ukclique > tech.* > tech.broadcast

J. P. Gilliver (John) (10.02.2019, 11:18)
On the BBC weather forecasts, there's one map that's occasionally shown
- usually (maybe always?) it shows a long view, showing a lot of the
northern hemisphere - which is just a colour wash, temperature I think.

To me, that one's of little or no use, because I have no idea where
Britain is, relative to the features being described. (I think it _does_
_have_ outlines, but in thin white.)

I feel the coastlines - of Britain at least, but why not all - should
appear, more prominently and in black, definitely on that one, but also
sometimes on the others: where there's a significant weather feature,
such as a patch of snow or heavy rainfall, it obscures the outlines, so
the viewer - who isn't as familiar with the geography as the presenter,
and doesn't get anything like the time to see the charts.

I'd say - but I could be wrong - that the change(s) date)s( from about
the time the BBC started getting its weather information from some
agency other than the Met. Office; certainly the change to what might be
called a more naturalistic set of presentations dates from _about_ then.
I'm not against naturalistic presentation itself, just where it
interferes with the actual purpose of the forecast, which I would say
loss of geographical perception does.
Brian Gaff (10.02.2019, 12:22)
Well I cannot see it these days, but I do seem to recall the view from the
geostationary satellite was often so distorted due to the angles that it
felt wrong Obviously mapping a sphere onto a flat piece of media is always
going to be a compromise but software has existed for years to place the
virtual view over any part of the earth so the squashed view from the
equator is not actually needed at all.
Brian
J. P. Gilliver (John) (10.02.2019, 12:50)
In message <q3ou0c$eql$1>, Brian Gaff
<briang1> writes:
>Well I cannot see it these days, but I do seem to recall the view from
>the geostationary satellite was often so distorted due to the angles
>that it felt wrong Obviously mapping a sphere onto a flat piece of
>media is always going to be a compromise but software has existed for
>years to place the virtual view over any part of the earth so the
>squashed view from the
>equator is not actually needed at all.
> Brian


I agree. One of the things that _did_ improve with the change of
presentation is the change to a proper overhead view of Britain, rather
than a view from the south which made England look bigger and Scotland
smaller.

It wasn't a view from geostationary anyway (I don't think many if any
weather satellites are that far out anyway), but (a simulated view -
they rarely really used actual satellite images) from a LEO as it passed
over say France or Spain. I occasionally thought of asking for, out of
balance, a similar simulated view from over say Orkney or Zetland or
further north; you could still have south at the bottom, but the
proportions would have been different. But I think the current flat
presentation is better than switching between those two.

But I still would like more (or more prominent) outlines, as below.
[..]
wolfgang sch (10.02.2019, 13:07)
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255> wrote
in news:isEosO06x+XcFw0e:

> On the BBC weather forecasts, there's one map that's occasionally shown
> - usually (maybe always?) it shows a long view, showing a lot of the
> northern hemisphere - which is just a colour wash, temperature I think.


You mean like this?

0:22 - 0:30

There are coastal outlines, besides it blends over seamlessly from a
view with pronounced oceans and land masses. What I find irritating
that there's no legend, which makes the colours meaningless.

> I'd say - but I could be wrong - that the change(s) date)s( from about
> the time the BBC started getting its weather information from some
> agency other than the Met. Office;


Andy Burns (10.02.2019, 13:16)
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

> I'd say - but I could be wrong - that the change(s) date)s( from about
> the time the BBC started getting its weather information from some
> agency other than the Met. Office;


Several other changes at the time of the switch, they used to give
perhaps 5 days forecast down to 1 hour slots, then another couple of
days down to maybe 4 or 6 hour slots. Now they give a full fortnight
into the future in 1 hour slots, they may as well be rolling dice as far
as I can tell.
Andy Burns (10.02.2019, 13:17)
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

> One of the things that _did_ improve with the change of presentation is
> the change to a proper overhead view of Britain, rather than a view from
> the south which made England look bigger and Scotland smaller.


Agreed.
J. P. Gilliver (John) (10.02.2019, 14:07)
In message <gcafg2Ftv5oU1>, Andy Burns
<usenet> writes:
>J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>Several other changes at the time of the switch, they used to give
>perhaps 5 days forecast down to 1 hour slots, then another couple of
>days down to maybe 4 or 6 hour slots. Now they give a full fortnight
>into the future in 1 hour slots, they may as well be rolling dice as
>far as I can tell.


I wasn't aware of that: yes, it's very silly. Forecasting British
weather more than about 3 days ahead - _maybe_ 5 to 7 when things are
very stable - is not currently possible; it's possible to generally see
what's coming in general terms, but not to give accurate (in position or
time) forecasts much beyond the above. There are just too many
variables, where we are.
J. P. Gilliver (John) (10.02.2019, 14:09)
In message <gcafiaFtv5oU2>, Andy Burns
<usenet> writes:
>J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> One of the things that _did_ improve with the change of presentation
>>is the change to a proper overhead view of Britain, rather than a
>>view from the south which made England look bigger and Scotland smaller.

>Agreed.

Purely based on your name, would I be right in thinking you might hail
from north of the border? Though I always felt that those views were
insulting, and I live in Kent.
Bill (10.02.2019, 14:13)
In message <+hI$vl61HAYcFwvc>, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6JPG-255> writes
>But I still would like more (or more prominent) outlines, as below.


On every screen, I would like the outline of the whole UK drawn in black
or some other distinctive colour, such as red.

Sometimes you get a complete white screen, showing cloud, with just huge
banners for city names. There is no way of knowing where any additional
details actually are.
J. P. Gilliver (John) (10.02.2019, 14:22)
In message <gl0p3q-hi1.ln>, wolfgang sch <see>
writes:
>"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG-255> wrote
>in news:isEosO06x+XcFw0e:
>You mean like this?
> 0:22 - 0:30


Yes. Although in that one, (a) they moved from the normal view to that
one keeping it in register, which I don't think they always do (b) UK
_was_ _moderately_ discernible as it was covered by light blue; it's a
lot less visible when it's under yellow or orange.
>There are coastal outlines, besides it blends over seamlessly from a


Oh, does it? Doesn't help if I happen to look at the screen at that
point in the forecast, though.

>view with pronounced oceans and land masses. What I find irritating
>that there's no legend, which makes the colours meaningless.


I don't mind that so much - I've more or less learnt their colour to
temperature mapping, and I don't _think_ they vary it. (Though I agree
such a scale wouldn't _hurt_, if you can find somewhere on screen to put
it.)
>> I'd say - but I could be wrong - that the change(s) date)s( from about
>> the time the BBC started getting its weather information from some
>> agency other than the Met. Office;

>

Thanks for that: so it _is_ being designed "with our new partners":
although the male newsreader didn't actually say that, the female
presenter did.

I don't think I've ever seen them use the global aurora (northern
lights) display shown though!
J. P. Gilliver (John) (10.02.2019, 14:31)
In message <BJ6PW2R5VBYcFw7L>, Bill
<Billaboard> writes:
>In message <+hI$vl61HAYcFwvc>, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
><G6JPG-255> writes
>On every screen, I would like the outline of the whole UK drawn in
>black or some other distinctive colour, such as red.
>Sometimes you get a complete white screen, showing cloud, with just
>huge banners for city names. There is no way of knowing where any
>additional details actually are.

Yes, that was my point. Most noticeable - to me - on the "colour-wash"
screen, but yes, on others too. (And all coasts, not just UK.)
Brian Gaff (10.02.2019, 18:33)
Hmm, OK then equatorial views then, I know a couple are out that far, no
wait this three, but they are a bit too far away to do much. The ones I pick
up on 137 plus Mhz all seem quite slow trackers as you can hear them for
quite a while, a rough guess about 6 or7 hundred miles up. Many are
inclined orbits though so it gets very complicated then. There are even a
few with the old fax machine transmissions on board that given the right
aerial, receiver and software could be received by anybody I'd imagine.
Brian
Phi (10.02.2019, 21:03)
With all their fancy technology they rarely find Carlisle.

"Brian Gaff" <briang1> wrote in message
news:m0q1
[..]
Andy Burns (11.02.2019, 00:16)
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

> Purely based on your name, would I be right in thinking you might hail
> from north of the border?


No, the furthest North I can trace ancestors is Barnsley :-)
Bill Wright (11.02.2019, 05:29)
On 10/02/2019 22:16, Andy Burns wrote:
> J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> Purely based on your name, would I be right in thinking you might hail
>> from north of the border?

> No, the furthest North I can trace ancestors is Barnsley :-)


Gilliver's non-travels then?

Bill

Similar Threads