Interesting Picture
 

http://i.cnn.net/si/multimedia/photo...an-wallace.jpg

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

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:eek:

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.

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.)

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? ;)

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?

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.

Dude.

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.

I could be completely wrong here, but I think the shot clocks provide the most accurate timing because there is less distance (less wire usually) from the scoreboard control to the display. Plus, they are LED displays so I would think they have faster response times than traditional displays.

Also, the difference between the shot clocks and timers on the scoreboard video displays (the ones that are becoming more common in the professional arenas) are even worse, I would guess because of the rendering needed to display the digits. I'll see if I can't snap some photos showing the difference when I go to my next game.

As for the TV insets, aren't they usually the clock from the shot clocks? I've only seen production on the local level (i.e. community broadcast), but I would think they have one camera pointed at the entire display to get the insets for both the shot clock and game timer.

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. :cool:

And is this affected by a player standing too far underneath the basket?

No, of course not.

But you can see a blind screen coming .1 of a second sooner.

w00t!
 

This is my 4,000th post!

An average of 1.5 per day.

Hey, congratulations on not having a life! :D

(Looks like I've got some work to do to catch up.)

Looks like I've got some work to do to catch up.

Looks like I've still got some work to do to catch up.

You can say that again, again.

Aw, never mind.

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.

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.

There was a prominent game in this area last year where this was an issue.

SLU vs Missouri State at the Scottrade Center

Version 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMUXeucpb3Q

Version 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIU5k_4cRos

http://d.yimg.com/a/p/sp/getty/e2/fu...47_bos_jaz.jpg

Here's another photo of the difference. The wraparound LED video clocks are significantly slower. Watch the shot clocks.

Wow !!!
 

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

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 :p

In the broadcast world, Monster Cables is like a swear word!

Yeah I know that but we won't be dealing with the techies... we'll sell this to the front office types. They'll love it!

If you don't know what we're talkng about check this out

http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/03/a...ter-cable-and/

So, instead of a monster cable product, would you like to buy a set of my super oxygen-free, aligned crystal, helical wound, spacially precise, carbon fiber jacketed, 110% copper, sound pipes?

I was going to until the mention of 110%. One can't have more than 100%. :D

That's the part we patented.

And the fact that we've only got one left?

And one more bonus....if you order today....the green inked DVD-edge sealer....keeps stray bits from being knocked out of the side of the DVD if the laser doesn't hit them just right.

Just realized I hit 3001 with that post....what a great set of posts to reach such a milestone...these will go down in history as some of the most impactful and influential posts ever made. :)

And being green it is earth friendly!

But is it 6/6 RoHS compliant?

Of course.

We have a NEBS version as well in testing right now. You can drop it in the ocean and it will keep on going!

How many you want?

Just the last one for now.

Welcome to the 3000+ club. It's kind of like wetting your pants while wearing a black suit. You get that lovely warm feeling, but nobody else really notices :D

I never got that feeling. Chuck must have stolen it.
Will I get it again at <strike>6,000</strike> 9,000?

You'll have to tell me when you get there!

Ya' know, when I started with Dr. Naismith, we used an hourglass. For outdoor games, it was a sundial. Never had a problem. :p

Precision Timing ...
 

Use this for Precision Timing:

http://sp1.yt-thm-a01.yimg.com/image/25/m6/3581170914

No picture of this one, but I was watching the end of the GT-ISU women's game, and there was definitely a 0.3 second difference between the above-the-basket clock and the arena clock at one time.

I'm getting my Congressman to investigate! :p

Getting the sundial to stop must've been tough, though some guy named Joshua did it once.

Resetting it is even worse. Usually takes about 24 hours to put time back on the clock.