You can see the BBC theme tune on the highlights at their cricket site. Are Sunset and Vine doing this, because they are using some of the shots of the urn that they used in 2005?
In other matters it looks like it will be the (new look) Channel 9 graphics for the highlights and in 4:3.
As Sunset + Vine won the contract to provide the highlights programme for BBC Sport, no surprise they've raided last years archive for the opening titles. Shame nobody thought to remix Soul Limbo up a bit though. Five Live stuck a backbeat to the track for the Ashes trails and it sounded really good.
Anyway having watches some of the highlights on-line, I do hope before 10/11.15pm tonight, the following happens:-
A) Someone at BBC Sport finds the 4:3 to 16:9 strech button and fills the whole of the nations widescreen tvs up, instead of ugly and pointless black curtains
B) Someone sorts out the sound mix. The commentators were lost under the crowd noise. Someone should go and buy a descent pair of headphones for the Channel Nine soundtruck.
You can see the BBC theme tune on the highlights at their cricket site. Are Sunset and Vine doing this, because they are using some of the shots of the urn that they used in 2005?
In other matters it looks like it will be the (new look) Channel 9 graphics for the highlights and in 4:3.
Yes channel 9 have finally sexed up their graphics but its in 16:9 down here
On the BBC online highlights, I wonder if they only had access to a 4:3 version of the Channel Nine coverage to work with to produce the 10-minute clip, but will have a 16:9 version for the main highlights programme on BBCi from 10pm and BBC Two at 11.20pm. After all, Channel Nine are showing the coverage in 16:9 (although apparently not HD like Sky have started showing cricket in from the 2006 cricket season in England) and Sky are showing it in 16:9 with there own graphics and coverage (Sky are using their normal commentary team, no Aussie commentators except for a couple doing the odd slot here and there).
Channel Nine have finally got rid of those crap graphics, and have a rather well designed package now. It is very similar to the Channel 4 graphics (apparently designed by the same company), with the glass frosted background on full screen and lower third graphics, but they are still using an upper-left score graphic. This match director who insists on this is so behind the times; every other broadcaster has moved on to the infobar style which works better (although the score graphic is much smaller than the predecessor).
Channel Nine have finally got rid of those crap graphics, and have a rather well designed package now. It is very similar to the Channel 4 graphics (apparently designed by the same company), with the glass frosted background on full screen and lower third graphics, but they are still using an upper-left score graphic. This match director who insists on this is so behind the times; every other broadcaster has moved on to the infobar style which works better (although the score graphic is much smaller than the predecessor).
Ah, I thought that design looked identical to the Channel 4 set last year (although with different colours!). It's a nice design, and I'm not a big fan of the infobar: hopefully we'll see them in proper 16:9 tonight.
Interesting that after Manesh, the first person seen on the BBC coverage was Mark Nicholas. How heavily involved is he in the C9 team - must be pretty senior if he's covering the toss!
Q: Are Sky using their own graphics are taking a "dirty" feed?
Interesting that after Manesh, the first person seen on the BBC coverage was Mark Nicholas. How heavily involved is he in the C9 team - must be pretty senior if he's covering the toss!
Q: Are Sky using their own graphics are taking a "dirty" feed?
a clean feed off Channel 9, but with their own graphics, I presume they have an arrangement to use the same gallery, as the graphics seem to be in sync with Channel 9's coverage!
Odd to see a 'BBC' DOG in the top right like that; though nice that it's nowhere near as opaque as the BBC TWO overnight one. Not too intrusive, although not sure of the need for it.
