The best audience-shot concert vids!
-
audi:
That only works when the brightest spotlight is on the artist, and even then the footage is still decent. And I don't see that many artists being willing to pay for an entire wardrobe of such fabrics, etc. Also: Paul McCartney is keenly aware that these audience-shot vids only promote him. Pretty much every gig he's played since '07 is documented somewhere on YouTube, and yet he's still putting asses in the seats today. This technology has been around since the '90s, when the "industry" was fed up with the paparazzi, following the Princess Diana tragedy. If a celebrity wore that certain fabric, the flash from the camera would render the photo unusable. Then a funny thing happened... ...celebrities remembered that they need the paparazzi.
I'll add that a lot of bootleggers and fans alike are content with filming a Jumbotron all night, which gives a pro-shot dynamic to audience-shot concert footage, such as this Eric Clapton concert from 2006: Eric Clapton @ Madison Square Garden 09-29-2006:
-
^ side note... Funny...you mentioning Eric this morning. I just watch the Ronnie Wood show from a couple years ago & he interviewed Pattie Boyd. She said Bonnie of Delany & Bonnie made Eric sing by saying if you don't sing God will take your voice away!
-
She was right. E.C. is one of the best singers of all time -- and he STILL sounds like himself, and he just turned 70!
-
amazing.
-
I can't stand cell phone videos, most of them are terrible. To get a decent quality audience vid which includes faces that aren't whited out, I think you need a real camera. One of my favorite audience vids of recent vintage is below; I would be shocked if it was done on a cell phone:
(skip to the 1 minute mark for the start of the music). -
Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if that were recorded with a phone. Cellular cameras put a lot of digital cameras to shame.
-
audi:
Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if that were recorded with a phone. Cellular cameras put a lot of digital cameras to shame.
I haven't seen proof of that; all of the people who always stand in front of me at concerts with their iPhones held in front of my face are always shooting rubbish. Most of them don't even know how to use the zoom feature!
-
audi:
Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if that were recorded with a phone. Cellular cameras put a lot of digital cameras to shame.
You can tell it is not a cellphone camera at 3:15 or thereabouts when he focuses. A cellphone can't do that precise focusing. (I only watched a couple minutes of the vid as I'm not a Bruce S. fan) ops: I like a couple of his songs though!
-
Nancy R:
audi:
Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if that were recorded with a phone. Cellular cameras put a lot of digital cameras to shame.
You can tell it is not a cellphone camera at 3:15 or thereabouts when he focuses. A cellphone can't do that precise focusing. (I only watched a couple minutes of the vid as I'm not a Bruce S. fan) ops: I like a couple of his songs though!
No problem! I posted not so much for Bruce but mainly because I think the exposure is exceptional for an audience video, it's one of the best I've seen.
-
I download dozens of YouTube vids every week. Videos as decent as this Springsteen clip are much more common these days -- in fact, I'd say that they're the norm. I'll go a step further and concede that the footage may very well not be a cellphone -- because the audio is not that great. Cellular mics are damn great these days.
-
One of our own shoots a lot of vids of Paul. Here is one from 2015:
-
Great sounding version of "Every Night. Very nice guitars.
-
Decent audio, for sure. I've often wondered: Why do people watermark footage of copyrighted material that they don't truly, legally own anyway?
-
Looks like they had different lighting at that show. Yeah, I don't why except that some people do take the youtubes & make complete concerts from them. So I guess she doesn't want anyone to think the "maker" of the DVD shot the footage.
-
-
oobu24:
Looks like they had different lighting at that show. Yeah, I don't why except that some people do take the youtubes & make complete concerts from them. So I guess she doesn't want anyone to think the "maker" of the DVD shot the footage.
I don't like the "harvested" cell phone DVD's either. But it's very hard to find a complete concert someone shot with a camera anymore.
-
I actually appreciate those compilation videos -- it gives a multi-angle perspective. However, I prefer them with only one audio-source mixed over the video footage.
-
audi:
Decent audio, for sure. I've often wondered: Why do people watermark footage of copyrighted material that they don't truly, legally own anyway?
Unless she's a professional photographer. ("Maggie Clarke Photography")
-
So, she was granted a photo-pass and can profit off of the footage? If not, her stuff is as illegal as all the other vids on YouTube.
-
audi:
So, she was granted a photo-pass and can profit off of the footage? If not, her stuff is as illegal as all the other vids on YouTube.
I honestly don't know audi, I was just taking a guess because of what she wrote on the vid.