The positioning of Video Cameras

[retrognome]

Here at Retro-Speed we are becoming more and more frustrated with the number of action pictures taken of open historic race cars spoiled by the presence of a video camera. And have asked organisers if a simple ruling could be introduced so cameras no longer make an otherwise entertaining photograph redundant. We have used the picture of David Hart's winning Lola at Zandvoort last week as an example

[grantp]

Originally Posted by retrognome

Here at Retro-Speed we are becoming more and more frustrated with the number of action pictures taken of open historic race cars spoiled by the presence of a video camera. And have asked organisers if a simple ruling could be introduced so cameras no longer make an otherwise entertaining photograph redundant. We have used the picture of David Hart's winning Lola at Zandvoort last week as an example

The Go-Pro does seem to be taking over from the bullet cams. I have seen a few cars with what seem to be 2 fittings and once, iirc, three.

On the other hand giant roll hoops can be just as disappointing in some cases, if one seeks to offer somethat that might replicate an original period look.

Maybe someone can come up with a Photoshop action or plug-in that will seek out errant cameras and eliminate them with a "content aware" fill!

[GORDON STREETER]

In view of whats happening in motorsport lately you are lucky to have cars to photograph.
Drivers like to relive the race and keep it for their records with the results and that is something we could never do years ago.
As technology advances day by day video cameras get better and cheaper and the recording media costs peanuts, unless they are banned by the powers that be I don't think people will stop using them, after all even with the cheapest free software it's very easy to make the photograph look better !
OK I know that it isn't what has been taken on the day but I don't think the drivers would agree with banning them

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by retrognome

And have asked organisers if a simple ruling could be introduced so cameras no longer make an otherwise entertaining photograph redundant.

While you are at it can you ask them to remove all the catch-fencing which ruins any photographs taken from the spectator areas?

Please tell me you weren't being serious

[retrognome]

Originally Posted by GORDON STREETER

In view of whats happening in motorsport lately you are lucky to have cars to photograph.
Drivers like to relive the race and keep it for their records with the results and that is something we could never do years ago.
As technology advances day by day video cameras get better and cheaper and the recording media costs peanuts, unless they are banned by the powers that be I don't think people will stop using them, after all even with the cheapest free software it's very easy to make the photograph look better !
OK I know that it isn't what has been taken on the day but I don't think the drivers would agree with banning them

I don't think I suggested they were banned, just moved to a more discreet spot. And surely some drivers fit them not for nostalgia but to produce, if need be, positive evidence before the MSA. Seriously, it takes time to photo shop images, and I already spend enough post race time resizing and sending images from hotel rooms as it is.

[retrognome]

Originally Posted by redshoes

While you are at it can you ask them to remove all the catch-fencing which ruins any photographs taken from the spectator areas?

Please tell me you weren't being serious

The only circuit I can think of that offers non acceditated photographers a fair chance are Brands Hatch, Zandvoort, and the Nordshleife. But we were talking modern video cameras and old cars I suppose scrutineers could always ban them as being non period.

e

[redshoes]

Originally Posted by retrognome

I don't think I suggested they were banned

Originally Posted by retrognome

I suppose scrutineers could always ban them as being non period.

Make your mind up

Are you going to suggest they ban roll cages, full-face helmets and nomex overalls as they are similarly "non period".

I've heard some pretty petty things to complain about but moaning about drivers fitting video cameras is taking things to a whole new level.

[GORDON STREETER]

Originally Posted by retrognome

But we were talking modern video cameras and old cars I suppose scrutineers could always ban them as being non period.

I suppose it would be OK to stick an old B&H 16mm camera on top to keep it in period, I happen to have one in the attic if anyone wants to try it !

[GORDON STREETER]

Originally Posted by retrognome

Seriously, it takes time to photo shop images, and I already spend enough post race time resizing and sending images from hotel rooms as it is.

Oh the joys of a top photo journalist

[retrognome]

Originally Posted by GORDON STREETER

I suppose it would be OK to stick an old B&H 16mm camera on top to keep it in period, I happen to have one in the attic if anyone wants to try it !

Perhaps it's possible to retro fit new technology into the old casing? Seriously.

[barnettracing]

What a pointless request. Times change. Historic racing isn't exactly the same as racing was back in the 50s/60s/70s etc. It is a re-enactment.

I think you would find retro-fitting new technology into an old casing would be more of a job than you think. It'd also cost quite a lot (fine for some historic competitors, but not all).

With regards to the photo you initially posted, I could tell that it wasn't a period shot not because of the camera but because the driver had a hideously complex helmet design. What next? Ban airbrushed helmets? Why do want them out the shot? Are you trying to pass your shots off as period shots?

[retrognome]

Originally Posted by barnettracing

What a pointless request. Times change. Historic racing isn't exactly the same as racing was back in the 50s/60s/70s etc. It is a re-enactment.

I think you would find retro-fitting new technology into an old casing would be more of a job than you think. It'd also cost quite a lot (fine for some historic competitors, but not all).

With regards to the photo you initially posted, I could tell that it wasn't a period shot not because of the camera but because the driver had a hideously complex helmet design. What next? Ban airbrushed helmets? Why do want them out the shot? Are you trying to pass your shots off as period shots?

I think that's a good question. The answer is no, but my satisfaction comes from recreating the scene as near as damn it as possible to how I remember it. I know it's not always possible.

[vjay48]

I do remember when i was racing in the 80s another driver appeared with a video camera and a ferguson videostar recorder fitted to his car secured with bath plug chains,perhaps since this would be in period this could be used. Only problem was didnt work!

[GORDON STREETER]

This is the "little baby" a Bell & Howell 16mm 70 DL perfect for mounting on a roll hoop, apart from causing a bit of wind resistance it would have to be modified somewhat as being clockwork it only lasts 40 secs at 24fps, that could cause a few problems during a race having to rewind it !
By the way these were still being used into the 70s by TV crews so it would be in period

[andrewc]

I quite like the idea of a historical looking case for a modern camera to fit into.

As well as being a very useful driver aid to work out why he was quick on a particular lap, older cars often don't have any form of datalogging, so a video camera is a useful method of providing an account of what happened, and with an increasing number of valuable cars being subject to an insurance policy, being able to determine what happened may be important.

We were racing at Oulton Park recently and one of our drivers slid off and hit the barrier. He was able to talk through what happened and was very sure of exactly what happened.

When we replayed the video, the car did a full 360 spin on its way to the barriers. The driver couldn't recall this!

[retrognome]

Originally Posted by andrewc

I quite like the idea of a historical looking case for a modern camera to fit into.

As well as being a very useful driver aid to work out why he was quick on a particular lap, older cars often don't have any form of datalogging, so a video camera is a useful method of providing an account of what happened, and with an increasing number of valuable cars being subject to an insurance policy, being able to determine what happened may be important.

We were racing at Oulton Park recently and one of our drivers slid off and hit the barrier. He was able to talk through what happened and was very sure of exactly what happened.

When we replayed the video, the car did a full 360 spin on its way to the barriers. The driver couldn't recall this!

Hi Andrew, I hope the car wasn't damaged too much. And yes, drivers memories can be incredibly short. That deserves another thread that has probably already been covered. Best excuses.

[andrewc]

Damage was to wishbones, driveshaft and wing. This happened on Friday testing, but we managed to get the car back together and won the race the following day.

The fact the driver, could almost re-enact the scene as it happened, apart from the doing a complete revolution before hitting the barrier bit, illustrates the value of a video recording if it is important that what actually happened is important to know.

[Tim the Grey]

They say there is nothing less reliable than an honest eye witness.
Apparently, in the current shooting investigation in france, one eye witness identified a 'White car'.
On being re-interviewd this had morphed into a 'red 4x4'?

Merely an observation of what strange tricks the mind can play.

[grantp]

Originally Posted by Tim the Grey

They say there is nothing less reliable than an honest eye witness.
Apparently, in the current shooting investigation in france, one eye witness identified a 'White car'.
On being re-interviewd this had morphed into a 'red 4x4'?

Merely an observation of what strange tricks the mind can play.

Yup.

Imagine what 'memory' will be in place by the time such a case would come to trial.

[ScotsBrutesFan]

Looking at the image in post#1, the reason that the camera is intrusive appears to be that the mounting point on the camera itself is on the bottom. This appears to be the case on all one piece (non bullet) cameras.
It would need a more complex and probably more expensive mount to bring the camera under the roll cage into the less intrusive location.

[Tim the Grey]

It also, I guess, depends on the Angle of View the camera provides, and which shot the guy using the camera wants? It may not provide what is required if it were fitted as you describe?

[grantp]

Originally Posted by Tim the Grey

It also, I guess, depends on the Angle of View the camera provides, and which shot the guy using the camera wants? It may not provide what is required if it were fitted as you describe?

I suspect this is the main point. Something like a Go-Pro has a wide angle lens but mounting below the roll hoop would likely end up with a strange or restricted view and a problem with exposure management if there was too little bright sky and too much dark cockpit.

The standard mount height seems to be somewhere akin to an F1 camera (for an open car) and the sort of 'view' provided by games simulations. I would guess it's the most comfortable result to watch later.

I assume you could mount the camera upside down and simply flip the video on post processing - it may even have orientation sensors in the camera? Not sure.

[andrewc]

I don't think Go-Pros don't know which way up is, they are used in all sort of extreme sports where up doesn't necessarily stay in the same direction all the time.

You will have to mount the housing upside down as well as there is an on/off control as well as the main lens cover being off centre.

Rotating video afterwards to make it the correct way up again can be quite an processor intensive operation - which if its to get instant review on a laptop following qualifying, then people may not be willing to do this.

[Tim the Grey]

Just hold the laptop the wrong way up???

No Post Processing involved in that!

[GORDON STREETER]

I can't see a problem mounting a video camera the correct way up under the hoop ? the only problem (as has been pointed out) is the angle of view.