Toggle sidebar

The new video board

R

RocketDawg

All-Conference
Oct 21, 2011
19,003
2,084
113
Any comments on it? Looked like the aspect ratio was greater than a normal HD screen. It's definitely wider than the board in the south end zone.

So to fill the screen, they stretched everything horizontally (and that made the already chubby majorette(s) appear even chubbier). Not sure I like that (actually, I know I don't like it). The one on the south end has a much better and correctly proportioned picture.
 
C

chem1970

Redshirt
May 5, 2013
108
0
0
The video board in the north end zone is slightly larger. The resolution of the north was not as good as the south but I assumed it looked that way to me because it is much higher and thus farther away from my viewpoint. I sit in section 04 so I'm in the middle of the field.
 
G

godlluB

Redshirt
Sep 24, 2012
504
0
0
Yeah, it looked like crap. The screen on the old board is taller than the screen on the new one, and the aspect ratio on the new one is all wrong. Really looked half-assed.

They're going to have to either crop the image on the NEZ screen or use a different video feed for each screen...or, you know, continue to look like crap. Unfortunately, it's too late to fix it the correct way and make it have the same aspect ratio as the original screen.
 
K

KurtRambis4

Redshirt
Aug 30, 2006
15,926
0
36
Really?

I thought it looked fine. Granted, I'm not a scoreboard expert. I certainly wouldn't use the word "crap" when describing it, though.
 
uptowndawg

uptowndawg

Senior
Jul 15, 2010
2,191
902
113
The south one wasn't as bright and had a softer look so I made it my go-to. Tint? Hue? I don't know what they call it, brightness I guess.
 
E

engie

Freshman
May 29, 2011
10,756
92
48
He has been hung up on the video board ever since they didn't paint and design it to exactly match the other one -- matching that whole side of the stadium, be damned. He was going to hate it no matter what...
 
1

123.sixpack

Redshirt
Sep 2, 2014
6
0
0
The biggest problem was the color saturation. A shot of a flag on the field looked way more fluorescent orange than yellow
 
B

bonedaddy401

Redshirt
Aug 3, 2012
4,663
22
38
I could not disagree more. I thought the new board had better picture than the old one. It is for sure brighter.
Both looked great and it's not even debatable.
 
F

FlabLoser

Redshirt
Aug 20, 2006
10,709
0
0
There is nothing wrong with the size or aspect ratio of the new board.

The new board does have a white balance and saturation problem. They need to put some big solid gray banner at midfield, shoot it with a camera, and adjust both boards for white balance.
 
D

dickiedawg

All-Conference
Feb 22, 2008
4,263
1,082
113
I mostly watched the south one. It being lower made the angle more comfortable to me and my neck.
Just preference.
 
aTotal360

aTotal360

Heisman
Nov 12, 2009
21,801
14,507
113
Color calibration is slightly off. Keep in mind boards of this size probably can't reproduce colors as accurately as a quality TV. The only thing that stuck out in my mind is that the new board has a slightly "cooler" image than the old board. As long as our uniforms don't look plum or wine, I'm good.

Considering this was the first game of the season, the control booth did a masterful job managing all the new equipment that was getting its first legit test run. There are 100s of things what could have went wrong.

As for the audio, there are a PILE of blown drivers that need replacing. This is leading to the muddy sound and low volume. From what I am hearing, it won't be addressed till the end of the season.
 
R

RocketDawg

All-Conference
Oct 21, 2011
19,003
2,084
113
Wicked Pissah said:
I never turned around to look at the new one. I rarely looked at the south one.
Click to expand...

How'd the game look from high atop the end zone? You like your new seats? Mine (on the goal line in the original club level) aren't as bad as I feared.
 
G

godlluB

Redshirt
Sep 24, 2012
504
0
0
Don't put words in my mouth, Engie.

I still think it looks bad that it doesn't even come close to matching the framing of the other one, but this is a whole different issue. This isn't a bad styling choice, this is a unfixable technical 17-up on a multi million dollar device. Why the hell would you not match the aspect ratio? Why?

I do a fair amount of work with high (some of them very high) resolution displays, so maybe I notice these sorts of things more than other people, but it looks bad. I noticed there was something wrong early in the game, and it distracted me bad enough that I spent a fair amount of the first half trying to figure out why it looked funny. I spent the second half trying not to look at it. The fact that they failed to include the 1600 amp circuit to the board in the design and MSU Physical Plant had to scurry at the 11th hour to run power to the thing should have been an omen that they hadn't put enough thought into it.
 
horshack.sixpack

horshack.sixpack

All-American
Oct 30, 2012
11,378
8,294
113
godlluB said:
Don't put words in my mouth, Engie.

I still think it looks bad that it doesn't even come close to matching the framing of the other one, but this is a whole different issue. This isn't a bad styling choice, this is a unfixable technical 17-up on a multi million dollar device. Why the hell would you not match the aspect ratio? Why?

I do a fair amount of work with high (some of them very high) resolution displays, so maybe I notice these sorts of things more than other people, but it looks bad. I noticed there was something wrong early in the game, and it distracted me bad enough that I spent a fair amount of the first half trying to figure out why it looked funny. I spent the second half trying not to look at it. The fact that they failed to include the 1600 amp circuit to the board in the design and MSU Physical Plant had to scurry at the 11th hour to run power to the thing should have been an omen that they hadn't put enough thought into it.
Click to expand...

Add inefficient to your list. If it draws 1600 amps that's 1/3 of the Cowboys video board power for only about 1/5 of the viewing area. Buncha newbs...
 
Dawgbite

Dawgbite

All-American
Nov 1, 2011
8,828
9,450
113
RocketDawg said:
How'd the game look from high atop the end zone? You like your new seats? Mine (on the goal line in the original club level) aren't as bad as I feared.
Click to expand...
I had trouble deciding how big a gain was on a running play without looking at the video board. 3 yards or 7 yards all looked the same from the endzone perspective, to me anyway. I could see pass plays developing better but running plays not so much. The Scoreboard Club is nice, I won't be moving back. As far as the south video board goes, it looked like a moving swirl of colors from 20 feet away. Kinda like an acid trip in an Austin Powers movie!
 
M

maroonmania

Senior
Feb 23, 2008
11,158
833
113
dickiedawg said:
I mostly watched the south one. It being lower made the angle more comfortable to me and my neck.
Just preference.
Click to expand...

Being in the lower bowl it is much easier just to look at the South End zone jumbotron because all you have to do is shift your eyes over from the game to the board. To look at the new board you have to uncomfortably tilt your head way up so after looking at it for the "newness" factor I went back exclusively to the original Mootube.
 
B

BulldogVetRep

Redshirt
Jun 3, 2014
86
0
0
chem1970 said:
The video board in the north end zone is slightly larger. The resolution of the north was not as good as the south but I assumed it looked that way to me because it is much higher and thus farther away from my viewpoint. I sit in section 04 so I'm in the middle of the field.
Click to expand...
I sit section 04 and thought the same thing. South did look better, but wasn't sure if distance had a factor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.