Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Airshow Aerial Imaging

  1. #11
    lnuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    143
    If we had been, probably had been able to read his instruments on the A-10's pass. LOL.]
    I have a question that you might be able to answer -- it's one I've wanted to ask the networks but I can't find a way to email/etc. them:

    Why do pro videographers do such a high percentage of work so zoomed in that you have trouble telling what's going on? There was a little of that in your video, mostly no big deal, but in the broader world I often have to look away from the TV screen (especially football games) because the nice, steady camera is catching a bouncing eyebrows-to-chin shot that makes me seasick.

    Larry N.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    787
    My guess is that drones are replacing the blimp at football games.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by lnuss View Post
    I have a question that you might be able to answer -- it's one I've wanted to ask the networks but I can't find a way to email/etc. them:

    Why do pro videographers do such a high percentage of work so zoomed in that you have trouble telling what's going on? There was a little of that in your video, mostly no big deal, but in the broader world I often have to look away from the TV screen (especially football games) because the nice, steady camera is catching a bouncing eyebrows-to-chin shot that makes me seasick.
    The networks are doing everything to fix their plunging ratings. E.g. the crown jewel of sports television today is the Thursday Nite Football NFL broadcast package [use to be Monday Nite Football]. It's down 20-21% [CBS & NBS share it] in the last two years.

    My short answer is: maybe trying to find a way to appeal to a generation raised on video games. Some believe the solution is making TV more like playing a video game. So rather than John Madden illustrating a play on his "tele-strator", put a camera in the QBs helmet. Of course, when you are that "close" to the action and have such a limited perspective, it requires 10 camera angles to show viewers the same thing John did with his "tele-stator".

    But I think the solution is what you are talking about.

    Viewers need/want a "macro" view of the competition. Not an over-zoomed in perspective. It would make watching sports TV relaxing again rather than something that requires a nap after.

    In my view, playing a video game and watching television are two different activities with two different goals. Much like watching a football game and playing football in your backyard are two different activities with different goals. I don't want my sports TV to become sitting in a chair that bounce me around during a play so it feels like I'm in the game. [The Consumer Electronic Speech keynote last week was by the CEO of Intel. The hot new topic is Virtual Reality. Put you right in the football telecast. Personally, I think VR is an additional entertainment experience. Not a replacement for the experience of television.]

    I watch NFL to put my feet up, eat some popcorn and kick back. Not to be bounced around visually or physically like I'm playing with my two young boys in our backyard.

    Lastly, the biggest viewership plunge is NASCAR. Maybe I'm biased. But I think this research remains true today. It's largely unknown as evidenced by the explosion of in-car camera use. https://youtu.be/nzqf9EG2cC0

    That research and our experience shown here 20 years ago is why we are designing the new platform to fly even higher than we did on auto racing 20 years ago......with 3 aerial cameras vs. the single camera blimps fly. https://youtu.be/Xqqnjz3nJIo

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Berson View Post
    My guess is that drones are replacing the blimp at football games.
    Actually, you don't see any live drone use anywhere on sports television. And probably won't for a long time to come.

    Currently live drone use by the networks is banned by virtually all the leagues & venues.

    It's called "The Last 50 Foot" problem. You can't mix the current drone technology with human beings. http://wapo.st/1MUlmna?tid=ss_mail&utm_term=.47ae150ffa54.

    It boils down to drones being 4-8 blades spinning at ~ 9,000 rpm. The perceived danger around people is too high. [Even shielded] Also, NASA did a recent study that drone noise is the most irritating environmental noise at the same volume levels.

    [99% of any drone footage on golf is shot before the tournament when the course was used. They did use a drone live several years ago at Whistling Straits. It had to remain over Lake Michigan. The only shots it was able to provide were virtually useless for the telecast. They could have been done out the window of a Cessna 150 out over the lake with a hand held Go-Pro.]

    Drones are a long way from making their way into live television. They need to be a lot more compatible for close use around humans before they'll risk them around the crowds in stadiums.




  5. #15

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    787
    Is the drone/blimp safe enough? (half powered, half balloon)
    I guess strong wind might be an issue unless it has enough power.

    P.S. That link didn't work. Can't even copy and paste. Weird!
    Last edited by Bill Berson; 01-18-2018 at 10:50 AM.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,408
    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz View Post
    Lastly, the biggest viewership plunge is NASCAR.
    With very good reason. It's BORING and as exciting as watching a pound of raw liver sit in a bowl!!! Around....and around....and around...and around...

    New coverage techniques, new technologies, new applications will not help change the nature of these events because they are what they are: Inherently boring for television viewing. I.E. bad television.

    The same can be said for multiple aerobatics routines at airshows, in person or on TV. Boring and uninspired after 2 displays. The TV ratings for Red Bull air races are abysmal.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by Floatsflyer View Post
    With very good reason. It's BORING and as exciting as watching a pound of raw liver sit in a bowl!!! Around....and around....and around...and around...

    New coverage techniques, new technologies, new applications will not help change the nature of these events because they are what they are: Inherently boring for television viewing. I.E. bad television.

    The same can be said for multiple aerobatics routines at airshows, in person or on TV. Boring and uninspired after 2 displays. The TV ratings for Red Bull air races are abysmal.
    Hate to be a TV exec. Awfully hard to figure out how to appeal to people. E.g. the phenomena of "reality TV" is hard to figure out. Would be impossible to predict the appeal of some of the shows that are popular. The Truman Show brought to life.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •