Read an interesting letter in SI today and wanted to get the boards take: the gist of the was that Hockey is a north south game rather than an east west game. and that the main camera angle should reflect this. The way it does in EA's NHL series.
Personaly I always try to get seats behind a goal whenever I go to games. I feel you can watch teh play develope better from that vantage, and would like ESPN to at least give it a try for a couple games (regular season next year?). If they could rig up one of those moving cameras over the Ice the way they do for football games, they could show the whole zone that the puck is in, and it would eliminate losing the puck when it is next to the boards except in one offensive zone.
I think they should at least give it a try, I'de tune in.
if "Washington is a Hollywood for ugly people," then, considering the remarks coming out of Tinseltown about Iraq, "Hollywood is a Washington for the simpleminded." John McCain
How interesting, because I'm 100% on the opposite view. I can not stand when they go to the rink-end camera angles, usually during powerplays. I have a problem following the puck and measuring distances between players from that camera angle end boards and especially on close offsides (crossing the blue line) it's almost impossible to tell from end board cameras.
I must also state I've been a hockey fan all my life so I'm pretty accustomed to the customary camera angles. But then again, I'm really not the type of person to poo pooh any new idea/angles, hell I liked most of the XFL ideas and I'm also a football fan... But they been trying it a bit for a few years (like I said during some powerplays) and I still not comfortable with that endboard camera angle
Was mentioned Three times, 3X, 3X. In the "Great Wieners" thread!
I think you're talking about the 'just above the goalie' camera angle, right Net? That camera angle sucks. But the camera they use in most hockey games comes from around center ice, and watches as one team attacks the other goal. Both teams are oriented and focusing their attention on the goal, so why shouldn't the camera?
Of course, it goes against everything that has been done in Televised sports tradition, so it'd feel really weird.
(edited by Jaguar on 9.3.03 1431) If they studied their paper money for clues as to what their country was all about, they found, among a lot of other baroque trash, a picture of a truncated pyramid with a radiant eye on top of it, like this:
Not even the President of the United States knew what that was all about. It was as though the country were saying to its citizens, "In nonsense is strength."
I guess if you really want to see plays develop you're going to want an overhead camera. I don't think anyone wants to see THAT angle all game.
The camera over the goal that Net Hack Slasher talked about can make you feel like you're on the ice, but it is definitely hard to follow. However, it helps me appreciate how tough it actually is to put together a good play as part of a hockey team. You can't see all of the ice at once, and much of your view of the near ice, even, is blocked by other players.
The standard camera angle, though, best portrays the game as a fan sees it in an arena. I've seen basketball and football from the ends of the court/field, and the only time it was good was when a TD or basket was scored. Now, on television, you can switch from one end to the other, so you don't have to worry about not seeing ANYTHING that happens on the other end of the ice. Still, these angles work best when a goal is going to be scored, so I think they should leave it for when they do: during a power play.
Video games use a north-south view, but the angle is usually pretty high. I think the only way they could move from the current format is to mimic the camera angles in video games, and that would be an expensive endeavor, I think. One thing this would eliminate is losing sight of the puck when it's close to the near boards. This was the only time I liked the glowing puck concept, as it let you "see through" the boards.
Anyway, I think that only the NHL could afford a change like this. You need a ceiling mounted camera as shots from the insane boom camera like they use at MSG make the average viewer (me) seasick. No one else would be able to do this, so other hockey would stay east-west. They big question is, would this make hockey more popular? The NHL needs a bigger fanbase, If this attracts more viewers: great. If it doesn't, it will surely alienate a few current fans. It's a gamble.
Interesting thought... My buddy has seats about 10 rows behind the goal for Bruins games and it definitely has its pros and cons. I think the new safety netting at both ends would impede any type of end-rink camera angles. Unless of course the camera was mounted very high. I agree with Sham in that it would probably be a fairly expensive conversion. And let's face it, hockey doesn't draw enough TV viewers to warrant a major presentation change. In fact, it may even turn off some longtime fans.
(edited by Simba on 10.3.03 1358) I wish they made Advent calendars for WrestleMania, although I'd skip the Mark Henry day.
Yeah, I scored some sweet seats for last night's game... I'm not a Ranger's fan (see my avatar, and don't laugh) but I wouldn't have minded seeing Bure play... or Messier... or Richter... or Leetch... or even Matt freakin' Barnaby.