HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Different Camera Crew for VS?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-01-2007, 10:02 PM
  #1
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,031
vCash: 500
Different Camera Crew for VS?

anyone know how this works? when the game is on versus do they just use the crew that msg uses and just keep the feed for themselves? or is it their own crew?

the reason i ask is i am ASTOUNDED that they only had 2 angles of that puck. against the Isles, we had like 54 different angles on the henrik save. whereas here, all they had were 2 angles.

anyone know how it works?


btw, yes, i think it was a goal.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2007, 10:14 PM
  #2
NY Rangers Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The haunted dolphin aquarium
Posts: 248
vCash: 500
I used to work at ABC developing a Sports Management System to help with yearly budgeting.

The way it worked over there was the television network is responsible for scheduling and paying a crew and renting out the necessary camera equipment.

The cameras get really expensive, so you can most likely thank the limited camera angles of tonights no-goal replay on the tight budget of the Versus network. If this game was being broadcast by MSG, I bet there would be more camera angles available, and it would have been ruled a goal.

The lack of cameras has nothing to do with MSG, it has everything to do with Versus.

NY Rangers Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2007, 11:00 PM
  #3
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,031
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NY Rangers Fan View Post
I used to work at ABC developing a Sports Management System to help with yearly budgeting.

The way it worked over there was the television network is responsible for scheduling and paying a crew and renting out the necessary camera equipment.

The cameras get really expensive, so you can most likely thank the limited camera angles of tonights no-goal replay on the tight budget of the Versus network. If this game was being broadcast by MSG, I bet there would be more camera angles available, and it would have been ruled a goal.

The lack of cameras has nothing to do with MSG, it has everything to do with Versus.
see, thats what i figured.

mind if i quote you on my blog?

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2007, 11:02 PM
  #4
Radek27
Registered User
 
Radek27's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,149
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Radek27
I have been reading both teams boards since the game ended and i'm sick of this topic already.

Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2007, 11:04 PM
  #5
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,031
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post
I have been reading both teams boards since the game ended and i'm sick of this topic already.
i havent gone over to the Buffalo boards yet, but I dont blame them for being upset at a lack of the opposite camera angle. Its downright laughable that there wasnt one (fortunately for us)

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2007, 11:10 PM
  #6
Radek27
Registered User
 
Radek27's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,149
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Radek27
Quote:
Originally Posted by inferno272 View Post
i havent gone over to the Buffalo boards yet, but I dont blame them for being upset at a lack of the opposite camera angle. Its downright laughable that there wasnt one (fortunately for us)
How hard is it? It's pretty clear to me. There was no angle that showed the puck fully over the line, therefore it's a non-goal since the original call was no goal on the ice. We can ASSUME it went there but there was no way Toronto was gonna make that call after game 3.


And one thing that no one has mentioned yet was why in the world would Hank leave the net with 18 seconds left in a one goal game in the playoffs? He cost us a point in the regular season with such a terrible play. Stay in the crease Hank!

Radek27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2007, 11:12 PM
  #7
dkatzism
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Was TSN using Versus's feed?

  Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2007, 12:08 AM
  #8
frozenrubber
Registered User
 
frozenrubber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 1,966
vCash: 500
The only thing I haven't seen answered:

Where was the in-net camera?

frozenrubber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2007, 12:09 AM
  #9
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,031
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by frozenrubber View Post
The only thing I haven't seen answered:

Where was the in-net camera?
that would probably be the least conclusive, just guessing though, but the angle of henriks pads would probably block everything out.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2007, 12:48 AM
  #10
frozenrubber
Registered User
 
frozenrubber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 1,966
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by inferno272 View Post
that would probably be the least conclusive, just guessing though, but the angle of henriks pads would probably block everything out.
I'm going through footage as we speak...but I don't think Versus had it/access to it. This is not the first time Versus has not had a favorable angle and I find it to be no coincidence.

frozenrubber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2007, 01:08 AM
  #11
frozenrubber
Registered User
 
frozenrubber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 1,966
vCash: 500
The coolest angle is this one...


frozenrubber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2007, 01:38 AM
  #12
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,031
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by frozenrubber View Post
The coolest angle is this one...

im guessing thats an angle 1 or 2 frames after what i would call the "conclusive" frame. do you have that?

would be great to see if the play was even close.

there obviously the puck is NOT in, as his pad is over the line, but a few frames before that, im sure you could see if it were in or not, or at least how close it was.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2007, 06:46 PM
  #13
NY Rangers Fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The haunted dolphin aquarium
Posts: 248
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by inferno272 View Post
see, thats what i figured.

mind if i quote you on my blog?
Sure. Go ahead.


I gave a somewhat deeper analysis of this on a different board under a different user name. You can use this too if you feel like it:


The television network is responsible for broadcasting the game, so they are responsible for the number of cameras and the angles at which they are set up. Mind you, that every camera adds to the operational cost of broadcasting an event. The number of cameras comes down to two factors: budget and ratings.

The network needs to make money, so they need to stay under budget. Ratings are driven by two or more networks airing a similar product during the same time slot. If there is a lot of competition it might be worthwhile allocating more budget into the broadcast to offer a better quality product and steal some viewers from the other networks.

In the case of last nights game where maybe there were not enough cameras / camera angles for video review to be effective, you can blame two parties: Versus for not budgeting for superflous camera angles and the NHL for not having a schedule based on competitive air time, therefore not forcing networks to produce a better quality broadcast to compete for ratings.

Look at the comptetive airtime schedule of the NFL vs the NHL, and compare the broadcast quality of these products. The NHL can also be blamed for not mandating a greater number of camera angles, but then again they had very little leverage with no television networks fighting for airing rights.

NY Rangers Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2007, 06:53 PM
  #14
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,519
vCash: 500
I truely don't believe it was a goal. At first I thought it was, but when you look at Briere (who had an unobstructed view from a couple feet away) and Ruff's reactions to it, it seems too fishy to me. Not even their post-game reactions, but their ingame reactions. No goal celebration, little to no complaining. It doesn't add up. Especially with how they've been.

Inferno, go watch the highlights on the TSN website. You'll understand what I mean. Watch Briere when the play is happening, he only raises his stick because he's getting hooked kind of and he's pulling his stick hard away. Then watch Ruff how quickly he just passes it off. He says a few words than says ah forget it.


Last edited by WhipNash27: 05-02-2007 at 06:59 PM.
WhipNash27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2007, 08:00 PM
  #15
Forechecker
Registered User
 
Forechecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 4,322
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Forechecker
Quote:
Originally Posted by NY Rangers Fan View Post
Sure. Go ahead.


I gave a somewhat deeper analysis of this on a different board under a different user name. You can use this too if you feel like it:


The television network is responsible for broadcasting the game, so they are responsible for the number of cameras and the angles at which they are set up. Mind you, that every camera adds to the operational cost of broadcasting an event. The number of cameras comes down to two factors: budget and ratings.

The network needs to make money, so they need to stay under budget. Ratings are driven by two or more networks airing a similar product during the same time slot. If there is a lot of competition it might be worthwhile allocating more budget into the broadcast to offer a better quality product and steal some viewers from the other networks.

In the case of last nights game where maybe there were not enough cameras / camera angles for video review to be effective, you can blame two parties: Versus for not budgeting for superflous camera angles and the NHL for not having a schedule based on competitive air time, therefore not forcing networks to produce a better quality broadcast to compete for ratings.

Look at the comptetive airtime schedule of the NFL vs the NHL, and compare the broadcast quality of these products. The NHL can also be blamed for not mandating a greater number of camera angles, but then again they had very little leverage with no television networks fighting for airing rights.
Also don't forget that VERSUS is producing multiple games on any given night. Whatever their budget, I've got to imagine that doing four games in two countries has got to be pricey. It'll be interesting to see if the angles/production values increase when the only have two games to follow.

Forechecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:35 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.