| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Bert's three-camera combo
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
 |
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 10:45 AM on 08.27.07 |
->> Bert,
What was your thinking in deciding to use a three-still-camera combo rather than a single video camera?
Either way, the result was very cool.
--Mark |
|
Jeff Kowalsky, Photographer
 |
West Bloomfield | MI | United States | Posted: 10:56 AM on 08.27.07 |
| ->> My guess is that the MLB television rightsholder has exclusive rights to the use of video cameras in the park. |
|
Matt Cashore, Photographer
 |
South Bend | IN | USA | Posted: 11:06 AM on 08.27.07 |
->> With the Mark III you need three bodies to get one sharp frame!
(Sorry, couldn't resist...) |
|
Fredrik Naumann, Photographer
 |
Oslo | Oslo | Norway | Posted: 12:19 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> I am a sucker for gadgets and innovative setups, and found the story behind interesting. However, looking at the result, I wonder if five days of rigging and hauling 175 pounds of equipment around really was worth it?
Single video camera (high speed if you like) on wobbly tripod (or handheld by drunk operator) would do the trick too. ;-) |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
 |
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 12:29 PM on 08.27.07 |
| ->> fredrik, the key to "why?" was in what bert said in the video "usa today wanted to do something different". a video would not have a)been the same and b) different |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
 |
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 12:48 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> Video and audio recording at most, if not all sports events are right protected.
Mahalo! |
|
Bastian Ehl, Photographer
 |
Magdeburg | _ | Germany | Posted: 12:52 PM on 08.27.07 |
| ->> Chuck, HD DV framegrabs would have provided the same result, at least for the internet. Still, Bert mentioned the right protection, so 3 bodies are a nice workaround. |
|
Jon Gardiner, Photographer
 |
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 12:54 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> "Single video camera (high speed if you like) on wobbly tripod (or handheld by drunk operator) would do the trick too. ;-)"
-Fredrik Naumann
I don't think so. Maybe for your clients, though.
-J |
|
Corey Perrine, Photographer
 |
Hudson | NH | USA | Posted: 1:00 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> HD frame grabs do not yield as large a file size, low ISO (gain), or sharpness than the said setup used.
In the future, I'm sure one of the frames will possibly grace the likes of the Baseball Hall of Fame because they will want a huge cutout or something. Regardless of what people think of Bonds, it was a historic moment.
Again, fabulous Bert! Good job too Jordan. |
|
Corey Perrine, Photographer
|
Hudson | NH | USA | Posted: 1:03 PM on 08.27.07 |
| ->> P.S. They knew one of the most historic sports moment was within their grasp so they prepared with the sharpest tools, still photography gear. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
 |
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:09 PM on 08.27.07 |
| ->> Now Burt needs three or four more set ups like that so he can do the next monumental sports occasion in bullet-time :) |
|
Fredrik Naumann, Photographer
|
Oslo | Oslo | Norway | Posted: 1:10 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> Circle the wagons, the vikings are here again!
Chuck, if a video isn't the same, nor different, then what is it?? (I'm guessing "same, same, but different" - like getting a pepsi when you ask for a coke?)
I wasn't actually asking "why", but since you bring it up...:
Shooting a picture standing atop an elephant would be different too, but I still think it would be way too cumbersome to do, just to be doing something different. And certainly if there was a ladder nearby, I wouldn't have bothered with the elephant!
Robert, where is the line drawn? Is there a number of fps when a still series turn into a video? Are you saying you would have used video if you were allowed? |
|
Greg Ferguson, Photographer
 |
Scottsdale | Az | USA | Posted: 1:16 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> I think it's a pretty cool demo of what can be accomplished with Pocket Wizards and high-end cameras. It's kind of a mini version of the camera setups used for The Matrix.
Soon Bert will be setting up cameras from first base all the way to third... they'll be inches apart and will fire sequentially. We'll see the incoming ball, then Bonds start to swing, then he'll start a slow motion lean backwards as he dodges the ball aimed at his head. The camera angles resulting in a panning image centered on Bonds. :-)
A bit more seriously, it's interesting that at what is effectively 30 FPS, there's still no "bat on ball" shot. If only Bert would have pushed the release about 1/60 second later... Sigh. Well, there's always next time! |
|
Fredrik Naumann, Photographer
|
Oslo | Oslo | Norway | Posted: 1:19 PM on 08.27.07 |
| ->> Jon, would you care to elaborate "Maybe for your clients, though. "? |
|
Jon Gardiner, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 1:32 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> Frederik,
Your comment speaks for itself. I found it rude. It sounds like you have an alternative and less professional approach to achieving the end result. If your solution were to do what you stated, then I would assume that your clients would be on board with the approach.
-J |
|
Fredrik Naumann, Photographer
|
Oslo | Oslo | Norway | Posted: 1:41 PM on 08.27.07 |
| ->> Jon, either you missed the ;-) or you have no sense of humor. No need for innuendo about my clients in a public forum, even if you disagree with my opinion. I forgive ya all the same. Even for spelling my name incorrectly. |
|
Phillip Davies, Photographer
 |
Garden City | NY | US | Posted: 2:17 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> It sounds like what USA was trying to do was what The "Red" camera is going to be able to do.
I just visited their site for an update and it appears that the first 25 cameras are being delivered at the end of this month. http://www.red.com/technology
I'm looking forward to seeing the results, the first time someone takes teh video and pulls HI REZ, RAW stills from it in a PJ context or for Sports.
PhilD |
|
Jon Gardiner, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 2:55 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> Fredrik,
I accept your unsolicited forgiveness ;-) Sorry for the misspelled name. What I take issue with is your apparent flippant remark after acknowledging the time and effort that went into the project. Mark Loundy posed the same concern in a better way. That's all.
-J
P.S. I have a pretty good sense of humor, or so I've been told. I'm sure your clients are very happy with how you get the job done ;-)
Am I using the emoticon correctly? |
|
Matthew Apgar, Photographer
|
Bridgewater | NJ | USA | Posted: 2:57 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> If video (and audio) rights are protected at a major league sporting event, and since video is a rapid succession of stills, wouldn't multiple rapid still cameras used to create (essentially) a video as a final product, be protected as well?
Somewhere in Alpes de Haute Provence, France, Henri Cartier-Bresson is rolling over in his grave. |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
 |
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 3:15 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> If bloggers can be ejected because they are providing a "live depiction" of the game, I wouldn't be surprised if this kind of thing didn't tick off the powers-that-be eventually.
Shame, 'cause it's really cool. |
|
Greg Ferguson, Photographer
|
Scottsdale | Az | USA | Posted: 3:15 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> Video and stills differ in how the image is created - somewhat. Video doesn't use a shutter, it's a constant stream of raster scans which our brain interprets as an image. Stills use the shutter to control the time that the sensor (or film) is allowed to see the complete image which is then stored.
Put together stills and display them quickly enough and our brain would blur it together like it does a video feed. The final results of the two might look the same, but lawyers would entertain themselves for hours arguing the differences. |
|
Brad Mangin, Photographer
 |
Pleasanton | CA | USA | Posted: 3:18 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> Hello everyone. Since I am such a geek who reads way too much about rights holders and pro sports every week in the SportsBusiness Journal (http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com) I thought I might come in here to try and explain a few things about how big time pro sports deal with rights in the United States.
I will use Major League Baseball coverage as an example. You see, the TV networks who pay BILLIONS of dollars for the right to televise big league baseball games during the regular season and post season on the national level (FOX, ESPN, TNT) and on the local level are protected by MLB. This protection prohibits any other entity (like newspaper websites) from running video highlights in any form anywhere. Now we have the league run websites thrown into the mix like MLB.com (which is currently worth over 2 billion dollars itself and owned in 30 equal shares by each and every big league club). The combination of the billions of dollars paid for TV rights and web rights has squeezed out any possibility of newspapers in this country of ever posting video of pro sports on their websites.
Newspapers also cannot even shoot with a video camera at these events (which eliminates any possibility of shooting HD video and doing frame grabs). You ca shot all the features you want outside the ballpark- but not on the field.
There are even current rumors (I have not seen anything in writing yet) that MLB will not allow newspapers to use audio recorded during a game to be used in a Soundslides piece with still photographs like Nhat Meyer and the folks at the San Jose Mercury News do so well.
This is a hard to explain and very complicated topic. I am not sure I am doing a very good job of explaining it here- but I am giving it my best shot. The point I am trying to make is the use of three cameras shooting at 30 frames per second in this instance to record home run #756 was the best LEGAL way to showcase the Bonds swing on the web. Video was never an option in any form.
If you would like to be more informed about these type of very dry but important topics that effect our business every day I suggest you check out the SportsBusiness Journal. This is the best and only source if in depth industry news that never makes it into the main stream press. You learn about TV negotiations, web rights, owners meetings, rules committees, etc. It is all here and this is what the clubs read to keep up on the business of sports.
I hope this helps explain things a little bit. This can be a very confusing and frustrating topic and this is something that will not be going away - ever. There is way to much money involved and that is something newspapers in the United States don't have much of anymore. |
|
Geoff Miller, Photographer
 |
Portage | MI | USA | Posted: 3:32 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> "I am not sure I am doing a very good job of explaining it here..." Brad, nope you did fine.
Bert, I do have one question. I assume that you pre-focused the lens and "locked them down" with gaffers tape (as seen in the video). However, I noticed that images 2, 5, and 8 (presumably from the same camera) appear a "hair soft" (mainly in the background)... but then the softness disappears in later images. Any idea why that was?
Cool rig, btw. |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 3:51 PM on 08.27.07 |
| ->> fredrik, here in the good ole US of A....you could be run out of town if someone gave you a pepsi when you asked for coke and vice versa. just thought you should know, I wouldn't want anything bad to happen to you should you ever visit. and also just so you know jon g. is one of the funniest non-working comedians around. his sense of humor is a thing of legends. he is so funny that letterman and leno have his number on speed dial in their phones.......8)) |
|
Scott Strazzante, Photographer
 |
Chicago | IL | USA | Posted: 4:02 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> Last year, Jason Wambsgans of the Chicago Tribune did a project where he shot still images and put together a flip book style presentation on NFL offensive linemen's footwork put to ballet music.
Shortly after it appeared online, the Tribune received a cease and desist letter from the NFL saying that the project had to be removed from the website.
I'm not sure if it was because it was too close to video or surpassed the number of still photos allowed online, but either way they stated that it violated the terms of the media guidelines. |
|
Les Bentley, Photographer
 |
Orlando | FL | USA | Posted: 4:09 PM on 08.27.07 |
| ->> Anyone calculate the dollars sitting on that tripod? |
|
Scott Kroll, Photographer, Photo Editor
 |
Melrose | MA | USA | Posted: 4:25 PM on 08.27.07 |
| ->> I believe a rough estimate without cables, plate, head and cards is about $37k. |
|
Shaun Ward, Photographer
 |
Perth | Tayside | Scotland UK | Posted: 4:56 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> Its strange but despite all the technology used it reminded me of the first movie pioneers over 100 years ago.
Here is a link to some movies created by Edison's Kinetoscope films.
http://www.nps.gov/archive/edis/video.htm |
|
Andrew Dolph, Photographer
 |
Medina | OH | USA | Posted: 6:31 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> Robert/Brad/Scott/Mark,
Is there a specific legal document obtainable that details the exact language used so that newspapers have a guideline to what's allowable and what is not? I ask because I did a Soundslides show on the snowed-out opening day at Jacobs Field, which combined the following: Game action stills, game feature stills, ambient nat-sound, an interview with one of the groundskeepers, and the original 1903 wax-cylinder recording of "Take Me Out To The Ballgame". With that being said, I'm a little fearful of re-publishing that show on our new website because of similar consequences the Chicago Tribune experienced. It exists on the old Gazette Photojournal, but would be difficult to find without the exact URL, or title of the show. We want to move some of the old content off the old Photojournal and onto the new one — soon. However, a couple of shows are questionable because of the relatively new regulations in place.
Thanks,
— Andrew |
|
David Harpe, Photographer
|
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 6:40 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> We live in a very strange world right now.
Why don't they just cover it all and sell the rights to light of any kind?
"Any light entering or leaving the staduim is the sole property of Major League Baseball/football and may not be reproduced or represented in any form without express written approval of the league." |
|
Michael Granse, Photographer
 |
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 6:49 PM on 08.27.07 |
->> Light entering the stadium is still in the public domain, as even the FCC isn't regulating sunlight (yet).
In the future, we will probably have to pay an annual license fee for the memory of an event we paid to attend. I'm not sure how it will be enforced, but I'm sure someone is working on it :) |
|
Richard Denham, Photographer
 |
Toronto/Buffalo/Niagara | On | Canada | Posted: 10:56 PM on 08.27.07 |
| ->> Really, what I think Bert was trying to accomplish was something different from the rest of the photographers at the game, after all that is what he said, and as far as I know, he did. I don't see ESPN, SI, or anyone else for that matter with a sequence like Bert did on there web site. Cheers for Bert for once again being innovative, and once again at the forefront of sports photography. |
|
John Lee, Photographer
|
San Francisco | CA | USA | Posted: 12:42 AM on 08.28.07 |
->> I applaud the idea, attempt, execution and results of this. And I'm sure one or several of the frames from this will to contribute to the indelible images from Bond's record.
But I say this respectfully that perhaps this is was a really hard way to do something easy.
I also respectfully understand the legal limbo that is professional sports' imaging rights, and that shooting video was just not possible for USA Today. But I'm just waiting for the waves of crafty lawyers representing professional sports to shut this technique down. They may give the Bonds scenario a pass given its historic connotation. But try using this technique down the road, and you'll quickly find the room that photographer image rights lives getting smaller and smaller.
In fact, if you were to look at this technique very closely, this is absolutely in fact moving pictures, in the same way that The Matrix special effects were shot. All lawyers need to do is to pull up that film-making technique as example for this to be considered video and not stills.
And yes, Henri has been rolling over in his grave, probably at 10 times a second. |
|
Jeff Hinds, Photographer
 |
Portland | OR | USA | Posted: 8:58 PM on 02.18.08 |
| ->> So, legally, what is the fps of a video camera? Isn't 30fps considered video or is the fact that there are 3 different cameras used make it ok, legally? |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
|
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 9:05 PM on 02.18.08 |
->> Didn't use three cameras at the NBA due to space limitations.
Mahalo! |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
|
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 9:06 PM on 02.18.08 |
->> First sequence --- Bob Deutsch's "Superman Dunk" --- actually is from a hand-held camera.
Mahalo! |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
|
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 9:09 PM on 02.18.08 |
->> Think of sequences 2 and 3 from the NBA Dunks as a brief time lapse.
Mahalo! |
|
Matthew Putney, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Waterloo | IA | USA | Posted: 9:24 PM on 02.18.08 |
->> Bert
The link says - The requested document was not found - I am wondering if the NBA sent a cease and desist letter. |
|
Matthew Putney, Photographer, Assistant
|
Waterloo | IA | USA | Posted: 9:25 PM on 02.18.08 |
| ->> Well... Now it seems to work. |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
|
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 9:29 PM on 02.18.08 |
| ->> This was approved by the NBA's Photo Czar. |
|
Jason Orth, Photographer, Photo Editor
 |
Lincoln | NE | USA | Posted: 9:55 PM on 02.18.08 |
->> If I mount 3 D300s up with the battery grip on each does that mean I'm shooting 24p?
Once I took off my tinfoil hat I realized this was just a really cool series.
Thanks Mssrs. Hanashiro and Deutsch. |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
|
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 10:08 PM on 02.18.08 |
->> You have to "sync" the cameras so they are not firing all at the same time. So no, just because you're shooting 3 cameras at 8 fps (if the cameras are really 8 fps), it is not 24 fps unless they are sync'd.
Mahalo! |
|
Jason Orth, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Lincoln | NE | USA | Posted: 11:17 PM on 02.18.08 |
| ->> Bert, I have to confess I was being a smart-a** about the 24p question, but your answer led me to how to do a sync system and inspired an idea. Thanks! |
|
Cody Buckalew, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Red Wing | MN | USA | Posted: 11:31 PM on 02.18.08 |
->> Great stuff!
I just hope that by the time I have access to enough gear to create something along the same lines you have not gone off and made it cliche!
I can just see one of my buddies saying, "oh, you Hanashiro'd the NHL skills competition? So what?!"
Just playing, Good work. |
|
|| Sponsor Special Deals
SB-900 TTL AF Shoe Mount Speedlight
|
Available from:
Samy's Camera
|
Price: $499.95 |
Notes:
The SB-900 i-TTL Speedlight leads the Nikon Creative Lighting System delivering the portability, power and versatility to support any photographer's creative lighting imagination. SportsShooter.com users should call 866-726-9463 to get the special SportsShooter price.
|
|
-- More Info -- |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|