This technology was already around back then so you didn’t miss anything. Cable cams have been a thing since the 60s

They probably put the cable cam in one corner of the stadium for the parachute landing so the cables are out of the way, and then bring it back into use after he's landed. If this is the case then they would be using their standard ground cams not the cable cam to film the parachute landing.

@@coulombicdistortion1814 if the cam is in one corner, then there is still 1 cable going fully diagonally across the open roof

@@efari They put it on one of the short sides to create the biggest possible opening, and obviously where this is going to be and where the cables will be is thoroughly discussed with the parachute guy.

They will put it in the center of the opposite end zone of the landing zone.

that was pre planned to seek attention 🙂💩

and he was a white guy!!!!

Patience... By releasing and pulling on the four cables. This is all controlled by a computer system to figure out the tension.

@@micahwagoner6114 Thx Mica. I had all answers i needed searching here for proper explanations.

The cables are very thin so the chance that you will hit a cable is very small

Pushes the cable down into the crevice

Production equipment

KAYBEE GANGTE 307,970

Yeah, that's what I was wondering. How come didn't get tangled in the steel cables?

@@brucetrappleton6984 and how come this video just skip that paart?

@BOB H the only part worth broadcasting!!

I can actually answer this. Two plans for skydivers. If they’re military and very good (near perfect record), then they park the camera up high at one end of the stadium. Makes a very large V in the cables for the skydiver to come down in. If they’re not as good or just not proven, then the camera goes low way into a corner, one line is disconnected (it’s weight is on the three according to what corner it’s in) and the line is pulled out of the way across the field. Once the skydiver is down, run it back over, attach the cable, attach the safeties, and away you go.

Darude - Sandstrom

they dont fly very fast

Not an expert but here are my guesses: (1) More affected by adverse weather (especially wind), (2) More likely to be dangerous when hit with - for example - a ball if it cannot recover, and (3) worse image quality because you need a wireless video link.

it was used in a much earlier time when there were no drones and how would broadcast live from an drone...

@@UtpoiyaMon_TituMousom mate i think they had drones back in 2017. Also don't ask me how they broadcast from a drone, I just know they do.

Drones are risky. People may get injured if the drone malfunctions, also drone's battery don't last long.

@@headhunter895 your mother is homosexual

Drones can fall into the ground and can damage players.

9940575019 call me sir

Bobs

Bobster986 Many times safer yes. Also , a drone big enough to support the camera and its mount would make too much wind and noise, not have a big enough battery for 3+ hours of flight, and could be fatal if it was blown into the crowd. As well as the additional image quality with wired vs wireless makes it a no brainer.

Matt Troll the cable cam shot isn’t used for three hours straight, so a drone wouldn’t need a battery that lasts 3 hours straight either, though there are hybrid drone solutions There are many drone today, I guess that you’re not aware of, that are compact and so are the cameras that produce a broadcast quality image. If the cable camera was to crash and hit somebody on the ground that would be fatality, to date there are no life threatening injures caused by drones, so it would make more sense using a 25 pound aircraft than a 225 pound cable cam, now that is a no brainer.

I believe the NCAA has a rule that outlaws drones from being flown over the stadiums during games.

Thats a true broadcast camera on the cable cam system which means it could weigh nearly 25 lbs by itself after its been rigged with all its necessary equipment including lenses, power sources etc. If that were to be carried by a drone, it would need to be considerably larger than 25 lbs to carry that camera. With that said, drones are far from an ideal choice here for a number of reasons, namely reliability. The sky cam system isnt going to fall. simple as that. a drone on the other hand has an incredibly higher chance of failing. Not only that but a drone will always be subject to wind changes where a a sky cam can be set in one place and be counted on to stay there regardless the wind. Like Matt said, a drone large enough to account for all this would need to be MASSIVE and the wind wash from it would absolutely be unacceptable ESPECIALLY when its affecting the players right below it.

​@@Bobster986 The flycam (cablecam is something similar but different) is hold by four wires that are capable of holding many times the weight they actually hold. Even if one rope fails there are three more ropes holding the camera in the air. Because of physics the camrea would either don't move at all or maximally swing back to the symmetry point accross the stadium. The ropes limit the space the camera can travel, and at a lot of venues this means the camera cannot or just can slightly exceed the play area. The chances of hitting people there (If it would ever fall, but as I mentioned this is very very unlikely) are very low.

Hate to say it, but you can't even rack the iris on that thing. There are many things that the inspire CANT do regarding the camera and its functions. Additionally, how would you live stream the 4/8k footage? I love DJI and the inspire is a BEAST, but it can't compare to a Freefly ALTA drone or a cablecam in these situations.

Drones only have a battery life of 15-20 mins and would have to be changed rather frequently missing parts of the game. Also it could have a failure of some sort and fall from the sky onto a football player and injure them.

@@wamsam21 You would use a coordinated swarm of them, not a single one. Injury is a risk with drones, but Skycams aren't perfectly safe either, back in 2011 one of them came crashing down and only barely missed some players. That said, the cameras on small drones are still very limited and not really suited for a high quality live TV broadcast. There are drones for bigger cameras, but should would probably be to dangerous.

Because for broadcast standards, the inspire its a toy.

The issue is more related to lenses than to the camera itself. Lookup broadcast lenses on KZfaq. There is some great videos explaining what's required for broadcast and why.