looks better on the newswall and leads to an important identification with the channel. The "Live from the skynewscentre" voiceover was also important .Then they axed the proper coming up sequence. And they should let other presenters like ( Paula middlehurst and martin stanford ) present more important shifts. I also can't comprehend the decision of removing the isle, they could at least use it for sportsline with a nice newswall backdrop..
So the 2 sky news logo showings at the toth and the this is "sky news" voiceover is not enough sky news branding?
in my opinion a clearly defined skynews logo on the newswall looks better than a mess of unclear pictures on the newswall. They did it so great from 5/2010 until 4/2011 . Why change it when it used to be better?
I understand that we're all here to discuss presentation, but I think you're going a bit too far. In fact, I could even go as far to say that you're as bad as Brekkie, except you're not asking for standing presenters, although, as the newswall is 'never used to potentional', I would say it won't be too long before that.
Sorry, but who is Brekkie?
My message to Sky is don't tinker. Everything in general is fine. I criticised their move last year to bring uniformity to programming but I think its been quite a good move. The graphics are fine - well ahead of BBC's and ITV's so there is no need for a change. I'd like to see double headed presentation but it's a luxury that shouldn't be comprimised for other important elements. Sky have very little improvements to make as everything they are doing is exemplary. Their quality of journalism is second to none, their presentation is brilliant and their content has improved in the last few years. Keep up the good work is what I say.
I really can't comprehend that! I think it is absurd that skynews shows a newswall backdrop of the top story at the ToTH for only 4 seconds instead of showing the skynews logo which looks better on the newswall and leads to an important identification with the channel. The "Live from the skynewscentre" voiceover was also important .Then they axed the proper coming up sequence. And they should let other presenters like ( Paula middlehurst and martin stanford ) present more important shifts. I also can't comprehend the decision of removing the isle, they could at least use it for sportsline with a nice newswall backdrop..
So the 2 sky news logo showings at the toth and the this is "sky news" voiceover is not enough sky news branding?
in my opinion a clearly defined skynews logo on the newswall looks better than a mess of unclear pictures on the newswall. They did it so great from 5/2010 until 4/2011 . Why change it when it used to be better?
I understand that we're all here to discuss presentation, but I think you're going a bit too far. In fact, I could even go as far to say that you're as bad as Brekkie, except you're not asking for standing presenters, although, as the newswall is 'never used to potentional', I would say it won't be too long before that.
Sorry, but who is Brekkie?
CR
I really can't comprehend that! I think it is absurd that skynews shows a newswall backdrop of the top story at the ToTH for only 4 seconds instead of showing the skynews logo which looks better on the newswall and leads to an important identification with the channel. The "Live from the skynewscentre" voiceover was also important .Then they axed the proper coming up sequence. And they should let other presenters like ( Paula middlehurst and martin stanford ) present more important shifts. I also can't comprehend the decision of removing the isle, they could at least use it for sportsline with a nice newswall backdrop..
So the 2 sky news logo showings at the toth and the this is "sky news" voiceover is not enough sky news branding?
in my opinion a clearly defined skynews logo on the newswall looks better than a mess of unclear pictures on the newswall. They did it so great from 5/2010 until 4/2011 . Why change it when it used to be better?
I understand that we're all here to discuss presentation, but I think you're going a bit too far. In fact, I could even go as far to say that you're as bad as Brekkie, except you're not asking for standing presenters, although, as the newswall is 'never used to potentional', I would say it won't be too long before that.
Sorry, but who is Brekkie?
I would recommend you visit the BBC News Channel presentation thread. Or, actually, don't.
My message to Sky is don't tinker. Everything in general is fine. I criticised their move last year to bring uniformity to programming but I think its been quite a good move. The graphics are fine - well ahead of BBC's and ITV's so there is no need for a change. I'd like to see double headed presentation but it's a luxury that shouldn't be comprimised for other important elements. Sky have very little improvements to make as everything they are doing is exemplary. Their quality of journalism is second to none, their presentation is brilliant and their content has improved in the last few years. Keep up the good work is what I say.
I really can't comprehend that! I think it is absurd that skynews shows a newswall backdrop of the top story at the ToTH for only 4 seconds instead of showing the skynews logo which looks better on the newswall and leads to an important identification with the channel. The "Live from the skynewscentre" voiceover was also important .Then they axed the proper coming up sequence. And they should let other presenters like ( Paula middlehurst and martin stanford ) present more important shifts. I also can't comprehend the decision of removing the isle, they could at least use it for sportsline with a nice newswall backdrop..
So the 2 sky news logo showings at the toth and the this is "sky news" voiceover is not enough sky news branding?
in my opinion a clearly defined skynews logo on the newswall looks better than a mess of unclear pictures on the newswall. They did it so great from 5/2010 until 4/2011 . Why change it when it used to be better?
I understand that we're all here to discuss presentation, but I think you're going a bit too far. In fact, I could even go as far to say that you're as bad as Brekkie, except you're not asking for standing presenters, although, as the newswall is 'never used to potentional', I would say it won't be too long before that.
Sorry, but who is Brekkie?
I would recommend you visit the BBC News Channel presentation thread. Or, actually, don't.
JA
james
The iPad's just failed on the paper review. Now the papers are being changed manually on the graphics.