winghaz Posted November 17, 2007 Share Posted November 17, 2007 It struck me, while watching the Ohio State-Michigan game, about how Michigan's numbers on the arms (or sides of shoulders) were easier to see than Ohio State's TV numbers.So what gives? I thought TV numbers are supposed to be easier to see on TV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCScout76 Posted November 17, 2007 Share Posted November 17, 2007 Yes, TV numbers are suppose to be readable - but since the age of the black and white TV, the numbers have change.The change has been more drastic over the past 8-10 years, to the point you can't read them unless you're up close.A few years ago, UCLA had those 'curly' numbers. Other school use them but you can't read them while watching TV.I guess HD TV might made them better. Seems uniform designers don't take that in to consideration when doing a make overof the team's unis. But as with anything, it's in, then it's out of style again. Good point winghaz! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BallWonk Posted November 18, 2007 Share Posted November 18, 2007 I guess HD TV might made them better.Except that with HD, you don't really need the TV numbers to identify the players. It is a very valid criticism, though, that TV numbers were instituted to make players easier to identify on television, but many teams wear TV numbers that are absolutely unreadable on lo-def TV screens. If a uniform element doesn't fulfill its functional purpose, then it's badly designed, no matter how pretty it might look up close and in person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quantum Posted November 18, 2007 Share Posted November 18, 2007 HD makes the image clearer, but the cameraman is usually focusing on the wonder of HD. That is, most cameras emphasize the picture ratio and shoot too far away from the player. Unless the player is lying flat on the ground, the TV numbers are pretty useless anyway.As far as not making out the numbers on lo-def, that problem will go away in no time. I don't think you can even buy a lo-def TV anymore. Even if you could, why would you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coast2CoastAM2006 Posted November 18, 2007 Share Posted November 18, 2007 As far as not making out the numbers on lo-def, that problem will go away in no time. I don't think you can even buy a lo-def TV anymore. Even if you could, why would you?because i don't have 2 to 300 dollars to spend on a hd tv especially when i don't have any problem with the numbers on my regular 23 inch orion tv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patsox Posted November 18, 2007 Share Posted November 18, 2007 What exactly is a "lo-def" TV? I thought that the term was technically "Standard Definition". Correct me if I'm wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winghaz Posted November 18, 2007 Author Share Posted November 18, 2007 I don't think this has anything to do with high definition or low definition. I think it has to do with the camera angles, and the camera angles, to me, just don't show the TV numbers very well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quantum Posted November 18, 2007 Share Posted November 18, 2007 As far as not making out the numbers on lo-def, that problem will go away in no time. I don't think you can even buy a lo-def TV anymore. Even if you could, why would you?because i don't have 2 to 300 dollars to spend on a hd tv especially when i don't have any problem with the numbers on my regular 23 inch orion tvThe point being is that standard definition has a very finite lifespan. Everything is being geared towards hi-def and your viewing experience will be degraded. Bottom line is with the changes coming, you're pissing away your money, considering the lifespan of a typical TV set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quantum Posted November 18, 2007 Share Posted November 18, 2007 What exactly is a "lo-def" TV? I thought that the term was technically "Standard Definition". Correct me if I'm wrong.Lo-def or low definition is the same as standard definition. Standard definition just doesn't sound as bad. In this case, it's not a matter of right or wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PackerBadger Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 I don't think this has anything to do with high definition or low definition. I think it has to do with the camera angles, and the camera angles, to me, just don't show the TV numbers very well.And that has to do with where the main cameras are placed in a stadium. There are some places where the main camera angle is so high that it makes sense to put them on the shoulders, and there are some where it's lower and it makes more sense to put them on the biceps ... that is, except for the fact that the numbers are now distorted because the jerseys are so tight over the pads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphabet Man Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 What exactly is a "lo-def" TV? I thought that the term was technically "Standard Definition". Correct me if I'm wrong.Let's not get too technical, we all know what low-def means.I think some sports should get rid of TV or shoulder numbers, particularly NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coast2CoastAM2006 Posted November 19, 2007 Share Posted November 19, 2007 As far as not making out the numbers on lo-def, that problem will go away in no time. I don't think you can even buy a lo-def TV anymore. Even if you could, why would you?because i don't have 2 to 300 dollars to spend on a hd tv especially when i don't have any problem with the numbers on my regular 23 inch orion tvThe point being is that standard definition has a very finite lifespan. Everything is being geared towards hi-def and your viewing experience will be degraded. Bottom line is with the changes coming, you're pissing away your money, considering the lifespan of a typical TV set.considering i have to budget each month. increasing my viewing experience isn't top priority. espeically when i spend more time on my computer than on the tv which i only watch for dvds anymore. we even got rid of satellite because we simply weren't watching enough tv to justify having cable/satellite. the only real time i watch tv is sunday night football to see what the cowboys are doing. other than that, i rather use it to play dvds and play my ps2. though i think she plays it more than i do, but she is more of a movie person. with the way we work, increasing our viewing experience with HD tvs, blue ray, HD dvds etc, well its really not top priority when our set up is fine as is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gothamite Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 I guess HD TV might made them better.Except that with HD, you don't really need the TV numbers to identify the players. It is a very valid criticism, though, that TV numbers were instituted to make players easier to identify on television, but many teams wear TV numbers that are absolutely unreadable on lo-def TV screens. If a uniform element doesn't fulfill its functional purpose, then it's badly designed, no matter how pretty it might look up close and in person.Bingo.That's the crticism I have about many contemporary designs - too many have been designed for the gift shop, not the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Falcon Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 ALL teams should wear TV numbers on the shoulder and not the sleeves. That way the sleeves (or what's left of them) can have stripes or a secondary logo. Teams like the Raiders and Chiefs need to move their TV numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JQK Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 Get rid of TV numbers, names on the back of uniforms, and everyone should have gray facemasks!!!A traditionalist can dream, can't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tBBP Posted November 26, 2007 Share Posted November 26, 2007 I guess HD TV might made them better.Except that with HD, you don't really need the TV numbers to identify the players. It is a very valid criticism, though, that TV numbers were instituted to make players easier to identify on television, but many teams wear TV numbers that are absolutely unreadable on lo-def TV screens. If a uniform element doesn't fulfill its functional purpose, then it's badly designed, no matter how pretty it might look up close and in person.Bingo.That's the crticism I have about many contemporary designs - too many have been designed for the gift shop, not the field.This right here is why I'm in the process of developing a new round of action templates to use for my concept designs. A uniform might look good on a style guide template, or hanging in the window of a gift (or sports) shop, but when those uniforms make it onto human bodies and onto the gridiron, what looked like a great design can turn pretty poo-poo pretty darn fast--some of them, anyway. My thing is that if I can make something look good in action (or at least, illustrated in action), since, 90% of the time, when we see players in uniforms, they're moving in them (unless it's baseball...then you can invert the percentages ), then I think I done did something good.(This might also answer more than a few questions I've had PM'd to me as to why I haven't put up anything in the Concepts board for a while...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Island_Style Posted November 27, 2007 Share Posted November 27, 2007 Get rid of TV numbers, names on the back of uniforms, and everyone should have gray facemasks!!!A traditionalist can dream, can't he?They do dream, but only in black and white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagler Posted November 27, 2007 Share Posted November 27, 2007 from what i understand they are called tv numbers and they have tv numbers not to be seen on tv, but to help cameramen more easily identify a player...so if they are looking to zoom in on someone and they just know his number, they have more options to look at, not just the back of the player or the front of the player. good example of this was the sabres last year when they introduced the slug, the little numbers on the front of the jerseys were a HUGE hit with the tv networks and i heard that the nhl even considered (or at least played with the idea of) making such numbers mandatory for all teams... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burning River Posted November 27, 2007 Share Posted November 27, 2007 I can see where the addition helped hockey broadcasts, by adding numbers to the front. Football already has numbers on the front and back. From my understanding, the "TV Numbers" were to help the spotter during broadcasts. I know at the old Browns Stadium, the Football Press box was on the roof at one time (maybe the whole time). So, the view from that down-ward angle made the "TV Numbers" more detectable for those doing broadcasts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-kj Posted November 27, 2007 Share Posted November 27, 2007 Get rid of TV numbers, names on the back of uniforms, and everyone should have gray facemasks!!!A traditionalist can dream, can't he?Yes, yes, we know. Take the numbers off, take off all the striping, have one team playing in plain white, the other in plain blue or red...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.