Superior cameramen

Watched Caty Cole on Elite last night,between 11.30 and12.20 she was awesome made even better by the camera man who is right over her, under her, all over her body just inches away,why dont the other stations do the same,sometimes on BS it's the camerman who lets the girls down.

(05-01-2010 14:52 )bombshell Wrote:  sometimes on BS it's the camerman who lets the girls down.

I would say, most of the time

Too right - the typical BS 'camera work' generally seems to consist of occasional wildly excessive zooming with a mediocre camera on a wobbly tripod, which really doesn't do the girls justice.

Maybe they'd be better off getting the girls themselves to do the filming - I've heard that Harmony Hex is a dab hand with a VC ...

I have actually touched on this subject before, but I have always felt that it deserves to be mentioned in its own thread:

(20-12-2009 23:53 )Dazwrexham Wrote:  I think that all the cameramen on these channels need to grow a pair of balls. Whenever there is a little bit of action, instead of filming it they shit themselves & zoom in on something else (usually the face). I appreciate that they are just watching their own backs, but it makes a mockery of the whole show, considering that it’s what their viewers are all waiting to see.

I do not think that the cameramen are completely to blame. They're obviously given explicit instructions that if anything interesting should happen, not to catch it on film Quite the opposite to what I was taught when I studied
I do feel that the rules have been relaxed a little bit recently, though there's still a long way to go before we see light at the end of the tunnel. I think that a big part of the problem is that Babestation, Partyland etc. are shown on Freeview as well as Sky, which due to the increased amount of viewers also means an increased amount of busybodies with nothing better to do than look for problems with which they can run to OFCOM & (in their own small minds) save the world.
Elite is not shown on Freeview & therefore does not run this increased risk.

(05-01-2010 14:52 )bombshell Wrote:  Watched Caty Cole on Elite last night,between 11.30 and12.20 she was awesome made even better by the camera man who is right over her, under her, all over her body just inches away,why dont the other stations do the same,sometimes on BS it's the camerman who lets the girls down.

Sorry to disagree but to be honest I don't like the Elite camerawork at all. I know we have different opinions so I hope people accept and respect my different view.

The way I see it, the camera is the substitute for our eyes, so whatever the camera shows is a substitute for us actually being there and watching the girls.
But if you had a girl "performing" for you, in your bedroom (lol) or wherever, you would be able to see most of her face and body most of the time.
For sure you might focus on one part of her body, say her legs, but at the same time you'd still be able to see the rest of her body.
And you'd keep eye contact with the girl, which is so important for many people.

For me, what Elite do terribly is far too much close up work and way too much camera movement - this means that you normally can only see one part of their body at any one time. This is totally different to what would happen in real-life, i.e. you'd be able to see most or all of their face and body.
And it also means with Elite TV you often cannot see their eyes as their face is off screen many times, and therefore you lose the "eye contact" - not good!

So I think the best camera work that BS and any station could do is far more zoomed out shots, where you can see all the girls' bodies most of the time - then you yourself can make up your mind what you want to look at, and you keep eye contact most of the time.

Also, fullbody images give you that crucial thing, showing how well-proportioned the girls' bodies are - i.e. the combination of long legs, tiny waist, great boobs and beautiful face.
The best way of telling how well-proportioned a body is, is seeing all of it in the one camera shot.

I agree with the previous post.
I prefer the camera to be mainly zoomed out, so that more of the girl is seen.
Occassional zooming in for close ups is ok though.

(05-01-2010 21:55 )Dazwrexham Wrote:  They're obviously given explicit instructions that if anything interesting should happen, not to catch it on film

I would disagree. The camera work varies so wildly from one night to another that the instructions must be anything but explicit. One cameraman will zoom away in total panic from any hint of action while another will zoom in and highlight it.

(06-01-2010 01:07 )vila Wrote:  

(05-01-2010 21:55 )Dazwrexham Wrote:  They're obviously given explicit instructions that if anything interesting should happen, not to catch it on film

I would disagree. The camera work varies so wildly from one night to another that the instructions must be anything but explicit. One cameraman will zoom away in total panic from any hint of action while another will zoom in and highlight it.

Yes, but this wasn't always the case. They used to be consistently crap
This is partly what I meant when I said that I felt that the rules had been relaxed a little bit recently.