General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSorry, what is going with Rachel?? She looks like her camera is at a higher angle....
and its kinda bothering me....I know its a stupid statement and should not be what we're talking about, just saying.
mucifer
(23,553 posts)NCLefty
(3,678 posts)So different studio, different set, different cameras, etc.
Jarqui
(10,126 posts)mopinko
(70,132 posts)a kennedy
(29,674 posts)2naSalit
(86,650 posts)She was in LA last night so that she can do her show and her book tour at the same time. It's too important, news-wise, for her to take time out from her day job and I'm thankful she's making it work.
a kennedy
(29,674 posts)Taraman
(373 posts)pnwest
(3,266 posts)like shes had a cocktail. Flushed face, eyes a bit unfocused... not that theres anything wrong with that, LOL, who among us HASNT had a liquid lunch on a Friday
Liberal In Texas
(13,556 posts)The camera should be at what we call eye-level OR ideally just above.
You NEVER want the camera to be below eye-level. It makes the presenter seem to be looking down at the person watching and will give the viewer an odd feeling of unease or like the anchor is trying to dominate them.
You also don't want the camera to be too high above eye-level. It looks like your talking to someone on the stairs below you. And as the OP has said, it bothered him/her. It's just annoying.
I did not see the show mentioned, but crap happens on live TV and it could have just been a mistake by a camera operator. (The cameras are all robotic now and one person controls [programs really all the moves] between 3 and 6 of them.) Also, there a lot of people in the business who haven't been trained well, are under paid and don't really know what the F they're doing. And this could be another explanation.