Quite right too...

oh yes. I can also totally understand musicians not wanting people to make videos of their live performances - although the distinction between small and large cameras seems a bit silly to me, in a concert setting.
 
:DI'll bite.
First off, it's football - you know, the game where you play the ball with your foot instead of your hand? ;)
And secondly, both "American Football" (can't we just call it what it is - American rugby?) and baseball consist mostly of static situations, waiting for the next few seconds of action - time which is conveniently filled with about a thousand advertisements. Basketball is the only one of the three major American sports that has any right of criticizing football for a lack of action. Don't know much about ice hockey (regular hockey happens on a field ;) ).

[edit]Just did a lil research. Turns out the average football player runs about 6 times the distance of the average NFL player, and almost three times as much as the average basketball player. And yes, football does involve lots and lots of explosive action going in different directions. You can be sure they're not running for the heck of it, so even if they're not scoring - because scoring is not supposed to be easy ;) - there're still players giving their all, probing, trying to create openings or stop the opponent from breaking through.
http://tribesports.com/blog/the-average-distance-run-in-different-sports
PS I saw some footage of the recent football tournament in the US (which Manchester United won)... WOW there are some seriously big stadiums! Michigan stadium filled to max capacity at 109k, very impressive.
 
:DI'll bite.
First off, it's football - you know, the game where you play the ball with your foot instead of your hand? ;)

Sorry Bart, I'm just accustomed to the old British word for your Futbol game. :tongue:

I'm really just jesting. I know you folks over there love your footie (though it bores me to tears). I understand my fave game baseball does the same to you folks on the old side of the pond.
 
...the distinction between small and large cameras seems a bit silly to me, in a concert setting.

Not at all. I was at the Albert Hall a few months ago and had a concert totally wrecked by a couple who were sitting in the row in front, both holding up iPads and recording the entire performance. In a darkened auditorium the brightness of their screens and the size of them was most distracting. They were asked a number of times to desist but they just carried on. The man in particular just watched the concert on the iPad screen - don't know why he bothered to turn up - he could have just bought the video.

Madness.

Twelve years ago I went to Prague for the first time. The Astronomical Clock is always a big draw, on the hour. Twelve years ago you could stand in the crowd and see it do it's thing. Today it is lost behind a sea of iPads*. Let's just consider that for a moment. A large, bulky, heavy device with a small, limited, low quality camera vs. a purpose-made high quality, pocketable image capture device that is available for a third of the price and doesn't obscure the view for those behind you.

There seems to be a view that says "It looks great on my BIG screen so therefore it MUST be better than something captured on your TINY camera..."

Or maybe it's just "I'm alright, Jack".

*other large tablets are available...
 
Sorry Bart, I'm just accustomed to the old British word for your Futbol game. :tongue:

I'm really just jesting. I know you folks over there love your footie (though it bores me to tears). I understand my fave game baseball does the same to you folks on the old side of the pond.

I LOVE baseball!!!!
 
Bill: I meant the distinction between DSLR's and other "professional looking" cameras and smartphones/compacts etc, as it's commonly made at concerts. Those all have screens of roughly the same size, and they're all equally annoying if you're in a darkened room. Perhaps a DSLR is even less annoying, if used for stills, when the viewfinder is used.

Perhaps the pro / non-pro looking camera distinction at concerts is made in fear of people not needing any professional footage anymore, but then so long as there's no dedicated mic, the footage is bound to suck anyway.

I do agree that the larger the screen, the more annoying / rude it is.

Luke, I quite enjoy playing baseball (we did it at school PE occasionally), but watching others play it... nah thanks. Not enough creativity and variety possible to really fascinate me as a viewer (that's no problem as a participant since I'm bad enough at it to make even the basics challenging ;) ). NFL might be fun to watch if they didn't spend two thirds of the time on time-out or breaks (rugby is good fun though), basketball I enjoy watching.

Steve, I'd call it 'the weirder one of two kinds of rugby they play down under' ;)
 
Back
Top