TV camera angles: like them or not?

[dommod]

I like to watch tennis on televsion. Too often though, the main camera angle to show the rallies seem to be high behind the baseline. I do not love this camera angle so much. The one I prefer? Lower and closer to the court, but also behind the baseline. This way, you have better feel for the pace and spin and it seems more interesting all around.

Why don't they use this lower camera angle more often? It is much better than the higher standard they typically use in my opinion.

 

[jamumafa]

Yeah I like that view too. It's better cos you can see the pace of the ball too...

 

[thejackal]

the one they had at the athens olympics was the best. i think it was closer and lower. the USO one is okay, but not as good. roland garros is just brutal.

 

[splink779]

I hate when it is too low, like in Paris. In fact Paris is my least favorite masters series because of it. There is an area between low angle and high angle where pace and spin just dont show. The recent Spain vs US tie had a horrible tv camera angle.

If its going to be low, then the US Open and French Open cameras are the best. They get your right behind the player. My favorite high camera is probably the US Open as well.

 

[Noveson]

I just hate when it is off to the side and high, like a basketball game style camera. As long as it is behind the baseline it is okay with me, lower is usually better.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Oh, I hate when they show the rally from about ground level. With each shot, I get increasingly anxious, wondering what I am missing.

I also really don't like the close-up on the player's face while they are serving. Show me the whole service motion, please. I kinda already know what their faces look like.

 

[Hondasteve]

I wish they would show a side view from slightly above head level every now and then. That would be a kick butt angle to show both pace and the extreme spin that the pros put on the ball.

I too really like the 'ground level' that is shown far too seldom, IMO.

 

[ne1410is]

yes i like the really low level shot from right behind the baseline. even if they zoom in and crop off part of the court its okay as long as they quickly move the camera to catch the ball. i like this view because it is most similar to what i personally see when i play tennis myself. thus, i feel like i learn the most from this angle.

the high angle looks very different from real life and its tougher for me to see what a certain shot would look like from the player's perspective and therefore how to respond to it. its good for showing the overall strategy of a player though.

 

[dommod]

yes i like the really low level shot from right behind the baseline. even if they zoom in and crop off part of the court its okay as long as they quickly move the camera to catch the ball. i like this view because it is most similar to what i personally see when i play tennis myself. thus, i feel like i learn the most from this angle.

the high angle looks very different from real life and its tougher for me to see what a certain shot would look like from the player's perspective and therefore how to respond to it. its good for showing the overall strategy of a player though.

yes, me too think low is best. your post sum this up well. I don't know what the sphinx lady is talking about -- I respect her opinion, but really don't see why she get anxious with this angle. It seems so much better and more realistic.

 

[35ft6]

Changing the stupid camera angle should be priority number one for pro tennis. We have the technology now to give people a better sense of how fast the sport of tennis really is, the players and the ball. The high above the court is fine so long as it's just ONE of the angles, but when it's the primary one during play, it sucks. Sucks. I'm a tennis fan and I'll even turn the channel on some tournaments when the camera is super freakin' high. Indianapolis used to be one of those tournaments. Add some evening shadows to the court and it's a wonder that it's being broadcast at all.

 

[lindamoggio]

Camera Angle

I am so often disgusted with the high camera angles at most of the tournaments on TV. It is too high and too far away. The US Open is the worst offender because it used to have a great angle from cameras that right amongst the seats in the corporate seating areas at Armstrong. Not too high, not too low. Perfect. Well, they no longer have cameras there. Why was this angle eliminated? Now it's to high in Armstrong and Ashe. What are they thinking. The angle at the recent french 2015 was so high that the ball could not be seen until it reached the near court.

 

[newpball]

I wish they would show a side view from slightly above head level every now and then.

Problem is framerate.

Tennis in 21:9 in 4K 60p from the side would be great!

:grin:

 

[MatsPhilander]

Cannot see a damn thing one end-incredibly annoying.

 

[RedBeard]

Also prefer lower angle. Cincinnati is perfect for me. Agree with others that U.S. open is too high...You can't get any gauge on the spin to know if the ball is going in until it actually bounces.

 

[West Coast Ace]

I wish they could mix it up (I know it's tough - you lose seats). High, south end, center of the court gets boring. When I go to tournaments I'm happy when there are different options.

The camera at Halle on the roof that shoots straight down and gets the whole court and both players is awesome.

 

[Bartelby]

The courts were there before the cameras so that can be an obstacle as when people's heads bob into view because they weren't seated before play begins.

 

[Andyk028]

As long as the cameras intermittently show Murray and Djokovic's wives...I am content.

 

[West Coast Ace]

On a related note: is anyone else unhappy that 3D TV appears to be dead? I would pay hundreds per year for a subscription (and blow $2k on a TV - or less for one of the Occulus Rift headsets) to watch the ATP tour every week in 3D.

I was out of town the years the Wimbledon mens final was shown in theaters - still regret missing it.

 

[Cenarius]

I know is not exactly on topic but does anyone hates how ESPN put the scorebords these day?

I do very much.As you can not see properly the footwork of the players.

 

[zep]

I know is not exactly on topic but does anyone hates how ESPN put the scorebords these day?

I do very much.As you can not see properly the footwork of the players.

Yes, it also hides the speed gun at times.

 

[zep]

The low angle is good only as a change up.

 

[MatsPhilander]

On a related note: is anyone else unhappy that 3D TV appears to be dead? I would pay hundreds per year for a subscription (and blow $2k on a TV - or less for one of the Occulus Rift headsets) to watch the ATP tour every week in 3D.

I was out of town the years the Wimbledon mens final was shown in theaters - still regret missing it.

A technology that never caught on-can remember them trying to bring it back in the 1980's & it failed.

 

[fms]

The lower angle should definitely become the standard, with an occasional switch to the high angle that they all use now to mix it up.

 

[jiddy-p]

Lower angle all the way. A good comparison right now is Queens vs. Halle. Halle is way too high, you really don't get a sense of what's going on in the court. As an actual tennis player, it's like I'm watching a completely different sport, I can't relate to it.

I really enjoy the practice footage you often see floating around, taken by fans right behind the players just above head hight. You really feel the pace.

Queens has a very nice angle, not too high, not too low.

This is an issue the ATP needs to deal with. They are too busy defending their copyrights by taking down highlight youtubers and destroying their website, when they should be investing in a ring array of GoPros for center court. An array of only about 50 cameras (a tiny investment) would give you matrix style camera swinging. The camera could follow the ball by moving side to side. There would be so many creative possibilities.

 

[jiddy-p]

Another thing they absolutely need to do is add infrared dyes into the colour of the balls. Or some kind of colour discrimination software that lights up the ball on the camera sensor, or with post-processing. This would allow tv viewers to see the thing way better, especially when you have mottled light in the stadiums.