Around the Dome 4 - Even More Flames News and Notes
- Thread starter Ace Rimmer
- Start date
BobColesNasalCavity
Registered User
Just a build a new rink for Christmas sakes
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,916
- 8,999
they are. doesn't mean they can't improve what we have in the meantime
Figgy44
A toast of purple gato for the memories
- Dec 15, 2014
- 13,477
- 8,819
Move this jumbotron to new arena? Or move to some public area to display other stuff? (IDK if there seemed to be a space like this somewhere in the draft designs of the arena).
Bounces R Way
Registered User
Figgy44
A toast of purple gato for the memories
- Dec 15, 2014
- 13,477
- 8,819
Really doubt the Flames would pony up for a brand new jumbotron just to leave it at the Saddledome a couple blocks away
That's what I was thinking.
"We will be bringing pieces from the Saddledome to the new event centre to remind us of the historical significance of the Saddledome."
*Sends over 2024 Jumbotron*
InfinityIggy
Zagidulin's Dad
Mildly shocked the ole roof can support a jumbotron so much larger.
Figgy44
A toast of purple gato for the memories
- Dec 15, 2014
- 13,477
- 8,819
I admit I haven't seen the current Jumbotron in a while, but I don't know if it's truly that much larger in terms of space taken up. It's a stupid tech spec thing. It certainly wouldn't take up 3.75x more space. I'm pretty sure it only takes up incrementally more space and they're screwing around with some maths to make it sound cool. Like if you had 10 toppings options in your burger, unique combinations of 3 toppings is 1,000 (10 x 10 x 10). You have 10 toppings options for 1 hamburger. Not 1,000 permutations of 10 items creating 1,000 unique burgers.
Visual TV Size Comparison : 65 inch 16x9 display vs 55 inch 16x9 display
Visual size comparison of a 65 inch 16x9 display vs 55 inch 16x9 display
For instance, 55" vs 65" TV goes from 1292 square inches to 1805 square inches. Raw values 65" divided by 55" inches is about 1.18x difference but from an area comparison it's around 1.40x.
55" to 110" is 5170 screen area vs 1292 or about 4x. But that's if you use TV ratios. If the jumbotron is allowed to be taller than wider than normal TV/projector ratios, then the jump in size isn't as high.
The current Jumbotron IIRC also is suspended from long bars from the ceiling. If those are removed, the new one doesn't need to go lower and you can increase screen height to increase screen area.
Also, IIRC, the corners of the current jumbotron weird which creates a sort of octagon shape instead of a cubed one above? (or at least maybe the images are not properly bezel to bezel?) A perfectly cubed one like the video above that has screen going edge to edge, there's probably already an increase in screen width if occupying the same space.
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,916
- 8,999
That's all well and good... but size isn't what matters.I admit I haven't seen the current Jumbotron in a while, but I don't know if it's truly that much larger in terms of space taken up. It's a stupid tech spec thing. It certainly wouldn't take up 3.75x more space. I'm pretty sure it only takes up incrementally more space and they're screwing around with some maths to make it sound cool. Like if you had 10 toppings options in your burger, unique combinations of 3 toppings is 1,000 (10 x 10 x 10). You have 10 toppings options for 1 hamburger. Not 1,000 permutations of 10 items creating 1,000 unique burgers.
Visual TV Size Comparison : 65 inch 16x9 display vs 55 inch 16x9 display
Visual size comparison of a 65 inch 16x9 display vs 55 inch 16x9 displaywww.displaywars.com
For instance, 55" vs 65" TV goes from 1292 square inches to 1805 square inches. Raw values 65" divided by 55" inches is about 1.18x difference but from an area comparison it's around 1.40x.
55" to 110" is 5170 screen area vs 1292 or about 4x. But that's if you use TV ratios. If the jumbotron is allowed to be taller than wider than normal TV/projector ratios, then the jump in size isn't as high.
The current Jumbotron IIRC also is suspended from long bars from the ceiling. If those are removed, the new one doesn't need to go lower and you can increase screen height to increase screen area.
Also, IIRC, the corners of the current jumbotron weird which creates a sort of octagon shape instead of a cubed one above? (or at least maybe the images are not properly bezel to bezel?) A perfectly cubed one like the video above that has screen going edge to edge, there's probably already an increase in screen width if occupying the same space.
It's the weight.
The new one probably weighs less
JPeeper
R.I.P. Johnny and Matthew Gaudreau
- Jan 4, 2015
- 12,006
- 9,343
The new one is also just essentially 4 screens, the old one had a lot of wasted space for either little screens or just aesthetic stuff like the three rings, the ads, etc.. The new one being just four big screens means every inch is being used for the screen. Wouldn't be surprised if it weighs less than the old one.
Figgy44
A toast of purple gato for the memories
- Dec 15, 2014
- 13,477
- 8,819
It's not the size of the jumbotron, it's how you use it.
That's what she said. Probably.
Read a thing earlier that they won't be taking the new jumbotron to the new arena, because the specs on it will be outdated for what the new arena is being built toReally doubt the Flames would pony up for a brand new jumbotron just to leave it at the Saddledome a couple blocks away
- Oct 12, 2012
- 56,916
- 8,999
Sell it to the Hurricanes, Rebels or Tigers so they can upgrade their arena at a discount, or split the LED panels up and donate them to different high schools so they can have video boards.
Also wouldn't shock me if Rogers paid for a bunch of it, since Sportsnet's name is replacing Enmax's on the scoreboard. They'll probably call it the Sportsnet Scoreboard or some stupid shit, not that it's much worse than Enmax Energy Board
