Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MLB Camera Work is Too Tight!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • MLB Camera Work is Too Tight!

    First time poster, but a long time baseball fan.

    Does anyone else hate the constant close-up face shots during a televised game? Even with runners on base, the camera is zoomed in on the pitcher's (or batter's) face instead of showing the runners, the fielders, etc. Show us the field and the game!
    Think I'm wrong? I challenge anyone to watch a half inning of ANY MLB game recorded in the last few years. 70% of the time the camera shows you a view of some face from a foot away. Why not show the viewers at home what the fans at the game see?
    Last edited by OldAsDirt; 04-09-2021, 06:13 PM.

  • #2
    Originally posted by OldAsDirt View Post
    First time poster, but a long time baseball fan.

    Does anyone else hate the constant close-up shots during a televised game? Even with runners on base, the camera is zoomed in on the pitcher's (or batter's) face instead of showing the runners, the fielders, etc. Show us the field and the game!
    Think I'm wrong? I challenge anyone to watch a half inning of ANY MLB game recorded in the last few years. 70% of the time the camera shows you a view of some face from a foot away. Why not show the fans at home more of what the fan's at the game see?
    Is there a poll or something that shows what the fans at home want to see? It would be interesting to see that.
    1885 1886 1926 1931 1934 1942 1944 1946 1964 1967 1982 2006 2011

    1887 1888 1928 1930 1943 1968 1985 1987 2004 2013

    1996 2000 2001 2002 2005 2009 2012 2014 2015


    The Top 100 Pitchers In MLB History
    The Top 100 Position Players In MLB History

    Comment


    • #3
      Agree! A poll would be interesting.

      I just watched two of the '75 World Series games that were recently shown on MLB. The camera technology back then was poor compared to today's, but the camera angles showed MUCH more of the game and the field. For me, it was a lot more interesting and enjoyable to watch.

      Comment


      • #4
        I agree. The camera work NOT technology was definitely better previously. As you mention, there are too many close ups & too many shots of home plate with the scrolling ads in the background. Growing up a Cubs fan, WGN, the local Chicago station that aired Cubs' games, had a producer named Arne Harris that did a fantastic job of incorporating shots of the fans. Along with Harry Caray & Steve Stone, Arne Harris made viewing many horrible Cubs' teams play actually enjoyable.

        Comment


        • #5
          Humorously, the only overly tight camera work I ever saw was a Mariner's game when I was in college. If there was a pretty lady in the stands the camera zoomed right in on her face. My friends and I were laughing about how the game was apparently second to that cameraman.
          "The first draft of anything is crap." - Ernest Hemingway

          There's no such thing as an ultimate stat.

          Comment


          • #6
            I like the spring training camera work. They show more field and fewer close-ups of faces.

            Comment


            • #7
              OldAsDirt and 3rdGenCub have it correct, and WGN had some great camera work. They brought the game to us with the correct angles to watch the GAME, not the individuals. If it was momentarily necessary, then a close up was done, but only because an announcer was discussing that player/coach.

              BTW, I also always loved TBS, but not because of the camera work necessarily. The close ups were done as WGN had done them, but the announcers added to the entertainment. Once Skip Caray had a fantastic adlib line. To wit upon a close up of some gorgeous blond in the stands:

              "You know what's wrong with her, don't cha? A b s o l u t e l y n o t h i n g!" Funny as could be.

              The problem I have with Extra Scuttlebutt and Popular Nonsense is that they focus on more than closeups, to the detriment of the game. It isn't just closeups. They'll interview everyone but the beer vendors in the belief that we need to know something. Never at any time is a player or coach going to divulge what has been going on between players' or coaches' ears. If the person divulged such, there would be hades to pay. Everyone knows that. So, what we get are cliches, observations we could see for ourselves, and agreement with anything an announcer has already mentioned. It amounts to empty headed tripe.

              Meanwhile, I'm thinking of Whitey Herzog's book title..... Hey ESPN, You're Missing A Great Game!

              Don't get me wrong here. Some of ESPN's game analysts are great, and they usually bring in a player who makes pertinent comments. I've always been a Karl Ravech fan. The microphone in the dugout adds bupkus, however.



              Catfish Hunter, RIP. Mark Fidrych, RIP. Skip Caray, RIP. Tony Gwynn, #19, RIP

              A fanatic is someone who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. -- Winston Churchill. (Please take note that I've recently become aware of how this quote applies to a certain US president. This is a coincidence, and the quote was first added to this signature too far back to remember when).

              Experience is the hardest teacher. She gives the test first and the lesson later. -- Dan Quisenberry.

              Comment

              Ad Widget

              Collapse
              Working...
              X