Interesting Picture

[Mark Dexter]

I know at least one poster on here works in the TV industry. Any idea on which clock the replay cameras are focused?

[vbzebra]

Used to work in local tv news and now in city gov't tv, but I don't know. Sorry. I've shot countless college bball games during my time in local tv news, and from that, my guess is the big scoreboard clock, simply b/c the position of the cameras ususally are not in places to get the clocks on top of the basket at the right angle for tv. Just my opinion. I could be right, I could be an idiot. That one is still up for debate

[Nevadaref]

Nice find, Mark.

For those who don't know the photo comes from last season's NCAA East Regional Final. G'town won the game in overtime after making up a late deficit in regulation, and advanced to the Final Four.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm......
So the scoreboard clock shows 33.0 seconds and the clock above the basket shows either 32.8 or 32.9. I can't tell as the resolution isn't crisp enough.
I don't recall this being a factor in the game though.

[Dan_ref]

Here's the source, which I found today on Digg

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mul...content.1.html

(Apparently SI is mostly interested in ncaa basketball that took place *this* century.)

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I don't recall this being a factor in the game though.

I agree. Even I'll stipulate that Georgetown won that game fair and square.

I was more interested by the fact that the clocks have a clear offset. It's likely less than 0.1 seconds, but this photo shows that, at least in some arenas, the possibility for discrepancy exists.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

I agree. Even I'll stipulate that Georgetown won that game fair and square.

I was more interested by the fact that the clocks have a clear offset. It's likely less than 0.1 seconds, but this photo shows that, at least in some arenas, the possibility for discrepancy exists.

Since the clocks are run from a single source at the table it should not be surprising that 2 of them are off by .1 or even .2 second. What is surprising is that there's no way (or if there is no one took the time) to synchronize them.

Maybe we have a business opportunity here?

[JugglingReferee]

Great find Mark!

I worked all camera angles shooting hockey games and camera 1 (main camera) or 2 (close up) often grabbed the time from the scoreclock, but we never had a camera focused soley on the clock. Focusing on the clocks near the backboard allow for also seeing the red light and the shot clock, which could allow for "killing two birds withone stone".

For the electronic signal to travel further to issue a start command would take such a small amount of time, it isn't funny.

[JugglingReferee]

Which display does the timekeeper watch when a basket is scored near 1:00 left?

With the correct timing, one display could read 1:00 and the other, 0:59.9.

[M&M Guy]

I thought the clocks ran off the same system, so it seems strange that there would be a difference. Could it be because there's a lot more wire for the signal to travel through to get to the upper scoreboard, and thus a little delay?

Another thing - I don't see the T signaling the 3-pointer; perhaps just another slight delay in the picture?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I thought the clocks ran off the same system, so it seems strange that there would be a difference. Could it be because there's a lot more wire for the signal to travel through to get to the upper scoreboard, and thus a little delay?

The difference in the clocks will NOT be due to wire length. For a 1/10th second difference, the wire to one display would have to be about 10,000 miles longer than the other one.

What is differnet is the control circuitry and the display technology.

The control circuitry that decodes the control signals from the console could be faster in one clock unit than the other.

The lights that illuminate the numbers could be of a different type...LED, Fluorescent, Incandescent, etc. Those have reaction times that are definitely different. LED's turn on/off nearly instantaneously while incandescents are much slower to change state. I think fluorescent's are also slow.


They are also not necessarily a full 1/10th apart. The could be just 1/1000th of a second apart and the camera captured the image just after one changed and just before the other changedd....giving the impression that they were 1/10th apart...could be 32.999 and 33.000. The only way to really tell would be to have high-speed video....the number of frames they're different times the duration of the frame would give you close to the real difference....if there are enough frames of difference to get a good measurement.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

They are also not necessarily a full 1/10th apart. The could be just 1/1000th of a second apart and the camera captured the image just after one changed and just before the other changedd....giving the impression that they were 1/10th apart...could be 32.999 and 33.000.

That's my guess.

That said, it would be really interesting to hear the discussion if a last second shot was counted/not counted based on one clock view, then a picture like this came out (with either shot clock at 0.1 and scoreboard at 0.0 or vice versa).

FWIW, when I do the clock, I watch the clock over the backboard. That's the only way I can see when the ball goes through and compare it to whether or not we're under (not at) 1:00.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The difference in the clocks will NOT be due to wire length. For a 1/10th second difference, the wire to one display would have to be about 10,000 miles longer than the other one. What is differnet is the control circuitry and the display technology. The control circuitry that decodes the control signals from the console could be faster in one clock unit than the other. The lights that illuminate the numbers could be of a different type...LED, Fluorescent, Incandescent, etc. Those have reaction times that are definitely different. LED's turn on/off nearly instantaneously while incandescents are much slower to change state. I think fluorescent's are also slow. They are also not necessarily a full 1/10th apart. The could be just 1/1000th of a second apart and the camera captured the image just after one changed and just before the other changedd....giving the impression that they were 1/10th apart...could be 32.999 and 33.000. The only way to really tell would be to have high-speed video....the number of frames they're different times the duration of the frame would give you close to the real difference....if there are enough frames of difference to get a good measurement.

Wow!!! This is better than the Discovery Channel!!!

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The difference in the clocks will NOT be due to wire length. For a 1/10th second difference, the wire to one display would have to be about 10,000 miles longer than the other one.

What is differnet is the control circuitry and the display technology.

The control circuitry that decodes the control signals from the console could be faster in one clock unit than the other.

The lights that illuminate the numbers could be of a different type...LED, Fluorescent, Incandescent, etc. Those have reaction times that are definitely different. LED's turn on/off nearly instantaneously while incandescents are much slower to change state. I think fluorescent's are also slow.


They are also not necessarily a full 1/10th apart. The could be just 1/1000th of a second apart and the camera captured the image just after one changed and just before the other changedd....giving the impression that they were 1/10th apart...could be 32.999 and 33.000. The only way to really tell would be to have high-speed video....the number of frames they're different times the duration of the frame would give you close to the real difference....if there are enough frames of difference to get a good measurement.

Maybe you and I should go into the arena clock synch business together.

Lotta money out there to be made on this Camron... we can even upgrade them to Monster Cables

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

I agree. Even I'll stipulate that Georgetown won that game fair and square.

I was more interested by the fact that the clocks have a clear offset. It's likely less than 0.1 seconds, but this photo shows that, at least in some arenas, the possibility for discrepancy exists.

Yep, you are right about that. I find it of note as well. Thanks for finding this excellent example.

BTW I took out a magnifying glass and the clock above the backboard definitely reads 32.9 in the photo.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

BTW I took out a magnifying glass and the clock above the backboard definitely reads 32.9 in the photo.

Dude.