Muhammad Ali through old camera technology

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by reznick, Oct 16, 2018.


Page 5 of 5
  1. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    27,674
    7,654
    Dec 31, 2009
    I’m with Reznick on this. The point he is making is that a great fighter is much harder to assess on bad film. And all anybody can say against this, is that Ali wasn’t near his best in the film. It is not the point he’s making.

    He’s saying look at what we are missing from that performance. It’s a good performance but we are missing the opportunity to breakdown and assess the technique and rate the speed.
     
    choklab, Oct 20, 2018
    choklab, Oct 20, 2018
    #61
    Rock0052 and reznick like this.
  2. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,636
    Mar 17, 2010
    There’s some really interesting data on this stuff.

    For instance, 90% of modern audiences will stop watching a video if it is in black and white. It doesn’t take a genius to extrapolate from that the impact it has on assessing boxing footage.

    Sometimes I stop to think about the humor of it all. These past boxing champions are getting ripped apart by supposed ‘analysts,’ not because of their boxing technique (as the analysts believe) but simply because of the type of camera used in the arena on that night.

    Film technology may be the most rapidly and drastically evolving thing in our species. The difference 100 years made is absolutely staggering. Film has a major role in our subconscious. People who grew up on black and white TVs often dream in monochrome even till today. Look at the Niagra Falls filmed with 1920s cameras and then go watch a Planet Earth documentary.

    I’ve used this example before and I’ll say it again. Marketers use specific colors on print and film ads to incite specific emotions and feelings. To argue that choppy black and white herky jerky film of the past isn’t effecting our immediate perceptions of boxers is simply asinine.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2018
    reznick, Oct 20, 2018
    reznick, Oct 20, 2018
    #62
    Rock0052 likes this.
  3. thistle1

    thistle1 Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,915
    151
    Jul 30, 2006
    Ali looks fine in this film and it represents what a clever boxer & mover he was.

    the quality is not bad at all, but like so much old cameras & filming, it's not capturing it all.

    as I've pointed out numerous times, it's not the fighters that are s hi t, it's the filmING and/or cameras... and we KNOW this, When the Odd Gem shows up from Old Film that is actually good footage, like that Aussie site from the 30s & 40s that had loads of great Quality Footage.

    So 2 things here, Ali looks fine, but's it's still not turn of the Century cameras of filmING (the Operator), and 2, the best comparison is always & only Proper Quality FilmING compared with 50s onward footage.

    as always the Better the Camera & Filming Quality, the Better the Fighter(s).
     
    thistle1, Oct 20, 2018
    thistle1, Oct 20, 2018
    #63
    reznick likes this.
Page 5 of 5