Top several Videographers of pool matches

hang-the-9

hang-the-9

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Which companies/people/events would you rank in the top of video quality, not just clarity, but also angles, switching cameras at the right time to show the best angle of a layout or shot?

I don't just mean those that put on good events (say TAR, which has great quality but not that many angles or production aside from just good matches and a single good camera angle), but those that actually do the overall pool match experience for TV well.

I have been watching several of the World Cup of Pool and Mosconi Cup matches on YouTube and the more I do, the more I like how Matchroom does things.

Arena is of a good size, setup of lights is good and enough fancy stuff to make it look like it was for a TV production, and the angles of the shots, especially ones like these http://youtu.be/dxFtAYDe54M?t=18m55s and http://youtu.be/dxFtAYDe54M?t=44m5s and how the cameras change and move just right to see the relevant part of the shot. Zoom in in for the shot, then after it's hit, zoom out or change cameras to see the result of the shot and where the cueball is, zoom in to see the player reaction as they approach for the next shot.
 
The main things that impress me are
Top down view
Accurate on screen scoring
And informative and attentive commentary.

The fancy multi camera stuff is nice, but seems like it could be pretty distracting (also probably quite expensive).

Having a referee present at the match catches my attention as well. I guess it is just a good sign of a professional quality match.

Match room does a phenomenal job. I always wonder why so many streams lack in the on-screen scoreboard department.


Carl

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk
 
I think Matchroom does ESPN-like quality. It's a matter of money and people resources. Inside Pool does a very good camera job (would be excellent if they had a "roving" camera to capture players-eye view of shots) but it's all on Alvin's shoulders to set it up, hook up the stream, arrange commentators, etc. Too much for one person, especially when he takes on the commentating duties too.

Minimum staff to do a great job:

1) Tech guy to set up and maintain cameras, lighting, computers and stream.
2) Roving cameraman to capture table-level views.
3) Producer to produce all off-camera information (scores, tournament chart, player bios, sponsor commercials, updates of scores on non-TV table matches, etc) and run the mixer board.
4) Commentator

The hardware and software these days is relatively cheap to do a dynamite set-up. It's the cost of people that determines whether a stream is good or great. Unfortunately, since there's no money in pool the streamers have to use as few people as possible. I think Dan from POVPool posted a thread a few months ago about how promoters won't even pay $75 a day to have their event streamed and put on youtube. $75 can't begin to cover Dan's costs...but the promoters don't have enough marketing cash to do even that.
 
Matchroom is by far the best. Their live production, as far as cameras used and slow mo replay ability trumps all. They also do a great job with their in match bumps to break and montages.
 
Matchroom is in a league by themselves. Its what it looks like when pro's do it. Their budget per day is also probably more than all the streamers in the US have for a year combined.

Whats funny is I get more emails complaining about switching camera views than people saying we should add them. As to slow mo replay for streams its doable but very expensive right now. I expect with the rapid advance of tech in the streaming world it will become more affordable in the future.

Just want to add TAR has three and sometimes four angles. With one or two operators for our matches. Only Accu-Stats does anything similar. When we do tournaments I don't use operators because working twelve to fourteen hours a day for over a week is just to much for what I can pay the guys who help me.
 
Last edited:
I definitely think Matchroom takes the cake hands down and I always enjoy Mosconi Cup. Accu-stats does a great job with all those years of experience and bringing us great events, players and memorable moments. I do like TAR a good deal but as Justin has noted he cannot afford to hire cameraman for events that run all day for many days but I think the finals matches should be full production. When I was watching the US Open matches I wanted to jump on a camera since no one was on it, haha. I don't think anyone can discount Run Out Media as they are near the top, sure you can say its a biased opinion but you can just view the videos on the playlist that is on Youtube for Bonus Ball and see it is well done. Here is a link if you are lazy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Y8RP3mAywk&list=UUTPxeIH9z3GqcuyjFgjhffQ
 
Last edited:
Technically, you are blessing the wrong Saint. It is SKY Broadcasting that provides the production values for the Mosconi Cup. And the reason they are so much better than other 'streamers' is because they are a television production company whose product can be streamed, not a streaming company.

They can afford to spend tens of thousands (or more) per DAY to give you that great quality. One of the posters said "ESPN-like quality". ESPN would kill to have that kind of quality. ESPN is very cheap. They spend less in a week than SKY does in a day.

As for high-quality streamers, look no further than their equipment list to see who is best. Accu-Stats would be first, followed by whomever else has spent close to as much money on cameras, mixers, Tri-Casters, etc.

When SKY goes on location they have a crew of several dozen techs, cameramen, lighting crews, producers, directors, assistants to those, etc. If you can spend the money you can get the quality. But you cannot get it on the cheap.

One other thing (as this is my pet peeve) - you will never see SKY do a broadcast from a dark room where the only light is the one over the table. The table is lit, the players are lit, the audience is lit, the place is bright! And the reason is psychology 101. Dark places are negative and unappealing and bright places are positive and appealing. But in America pool tournaments are held in dark caves that are as depressing as a winter night. I do not know if we will ever learn to just turn on the lights in order to bring the game out of the dark.
 
Jerry Forsyth said:
Technically, you are blessing the wrong Saint. It is SKY Broadcasting that provides the production values for the Mosconi Cup. And the reason they are so much better than other 'streamers' is because they are a television production company whose product can be streamed, not a streaming company.

They can afford to spend tens of thousands (or more) per DAY to give you that great quality. One of the posters said "ESPN-like quality". ESPN would kill to have that kind of quality. ESPN is very cheap. They spend less in a week than SKY does in a day.

As for high-quality streamers, look no further than their equipment list to see who is best. Accu-Stats would be first, followed by whomever else has spent close to as much money on cameras, mixers, Tri-Casters, etc.

When SKY goes on location they have a crew of several dozen techs, cameramen, lighting crews, producers, directors, assistants to those, etc. If you can spend the money you can get the quality. But you cannot get it on the cheap.

One other thing (as this is my pet peeve) - you will never see SKY do a broadcast from a dark room where the only light is the one over the table. The table is lit, the players are lit, the audience is lit, the place is bright! And the reason is psychology 101. Dark places are negative and unappealing and bright places are positive and appealing. But in America pool tournaments are held in dark caves that are as depressing as a winter night. I do not know if we will ever learn to just turn on the lights in order to bring the game out of the dark.
Click to expand...

Very interesting insight, one I had never thought about: the darkness at most pool happenings. I had always thought it was because when the room was dark, the lights over the table allowed one to focus more on the table. For spectator and viewing reasons, though, I can understand how lightening up the room would be a plus.

FWIW, as I realize the IPT is frowned upon by many, they had one of the best set-ups I'd ever seen at a pool happening, to include a massive amount of high-tech equipment and multiple camera people. And guess what? The Starship Stage, which is what the IPT called it, was lit up quite brightly. :cool:
 

Attachments

  • Starship Stage 2.jpg
    Starship Stage 2.jpg
    76.7 KB · Views: 246
Pretty much a no-brainer, Matchroom/SKY are king at the pro TV level.
Accu-stats is great otherwise, and TAR is hugely improved (check out the old days vs. now).

I've always been blown away by what they do with Snooker. Not sure if that's SKY or what.
Instant replays, many angles (including crowd and players), pocket cams, slow mo, and that's just the basic stuff.

On several shots they generate a quick 3D or photoshop snapshot of the table and the current layout.
They overlay that when the ref has to replace to the cue ball or a moved ball back to its original position.
So the viewer can instantly verify the ball is exactly where it was last time.

On amazing long shots they have an animation showing a line extending from the cue ball to the OB,
then onscreen numbers showing the exact distance of the shot in feet/meters.

When they do a telestrator it's clean straight lines and not ghetto yellow crayon scribbles.

PS to Jcin: Is it within your ability do do replays without the slo-mo?
I'd just love to see a great shot again (or a close hit/foul). Doesn't have to be slowed down.
 
streamers

I thought TV Mike's stream of Earl & SVB in Lincoln Neb on the 10 ft was very good. nice feel, good camera angles.

Accu-Stats is always consistently very good. best announcing.
 
lakeman77 said:
I thought TV Mike's stream of Earl & SVB in Lincoln Neb on the 10 ft was very good. nice feel, good camera angles.

Accu-Stats is always consistently very good. best announcing.
Click to expand...

LOL, you have three different evens mixed up there my friend.


Earl played Shane in Helena

TV Mike did Earl vs Archer in Lincoln

No 10ft table at either one

Tar did Earl SVB on 10ft in te Midwest somewhere think.
 
I'm not sure I can add anything more to what's already been said. I agree that Sky Sports coverage is probably the best (I would rate the Snooker production values even above that for the reasons Creedo mentioned) then among the streamers there is TAR and Accu-Stats in a class by themselves. That's why I never mind paying for their ppvs. One thing I will add is one of the things I liked about the Sky Sports coverage was the camera angle behind the player's stroking arm. It really let you see a view of their mechanics we don't often get to see.
 
Whoever produced this year's Amway Espring Cup did it top notch. Can't comment on the commentary, as it was in Mandarin, but the production values,clarity, camera angles, replays in slo-mo, and score keeping was easily Matchroom/Sky Sports quality,or better.
 
Jerry Forsyth said:
Technically, you are blessing the wrong Saint. It is SKY Broadcasting that provides the production values for the Mosconi Cup. And the reason they are so much better than other 'streamers' is because they are a television production company whose product can be streamed, not a streaming company.

They can afford to spend tens of thousands (or more) per DAY to give you that great quality. One of the posters said "ESPN-like quality". ESPN would kill to have that kind of quality. ESPN is very cheap. They spend less in a week than SKY does in a day.

As for high-quality streamers, look no further than their equipment list to see who is best. Accu-Stats would be first, followed by whomever else has spent close to as much money on cameras, mixers, Tri-Casters, etc.

When SKY goes on location they have a crew of several dozen techs, cameramen, lighting crews, producers, directors, assistants to those, etc. If you can spend the money you can get the quality. But you cannot get it on the cheap.

One other thing (as this is my pet peeve) - you will never see SKY do a broadcast from a dark room where the only light is the one over the table. The table is lit, the players are lit, the audience is lit, the place is bright! And the reason is psychology 101. Dark places are negative and unappealing and bright places are positive and appealing. But in America pool tournaments are held in dark caves that are as depressing as a winter night. I do not know if we will ever learn to just turn on the lights in order to bring the game out of the dark.
Click to expand...

Thanks, very nice post about what goes on there.
One of the things I like about the really good broadcasters is that whoever is swapping between cameras and controlling them actually knows how to film pool. Too often in the ESPN and other "TV" productions you'd see a shot, but they focus on the cue or the player instead of showing us if the shot actually went in, where the balls ended up, etc... I keep meaning to put on YouTube some parts of some International Women's tournament or tour that had some of the worst video angles and commentary ever done for pool. Ronnie Allen was doing commentary but he was paired with a woman who did not know anything about pool.

JAM, I agree about IPT, they also did a great job, the few videos of their stuff on YouTube looks very well done. Many here have posts about what they'd do if they won 100 million and can fun a pro tour, well one of the things I'd do is re-resurrect whoever was doing the IPT production and use that for the tour.
 
Mark, I stand corrected, you are right. it was Archer vs Strickland, Ap 2-3 2011, Drifters Pool Hall, Lincoln , Ne. streamed by TVMike. billed as BAD BLOOD, $10,000 Challenge Match
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top