![[DFO] Drum Forum](/styles/drumforum/xenforo/logo.png){kind=logo}
This has probably come up before. I would like some honest opinions and thoughts.
Bands in concert film/video. Do you appreciate the scenes changing every 2 seconds, close-ups of faces while hands are moving all over the place, radical scene speed changes trying to keep up with the drummer's final flurry in his solo - like some visual strobe light, etc, etc?
I ask because when I play this festival in Germany, moved to August, if it happens at all, all the bands are recorded and posted on Keep It True's fb page, as well as YT. Personally, I despise all the gimmickry, the over-production/fancy/every production trick in the book at the drummer's expense and the overall band's expense that is seen in films now.
Are these things actually acceptable and entertaining to people not high on something?
Awhile back I came upon a YT video of numerous drummers trading licks at a festival. Dennis, John Blackwell, Cindy Blackman, others. A turn comes to Dennis and he lays down this absolutely atomic single stroke roll and the camera is on Blackwell's face the whole time. I literally dropped my jaw at the stupidity of such a camera choice.
I cannot stand the way bands are shown today. Actually, this goes all the way back to Cream's final performance at the Royal Albert Hall. BBC production. Easily one of the worst productions I have ever seen.
The audience sits or stands and takes in the whole band. They can look at whatever, whoever, whenever. True, being there and the total expanse of the image in your eyes cannot be reproduced on a small screen and I understand close-ups and all but, why do film makers change the scene every 1-3 seconds? What is the point? What is the principle behind such production? They almost always miss something another musician does and cut to them too late, or leave out things altogether. Incredibly poor editing.
I remember this began, iirc back when Hill Street Blues or NYPD Blue, or one of those police programs came on, and the directors and producers began this whole change the scene every 2 seconds-thing, and do close-ups of half a face and all. Now it is done everywhere.
I really dislike what live concert footage looks like today. But, maybe I am missing something. What is the advantage of changing scenes every couple of seconds, and showing a drummer's face when his hands are doing something "important," to us, anyway, or showing his hands, trying to, when they are moving all around and the scene is just a mess as a result. To me such footage is worthless. A guitarist plays a solo and they show the bassist's face. Ridiculously inept things like that, constantly, throughout. And this is all post-production, too. Why do they make such choices? It ruins it for me. I'd like to say something, ask something of the film crew when we go on but, I don't want to come across as rude or anything. To me it is just common sense. Show the band as close to what the audience experiences as possible. Some close-ups. No over-production of solos, no headache inducing, rapid scene changing.
Am I alone in this observation?
Bands in concert film/video. Do you appreciate the scenes changing every 2 seconds, close-ups of faces while hands are moving all over the place, radical scene speed changes trying to keep up with the drummer's final flurry in his solo - like some visual strobe light, etc, etc?
I ask because when I play this festival in Germany, moved to August, if it happens at all, all the bands are recorded and posted on Keep It True's fb page, as well as YT. Personally, I despise all the gimmickry, the over-production/fancy/every production trick in the book at the drummer's expense and the overall band's expense that is seen in films now.
Are these things actually acceptable and entertaining to people not high on something?
Awhile back I came upon a YT video of numerous drummers trading licks at a festival. Dennis, John Blackwell, Cindy Blackman, others. A turn comes to Dennis and he lays down this absolutely atomic single stroke roll and the camera is on Blackwell's face the whole time. I literally dropped my jaw at the stupidity of such a camera choice.
I cannot stand the way bands are shown today. Actually, this goes all the way back to Cream's final performance at the Royal Albert Hall. BBC production. Easily one of the worst productions I have ever seen.
The audience sits or stands and takes in the whole band. They can look at whatever, whoever, whenever. True, being there and the total expanse of the image in your eyes cannot be reproduced on a small screen and I understand close-ups and all but, why do film makers change the scene every 1-3 seconds? What is the point? What is the principle behind such production? They almost always miss something another musician does and cut to them too late, or leave out things altogether. Incredibly poor editing.
I remember this began, iirc back when Hill Street Blues or NYPD Blue, or one of those police programs came on, and the directors and producers began this whole change the scene every 2 seconds-thing, and do close-ups of half a face and all. Now it is done everywhere.
I really dislike what live concert footage looks like today. But, maybe I am missing something. What is the advantage of changing scenes every couple of seconds, and showing a drummer's face when his hands are doing something "important," to us, anyway, or showing his hands, trying to, when they are moving all around and the scene is just a mess as a result. To me such footage is worthless. A guitarist plays a solo and they show the bassist's face. Ridiculously inept things like that, constantly, throughout. And this is all post-production, too. Why do they make such choices? It ruins it for me. I'd like to say something, ask something of the film crew when we go on but, I don't want to come across as rude or anything. To me it is just common sense. Show the band as close to what the audience experiences as possible. Some close-ups. No over-production of solos, no headache inducing, rapid scene changing.
Am I alone in this observation?
