Can we get more cameras on the ground?

Drone way over used. 

I like the drone shots but I agree they really need more ground level cameras. 

Gimme some of them boys hammering out of the turns.

The drone has a better camera this year, but the image still isn’t great.. that spider cam was at least high quality

It’s like in practice they are so zoomed in.  Zoom out a bit so we can see the speed 

Yeah it's been really bad lately and feels lazy and cheap. Floor cameras are such a more exciting view. I watch the press day footage just to see things from a ground perspective. And yes to zoom out in RDL, that's been a problem for years. 

Yeah the camera right before the finish, when they jumped out of the sand, reminded me of exactly this. Cause it looked sooo good. Def need more of those again. 

The angle tonight from the camera on the ground over the stands in the long rhythm really gave a sense of being there. None of the drone cameras or other super elevated angles ever do the track justice. 

Broadcast cam:

Ground cam:

They’re to cheap to hire more cameras and men to have the ground cams. 

Go back and watch a race from 2013ish and tell me what we have now is a better product. It’s not. 

As long as they continue to focus on a lone rider and not the battle farther up…then I guess so.

sarcasm*

Statements here support better viewing in person. One can move back and forth accross the stadium watching battles where ever they are. Cameras are limited to what story is being presented. 

My theory over the past few weeks of SX and other NBC sports programs is that they have most of their NBC Sports camera operators prepping for and now over at the Olympics so they’re relying more on drone, standstill robotic cameras etc for US based sports the past few weeks. 

It’s both difficult and potentially unsafe to put cameras on the actual floor of most of the places supercross runs. A better compromise is to put them in the lowest level of the stands. The ballparks have hard camera positions that are well established for the stick and ball games, but they tend to be too high to give that sense of speed we experience when we’re standing trackside.

They often run a SXS-mounted camera at Daytona, giving that great tracking shot of racers as they go down the long straight. But that’s a pretty expensive setup for basically one shot.

Like it or not, it's probably a production cost issue.  I'd bet you can buy 50 drones for the cost of a floor broadcast camera.

Something positive though, that drone shot of the start they had all night was absolutely fantastic compared to what they do usually do with multiple angles and zoomed in! Wish it would be like that every round.

I’m not a fan of the drone shots, but I have to admit that start to first corner shot is badass.

The drones aren’t autonomous, someone still has to man them so that doesn’t make sense. 

No we can’t. They can’t even stop showing split screen interviews during the live race. They can’t make marginal improvements that are asked for year after year. 

I understand the cost issue but I don’t see it being the cause. Pre drone, pick a year, pick a race, do it over and over and the camera angles and coverage were all very similar… and much better than what we have today. 

It seems like there is more money flowing into the sport now more than ever. Sellouts, higher viewership and higher rider payouts (SMX). So why would it be cost, solely cost? I understand budgets and cutting costs, but to sacrifice production quality, e.g. fewer cameras and low quality drone camera, during a period of growth like we are seeing makes no sense. 

Last night there were multiple production issues and RC and JW were downright terrible. Multiple battles going on and they are telling stories and not calling the race. 

So why has the broadcast/coverage/production gotten worse over the past several years?

To me it’s all Bondo. He’s absolutely horrible. He is taking production down a road that makes it difficult, and very frustrating, to watch at times. 

I agree. The side shot of the start is useless, we usually have no idea who got a jump or anything until a replay. The drone for the start is the best I've seen so far.

Ground view cameras really show how gnarly the track is. Also shots from directly in front or behind at ground level shows how much the bikes move. 

I kinda miss that thing they used to do a lot in the 90s and 00s on supercross triples. They would have a camera on the back side of the jump face pointed up and facing the landing. Always thought it looked cool seeing them sailing over the big triples from that perspective. Drone is definitely a little overused. Cameras on the track level do the track a lot more justice imo.

Costs for cameras/cameramen but I’d also assume this is a safety issue as well. The HD broadcast cameras with the 200x HD zoom are massive and need space for them to be operated. There’s a ground level camera in between a lane or two but those aren’t handheld and are operated remotely. There’s one smaller over the shoulder style camera and they’re usually standing by the mechanics area. That’s a two man operation, one holding the camera and the other making sure the wires behind the operator aren’t getting tangled on anything (this duo also films JT when he is on camera). Posted some photos below of each so there is a better understanding of their perspective sizes. 

All that being said, I have always believed it’s difficult to understand on camera how fast they’re going unless the camera is eye level with the rider. 

- large broadcast camera with big zoom lens

- over the shoulder broadcast camera whose typically followed by someone else holding the wire connected to the feed

What doesn't make sense is thinking that manning 3-4 more floor cameras costs less than manning one drone.

I saw very little drone footage compared to other rounds  . Most of the race looked like it was shown from cameras up high in the stadium to me.    That's why they were all so smokey and some of the worst image quality I've seen recently.  The drone footage was better  ( in my opinion) than the super far away cameras that had to cut through the smoke that never seemed to leave the stadium.  

 When I've shot photos at SX and Arenacross  that's what I've experienced when I went way up in the stands with my bigger lens that I used outdoors VS being down in lower levels or on the floor. Smoke that is often leftover from opening ceremonies fireworks lingering .  The high up shots felt more like dedicated cameras  high in the stadium relying on zoom to get closer. 

 They didn't feel like the drone shots to me.   

I think it was more of a left over smoke from the pyro issue than a camera quality issue. I don't remember the other rounds being so bad.  

Ive been wondering what the riders think of the drones...?

They fly fairly low, I would think seeing a drone between you and a competitor would be distracting.

Its wild when you see a shot and the drone is in it so close to them sometimes.   They have gotten some amazing shots with them. And some have sucked too.  

They probably have spotters helping them avoid hitting a rider.  I like how they are flying lower and closer to the riders  and getting shots that give more of the feeling of  the speed and feel of riding.  I like the close follow shots of a drone better than the older rider won cameras.  

I normally don't complain about the race coverage, but that image quality was disappointing. I wanna say I remember hearing  that cameras and operators were being used at the Tour De France or Olympics  some big sporting event, on Pulp one time when there was a similar noticeable drop in quality. One of the Jason's  were explaining it back then.  So maybe the poster that said they have people and cameras over at the Olympics that would normally be used for SX has something.