WWE in widescreen

[zenon]

Did Sky ask WWE to produce their shows in widescreen, the reason I ask is that they were very late in moving to 16:9 and I given how popular it is in the UK I reckon Sky would have been quite frustrated that it was 4:3 for so long.

[Hatton Cross]

Pressure from Sky?
Doubtful. Pressure from pretty much every other broadcaster putting the majority of output in 16:9 that had the rights to this rigged entertainment, leading to WWE productions going widescreen.

I guess the same situation that Bernie Ecclestone found himself in with F1 coverage when FOM was host broadcaster of some of the races, before they took on the production of all (*) the races in a season.
They were still 4:3 and none HD when other sports were offering those feed and picture formats to rights holders.
(* - Monaco, excepted)

[Richard]

Pressure from Sky?
Doubtful. Pressure from pretty much every other broadcaster putting the majority of output in 16:9 that had the rights to this rigged entertainment, leading to WWE productions going widescreen.

I guess the same situation that Bernie Ecclestone found himself in with F1 coverage when FOM was host broadcaster of some of the races, before they took on the production of all (*) the races in a season.
They were still 4:3 and none HD when other sports were offering those feed and picture formats to rights holders.
(* - Monaco, excepted)

Think there was one year (2000 maybe) where the Australian GP was broadcast in widescreen in Australia but the host broadcaster provided a centre cut-out 4:3 world feed. I think that may have been frowned on as the BBC (who still provided the feed for the British GP even after they lost the rights) could have easily provided a 16:9 feed even if it was just for ITV audiences.

[VMPhil]

It's more likely that WWE went HD which of course has 16:9 aspect ratio. We were ahead on SD widescreen but the US was ahead with HD production.

[News Engineer]

Think there was one year (2000 maybe) where the Australian GP was broadcast in widescreen in Australia but the host broadcaster provided a centre cut-out 4:3 world feed. I think that may have been frowned on as the BBC (who still provided the feed for the British GP even after they lost the rights) could have easily provided a 16:9 feed even if it was just for ITV audiences.

The first truck and studio that ITV used was built by BBC Resources, but not run by the BBC. The BBC themselves weren’t the host broadcaster for the British GP after 1996, it was ITV until FOM took over in the mid 2000s.

FOM gradually took over all* host broadcast duties once their own PPV operation ended after 2002, but it took a few years. Japan was the last hold out, fortunately they (along with RTL in Germany, ITV aim the UK and C9 in Australia) were one of the better ones.

They were one of the last sports to go 16:9, around 2006. They went HD in 2010, then UHD / 4K in 2017.

(*Not Monaco)

[News Engineer]

It's more likely that WWE went HD which of course has 16:9 aspect ratio. We were ahead on SD widescreen but the US was ahead with HD production.

Yes, that is by far the most likely reason. Once Sky could bring in and downconvert the HD feed it would have alowed them to broadcast the programmes in 16:9.

The US going HD meant those watching US sports* in the UK got a huge leap in quality once the HD signal was distributed internationally, even before there were actual HD broadcasts in the UK. Although there were a good few years where the images were still being converted to NTSC for distribution outside the US before being converted to PAL for UK broadcast.

(*or scripted entertainment in the case of WWE)

[James Martin]

I remember that when Sky Sports would play out RAW and SmackDown on Friday & Saturday nights the picture quality was fairly OK, but the live PPVs could often look a bit challenged - clearly going through different NTSC-PAL conversions at the time I'm guessing?

[News Engineer]

Could be, or different route / type of distribution.

Maybe one was converted in house and another arrived already converted?

[Mort]

Think there was one year (2000 maybe) where the Australian GP was broadcast in widescreen in Australia but the host broadcaster provided a centre cut-out 4:3 world feed. I think that may have been frowned on as the BBC (who still provided the feed for the British GP even after they lost the rights) could have easily provided a 16:9 feed even if it was just for ITV audiences.

The first truck and studio that ITV used was built by BBC Resources, but not run by the BBC. The BBC themselves weren’t the host broadcaster for the British GP after 1996, it was ITV until FOM took over in the mid 2000s.

FOM gradually took over all* host broadcast duties once their own PPV operation ended after 2002, but it took a few years. Japan was the last hold out, fortunately they (along with RTL in Germany, ITV aim the UK and C9 in Australia) were one of the better ones.

They were one of the last sports to go 16:9, around 2006. They went HD in 2010, then UHD / 4K in 2017.

(*Not Monaco)

Having watched (and pixel peeped) the UHD F1 straight off the transport stream, by eck, the CGs might be 4K but nothing else is! It mostly looks like upscaled HD, and average quality at that. They must be using older cameras and/or lenses... No way it's actual 4K UHD glass to glass (excepting the graphics). I do wonder if they're dual running just to present UHD while they upgrade all their kit.

[James Martin]

Could be, or different route / type of distribution.

Maybe one was converted in house and another arrived already converted?

The Fri/Sat night weekly shows which looked OK were recorded, having aired live in the USA on Monday and Thursday night respectively.

The PPV events however would air live everywhere (so a 1am start in the UK) as they do nowadays - but these always had that classic "washed-out" look you used to get on American imports.

It was odd going on holiday to Florida and seeing Amercian shows I was used to watching back home look far crisper, but the British shows had weird picture artefacts.

I've posted in the Eurovision thread but worth mentioning here if you ever see clips of the Paris 1978 show they look terrible. Blurry pictures, weird saturation etc - again a probable consequence of producing the show in SECAM and then it being converted to PAL for the rest of the continent.

[thegeek]

Pressure from Sky?
Doubtful. Pressure from pretty much every other broadcaster putting the majority of output in 16:9 that had the rights to this rigged entertainment, leading to WWE productions going widescreen.

I guess the same situation that Bernie Ecclestone found himself in with F1 coverage when FOM was host broadcaster of some of the races, before they took on the production of all (*) the races in a season.
They were still 4:3 and none HD when other sports were offering those feed and picture formats to rights holders.
(* - Monaco, excepted)

Think there was one year (2000 maybe) where the Australian GP was broadcast in widescreen in Australia but the host broadcaster provided a centre cut-out 4:3 world feed. I think that may have been frowned on as the BBC (who still provided the feed for the British GP even after they lost the rights) could have easily provided a 16:9 feed even if it was just for ITV audiences.

for quite some time after theyv went widescreen, FOM provided multiple feeds: one with 16:9 safe graphics and another with 4:3 safe ones. I can't remember if they also distributed a 4:3 CCO version of that for broadcasters without their own aspect ratio converters.