Live coverage of Sprint Finishes: Head-on camera or Helicam shot?

[tobydawq]

Running has side on, Motor sport has a diagonal, swimming side but higher: what other sport does head on?

Right, I don't know what I was thinking regarding running...

 

[tobydawq]

Wow, today was bad. There is a delay of a couple of seconds on heli and moto shots compared to the set cameras on the finishing straight. That has always been the case but apparently not anything the producers ever manage to realise. And today they cut between front and heli shots several times during the sprint which made it basically impossible to watch in real time. I suppose it was because of the bend in the road but it just doesn't work at all.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Running has side on, Motor sport has a diagonal, swimming side but higher: what other sport does head on?

Athletics only has side on in stadium. In marathon, cross-country, fell-running and combination sports that end with a run (modern pentathlon, triathlon, duathlon) the finish is almost invariably head on. A lot of motorsport on road courses and street circuits is head on for the finish, only oval track racing where the whole course can be picked up from one vantage point are they side on (so similar to athletics in that regard). Snowsports invariably do head-on for the finish, whether that be endurance-based like cross-country, NoCo and biathlon, or speed-based like alpine, ski cross or snowboard cross. Sliding sports have a head-on finish at most venues. The only wintersport 'race' discipline that is invariably side-on is speed-skating. And when you come to think of it, track cycling has a side on camera, no?

In general, we can see a theme developing here. Arena-based sports with a fixed course which can be surrounded on all sides have side-on cameras - oval-track disciplines or swimming, which entails going back and forth along the same course in parallel. Velodromes, athletics tracks, speed skating tracks, oval-track motor racing. Whereas point-to-point racing or more complex circuit racing (except motorsport rovals, where they use the cameras from the oval) tends to favour the front-on method.

 

[Netserk]

Another thing that would improve the coverage of the sprint would be distance markers on the road, not just on signs by the road side. A yellow or red line across the road at 500, 300, 200, & 100 m to go.

EDIT: Of course, it'd be obvious to have the distance written on the road, so that it can be seen from the helicopter as well as from the riders (but would be upside-down for the head-on camera).

------------ <- Finish line
----100----
----200----
----300----

----500----

 

[Netserk]

Wow, today was bad. There is a delay of a couple of seconds on heli and moto shots compared to the set cameras on the finishing straight. That has always been the case but apparently not anything the producers ever manage to realise. And today they cut between front and heli shots several times during the sprint which made it basically impossible to watch in real time. I suppose it was because of the bend in the road but it just doesn't work at all.

Today was worse. Horrible TV production.

 

[tobydawq]

Today was worse. Horrible TV production.

Yeah, it's mind-blowing how this can suddenly become difficult for the producers...

 

[IndianCyclist]

Head on view provides no perspective of how behind the rider is. Overhead is the best for sprints. In the head on, it looks like the sprint was very close but in the overhead it is a bikelength which in cycling terms is no contest. Head on view is good emotions/solos. u see the emotions like Soler shushing etc which is not visible in overhead

 

[Netserk]

The problem is that the stationary cameras are besides the road before the finish line and that they stay on them for too long, so that we see the side and back of the riders instead of keeping the heads on shot.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

The moving side on cameras on the Champs Elysees are great, but obviously not possible for most races.

In general, head on view is more exciting live but if you want to follow what actually happened the overhead view is the only one to watch. There’s almost always a full replay broadcast from the overhead position, so seeing it initially head on and then rewatching it overhead seems like a reasonable approach?

I agree that rapid cutting between views that have different time lags is infuriating,

 

[Netserk]

Good example of why overhead shot doesn't work live. Impossible to judge how close they were to the finish.

 

[Berniece]

Good example of why overhead shot doesn't work live. Impossible to judge how close they were to the finish.

You need it with a proper angle, not from the top

 

[scribers]

You need it with a proper angle, not from the top

I thought the overhead was good and the angle not bad. I could clearly see winner and some placements (at least that I cared to)

Personally I can't tell what is going on when they show front street level.

 

[Berniece]

I thought the overhead was good and the angle not bad. I could clearly see winner and some placements (at least that I cared to)

Personally I can't tell what is going on when they show front street level.

What might work, but is not possible for all races due to cost and infrastructure, is a camera cable for the last km.

 

[RedheadDane]

One camera from the front.
One camera from above.
One camera from the left side.
One camera from the right side.
Show everything at once!

 

[scribers]

One camera from the front.
One camera from above.
One camera from the left side.
One camera from the right side.
Show everything at once!

Kirby will implode like a black hole!

 

[Samu Cuenca]

One camera from the front.
One camera from above.
One camera from the left side.
One camera from the right side.
Show everything at once!

They had over 30 cameras to cover El Clásico the other day, but the amount doesn't matter much if the required one is missing or not working.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

What might work, but is not possible for all races due to cost and infrastructure, is a camera cable for the last km.

Use a drone. Operator can do dozens of trial runs before the peloton enters the last 20k, to make sure what the best angle is without crashing into anything.

 

[RedheadDane]

They had over 30 cameras to cover El Clásico the other day, but the amount doesn't matter much if the required one is missing or not working.

My suggestion is four cameras. Not 30.
And of course the organisers should make 100% sure they work, and that they don't go missing.

 

[Slavique Nuke]

They had over 30 cameras to cover El Clásico the other day, but the amount doesn't matter much if the required one is missing or not working.

They don't even have goal-line technology in that mickey mouse league

 

[tobydawq]

I thought the overhead was good and the angle not bad. I could clearly see winner and some placements (at least that I cared to)

Personally I can't tell what is going on when they show front street level.

How not? Just look at the wheels, it's not that hard...

 

[Danskebjerge]

They almost produced the sprint in the same way in Turkey today. Overhead shot until a few meters from the finish line. That doesn't work of course - we need to see the distance to the finish line sooner -, but I like the concept of showing the riders from above.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

How not? Just look at the wheels, it's not that hard...

Front view in 2d you have no sense of depth.

 

[Mayomaniac]

Frankly I prefer live overhead shots, if done properly (last 250m or so).

 

[tobydawq]

Front view in 2d you have no sense of depth.

That's why you look at the wheels...

 

[Berniece]

Use a drone. Operator can do dozens of trial runs before the peloton enters the last 20k, to make sure what the best angle is without crashing into anything.

I wasn’t such a fan of the drone footage in De Ronde. Not sure they could make it work for a sprint, but can be tested of course.