Hi
A bit of a rant.
I (and many others here, despite claim to the contrary
) am an audiophile. I am also a videophile.
I am forever annoyed by the various audio and video distortions that have come to signify someone is "clearly" using the Internet to either conduct an audio or video interview/session. I have scant experience with non-American news networks so bear with me.
Bother #1) The voices that sound like last century mp3 at 33.6 Kb/s. We know and have noticed that calls on FaceTime, What'sApp or whatever social platforms, use High Definition codecs that actually sound much clearer than regular or cellular phones calls/codecs. It seems to be an almost "de rigueur " thing on CNN and the US TV Networks to have that sort of distorted voice on those correspondent or "people on the Internet". Most often than not, these people and/or News Networks correspondents have vast amount of Internet bandwidth available... Why do they subject us to these?
Bother #2) The Optical distortion of using the wide angle lens from laptops, tablets and smartphone on Zoom and other video conference calls on the News and Media Networks. Seriously!??? The paradox is that it makes every single person on those calls, strange and .. yes... less attractive.
Bother # 2.5) The ceiling-as-a-background that comes from people using their laptop for the meetings...
Bother # 3) Inadequate lighting: In a world where good, ringlights with good output and infinitely adjustable lumens and color temperature, are available for less than $50.. Why do they light their correspondents so poorly?
Bother #3.5 ) Poor video definition, as if they were using a 33.6 kb/s from the 1990's.
Those could well be aesthetics choices. They don't serve the public and the News networks very well and IMHO contribute to further the erosion of confidence in the News Networks...
A bit of a rant.
I (and many others here, despite claim to the contrary
) am an audiophile. I am also a videophile.I am forever annoyed by the various audio and video distortions that have come to signify someone is "clearly" using the Internet to either conduct an audio or video interview/session. I have scant experience with non-American news networks so bear with me.
Bother #1) The voices that sound like last century mp3 at 33.6 Kb/s. We know and have noticed that calls on FaceTime, What'sApp or whatever social platforms, use High Definition codecs that actually sound much clearer than regular or cellular phones calls/codecs. It seems to be an almost "de rigueur " thing on CNN and the US TV Networks to have that sort of distorted voice on those correspondent or "people on the Internet". Most often than not, these people and/or News Networks correspondents have vast amount of Internet bandwidth available... Why do they subject us to these?
Bother #2) The Optical distortion of using the wide angle lens from laptops, tablets and smartphone on Zoom and other video conference calls on the News and Media Networks. Seriously!??? The paradox is that it makes every single person on those calls, strange and .. yes... less attractive.
Bother # 2.5) The ceiling-as-a-background that comes from people using their laptop for the meetings...
Bother # 3) Inadequate lighting: In a world where good, ringlights with good output and infinitely adjustable lumens and color temperature, are available for less than $50.. Why do they light their correspondents so poorly?
Bother #3.5 ) Poor video definition, as if they were using a 33.6 kb/s from the 1990's.
Those could well be aesthetics choices. They don't serve the public and the News networks very well and IMHO contribute to further the erosion of confidence in the News Networks...
