What do you all think of the Skycam? It obviously plays a big role in major football television productions. Do you think it would have value in other sports? Basketball, hockey, soccer, even baseball?
Printable View
What do you all think of the Skycam? It obviously plays a big role in major football television productions. Do you think it would have value in other sports? Basketball, hockey, soccer, even baseball?
Nothing on this?
I think it would be a lot tougher in all of the other sports. Football is the one sport where the flight of the ball is rather predictable, and if the camera is behind the play, you're pretty safe. Baseball, you obviously never have any idea where the ball is going to go. Basketball, to a lesser extent, but the fact that the action is constantly going both ways, I'm leaning no there. Soccer, maybe. But doubtful. hard to tell when a ball is really going to get elevated, and you're going in two different directions there as well. Same theory with hockey. Plus in the indoor sports, you have the big scoreboards that hang from the middle of the arenas that you would have to deal with.
Good points. They did use it in the NBA Playoffs for the first time this year, so it can be done inside. Do you feel that it really adds a new dimension to the game/production? Do you think it should be more ubiquitious in football telecasts?Quote:
Originally Posted by Homer Bailey
ESPN tried an overhead cam for a Kentucky basketball game a few years back. It was a disaster. They were planning on using it the whole game but pulled it after the first half. I know I felt like I had motion sickness while watching.
It seems like there was a an Ohio State basketball game that tried this too. It was so hard to watch that I turned it off. The production crew had a hard time deciding which angle to view. It was pretty ugly.Quote:
Originally Posted by cumberlandreds