Originally Posted by New013
I still disagree with what he's saying despite your attempt to reconcile our differences, I think the copter can get better coverage than a guy with a camera. A guy with a camera is head height so you're going to get the profile shot of the disc, it's not as aesthetically pleasing and it's harder to see the farther the disc gets away.
With the copter you're above the disc and can get a lot more lateral movement than a guy with a camera can. You're going to get a better shot of the disc flying, not to mention you can get way more angles on a fairway with a copter than you can with a guy and a camera.
Crane cams? How is that logistically possible to set up on 18 holes with the budget of current film crews?
A blimp? how is that better than a copter? The copter can actually fly in semi wooded areas, a blimp can't see crap in the woods. A copter gets multiple angles a blimp gets one angle.
He's saying the copter can't get legit coverage of the disc well if you watch that first video I think that proves everything about what he's saying wrong. Trying to push the way ball golf is filmed on to disc golf is dumb, it's two completely different animals.
Dude, you need to stop trolling. Don't start arguments about things you don't understand.
First of all, Whiteybear is correct in his assessment that while this is a really useful tool, it's not going to become the standardization of disc golf videography (at least with current technology). Second, it's not in opposition to those excited about it to point out this fact - so this whole issue is a complete flame war created from a non-argument.
but the thread being dug up is awesome - I missed it the first time around, I'm going to look at ways to adapt this for my own projects