|
Post by johnnyb on Jun 11, 2024 12:33:08 GMT -5
You’re so busy recording a concert you can’t just sit back and enjoy the show! Personally I wouldn’t want to film a concert ! I would rather sit back and enjoy the concert! Believe it or not, you can do both. When I recorded all of that Nashville concert footage, I used a GoPro, which is really small and emitted no light. I just held it with one hand about chest high and then watched the concert. lol There you Donk, you go and record the concert and come back and post it here for all us less fortunate who are too cheap to pay the 28 bucks. Lol!
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Jun 11, 2024 12:57:34 GMT -5
Believe it or not, you can do both. When I recorded all of that Nashville concert footage, I used a GoPro, which is really small and emitted no light. I just held it with one hand about chest high and then watched the concert. lol There you Donk, you go and record the concert and come back and post it here for all us less fortunate who are too cheap to pay the 28 bucks. Lol! Consider it done, JB!!!! It's the least I can do considering our Jackie-Italy trip was cancelled. I heard that Disappointed cried for days. lol
|
|
|
Post by richard on Jun 11, 2024 13:31:42 GMT -5
Believe it or not, you can do both. When I recorded all of that Nashville concert footage, I used a GoPro, which is really small and emitted no light. I just held it with one hand about chest high and then watched the concert. lol There you Donk, you go and record the concert and come back and post it here for all us less fortunate who are too cheap to pay the 28 bucks. Lol! It's not a question of being cheap it's a question of greed to pay $28 for something that should be free.
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Jun 11, 2024 13:42:22 GMT -5
There you Donk, you go and record the concert and come back and post it here for all us less fortunate who are too cheap to pay the 28 bucks. Lol! It's not a question of being cheap it's a question of greed to pay $28 for something that should be free.
Why should it be free? People attending the show have to pay. Why should you get it for free? Sounding a little entitled there, Richy Rich. lol
|
|
|
Post by Disappointed on Jun 11, 2024 13:50:27 GMT -5
Junk is usually free. Why should you get it for free? True, you probably should get paid to watch it.
|
|
|
Post by richard on Jun 11, 2024 14:26:27 GMT -5
It's not a question of being cheap it's a question of greed to pay $28 for something that should be free.
Why should it be free? People attending the show have to pay. Why should you get it for free? Sounding a little entitled there, Richy Rich. lol It's a small night club show, not like a real concert to begin with. Jackie is a small time artist that needs to get her name out if she is going to make it in popular music. Is Jackie going to put on a great show with a band and backup dancers or is she going to just stand in front of a mic and sing.
|
|
|
Post by colt46 on Jun 11, 2024 14:51:39 GMT -5
Jackie maybe small time, but to Jackie fans she isn’t! Again you are speaking from a non fan’s perspective! You would never go see Jackie, you want to watch her free Utube videos!
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Jun 11, 2024 15:39:57 GMT -5
Why should it be free? People attending the show have to pay. Why should you get it for free? Sounding a little entitled there, Richy Rich. lol It's a small night club show, not like a real concert to begin with. Jackie is a small time artist that needs to get her name out if she is going to make it in popular music. Is Jackie going to put on a great show with a band and backup dancers or is she going to just stand in front of a mic and sing. You can call it a concert, or a show if you prefer. But she's providing entertainment, and you are getting a substantially reduced price to attend remotely. Usually at 54 Below she has a small band - piano player and percussion at minimum. It's only $28 bucks...you don't get backup dancers or full-sized band when you are only shelling out $28 bucks. ROFL Jackie has posted videos of herself singing some of her SOLLA songs on YT...that's free to anyone wanting to view it.
|
|
|
Post by johnnyb on Jun 11, 2024 15:57:00 GMT -5
It's a small night club show, not like a real concert to begin with. Jackie is a small time artist that needs to get her name out if she is going to make it in popular music. Is Jackie going to put on a great show with a band and backup dancers or is she going to just stand in front of a mic and sing. You can call it a concert, or a show if you prefer. But she's providing entertainment, and you are getting a substantially reduced price to attend remotely. Usually at 54 Below she has a small band - piano player and percussion at minimum. It's only $28 bucks...you don't get backup dancers or full-sized band when you are only shelling out $28 bucks. ROFL Jackie has posted videos of herself singing some of her SOLLA songs on YT...that's free to anyone wanting to view it. I’d pay to watch Dissypointment scarf down a few burgers while standing on her head. ROFL!
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Jun 11, 2024 16:10:23 GMT -5
You can call it a concert, or a show if you prefer. But she's providing entertainment, and you are getting a substantially reduced price to attend remotely. Usually at 54 Below she has a small band - piano player and percussion at minimum. It's only $28 bucks...you don't get backup dancers or full-sized band when you are only shelling out $28 bucks. ROFL Jackie has posted videos of herself singing some of her SOLLA songs on YT...that's free to anyone wanting to view it. I’d pay to watch Dissypointment scarf down a few burgers while standing on her head. ROFL! Hey now...that might be worth the price of admission!
|
|
|
Post by richard on Jun 11, 2024 16:27:35 GMT -5
Jackie maybe small time, but to Jackie fans she isn’t! Again you are speaking from a non fan’s perspective! You would never go see Jackie, you want to watch her free Utube videos! Olivia Rodrigo put her Sour album out on Youtube complete with large stage and settings for each song and backup dancers with her band. She now broke it up in several segments. But we should pay for Jackie's when she is probably hardly spending any money to produce a good show.
Just one song from Olivia Rodrigo's free concert
Just to show how out of touch Jackie's management is/was
Mike took down videos of Jackie's concerts claiming it was stealing from her.
Olivia's Sour tour got sold out in a couple of hours with people complaining they are put in Q with 80,000 people for a 7,000 capacity concert and was quite pissed she didn't schedule Arenas on her first ever tour. Olivia didn't make that mistake with her Gut Arena tour but still sold everything out.
|
|
|
Post by 1 Guest on Jun 11, 2024 17:39:22 GMT -5
It's not a question of being cheap it's a question of greed to pay $28 for something that should be free.
Why should it be free? People attending the show have to pay. Why should you get it for free? Sounding a little entitled there, Richy Rich. lol I'm not saying that it should be free, that's up to Jackie, but it would be very good promotion for her, and that's something that she really needs.
|
|
|
Post by BOGC on Jun 11, 2024 18:34:26 GMT -5
You’re so busy recording a concert you can’t just sit back and enjoy the show! Personally I wouldn’t want to film a concert ! I would rather sit back and enjoy the concert! Believe it or not, you can do both. When I recorded all of that Nashville concert footage, I used a GoPro, which is really small and emitted no light. I just held it with one hand about chest high and then watched the concert. lol I've kept looking for a pair of camera glasses with decent (1080p at least) video AND decent stereo (ideally binaural, with the microphones near my ears). They also need high light sensitivity yet the ability to cope with a spotlit performer on an otherwise dark stage (only in the last five years or so could smartphones do well at that unless you fiddled with the settings a lot). The camera glasses would also need to have a stealth mode (no visible indicator lights once you had them set up, preferably controlled via a Bluetooth phone app). That would generate no complaints and minimal notice, and would not distract me much; I'd just have to remember to always look in the direction that I wanted the camera pointed. So far, I haven't found anything that I think would do the job. For awhile, PivotHead looked like they might get there, but they're still short on the audio side, IMO. I don't expect as good as a full-size pro camera with hookup to venue sound system, but something at least better than your average shaky vertical orientation smartphone video would be nice. Even then, there'd be issues with noisy people nearby, etc. Livestreams are IMO better, close to the best possible (short of a major pro setup with multiple cameras, such as for a TV special). After the cameraman's cut and the venue cut and whatever else, they may be priced such that they're the next thing to free as far as the performer(s) is/are concerned (they're not getting much at all). Maybe THAT would be worth making little right away for the sake of publicity. The problem with publicity is that none of it is actually free to obtain. It takes either hiring experts, or learning sufficient expertise (and contacts) oneself; even social media needs to be a lot more than a bunch of amateur selfies, although those can provide filler between better content. That costs money or time or both. It may involve some (or a lot, for a higher end video) production costs. Even time isn't strictly free, doing one thing (that may make money eventually) means putting off another, and what is the best "investment" isn't necessarily more obvious than it is in the stock market.
|
|
|
Post by BOGC on Jun 11, 2024 18:38:03 GMT -5
There you Donk, you go and record the concert and come back and post it here for all us less fortunate who are too cheap to pay the 28 bucks. Lol! It's not a question of being cheap it's a question of greed to pay $28 for something that should be free.
Why should it be free when someone has to pay the cameraman, and the venue for access to their sound system, and maybe others? It could perhaps be nearly free insofar as the principal performer takes no cut themselves, for the sake of the publicity. But why the heck should they pay out of their own pocket and just HOPE the publicity is worth it? That might work for a larger venue (except a larger venue would probably expect a larger cut), but that could push the entire event in the red otherwise. Not like there's a fortune in endorsements without tens of millions of followers (or regular TV appearances, or both). So tickets, PPV, sold albums or downloads, and just barely streaming (except in huge numbers) are where the $$ come from until the endorsements reach a significant level.
|
|
|
Post by donkey on Jun 11, 2024 18:47:31 GMT -5
Why should it be free? People attending the show have to pay. Why should you get it for free? Sounding a little entitled there, Richy Rich. lol I'm not saying that it should be free, that's up to Jackie, but it would be very good promotion for her, and that's something that she really needs. I don't think very many non-fans are looking to remotely attend a Jackie show at a small restaurant in NYC., even if it's free. I think the only people interested are what's left of the Jackie fan base, those who follow her and know what's she's up to via her social media. Many of them are likely very willing to pay the very modest $28 to see it. Besides that, it would be quite unfair to the people who made the effort to actually attend the event, who paid full ticket price to see the show, to then see those who didnt come be rewarded with a free show. This remote concert is an attempt to up the ticket sales revenue, while giving show access to more fans. I think it's a win for everyone. It would be VERY interesting to see how many remote tickets end up getting purchased. That would be a huge indicator of how much interest remains in her. It would indicate how many fans are still fans, but can't or won't travel to go see a concert.
|
|