F1 being filmed in HD this year

Posted on | Author Keith Collantine

The BBC has confirmed F1 is being filmed in HD this year.

But Formula One Management is not making the high definition feed available to broadcasters.

Danielle Nagler, the BBC’s head of HD, wrote on her blog today:

The events are being filmed in HD (as far as we know) but they are not made available by F1 to broadcasters in HD.
Danielle Nagler

Earlier this year Lee McKenzie from BBC’s F1 team said HD would be offered to F1 broadcasters in 2011. It may be that FOM wishes to get a year’s experience of filming in HD under its belt before committing to a live feed in high definition.

Hopefully they will release the HD footage shot this year in some form, either via their website or perhaps the end-of-season video review.

Meanwhile, NASCAR is being broadcast in HD for the sixth year in 2010.

Thanks to Mikesrandall for the tip

88 comments on “F1 being filmed in HD this year”

  1. Damn… that wasn’t quite what I expected to read, but at least its happening!

    1. I smell season review on BluRay.

      1. That’s enough to make one drool slightly…;-)

  2. MikeSRandall
    3rd March 2010, 12:21

    Well, that is (sort of) good news – a step in the right direction. The question now is: What are they going to do with this footage that they’re shooting? It seems an incredible waste to invest in the technology and then just use it to fill Bernie’s video shelf, never to see the light of day.

    Personally, about the only thing which could persuade me to bite the bullet and go for an HD TV would be F1 in HD. I hope the BBC can take a lead in persuading FOM to hand over the footage as soon as possible.

    1. José Baudaier
      3rd March 2010, 21:59

      They’ll probably use it to sell some season 2010 highlights/best moments Blu-Ray.

    2. Malcolm Clark
      5th March 2010, 14:03

      How long have you been following Formula 1? Bernie will use it to make himself more money. [Remember when he completed a deal with BBC for race coverage but they forgot to include ‘practice’ and ‘qualifying’ in the contract – so couldn’t show it until they’d renegotiated?]

      PS HDTV is great; I got it for watching lions eat antelopes, very much like F1 really.

  3. It’s moving in the right direcion!

    Heres hoping for a end of season bluray edition!!!!

    1. seconding this.

  4. Christian Biddon
    3rd March 2010, 12:40

    WTCC is broadcast in HD, as is Formula 2. I am willing to bet that the same group of people will be manning the cameras etc when F1 is filmed in HD so why not repease it to the broadcasters.

    This reluctance to bring HD to the top level of motorsport is pathetic, just like most other things controlled by the powers that be in F1.

  5. i can understand this but after 3 race you can push it to the live feed

    madness i tell ye

    1. I agree – a whole season’s practice? Pull the other one.

      If I was the BBC I’d be getting very angry about them not getting the HD feed.

      Speaking as someone with a nice big TV and SkyHD. ;)

  6. Anybody know the reason why FOM aren’t releasing the feed in HD? From what I can tell, they can do it, everything technical is in place – they just aren’t doing it.

    1. Sounds like a way for Bernie to extract more money out of broadcasters.

  7. It’s about money: B.C. Ecclestone wants the broadcasters to pay extra for the HD-feed.

  8. This is absolutely ridiculous. I know it’s been said many times before, but in this day and age for F1, the supposed pinnacle of motor sport, not to be in HD is a farce. The world cup being in 3D makes F1 look even sillier.

  9. From what I have read elsewhere its been filmed in HD for some years. I actually got HD this time last year fully expecting the BBC to be able to air F1 in it, as around Xmas 2008 Bernie said “if the BBC want HD they can have it”. As ever we dont know whats going on in the background, nothing in this world is ever as it seems.

    I watched the WTCC and F2 in HD last season on eurosport which was amazing (with the exception of that tragic race at Brands, for obvious reasons I didnt enjoy that live experience at all) But it begs the question if by comparison a small time TV production can do it what is FOM messing about at.

    I think there is also an issue with the term HD. What I do believe is that F1 was being filmed in 720p which is not full HD. The BBC has a trust commitment to only airing content on BBC HD which is native 1080(i). Which is why there is not a lot on it, but what is on it looks so much better than the sky service channels that upscale and so forth.

    High speed sporting events are often filmed in p (progressive) as it offers better capture than i (interlaced) of fast moving images. 720p broadcasts take approximately the same bandwidth as 1080i streams. which explains why F1 has been done in 720 in the past. Maybe 2010 sees the filming go to 1080p (bluray quality) and maybe then we might see the interlaced equivilent broardcast on air. fingers crossed but I am not convinced we will see anything until 2011.

    in short – what a joke…

    1. MuzzleFlash
      3rd March 2010, 13:24

      So even if F1 is broadcast in HD it won’t be full 1080p? Formula One is the only reason I’d want to get HD.

      Mind you I live in the middle of the Irish countryside so I was happy enough with the quality increase I got with Digital.

    2. JaffaTheCake
      3rd March 2010, 15:55

      Actually, interlaced footage is better for sport. You get double the frame rate at the expense of halving the vertical resolution (because 2 frames are interlaced together).

      1080i is 50/60fps, whereas 1080p is usually 24/25/30fps.

      1080p is better for films, as films are typically shot in 24fps, so they make full use of the vertical resolution.

      1. 1080p can be 50 or 60 fps too. But nothing aside from games consoles use it yet because of the bandwidth hogging.

        I’d have thought Bernie’s sponsors would quite like people to see their brands and logos clearly instead of the disgraceful fuzzovision we get at the moment. Him holding out for yet more cash from broadcasters is doing yet more damage to the reputation of F1.

      2. No.

        Progressive is better for sport as the whole screen refreshes at once allowing for a smoother picture and less strain on your eyes.

        There is as much information in a 720P image as there is in a 1080i image. Put the same image next to each other and you should pick the 720P as being better due to the progressive refreshing.

        Then there is the compression and processing to take into account which further provides an advantage to a progressive image.

  10. Do the camera’s on the cars film in HD?

    1. Last year there was one HD onboard camera in each race. You could usually tell which one it was even when watching in SD. Don’t know what the setup will be for this year though.

  11. hmm Pay-Per-View maybe?

    1. No thanks…

  12. the in-car cameras are not HD, the newer ones they begain using last year are higher resolution SD.

    bbc made a mistake, there will be nothing shot in hd this year as all the equipment isnt hd ready just yet and fom are waiting for the next upgrade cycle to buy fully hd cameras and other little bits.

    the cameras they have at present are GrassValley LDK5000 models and are SD but can be upgraded to produce in HD. However even once upgraded they don’t give the best picture quality compared to newer products. formula one management brought these cameras in April 2006 & they were first used at montreal that year so there a couple years old now.

    biggest reason they have yet to go hd is the cost involved and the limited number of broadcasters that would use the hd broadcast. thers only something like 10 worldwide that would pick up a hd broadcast and that woudnt cover the cost of either upgrading the equipment or producing the broadcast.

    for now if you want to see f1 in hd you will just have to find the japanese broadcast of suzuka which has been in hd since 2006.

    1. the cameras they have at present are GrassValley LDK5000 models and are SD but can be upgraded to produce in HD. However even once upgraded they don’t give the best picture quality compared to newer products. formula one management brought these cameras in April 2006 & they were first used at montreal that year so there a couple years old now.

      Very interesting, where’d you find this out?

      1. have seen this info posted on several message boards by some people ‘in the know’ so to speak.
        the digitalspy f1 tv discussion often sees some very knowledgeable peopole post there, but i’ve also seen the same info as well as more posted elsewhere.

    2. Anyone know what make and model the onboard cams are on the F1 cars? F1 Dave mentioned the GrassValley LDK5000 – I thought he was referring to the onboard cams but these are the broadcast cams.

  13. who knows, maybe half way through the year they’ll like it and release it to the broadcasters.

  14. Hmm is the technically advanced world of F1 being out done by back woods circle racing? LOL by 7 years to boot as well.

    1. Sky didnt show it in HD last year but there was a series of documentaries that followed non-stockcar racers trying to make it in Nascar such as montoya, JV, Dario etc and the racing footage used was the HD version, boy it looked good. The increased quality made a huge difference. Now its shown on Open access the picture is awful!!!

      With regards to the onboard shots, they started using HD cams at some point last year. Those that watch the read button will nodoubt of heard AD banging on about how great it was on their feed and how he wishes those at home could see it.

      1. p.s. I wouldnt be too keen to knock nascar, its probably the second biggest 4 wheel sport in the world. I am a casual viewer and will never get the obsessive appeal of it but it must be doing something right. The restrictor plate racing is a must see though for something completely different to anything else in the world.

        For those unfamiliar… on the super high speed flat out tracks such as talledaga and Daytona they fit restrictors on the cars so they all max out at the same top speed, you then get 43 cars 3 wide nose to tail topping 220mph in a massive pack, before they banned bump drafting on corners you would see people working together which the car in the draft physically pushing the car in front. Its a real treat for those that are interested in aerodynamics and the draft effect etc.

        1. I don’t knock Nascar, I think it’s a fun sport to watch and attend. However, I have to correct you, they go roughly 193-196 mph. 220 is a little fast at any track for Nascar, you might see 208 mph at California, Michigan, or Atlanta.

          1. If they would remove the restrictor plate then you might see 220-230mph, as Rusty Wallace did a test a couple years back. He was testing the new transponders (for timing the cars) at very high speeds to see just how much high speed/vibrations the transponders could handle. He just nicked aboved 225mph.

  15. I’d take 720p or HD-ready over SD any time. Of course, only 1080p is true HD.

    1. I might be wrong… but I believe 1080i is the best that can currently be pushed over satellite.

  16. what a crock!
    just release the HD feed already

    Surely they (FOM) dont need a full season to try it out, at the very most they could test it in the first race and then release the feed for the remaining races

  17. Only F1 could have an HDTV manufacturer sponsor the live timing and not broadcast the coverage in HD. This is all about the cost of sending an HD uplink truck to each event. Pure and Simple. Bernie won’t pay, the broadcasters won’t pay – the viewers suffer. I hope they put that in the “Fan Survey”.

  18. As usual, where Dear Bernard is concerned, it’s all about the money.

    The 2010 season will be recorded in HD, for release on the 2010 Season Review DVD. Folks will see that and demand of their cable and satellite providers that they provide the HD feed that F1 already has. They will be outraged that F1 had it a whole season and the provider never offered it. (Machiavelli had nothing on Bernie, lol.)

    Bernie will now be able to name his price, which of course will be exhorbidant. In the end, the cable/sat providers will in effect pay Bernie’s entire cost of upgrading his operation to HD.

    Cable/sat providers will be paying so much for the HD feed that I expect many/most of them to move the F! broadcast up to a higher tier on their packages, meaning of course we will have to pay some outlandish price to get a Sports Tier full of a ton of things we care nothing about, just to get F1 in HD.

    For many of us, this means the cost would be prohibitive and we still won’t have F1 in HD. In some cases, it might mean one won’t see F1 at all. Sometimes I really hate Dear Bernard.

  19. It’s another semantic argument for those who think they can see the difference between 720p and 1080p, or as the US satellite companies have started saying ‘full HD.’ ESPN, one of the biggest users of HD, have said the costs involved to go to 1080p just isn’t worth it and if they ave decided that 3D is more important than 1080p that might say something. 1080p is just an excuse to sell new tvs to those of us that have had HD sets for close to a decade now. And I don’t know how FOM films each race now but it looks DAMN good on SPEED-HD here in the US. It is a beautiful widescreen feed, and is not stretched, have compared the sd and hd feeds and hd shows more.
    I’m kinda surprised that LG hasn’t pushed FOM or picked up some of the cost to get their name on the feed. They have a pretty big presence on US sports in hd.

    1. i can tell the difference… of course it depends on the screen size. anything larger than 40inch the difference is quite noticable. and of course that depends on the viewing distance. comparing 1080i to 1080p is a tad trickier. but yeh, if it’s too expensive, just settle for 1080i.

  20. This is absolutely pathetic. Every major sporting event these days is broadcast in HD. Hell, so is pretty much everything else on TV that’s worth watching. I probably watch 95% of content in HD these days. There’s just no excuse.

  21. Another of Bernie’s stalling tactics while he figures out exactly how to extract as much money as possible from this…

  22. here is something to consider with it ‘other sports are in hd’ argument.

    other sports are often produced by the broadcaster. nascar is produced by fox for fox, indycar is produced by versus for versus, the soccer events are usually broadcast by sky or bbc for that broadcaster.

    as such when fox wanted nascar in hd they just had to get the hd equipment themselfs and they had a hd feed.

    fom have to produce a world feed that every broadcaster is able to pick up. unlike most other sports it isn’t produced for any single broadcaster. fujitv have a hd feed for suzuka because they produce the feed for that race themselfs as one of the 2 non-fom races.

    if you look at other sports where there is a single broadcaster like fom they are often not hd yet. wrc isn’t hd, superleague formula isnt hd, motogp isn’t yet hd.

    wtcc is hd only because eurosport (via Eurosport Events) is involved with the tv production and wanted something to help promote there hd channel when it launched.

    more recently if you look at some of the soccer thats been broadcast in 3d, its been 3d because sky and espn are pushing 3d channels that they intend to launch in the not too distant future. if it was left upto a specific single broadcaster like fom they woudn’t be 3d.

    1. This is a good point. Hadn’t looked at it that way before but I guess you are right.

  23. F1 season review is coming out on Bluray as well as DVD then, I take it. From my point of view, I see no reason to get HD from my HD ready TV, I can happily tolerate my digital set top box’s decent defition at the moment. Being under 18, I don’t pay for BBC liscence and I have no HD package subscription!!

    1. I’m sure it’s only people over 75 who don’t have to pay for a TV Licence…

  24. Presumably Bernie doesn’t own an HD TV yet? :-)

  25. We recently bought a 1080 TVs and sometimes connect through a core2duo laptop to get HD from BBC iplayer. Being the same age as Bernie I do not wish him to be in a bath chair but why does he have to be so miserably mean? (thats the generation that the designer of which the PC was a member)How can it benefit him to deny the people on this site, many of whom are still at college, their opportunity to be the core future of F1. Who does he think kept F1 alive through good and bad years and why has someone not looked into how Bernie benefited from F1 for years before the FIA sold it to him cheaply? of course F1 should move forward but not with the times but ahead of them.

  26. I was around when ‘black and white’ changed to ‘colour’. Don’t know what all the fuss is with HD to tell you the truth.

    It’s not staggeringly better and apparently Bernie reckons that there isn’t enough interest in it yet to warrant a change.


    1. that’s what lots of my customers say…until i tell them ‘that’s a dvd, this is blu ray’. and then they say ‘WOW’. depending on the screen size of course. it certainly a significant improvement. ice hockey is a really good example as with golf. when the puck/ball moves on a high def image, you can still see it… as with cricket (most ball sports really). it would be quite interesting in F1 as you would get a much better idea of the state of tyres (you could see graining at earlier stages for example from the onboard camera). also, the cameras would pick up new intracate aerodynamic details on the cars. you’ll probable be able to see the marbles of the racing line too which would help casual viewers to understand why no one tries to overtake in montreal…oh yeh, and the sponsers who only get a tiny space on the car will be seen…

    2. maybe he meant interest, as in interest rates!

    3. Yes it is staggeringly better. I can’t stand watching football in SD any more.

  27. it’s hardly an experimental technology now. why the flip would they bother filming it and not broadcast it???? that makes no sense. wow is all i have to say…

  28. LOL at the bloke who is moaning it won’t be in 1080p FHD but only in 720p, whenever it happens. There is NO broadcast in FULL HD currently and there will NOT be for the foreseeable future and possibly never. There is not enough bandwidth and there may never be enough.
    Which is as well as the difference is technically impossible to see unless you’re 7ft away from a 50 inch screen.
    Besides, the BBC have massively downgraded their HD broadcast at the end of August, eliminating a lot of the added detail and adding a fair amount of noise too. That’s another scandal slowly bubbling to the surface though.

    1. The BBC transmit 1080i, all content is filmed in 1080(i/p) minimum.

      and yes I am sitting 7ft away from a 46″ TV and its a pro-sumer high end TV, You can very much see the difference.

      1. nick, most people aren’t you. Most people don’t know what the difference between 4:3 and 16:9 is (as can be evidenced by the amount of people that will happily watched a stretched image to ‘fill the screen’) – let alone the difference between SD and HD. Even less could see the difference between 720p and 1080p – plus 1080p isn’t available over the air (in any country).

        NICK is correct about the compression ratio increase and after watching the football tonight on ITV HD I’d say that if the bandwidth is lowered any further HD will become even less of a selling point.

        As for your pro-sumer unit… more money than sense.

        4K will be the next big thing – after people realise 3D is a big marketing scam designed to sell headache tablets.

        Better start saving.

        1. Well they are selling a lot of blu rays to these people who are nit like me then.

          As for the more money than sense comment I suggest you rethink that, a pro-Sumer set is available for under 1k nowdays, and if got in the sale were available for around 700. That’s hardly a heap of cash in this day if you are into film / gaming etc and gave the eye for the difference.

          Like anything in life, be it wine, cars, tv’s those that do not appreciate what makes a given object great just won’t understand.

      2. 1080i is NOT full HD, and brings no more data/detail than 720p. You can’t see the difference because it does not exist.
        What’s a pro-sumer set BTW ?

        1. That’s just not true

          1. http://ezinearticles.com/?Eye-Candy?-Which-Wins?-1080i-Vs-720p–And-What-About-1080p?&id=123148

            “1080i vs 720p: MOTION CHANGES EVERYTHING

            Motion is different issue. If you want to see motion clearly, then live action 720p is what looks best, compared to 1080i. Here’s why: the information content of 720p is about the same as 1080i, though what it lacks in spatial resolution, it makes up for in temporal resolution (because the picture is at 1/60th of a second, not 1/30th x 2.) On 1080i, this would show as flickered or jagged edges on bright horizontal objects (like in the background of a camera pan.)”

            This is really the ABC of AV. I haven’t invented anything. People are fed an awful lot of BS by the likes of Comet, Currys etc. Semi-pro or not (whatever that means).
            They want to sell 1080p because ther’s more margin in it and they will say ANYTHING to convince people, however worse the end result is. People like big numbers, particularly if they are clueless.
            Add the fact that people buy LCDs or LEDs (which are only LCDs) and you end up with the worse possible scenario for HD broadcast = 1080i on a motion unfriendly LCD. Add the terrible 200mhz (which should always be off) and you get a worse HD pic than SD on a quality plasma, like a G10.

        2. 1080i isn’t at 1/30th x2 (what does that even mean?). It’s at 1/60th (1/50th in Europe) but just has half the lines missing. The reason it can detract from the picture in fast motion sport is when the TV can’t do a very good job of making up the remaining lines. If the TV has good processing to do that, it’s arguably preferable to 720p. But I’d agree, having gone from 720p to 1080p, the difference is marginal at any normal viewing distance.

  29. What kind of viewer numbers tune in for nascar every week in compairson to f1? Sounds like F1 may need to take a page from nascar in coverage and camera angles. Coverage for nascar is pretty large here in the states. I dream of the day f1 is on the same level. would be so awesome.

  30. “Meanwhile, NASCAR is being broadcast in HD for the sixth year in 2010.”

    That’s more because HD isn’t much of an upgrade over PAL while it’s lightyears better than NTSC. HD TV has had much greater acceptance in the US compared to overhere in Europe.

    I can’t tell the difference between the HD channels and the (digital) PAL channels. Digital is a lot better than analog broadcasts already.

    1. Digital (compressed at the levels most broadcasters use) is demonstrably worse than analog.

      HD is far better than 576i, just like it’s far better than the 480i used in the US.

  31. Some light at the end of the tunnel, I hope they do HD in 2011.

  32. Great, all I have to do now is spend 300 quid on a new TV and an extra 10 a month for HD subscription and I’m sorted!

    Oh well. If you’ve already shelled out, this is good news for you.

    1. BBC HD is free to air. You don’t need a sub.

  33. I honestly dont get the point. When there are millions of people watching the sport live on television every other weekend for the entire season, why would they use the HD for just the DVD review which may be only a couple of hundred people will buy?? Its beyond my comprehension.. The only thing thats a bit clear to me in all this is just that uncle Bernie might be getting a bit too old to understand what all this technology buzz is about these days..

  34. @NICK (no reply button)

    You are absolutely right and I would not disagree that 720p is better for fast moving images as said in a previous post. For slow moving images 1080i can be gotten away with, and believe me it is better than 720p in those cases. The i only suffers when the image pans quickly which really shows up the lacking in interlaced pictures.

    A good example was when the rugby was showing on BBC HD, when moving fast the picture was hard to follow because of the interlacing.

    With regards to comet etc just trying to sell 1080 for the margin, this is true… but thats really a poor argument against it, they will always try and sell to the best margin, but that does not mean 1080 is bad. If we forget TV and talk pure AV signals, 1080p > 720p fact.

    The fact we have to settle for 1080i for TV feeds is out of our hands, and I dont think anyone was ever trying to argue that 1080i was better than 720p, my points were all focused around the point that the BBC will only show 1080i minimum. That is what the BBC trust imposes on them.

    1. Fair comments nick.
      “1080p > 720p fact” = absolutely true with the right source but 99.9% of sets are either too small or too far for the human eye to even see the difference (by a big margin), which is a shame.
      As for the BBC, they have lost HD credibility IMO now with their August 09 HD downgrade scam, which is for me the key reason for the current poor/noisy HD IQ, and particularly on the rugby as you point out quite rightly.

      1. Yeah mine is a Panasonic Plasma 600Hz so to be fair I get better value out of the feed than most.

        I have to admit I have not watched anything on BBC HD since Yellowstone which was absolutely stunning quality. My set has a superwide colour gamut which is amazing for nature programs like that, you dont what your missing until you see all these colours a standard set just blurs into one, namely shades of green and reds. When you get onto blu-ray quality… oh its nice. but yea that in no way affects F1 so… ill shutup!

  35. three4three
    4th March 2010, 11:07

    Meanwhile over in the football world, some matches are being broadcast in 3D… Better late than never I guess.

    Seriously though, and this is a point that has been raised many times by various journalists, websites and forum posters, FOM needs a new direction in terms of PR and keeping up to date with technology (imagine that about F1, the ‘pinnacle of motorsport’!). They should have a rethink on how better they can connect and interact with the fans, how better to utilise the internet. We’re in the second decade of the 21st century, it’s time FOM caught up!

  36. maybe Ecclestone is just worried that HD will keep even more people from buying f1 tickets.

  37. Marc Connell
    4th March 2010, 21:28

    iv finally got a decent HD monitor for my pc and about to by a blu ray drive. I cant wait for the season review. If sky broadband was good i would probably steam it live of the Internet in hd!!!!!!!

  38. Yesterday through no machinations of my own the most ridiculous 40 inch HD telly has set up residence in my house.
    Please let the BBC rangle HD at some point this year, the tennis in HD was amazing, an that was on a pretty small telly, we want F1!

    1. The thing is with TV size, you start of with a massive 32, then it does not seem so big anymore… and for the same price you can get a 42.. so you do… then for the same price you can get a 46/50 … you see where this is going.

      to be fair tech is my “thing” so where as some people pay through the nose for a football season ticket, some on holidays, some on cars, I go for kit.

  39. I’m going to turn the colour completely down on my set and watch it with rose tinted glasses.

  40. Did you know that 1 in 50 cannot see in 3D!

  41. Florida Mike
    6th March 2010, 23:56

    It’s almost a moot point for me here in Florida where F1 is carried on Speed TV which doesn’t have an HD channel on Comcast cable. I don’t know if Direct TV or Dish Network satelite service offers Speed TV in HD, but I would still only get SD on the cable service I subscribe to.

    Fox covers 4 races in the summer, and it’s broadcast in full 16×9 widescreen on their HD channel, but posters on this board have said it’s upscaled SD; it’s still much better than the 4×3 SD on Speed.

  42. Question for F1 Dave, or anyone else who knows…

    F1 is shown in many different countries at many different Frame Rates, including 25, 30, 50 and 60 FPS (50 and 60 when they use HD). My question is, what Frame Rate do the F1 cameras use, and how is it converted to the broadcast Frame Rates? For movies, they record at 24FPS and then for 25FPS broadcast they just speed it up, so the run time is shorter. But F1 is live, so they can’t speed it up or slow it down, so how do they cope with all the different Frame Rates. Any answers welcome :-)

  43. Matt Whiting
    30th March 2010, 12:35

    I’ve just been reading these replys and i know its nearly a month since any1 wrote about this but the reason i’m now looking into why F1 isn’t in HD is becoming ever more strange. . . Can it really be because of cost and the broadcastors ? The answer is NO !
    MOTO GP will be in HD this year, as will WORLD SUPERBIKES ! WSB Has no were near the same amount of viewers as F1 or MOTO GP but there doing it!I caught the WSB this weekend on Eurosport HD ! IT LOOKED AMAZING ! ! ! !

  44. Sooo lame to not have F1 in HD. On this side of the pond, I can watch the FEEDER series for Indycar and NASCAR in HD. Hillbillies on dirt tracks, in HD!!! Yet the “pinnacle of motorsport” can’t seem to get it done. Bernie, you are an idiot. A rich idiot, but idiot none-the-less.

  45. Does anyone know which camera’s are currently being used for the F1 onboard camera’s?


  47. Looks like Brazil will be on BBC One HD if OneHD meet the rumoured launch date. Will F1 just be upscaled though ? MotoGP is in HD the weekend before on BBCHD – could it signal a sea change ?

    1. At present FOM have not said anything about supplying a HD feed in 2010, so my guess is just an upscaled SD feed.

  48. Maybe you could make changes to the blog subject F1 being filmed in HD this year | F1 Fanatic – The Formula 1 Blog to something more better for your subject you create. I loved the the writing still.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.