Video Evidence? - Is it possible??

Spiderman · Post by **Spiderman** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:01 am

Here's a suggestion that this topic has produced - as we are now onto suggesting ideas to the BBC or whoever covers the Europeans, I think it would be an awesome idea to ask them to place just one or two overhead "polecams" looking down towards the bottom of the pole, not for "third umpire" reasons but for spectacular TV coverage reasons. These could be on upstreams where "half heads" could appear. I think this would greatly improve the coverage and also inform the public (if not the judges) of brilliance or errors.

I watched an international event on Eurosport last year (might even have been the 2008 Europeans) and watched Jan Sajbidor from Slovakia on home waters in front of his prime minister win the event....or did he really? He flew down the course with a stunning display of power and ability but, from the angle on the TV coverage, he seemed to 50 an upstream by passing through it downstream. On the same basis that you need a whole head to get a gate, you should need a whole head to miss it when passing through it in the wrong direction! It is the gate below the bridge. I reckon he only misses it with half a head and therefore should have got a 50 rather than 1st place! I posted it on Youtube ages ago here:-

50 or not?

Possibly the prime minister being there on home water slightly swung the judges decision? But as I said, a stunning performance in all other respects.

PP

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:15 am

Hmm illustration of the problem of 2d cameras. At first it looks as though his head it outside the gate, then it drifts to a half head position from that angle. BUT where was he up/down stream, did it look like a half head due to him carving in behind the gate. Synchronised right angle cameras might help!

I believe that at many televised events the TV pictures are streamed to the teams for analysis (and at others the teams do their own videos. So the information is there, all that is needed is to confirm permission to use the video for that purpose and to find someone willing to rejudge three days of video who is trusted not to make a witch humt of any errors found, OH! and confidence that any such errors will not detract from the standing of the event once it is completed.

Re judging the 50s should not be such a hard job, they are easy to identify, but how do you identify the questionable cases? Especially those where BOD to the paddler means they do not get written down?

I know I am sounding like a kill joy, but I woudl love the opportunity to review the raw video of my judging, with a copy of my judging sheets so that I can learn where I am getting it wrong and get better.

John · Post by **John** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:03 am

Here's a video of Sajbidor from a different angle. Still not easy to tell if it's a 50....

Spiderman · Post by **Spiderman** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 12:11 pm

Excellent post John. Great to see an alternative angle of exactly the paddler and run that I am referring to! And now I am even more convinced it was a half head! If you pause each video as his head is directly under the pole they BOTH show a half head. Accordingly, the question of where was he upstrem/downstream when watching the first clip is made clear by the second one. His head is at the lowest point in both clips at this point, ipsofacto, we get a unique x-y co-ordinate from the two cameras that seem about perpendicular to one another.

What this shows really, with John saying he is still not sure and me saying I am, is that even with TWO cameras at virtually perfect positions, the idea is still not going to illiminate dispute.

But enough of that...what about the idea of a polecam mentioned above? How can we get this idea across to those responsible for the upcoming Europeans? I would love to see the main cool shot being of an athlete necking the gate with a picture-in-picture from the polecam at the same time showing just how cool the move really is.

RussJohnson · Post by **RussJohnson** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:20 pm

Spiderman wrote:Here's a suggestion that this topic has produced - as we are now onto suggesting ideas to the BBC or whoever covers the Europeans, I think it would be an awesome idea to ask them to place just one or two overhead "polecams" looking down towards the bottom of the pole, not for "third umpire" reasons but for spectacular TV coverage reasons. These could be on upstreams where "half heads" could appear. I think this would greatly improve the coverage and also inform the public (if not the judges) of brilliance or errors.

i think that the suggestion that peter is making here is the idea that i came up with earlier, not to discredit peter btw.

this is proberbly the best way of seeing penalties of such nature.

does anyone know who's in contact with the BBC, so that we can ask for there opinion on trailing the idea??

Russ Johnson

Spiderman · Post by **Spiderman** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:42 pm

Erm, actually Russ, it is not the idea you came up with earlier. I think what we have here is what we in the design business call a brainstorming session. These typically produce ideas that get trashed (as they were thrown into the mix by firing from the hip or just being ill informed) but they DO produce good results!

Some of my best designs have come from madcap suggestions that would never work as suggested but after being torn apart have produced something that could not have come up any other way.

You mentioned overhead cams on independent lines and for the purpose of judging. DJ developed this to specific cams looking down the poles, again, for judging purposes. My suggestion introduces the term "polecam" for the purpose of entertaining TV and has absolutely nothing to do with judging

So from your idea to fix a perceived judging problem, the discussion has thus far got to my suggestion to improve TV viewing. Hence, no discredit here at all

Who knows what we will come up with by page 10?!

Both Russ and I have a different goal here but it seems we are both looking for info about how to draw the attention of the TV bods to our ideas. Im sure sombody must know who is the contact point?

PP

RussJohnson · Post by **RussJohnson** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:12 pm

Spiderman wrote:Erm, actually Russ, it is not the idea you came up with earlier. I think what we have here is what we in the design business call a brainstorming session. These typically produce ideas that get trashed (as they were thrown into the mix by firing from the hip or just being ill informed) but they DO produce good results! Some of my best designs have come from madcap suggestions that would never work as suggested but after being torn apart have produced something that could not have come up any other way.

You mentioned overhead cams on independent lines and for the purpose of judging. DJ developed this to specific cams looking down the poles, again, for judging purposes. My suggestion introduces the term "polecam" for the purpose of entertaining TV and has absolutely nothing to do with judging

So from your idea to fix a perceived judging problem, the discussion has thus far got to my suggestion to improve TV viewing. Hence, no discredit here at all Who knows what we will come up with by page 10?!

Both Russ and I have a different goal here but it seems we are both looking for info about how to draw the attention of the TV bods to our ideas. Im sure sombody must know who is the contact point?

PP

sorry peter. i mentioned a similar idea, i just got my wire's crossed (no pun intended), but reading through my comments it does mention back to some of your messages. sorry again. :;):

by page 10? we'll proberbly have gone in a full circle and mentioning original ideas. if we get that far with this topic.

i think we need to find who's in touch with the bbc. maybe Emma Aldridge will know seen as shes organising the event itself.

Russ Johnson

Spiderman · Post by **Spiderman** » Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:51 pm

Ah..I may have a chat with her at The Ski Slope then

oldschool · Post by **oldschool** » Fri Apr 24, 2009 1:20 am

Just a thought but would "bearercams" be better than pole mounted cameras? once a pole has been hit it can spin for quite a while and then you would have no idea about where the gateline is.

In terms of using the technology for judging i think its a bit of overkill, but perhaps if a clear angle is available on video it should be allowed to be taken into consideration by the jury before they reject the protest regardless!

I know the previous videos prove that clear angles are hard to come by but it is possible.

And just as a final point on the video of Mr Sajbidor I think it was a definate 50, if his head was ever in the gateline it certainly went through in a downstream direction! Sorry Jan!:p

Spiderman · Post by **Spiderman** » Fri Apr 24, 2009 1:26 pm

Good point regarding the spinning pole.....visions of thousands of people at home tuning in to watch the event and throwing up all over the place! lol. I never thought of that. As we call what you call bearers, spreaders, I would concur that a "spreadercam" would overcome this problem. There is typically just one "target" pole on any gate (indeed, hence the evolution of those awful one pole "gates") so a cam on the spreader almost directly above the pole would give a great overhead shot of the negotiation of even a swinging, spinning pole.

Regarding JS's downstream, upstream, thats 2 say 50 and 1 unsure....cast your votes!

PP

RussJohnson · Post by **RussJohnson** » Sun Apr 26, 2009 7:55 pm

oldschool wrote:Just a thought but would "bearercams" be better than pole mounted cameras? once a pole has been hit it can spin for quite a while and then you would have no idea about where the gateline is.

In terms of using the technology for judging i think its a bit of overkill, but perhaps if a clear angle is available on video it should be allowed to be taken into consideration by the jury before they reject the protest regardless! I know the previous videos prove that clear angles are hard to come by but it is possible.

And just as a final point on the video of Mr Sajbidor I think it was a definate 50, if his head was ever in the gateline it certainly went through in a downstream direction! Sorry Jan!:p

Thanks for your comment.

Spiderman, i think this is the idea that i thought you were using,

I total agree with this view, the technology is there and its relatively inexpensive. its possible to fit a camera to a gate spacer and this can take a view of both poles. as with peters view with single pole gates starting to make and apperance, especially at tully, this would help must more with a camera just needing to be attached to the spacer above the pole.

so thats 2 people who have thought up of "Bearer Cam" mines just called "Spacer Cam"

Thanks to all who've commented so far, i hope PP has talked to Emma this weekend after a shuttle hint from me this weekend.

Russ Johnson

djberriman · Post by **djberriman** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:49 pm

Hmm, gate line moves with the pole not where the bar is.... generally it should be in focus.... but what about when the pole is belted on entry to the gate and swings off, you need to know where it is/has gone, if its not in picture, it proves nothing, thus on 2nd thoughts you really need one on the poles and at least one on the bank.

I'm not sure that kit is inexpensive, you would need a very good frame rate and resolution to be able to prove anything, plus the kit would have to last for at least 12 hours without being recharged etc, preferably 3 days, be wireless, be weather proof and pretty shock proof. Finally the receiving kit would have to be capable of receiving the pictures from ALL the cameras on the course and processing it/storing it fast enough, plus allowing for video replay at the same time. Given the distance of some courses and other transmission factors this could be quite a big ask for cheap kit. I've tried an action cam and the ain't that great, even with the biggest card in they can only record 2 hours, they are not exactly light either and the quality of the picture isn't brilliant.

Canadian Paddler · Post by **Canadian Paddler** » Mon Apr 27, 2009 5:27 pm

If there was money for all this wireless kit, with the required reliability, personally I would put it to communications. Wireless start/finsih and judges, remove the cats craddles and wires being dropped in puddles and holding up the C1s (inevitably with dead legs) whilst we get comms back.

But then again wireless would have similar comms break issues, possibly needing more fixing.

Yep I am an old stick in the mud.

BUT great discussion, and if we can come up with a good solution, we can then try to get it sponsored so that it is affordable.

ps. Anyne actually approached their club about sponsoring a video evidence rule at the next ACM, or will this all come to nothing? PP??

Spiderman · Post by **Spiderman** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 11:51 am

Good question CP. It is not something I would wish to get involved in though. I am contraversial enough in other areas! lol. I am more enthusiastic about this from the TV coverage advantage rather than judging. Sorry russ but between photographing, videoing and competing (the latter very badly for reasons beyond me! Grrrr!) I did not find time to speak to Emma about the overhead cam for TV purposes. Hopefully, she will read this thread though and be aware of it. Someone who is involved with the staging of the event must be reading this so hopefully this communication platform will be adequate to make sure the idea is raised with the TV company in question.

As an aside though, regarding using overhead cams (OHC) for video evidence for judging purposes, I still think it is very "do-able"

A good friend of mine came up with an idea for a TV show but he could not impliment/patent it because the camera technology did not exist to do what he wanted to do. He was walking through an unlit wooded area, very drunk indeed, and got to thinking how very funny it would be to be able to see himself fumbling around, arms outstretched, tripping over logs etc etc. He then thought it would be good entertainment if people could see people doing simple taks in total darkness like changing shirts or making a cup of tea. He approached a manufacturer who developed a camera that allowed you to see with absolute clarity what was going on in the dark, not infra red but something slighty improved. The program aired in the UK in the late 90's called "In the Dark with Julian Clarey". It was sold to about 25 countries and he now lives off the proceeds

So, the point is, just because there are difficulties or seemingly impossible hurdles to overcome, this is no reason not to further discussion and investigations to see what develops

Interesting idea to get this sponsored CP. Must be someone out there who sees an a good reason to be associated with this type of progress. It really is not rocket science to mount a wireless cam and receive/record a signal from it.

But lets see if we can get it hooked up for TV at the Europeans first just to start the ball rolling - even on just one or two crucial gates. Then any sponsor would be able to see what will be produced.

PP

RussJohnson · Post by **RussJohnson** » Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:37 pm

PP, i'll email emma then, ive been in touch with her regarding helping at the euros so i'll question her.

yep, this topic is very much open, but i think we need to see whats happening at the euros first.