Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by Big Mike, Feb 29, 2008.
I'm not sure I get the point of the remote cameras. It seems like it would have been cheaper to just hire individual photographers to do the photos rather than hard-wiring remote cameras in all corners of the stadium. It's still cool though.
That was a pretty interesting read. Good article.
I wonder if that means some new cameras are going to come with free blue screens of death and need to be rebooted in between each picture?
A bunch of D3s would have been cheaper than their lighting setup too.
The entire thing seems pointless to me.
/EDIT: heck even the 1Ds they are using should do fine with stadium lighting.
Yeah I guess you guys would know better than the team sent by Sports Illustrated how to properly cover the Final Four.
If you actually read the story you will see there are a total of 16 remote cameras some in locations like 200 some feet over the stadium floor where you would have to pay some guys combat pay to go to.
Yeah I guess the guys for SI/Time and contracting lighting for most of the major press in the United States should worry about how much money they are spending. Also if you read the story you will see there are several Canon 1D Mark II N used for available light shooting. This is an actual quote from the story " The Canon 1D Mark II N bodies, however, were used for available-light, high-speed shooting.".
By the way Mike thanks for the very interesting story great find!!
Separate names with a comma.