h a l f b a k e r yIt's not a thing. It will be a thing.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Watching a hockey game in person can be a thrilling experience. Hockey is a fast-paced game and the action can move quickly around the rink. When watching hockey on TV, however, a lot of times the camera-men have trouble anticipating where the puck is going to go next and have to play catch up. There
are some shots on goal that a fan at home doesn't get to see because of this.
My idea is to imbed a small radio transmitter in the puck and have a TV camera that automatically centers the puck in it's view. That way, no matter what is giong on, the camera will follow the puck and we get to see what is going on. There will still be other cameras manned by people for the rest of the action which the TV crew can switch to, but the auto-centering camera would be helpful when the action is fast.
Please don't confuse this idea with that stupid blue line that followed the puck around that some goofs drew on the screen so slower types could follow the game.
(?) a very intersting article about this subject
http://csdl2.comput...g/1997/02/g2006.pdf
[jhomrighaus, Dec 18 2006]
[link]
|
| |
I think there is a reason they don't do that now with the radio tracked pucks(where do you think they get the stupid line Blue Line). Can you say sea sickness! |
|
| |
So the camera would have to move at about 70-100 mph on a slap shot. I don't see how this would help the viewer at all. |
|
| |
see link for details of Blue Halo(not drawn at all but digital) This came from the first Google hit when searching "Hockey Puck Tracking" Do some research next time. |
|
| |
After some thought, this idea has nothing to do with that
blue halo thing. This would keep the camera focused on
the puck. I think you may have misunderstood. |
|
| |
A lot of people seem to have skimmed the title, come to an
incorrect conclusion about the idea, and boned it on that
basis. I know that's how things are done around here but
perhaps a slower reading is justified in this case? |
|
| |
^true, though the title seems pretty obvious. |
|
| |
I'm not sure it would work: you'd definitely need some sort of fuzzy for a slapshot or you'd get seasick, but it'd be worth trying. |
|
| |
I suppose that's preferable to other things you could do with a Sony AS15 action cam wriststrapped to your hand |
|
| |
You know, with more deliberation, I think maybe I was wrong.
This idea probably does suck. |
|
| |