(no title)
jrnvs | 4 years ago
Interviewer: Is it possible that the photo was taken a wee bit before the black line? Photo operator: I doubt it... I doubt it because we really took a good look if it's all been set up correctly.
jrnvs | 4 years ago
Interviewer: Is it possible that the photo was taken a wee bit before the black line? Photo operator: I doubt it... I doubt it because we really took a good look if it's all been set up correctly.
sverhagen|4 years ago
While all folks involved here take great pride in their work, the alignment of the camera just never got the attention it clearly deserved. No one ever did the math and they just assumed the difference wasn't significant. Also, people just liked it better to align the camera on the white part of the finish line, since it greatly improves the contrast of the capture. I am sure the equipment has improved, but for a long time, the only thing you were concerned about was contrast, a sudden change in weather (lighting) was known to, at times, render the entire operation useless. Particularly since we were a small operation with only one (photo-finish) camera. Plenty of times I had to climb up ladders and vans to make eleventh hour adjustments to the equipment, with the contestants already in sight.
I feel super bad for the guy. To his defense, the responsibility lies with the UCI officials. To their defense, they do not check up on details like this. Until now, that is.
I remember at least one other time where the broadcast camera (they also tend to have one exactly on the finish line) seemed in disagreement with our "official" photo finish results. That time, a simple shrug did the trick: "hey, photo finish, you know".
tomglynch|4 years ago
And 99.9% of the time it wouldn't make a difference, he's just very unlucky that this time it may have (or may not have, but either way it's brought a focus to the camera position).
I see you're now a software engineer. How did you end up moving from photo-finish operations to software?
tinus_hn|4 years ago