Posted on 11/10/2009 12:49:57 PM PST by a fool in paradise
This photo of U2 lead singer Bono, shot during U2's Rose Bowl show on October 25, by amateur photographer Bruce Heavin, was taken with a Canon PowerShot G11, and is representative of the high-quality pictures that ticket-holders can easily take these days at concerts and other events with point-and-shoot cameras. Note the people in the picture snapping their own images of Bono.
(Credit: Flickr user Bruce Heavin)
Shot with a press credential from the photo pit and with a digital SLR, this CNET photo is not all that distinguishable from the photo (seen above) by amateur Bruce Heavin, which he took with a Canon PowerShot G11, a point-and-shoot camera.
(Credit: Daniel Terdiman/CNET)
I remember four or five years ago everyone was searched at most concerts and you had to take your cameras back to your car. When I was at the U2 concert a few weeks ago, pretty much everyone had a camera, and a lot of folks even had video cameras and no one cared.
[collapses, wisps of smoke puffing out his ears]
Rock and roll PING
I had pretty decent seats side-stage (comped from the casino where the concert was), but decided against any photographs. Didn't see the need.
The lower picture clearly looks more professional to me... I have no doubt the little point and click the fan used has all the technical specs to take a great pic, but I don’t think anyone looking at those 2 pics and had to pick which one the professional took, would pick the top photo.
It’s also about “controlling” the image.
Wasn’t always like that. And if you are “good enough”, the artists (maybe not their management but the performers) can be appreciative (as long as it isn’t intrusive).
Youtube videos often look like crap and sound like mud though. The cameras have too much shake and don’t give a “good” impression what a performance was like.
All of which are out of control, ego maniac jerks.
I don’t see what the band hopes to gain by all this hoop-la.
This is a public venue, people paid upwards of $100+ to be there. This is a public performance, and without a flash that disturbs others, I see no reason why John Q. Public can, or should be prohibited from taking as many photo’s as he can.
This makes the fans happy. Happy fans make for good publicity and more CD sales, this in turn means more concerts and more money for the band and their promoters.
Hack off the fan base, and your band dies.
Hello, Dixie Chicks and Metallica (I’m talking to you)
How many of those professionals just used their press credentials to get into the show for free while the fans actually paid for their seats?
Technology already exists to “jam” digital communications...expect that to be used to stop the workings of such devices.
It’s come down to an unwritten rule (often, sometimes actually written) that cameras without removable lenses are permitted. We got here because EVERYTHING is a camera now (phones especially). But unlike a film camera, digital cameras have those bright back panels that can be disracting to the audience members in back.
Alternatively, I’ve seen several performers who know the cameras are out there and that venues have gone smokeless so lighters aren’t “allowed” and will have the “light show” from the crowd done with cellphone cameras now.
I think that the top composition, with the cellphones in the crowd, was selected because (A) it showed audience members taking shots and (B) it showed how close some of them are to the performance.
In the online comments, some critics said that the top image would not be selected by an editor. Yet it WAS selected to illustrate this article.
If you’re upfront at an event even the analog high-end point-n-shoot cameras could give you “professional” looking images, if you know what you’re doing. Those point-n-shoot Contax and Leicas, among others, weren’t cheap for nothing! Their optics were superb. I still want one of them. My wallet? Not so much (:
Metallica? You mean the one that continues to set sales records and sells out nearly every night no matter where they are playing?
That dying band?
And speaking of Metallica and cameras. I have seen them 24 times live and brought a camera into nearly every show. Kirk Hammett, on multiple occasions would notice me pointing a camera at him, stare me in the eyes, hold a pose, see the flash, nod his head, and move on.
I hear it is being used to block cellphone transmissions of the show.
This 12MPx image stabilized 26X Zoom does not have a removable lens...
I thought Lars had pretty much single-handedly sunk the band.
I’m glad to hear that Kirk was really cool about the camera; that’s the kind of actions that make you, me and others want to shell out the $100/ticket and fight traffic to attend a concert.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.