camera coverage of WC 2003

[dr nick]

has been woeful. im not sure if they normally do this but i havent noticed it as badly as i have this tournament.

why when a player hits a ball towards the boundary do they have to zoom right in on the ball making it impossible to tell if a fielder is coming around or not. they also zoom right in for the shots which are going for 6, so you cant tell they are gonna clear the rope until after it happens. bit of an anti climax

every ball that has beaten the infield so far in the Ind v Eng game, i have been able to count the stitches on leather they have zoomed that close, and i have no idea if the 3rd man is there or if it is racing for 4.



at least the AFL cameramen know better. if you look they never follow the trajectory of the ball. they more concentrate on the pack forming where it is going to land. cricket should take a leaf out of their book i reckon.

any other thoughts?

[Kenny_01]

Hmm, I really havn't noticed many problems. I'll pay closer attention from now on.

[JUBJUB]

Some of the camera work has been shocking,much like it was during the recent Sth Africa v Sri Lanka test series [same coverage].A few times there's been an outfield catch not captured "live",because the cameraman has thought it was a six.

[dr nick]

Originally posted by JUBJUB
Some of the camera work has been shocking,much like it was during the recent Sth Africa v Sri Lanka test series [same coverage].A few times there's been an outfield catch not captured "live",because the cameraman has thought it was a six.

a symptom of trying to zoom in and follow the ball.

[ScouseCat]

Originally posted by Kenny_01
Hmm, I really havn't noticed many problems. I'll pay closer attention from now on.

I can't say I've noticed anything different either.

[JUBJUB]

Why do they keep showing the commentators in the box ? At least we now know Richie Benaud has arms & he doesn't wear the off white jacket 24/7.