Rocket Challenge amateur film crew.

Troll. It was a great show. Looks like your opinion sucks.

Hey aren't you the ATF agent looking to hit planes with J-350's. Now we know why you make such foolish statements.

Dennis

There could have been more. But have you watched American Chopper? What technical information about motorcycles do you walk away with? More than

1/2 the show is about the people, and that was what was great about the show. People having a kick az time. They did a great job of showing the kids (inspite of the LD part of LDRS) and maybe future shows they can hit more details.

No, the show was about the hobby, and that's not just rockets going up.

I was amused to find their video skill no better than mine after filming several launches. And me with 10year old 8mm technology. I do need one of those helocams.

Yeah, or they could have only shown the rockets going up. That would have gotten boring real fast (especially for non-rocketeers). I wasn't too happy with some of the editing, dirt flying as you said, but more the people looking up when the shots of the rockets were already descending towards the horizon. Uh, why is he still looking up?

You can't bury the general public with Tech. Turn'm off real fast.

I'm sure AC is a joke to those in the cycle community, but what counts is the outside folks perception.

Joel. phx

I think it was appropriate for the more general audience they try to appeal to. Yes I'd like to see more tech stuff too but, I don't think it's going to happen on this venue.

As for taping the action - have you ever tried it? It's much harder to capture something that goes from 0-600 in a second or 2 than a slow poke dragster that takes 4 seconds & only goes 2 or 300 MPH and is much bigger.. You might want to be more realistic in your expectations.

Phil Stein

Phil Stein

Zealots. It clouds rational and objective thought. However that may also apply to the target audience.

Rocketeers have little concept of videography or its techniques. And you just posted to rmr where the least likely to be fact position typically prevails on political matters, and I am NOT exaggerating.

I suppose I somewhat disagree. I used to publish a magazine. The one that literally inspired what we now know as TRA-HPR and NAR-HPR. I found the most effective imagery was "people shots" not mere rocket shots. The most effective imagery to my editorial targeting was optimum rocket shots with people in them for reference.

On TV which is known as the small screen because it is essentially

640x480 resolution or so forces narrow shots, close-ups, and other techniques to suit the limited medium. Rockets on the other hand are viewed best in a HIGH resolution image format. So it may simply be the shots they had didn't look good on the screen.

Movie folks overcome that by shooting radically offset exposures and film speeds and adjust in editing. Example of a film of this type is:

And my summary comment is far simpler and more neantratal. 90% of the respondents so far have praised it and despite the merits of your arguements you are in the small minority. So perhaps in this case mob rule should prevail.

It is also instructive to remember broadcast television is "fire and forget" and not typically recorded and viewed over and over like a movie, so whatever you gain from the viewing experience is momentary and fleeting anyway.

Just Jerry

Well said.

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 06:44:32 -0600, In the heat of the moment, Alex Mericas posted: .

I admit that since I am an electronics tech. I do often want to see more technical stuff than most people. But I thought this show to be even less than the common viewer would have been interested in seeing.

-- I am a member of the rabble in good standing. -- Westbrook Pegler --

I got a kick out of how they added machinery sound effects in at least one place where people were raising a launch rail by hand.

They also add tire skid noises to airplane documentaries that involve planes landing on dirt airstrips...

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 05:51:20 -0700, In the heat of the moment, "Joel Corwith" posted: .

I have no interest in choppers and have not watched the show. I suspect that the general public would not watch the Rocket Challenge. The main audiance is people who have a general intrest in rockets.

You should notice that I did not criticize the rest of the many "people shots". Even though I have more interest than most people, I too would have become bored with just rockets going up. I thought they did fine at expressing the hobby aspect.

Assuming that you are an amature photographer, you make my point. They were supposed to be pros. Therefore they should have done work that was much better than yours.

The accent only lasts a few seconds before the rocket is usually out of the camera's reach. And yet, the lift off was usually quickly cut to people looking up. Again, and again, and again. I had my fill of people looking up. I would have much rather spent those very few seconds, watching a continuous shot of the accent.

The "outside folks community" is not just one block. It is divided into those with no inter3est and those with enough interest to watch. The watching group is divided between the "insiders" (VERY small) and the generally interested.

The real market is the MUCH larger, generally interested. I have no idea of how the show is shot to appeal to the generally interested. I have been a real motorcyclist for thirty-five years and the show is of no interest to me.

-- I am a member of the rabble in good standing. -- Westbrook Pegler --

I think I know the clip to which you are referring, if you look carefully you will see a hydraulic cylinder at the bottom left of the launcher. It

*was* being lifted hydraulically - I don't think those were "sound effects".

I used to think this was weird until I spun my car tires in the dirt and heard the same (or very similar) loud screaming sound as on pavement.

I would not be at all suprised if aircraft landing on hard dirt surfaces made very similar chirping sounds from the tires as those landing on tarmac.

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 06:48:18 -0600, In the heat of the moment, Alex Mericas posted: .

When I was a kid I shot some small rockets, and as an adult I sometime use an electric match to set off pyrotechnics. And occasion, I have been fortunate enough to use blasting caps, det cord, and C4.

I ALWAYS ignite on the 2. It never fails to really surprise onlookers. I love to see them jump. :)

-- I am a member of the rabble in good standing. -- Westbrook Pegler --

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 05:27:13 -0600, In the heat of the moment, The Pink and Yellow Rocket posted: .

Google is your friend..... You can even use it to look up my posting history and you will see that I am no troll.

Please tell me how anyone who calls themselves "The Pink and Yellow Rocket" can have an objective opinion about the show?

-- I am a member of the rabble in good standing. -- Westbrook Pegler --

Roger Ivie wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@Stench.no.domain:

Like those ricochet zings when there's nothing in sight to ricochet off.

len.

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 09:30:51 -0500, In the heat of the moment, Phil Stein posted: .

For several years I worked as a professional photographer. I have no doubt that it is difficult to keep a rocket in frame. However, these people were supposed to be professionals. Geeze... One of their longest continuous accent shots did not even contain the rocket. It just panned up the smoke trail.

-- I am a member of the rabble in good standing. -- Westbrook Pegler --

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 08:28:18 -0800, In the heat of the moment, Jerry Irvine posted: .

For a long time, I have lurked on this NG. I posted knowing full well that the zealots would disagree. In spite of that fact, I hoped to start a thread which would contain enough criticism to help the next filming to be better. I know of no other way to reach those did the work and might do it again.

Thus the next show might be worth watching.

If your magazine was full of "people looking up" shots, it would have failed and inspired nothing. I have no doubt that it had many people shots. However, they were probably of people doing interesting things. Repeatedly looking up is not interesting.

As a still photographer, I primarily shot 4 5 and at minimum 2 1/4 square. In spite of the difficulty of using these formats, I did it because I have an appreciation of high resolution.

That said... To some extent I disagree with you. Sure.. the rocket quickly gets small. But for a few seconds it has fire and smoke shooting out if it. During that it is an easy shot.

Interesting image! How interesting would it be if it included only the smoke trail?

On this NG I have mostly seen praise. But like you said... These people are mostly zealots. I have not seen any polling of the main audience. Thus, I have no reason to believe that I am in the minority.

True. And my point is that these three hours could have been better used and should (hopefully) the opportunity again occur, the time will be better used.

-- I am a member of the rabble in good standing. -- Westbrook Pegler --

Right, you get that. Even someone experience in filming rockets will have a tough time keeping the rocket in-frame. For all my footage of many different flights, it's easy to see why for the few projects they were following, they couldn't keep up. If they filmed many flights, then they could have only used the ones they kept in frame. You have to second guess the launch and speed or it's out of the viewer. It's funny but rockets don't always go on 'launch'.

Joel. phx

They're professionals, not rocket professionals and then even the rocket professionals don't get all of them.

GFL. This is rmr and the only expected retort is a personal attack :)

Point.

You rock.

Point again.

Real argument on rmr. Gee I wonder what will happen next? NAR certifying USR motors?

Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Jerry

But they do get "some" of them.