I love what SVT do with Melodifestivalen each year and actually take more notice of what happens in Sweden now that what happens with our entrants. Definitely looking forward to their efforts at hosting the contest next year and think they'll outdo 2011 and 2012's efforts. Scandinavian's seem to know how to make classy multi-camera television better than anyone else IMO.
I think I'm right in remembering the main innovation in 1998 being the scoreboard which was a totally new style and got used for a few years afterwards, possibly until Sweden 2000?
Yes, BBC Resources managed the scoreboard in Israel, and I think the 2000 board was still managed on the same system (Avid) but not run by the BBC.
The lips logo from Sweden 2000 came close to being the standard logo of the contest, but instead they went with the one from Istanbul in 2004.
Have a feeling 1998, 1999 and 2000 scoreboards were all provided by BBC Resources (they were made in-house by the BBC for 1998 and popular with the EBU who decided to use them for a few further years). It may be that BBC Resources didn't sponsor the board in 2000 (so it may not have had a BBC logo on it) I may be wrong - but was pretty certain (I know some of the people involved in writing the software that generated it...)
May be wrong - but I think the same system was used 3 years running. Didn't think Avid had anything to do with it technically.
Looking at the voting from 2000 the thing seems odd is that it doesn't re-order throughout the voting, again another innovation that started sometime and had been used ever since
I think I'm right in remembering the main innovation in 1998 being the scoreboard which was a totally new style and got used for a few years afterwards, possibly until Sweden 2000?
Yes, BBC Resources managed the scoreboard in Israel, and I think the 2000 board was still managed on the same system (Avid) but not run by the BBC.
The lips logo from Sweden 2000 came close to being the standard logo of the contest, but instead they went with the one from Istanbul in 2004.
The scoreboard in 1998 was unlike anything which had been used before- I'm pretty sure it was the first one to have any animation and movement, such as the points moving to the relevant country. There's also this rather novel way of showing the votes, which never got used again,possibly because it's not as clear who's in the lead. (Starts at 5:25 in this video):
BBC Resources ran the scoreboard in 1999 (they even got their logo on the bottom of the scoreboard, similar to how a sponsor would today). They did actually manage the scoreboard in Sweden 2000 as well, although I don't think they were credited for it that time.
The 2001 scoreboard was pretty similar to the previous years, although I'm not sure who was responsible for running it.
In 2002 they started using Vizrt, which I assume is the same system they're still using today?
Perhaps surprisingly, it wasn't until 2003 in Latvia that the countries actually rearranged in order of points as they were awarded- I'm not really sure of the reason for this, perhaps it takes more advanced software which wasn't available until then? The scoreboards produced by BBC Resources clearly had the capability to rearrange, as they did several times briefly during the voting.
Seeing as we're reminiscing somewhat, I *loved* the graphical intros/outros and all of the scoreboard animations in 2007.
What a great design.
I quite liked the design itself, but I found the scoreboard a bit too small to read clearly that year (as did someone in the audience if you listen carefully at 2:15 )
There aren't many scoreboards you can fault - and even though the current design is a bit plain compared to some earlier efforts it does the job very nicely.
The only thing I don't like about the reordering of the scoreboard and a consequence of both the expansion to 40+ voting countries and countries not voting in the order they performed is that you can't tell who has voted and who is still to vote anymore.
There aren't many scoreboards you can fault - and even though the current design is a bit plain compared to some earlier efforts it does the job very nicely.
The only thing I don't like about the reordering of the scoreboard and a consequence of both the expansion to 40+ voting countries and countries not voting in the order they performed is that you can't tell who has voted and who is still to vote anymore.
That could easily be solved with the addition of a map at the beginning of each vote with voted countries shown in a different colour to ones still to vote. Several previous scoreboards used a similar idea to show where the country was (like above), so the same idea could be integrated. I thought this year's voting sequence felt a bit, well, boring, because it was just a face on a screen, and them just giving out numbers. The sequences above with proper transitions were more 'exciting'.
The 2007 design was just wonderful, the logo, the opening, the scoreboard, the stage, and the theme music. I loved it, it still looks modern in 2012!
I think Sweden will come up with something just as good, if not better. I'd imagine a stage more reminiscent of Germany 2011 or Norway 2010, though. This years stage was okay but seemed to be lacking, and I didn't really like the green room being where it was.
Norway's 1996 scoreboard was pretty innovative in that it was a virtual reality job, with the scoreboard appearing next to, around, behind and in some cases in front of the presenter who wandered between a couple of podiums (podia? ). According to wikipedia, it was powered by Silicon Graphics. ISTR a few rounds of applause as some of the more interesting animations occurred (though of course the audience could only see what was happening via monitors) but it got a little samey towards the end.
This year of course, much was made of the excitement algorithm they'd used that was supposed to make it unclear who was going to win from the start. Something that evidently didn't work at all - it was the dullest voting since Alexander Rybak IMO.
)
). According to wikipedia, it was powered by Silicon Graphics. ISTR a few rounds of applause as some of the more interesting animations occurred (though of course the audience could only see what was happening via monitors) but it got a little samey towards the end.