 |
The VH Trade Site Forums Archives
This is the Archives page for the Van Halen Trade Forums.
VH Trade Site - Van Halen Bootlegs and Boot TradingThe complete, definitive Van Halen bootleg, CD, CD-R, DVD, DVD-R, VCD, and tape trading site.
Both the experienced and novice bootleg trader or collector will find something of value here. VHTrading.com is set up for those who want to trade rare and unreleased Van Halen, David Lee Roth, Sammy Hagar, and Gary Cherone recordings, plus Fan Forums, lists of Audio and video boots, set lists, classifieds, articles, and much more!
|
| To view the "live" version of the forums page, go here: http://www.vhtrading.com/forums/index.php.
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
frankm
Joined: 2003-04-01
Posts: 3394
Location: Wisconsin
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dirq Van wrote: People call a screenshot pro shot
Sometimes.
I don't think of a screenshot as pro shot. Even if it is from the line feed to the screen which is technical different from having a camera in the crowd pointed at the screen. The camera in the crowd pointed at the screen shouldn't be called pro shot but I have seen where some people have called it that (probably because of the multiple camera angles and editing and whatnot).
I find it easier to call a recording of the line feed going to the screens pro shot but even with that there is room for disagreement. Yes again it has multiple camera angles and it should be clearer, much clearer than the camera in the audience pointed at the screen but it can be argued that whatever camera angles there are or whatever editing there is is done with the audience in mind not with the video recording in mind and thus isn't always great.
I recall some talk about a Rush pro shot from their 2002 tour which was the line feed to the screen. However, Rush uses a lot of video elements on the screens not just stage shots so I heard there was actually very little of the band and that the video was not very good, I've never seen it so I can just go by what I've read.
In any case there is a lot of room for interpretation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Chris UK
Joined: 2001-05-18
Posts: 2637
Location: Staffordshire, United Kingdom
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 11:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
In my book, a camera pointing at the projection screen is a 'screen shot' not a 'pro-shot' as many of them look shite! (although I have seen a couple of good ones recently).
However, I do class a line feed recording of what goes onto the projection screen as pro-shot, because is it multi camera and shot and mixed by professionals. Yes, I agree that the footage that goes onto the screen usually contains too many close-ups and this feels odd to the viewer as there are no wide shots to contextualise things. But it is still pro as far as I'm concerned.
Incidentally my definition of a pro shot always means it is multi camera. If I get footage that is single camera but shot by a proffesional, I dont list it as pro shot. If it is on a tripod I put 'Tri' as a catrgory.
Chris. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|