C Sims Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 I was just curious but when looking at the cover of my new issue of Front Sight it appears to me that the guy taking the picture of Mr. Leatham is in a "dangerous" place. Sure good that the finger is out of the trigger guard. Just wondering if I was the only one that noticed this. It even appears that he must have been "down range" when taking the pics of Eric Grauffel, Todd Jarret, Linda Blowers, and Kay Miculek. A picture is worth a thousand words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 I shot a good chunk of the Area 8 Factory Gun match with one camera on a tripod connected to a radio frequency trigger and the second camera handheld. After the first couple of stages it got pretty easy to trigger the transmitter with the left hand while continuing to shoot with the right hand... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 I have some video of Rob shooting that stage, from what I can see, there is a shadow on the right of my video that appears to be a camera on a tripod. No-one was standing there. Because of the layout of the stage (the right-hand part of the stage was angled closer to the berm) anyone standing in where the camera was at the start signal would have been in front of the shooter. If I knew how to post pictures here I could add it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warpspeed Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 The pictures are taken by remote control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Nyle Leatham's been doing that for YEARS. Not sure if that's one of his photos, but I seem to remember that there was an old photo from the year I was born (or right around there) that Brian posted of him and Rob in a shootoff situation. He was trying to get forum members to name all the people in the background of the photo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Hi guys, Since "pin-hole" cameras are so cheap these days, my guys in Hong Kong actually have tiny cameras peeking through the middle of holes cut in Penalty Targets, so we get some awesome shots (still and video), which makes things appear as if the "cameraman" thinks he's Superman and the RO is Stevie Wonder. So far, none of the cameras have been shot, although some of the PTs have been "winged". The local joke is that if you shoot out a camera, you get the penalty on the PT plus a US$20 fine. And, Yes, the high humidity out here in the tropics affects our brains Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garfield Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Hi Vince, Can't you put some of that footage online somewhere ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnL Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 I wondered about that too. It also appears that he is breaking the 180. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDave Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 It does not appear to me that Rob is breaking the 180. If you look at the bottom of the photo, you see another charge line. It is possible for a stage to have multiple 180 lines. The RO/CRO in the photo has his attention on Rob, if he had actually broken the 180, he would have been DQ'd, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C Sims Posted January 9, 2004 Author Share Posted January 9, 2004 I hadn't thought about the remote controlled cameras, that is a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnL Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 It does not appear to me that Rob is breaking the 180. If you look at the bottom of the photo, you see another charge line. It is possible for a stage to have multiple 180 lines. The RO/CRO in the photo has his attention on Rob, if he had actually broken the 180, he would have been DQ'd, right? No, the 180 is parallel to the backstop and is there to protect everyone who is up range. You can have multiple charge lines and they can be perpendicular to each other which is what seems to be the case here. In any case the photo gives the apperance that Letham is breaking the 180 - then again he may not. I just think that the photo wasn't the best choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDave Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 JohnL - you are correct. What I really meant to say/ask was - could there be multiple backstops? There was a stage at the Mid-Atlantic Sectional (stage 7?) in wich the 180 changed 3 to 4 times (nearly 360 deg. berms). Actually, after looking at the stage description (Stage 13 it looks like) the photo may be an optical illusion. The charge line by Robbies left foot isn't perpindicular to the backstop, its at an angle slightly less than 180, and it appears that his muzzle is in concert with that. Again, if he really had, he should have been dq'd. I don't think its a bad photo either. If it wasn't for remote photography, we'd never get cool shots like this. The bottom line is that Rob wasn't DQ'd and he won the Limited Nat's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Hi guys, If nothing else, this thread supports the following new IPSC rule: 11.1.5 Retain Evidence – An appellant is required to inform the Range Master of his wish to present his appeal to the Arbitration Committee and may request that the officials retain any and all relevant documentary or other evidence pending the hearing. Audio and/or video recordings will not be accepted as evidence. -:unless you've got a whole bunch of cameras taking shots from every angle (e.g. like 10 per stage, which we never do), single cameras make things as clear as mud. Garfield, I'll try and get something online - give me a few days. POSTSCRIPT: Wow. I've received quite a few emails asking about the cameras - here are some for sale on eBay with advice on what else you need to use them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dajarrel Posted January 9, 2004 Share Posted January 9, 2004 Thanks Vince, Those cameras appear to be some kinda neat!!!! I'm going to see about getting some and setting them up! dj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted January 10, 2004 Share Posted January 10, 2004 I just posted this to the IPSC Mailing List, copying it here for the benefit of all who are interested in this thread: I have a video of Robbie shooting this stage. The camera angle is bad and gives a false impression. The entire stage was angled with the right hand side of the stage being closer to the backstop than the left hand side. This was probably a deliberate act on behalf of the stage designer/construction crew as the stage required the shooter to stuff an object into the barrel that you can see in the picture. If the stage had been parallel to the backstop then just about everyone that shot it would have broken the 90 degree rule. I can assure you that the video I have proves that Robbie did NOT break the 90 degree rule. I wish I had a place to post the video... Image at the USPSA Gallery showing the angle of the stage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted January 10, 2004 Share Posted January 10, 2004 Those cameras appear to be some kinda neat!!!! I'm going to see about getting some and setting them up! Just a small tip - use short lengths of cable (e.g. 5 metres long each) and have some spare cables ready to "plug 'n' play". This way, if and when the cable gets shot (not that often in our case, but it does happen), you only need to replace a 5 metre section, not the whole (possibly 20m?) length. My guys have it down to a fine art now, and they can replace broken cables faster than we can patch targets on the stage. In fact, I'm trying to get a video (which I'll post online) of some of our really "high-tech" stages - some of them are set-up with laser beams (also quite cheap these days). As you progress through the COF, your body "breaks" the beam, then all hell breaks lose and targets start swinging and bobbing all over the damn place. We don't have many ranges in Hong Kong, and the ones we have are small, so my guys here get pretty creative to compensate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted January 10, 2004 Share Posted January 10, 2004 In reference to the 180, look closely at the PVC shooting box. The front edge of the box is the 180. Draw a line extending off of the box and then draw a line extending from Rob's muzzle. It looks to me that he's got about 30 degrees or so to play with before he gets to the 180. Kinda unsettling looking down that muzzle though, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnL Posted January 10, 2004 Share Posted January 10, 2004 In reference to the 180, look closely at the PVC shooting box. The front edge of the box is the 180. Draw a line extending off of the box and then draw a line extending from Rob's muzzle. It looks to me that he's got about 30 degrees or so to play with before he gets to the 180. Kinda unsettling looking down that muzzle though, isn't it? Looking at the photo again I see the start box and you're right about the angle. The fault line does give a false picture and only confirms what Vince said about photographic "evidence". Pictures do lie! Reflecting on the whole thing a little more it is clear that if there had been a photographer taking this photo the RO would have stopped Robbie long before this picture was taken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runin Ronin Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 Nyle Leatham's been doing that for YEARS. Not sure if that's one of his photos, but I seem to remember that there was an old photo from the year I was born (or right around there) that Brian posted of him and Rob in a shootoff situation. He was trying to get forum members to name all the people in the background of the photo. I'm not as good as Nyle Leatham but, I have played with Remote Cameras during a match. It's safe for the shooter and the photographer. Might not be for the camera but, mine are insured: http://www.photoreflect.com/scripts/prsm.d...0&ts=1074240303 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C Sims Posted January 16, 2004 Author Share Posted January 16, 2004 Runin Ronin, nice looking photos! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runin Ronin Posted January 16, 2004 Share Posted January 16, 2004 Runin Ronin, nice looking photos! Thanks for the compliment. I actually sent a bunch of these images and wrote an article for Front Sight but, it didn't get published. I'm going to try again this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
38supPat Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 11.1.5 Retain Evidence ? An appellant is required to inform the Range Master of his wish to present his appeal to the Arbitration Committee and may request that the officials retain any and all relevant documentary or other evidence pending the hearing. Audio and/or video recordings will not be accepted as evidence.-:unless you've got a whole bunch of cameras taking shots from every angle (e.g. like 10 per stage, which we never do), single cameras make things as clear as mud. ...And photo/video every shooter in the match. Somehow I'm not surprised that they finally made a rule regarding this, but its generally been accepted for years that video/photo evidence would not be accepted as part of an arbitration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mactiger Posted January 21, 2004 Share Posted January 21, 2004 Actually, the no video/photo evidence was in all the rule books I've ever used, except the last one, where it was, I'm sure, inadvertently left out. I've only seen one person try to use it in arbitration, and it actually worked against him. The new rules again specifically prohibit photographic evidence, as Vince states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now