Jump to content

Photo evidence of 16mm camera at Bath 70'


LedZep342

Recommended Posts

This is a neat pic I found, as you can see to the right of the photo is the 16mm camera, there is no operator, but the camera is facing page, so it might be running, also to the right is two men, one of which is holding some sort of an object (might be an 8mm camera):

lz19700628_29.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those are most definitley lighting stands. Zeppelin never had cameras put into rows.

Nooo, look too the right, here's a color pic of what the camera looks like with an operator:

bath-cam-derek.jpg

This pic is just black & white/without an operator, and I said "to the right of the photo is the 16mm camera" you obviously didn't read that. It's easier to see the pic in full, so you should probably right click and press view image.

lz19700628_29.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there's any dispute over whether or not cameras were present at Bath. The dispute is over whether or not the footage from said cameras still exists.

On a side note, god I hope the Pontiac '77 footage still exists!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EDIT

Sorry, I was looking above. That is a 16mm camera, sorry!

Nope, that's not a 16mm camera but ENG equipment (read; professional TV video camera). Heavy!

16mm camera's like ARRI's, Aatons or Eclairs were developed to give camermen more freedom to move.

Nevertheless, these studio camera's were always used in multi cam sets, so there should be at least two or so positioned on stage (for medium shots and close ups) and another one near the mixing board (for long shots).

So the theory that the footage was underexposed doesn't count anymore... the video signal is there or it has been damaged/detoriated (like the Julie Felix BBC footage)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, that's not a 16mm camera but ENG equipment (read; professional TV video camera). Heavy! 16mm camera's like ARRI's, Aatons or Eclairs were developed to give camermen more freedom to move. Nevertheless, these studio camera's were always used in multi cam sets, so there should be at least two or so positioned on stage (for medium shots and close ups) and another one near the mixing board (for long shots). So the theory that the footage was underexposed doesn't count anymore... the video signal is there or it has been damaged/detoriated (like the Julie Felix BBC footage)

Peter Grant did not permit the band to be filmed; the camera crew was not allowed on stage during Led Zeppelin's performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there's any dispute over whether or not cameras were present at Bath. The dispute is over whether or not the footage from said cameras still exists.

On a side note, god I hope the Pontiac '77 footage still exists!

Yea, well I'm sure there is, whether it be 16mm or 8mm footage, and I would like to see the Pontiac footage too, if it still exists!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, that's not a 16mm camera but ENG equipment (read; professional TV video camera). Heavy!

16mm camera's like ARRI's, Aatons or Eclairs were developed to give camermen more freedom to move.

Nevertheless, these studio camera's were always used in multi cam sets, so there should be at least two or so positioned on stage (for medium shots and close ups) and another one near the mixing board (for long shots).

So the theory that the footage was underexposed doesn't count anymore... the video signal is there or it has been damaged/detoriated (like the Julie Felix BBC footage)

I thought those were just lights, for lighting up the stage for the night, here's a color pic of what they look like on the other side:

post-16772-0-87353600-1304250196_thumb.j

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My account:

I do agree with tomkid, That is too big for a 16mm camera.

According to "ukrockconcerts",

Led Zeppelin: One active camera to film the crowd. Footage definitely exists of their act.

So if this is right, the 16mm film/TV cameras (if used) was probably shot around the stage, if it ever was filmed in the first place.

The only known footage from Bath is the 22 second 8mm film, which will probably never enter the bootleg trade. Ya never know, folks! And the Pontiac footage would of been a nice surprise for yesterday, haha

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My account:

I do agree with tomkid, That is too big for a 16mm camera.

According to "ukrockconcerts",

Led Zeppelin: One active camera to film the crowd. Footage definitely exists of their act.

So if this is right, the 16mm film/TV cameras (if used) was probably shot around the stage, if it ever was filmed in the first place.

The only known footage from Bath is the 22 second 8mm film, which will probably never enter the bootleg trade. Ya never know, folks! And the Pontiac footage would of been a nice surprise for yesterday, haha

Well, that camera to the right stayed to the left of the stage, cause in every other photo of every other act I saw that camera to the left of the stage, and in all the other pics of Zep at Bath that I've seen the camera wasn't their, so I have a feeling they filmed that number. And dude, that 22 seconds of 8mm film is really not worth anything, it's just to short, and what do you mean the Pontiac footage would've been a nice surprise for yesterday?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was probably innactive. Either that the cameras were around the stage, or it was never film.

And every Zep clip is useful! You used to really want it. And yesterday was 4/30, and the gig was 4/30/1977.

Yea, it probably was inactive, there probably would've been an operator at the camera, but you never know.

And yea, I guess you're right every Zep clip is useful, and I did really want it, but really, I mean it's only 22 secs. Oh, and that's neat, I just realized I got onto the LZ forum on the 27th of February, the Sydney gig.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Quote from Peter Grant:

"Some People were trying to videotape the Bath Festival and they'd already been told beforehand they couldn't, so I had no qualms about throwing a bucket of water on to the tape machine which blew the whole lot up. Whoosh! It made a horrible smell and then it melted."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...