"great artists"?

This looks like the lineup from KROQ weenie roast of 2003.

And I was wondering why all my bay-area friends are in LA this weekend.

I am trying to keep a positive view about this, but its hard. First, this *might* not have ever made it on the BB radar, save the CrowdFire/Battelle aspect. Many great festivals have happened this year, with nary a mention on BB. Being ad avid showface, I can't stand having my view blocked by a million crappy camera's and cell phones taking equally crappy images. IMO, it hampers the show experience. I have seen images taken at shows like this, and basically, they are crap. Unless they start producing cell phones with ISO levels of 3200 and above - (that actually work with out producing noise) - then the outcome is poor quality. To encourage this is just hampering the overall experience of people trying to watch the show.

Don't get me wrong, I fully understand the purpose behind Crowdfire. Its a great idea.

But at what cost?

Before I am labeled a troll or threadjacker or whatever, just let me reiterate I appreciate the idea behind melding the real and virtual world. But these images make MP3's looks like they came from a Hasselblad. I guess a great video editor/producer can make a great assembly of them, ala the My Morning Jacket video produced at Lollapalooza last summer, but if everyone is sitting in the audience staring at the screens of cells phones in front of them...

...how much do the tickets cost again?

that looks like a really great lineup! and jack johnson.

I'm sorry, but there is no way to say this: As much as I love technology and work in the field, nothing is more irritating and ruins the concert-going experience than folks holding up cell phones and cameras and spending more time worrying about how to document the event rather than enjoying it.

Does this mean all the bands have given attendees permission, if not encouragement, to videotape or record their sets and share them with the world? If so, I guess it's a one time thing and not likely to set a precedent. Yeah, camera phones are lame and obnxious, but modern digital recorders and high-end microphones can produce really terrific recordings, especially if they don't have to be stealth.

I dread the day cell phone reception reaches Burning Man.

If all of the footage can be combined into a 3D film of the entire event that'd be awesome. Until then, don't really see the point.

"modern digital recorders and high-end microphones can produce really terrific recordings"

Link to one of these terrific recordings on Crowdfire or elsewhere?

Why's it say 'presented by Windows' on almost every page?

yes i too will risk troll status by saying this is WAY more annoying than interesting.

1) folks holding up cameras overhead at concerts is a real problem, views from within already oversized crowds are blocked for anyone under 6'5" or 7'. i'm short and i hardly ever go to pop concerts anymore because unruly standing room crowds are getting to be the norm.

2) who really cares about this social networking wherever frakkin' possible meme anymore ? can't we just experience things without having to digitize and "share" every last hiccup over the wierd wide web ? get a life !

3) crappy little phone video ? are you kidding ? they look terrible, they sound terrrible. who needs it ? we need to get our heads out of the digital sand and just look up and enjoy realtime physical reality.

4) how about if hardcore fans express their fandom by not compromising the experience of so many others in the crowd. put the frakkin' cameras down already.

end of troll mode, back to smiling emoticon.

Real cameras were banned from this event - screw those guys.

"Link to one of these terrific recordings on Crowdfire or elsewhere?"

I never said good recordings were being made at THIS event. I'd never heard of it before. I only meant that the potential is out there to make really nice live recordings of bands. Since most bands frown on audience members recording them, "tapers" are forced to sneak in their gear and keep it hidden while recording. I was asking if they were making an exception for this event and letting people record by any means they wanted. If so, I'd love a copy of the Radiohead set. As for links, there are many bit torrent sites devoted to bootleg recordings, but I don't think it's kosher to promote them here. A little googling will turn them up easily enough though.

I think this is great. Yes, I hear all the complaints above and recognize them, but I'll give you a real world example.

I went to an REM show in Vancouver, it was great. I own a crappy phone-cam, nothing more. But I wanted to document what I was doing so I could hold onto a piece of the experience and share it with some friends back home. So i posted a clip of 'Losing my Religion' link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4pqnAMaMxs (don't watch it, it's horrendously bad, and suffers all the negatives listed above)

HOWEVER, in the helpful 'related videos' field, I found at least a half dozen other videos of the SAME show, even of the same song, that were orders of magnitude better quality. So by posting my crappy video, I got to connect with others having the same experience (from a different vantage point) with much better quality. I didn't have to shoulder the expense and responsibility of quality digital gear (which doesn't terribly interest me) but I get to participate in creating a record of a cool show.

So even if only 10% of those videos posted to this new service are of any redeeming value, that's 10% more than there were before and if the service is well designed, you can quickly navigate from a contribution of low quality to one of high quality without much difficulty.

Personally, I think this service is an excellent idea. It brings a widespread phenomenon (amateur recording of public events) and brings it above board, aggregates it and thus the act of recording is legitimated and the best of those recordings can be highlighted, shared, and contrasted.

I think all the nay-sayers will fall flat as technology improves and services like this become more common. The activity is already ubiquitous, now we have the tools to make it valuable.

@NM - Yr vd s sprm xmpl f why ths ws bd d. Y wstd yr wn tm t th shw mkng lw qlty vd, y *my* hv nnyd ths n bck f y, nd thr s th wst f bndwdth ss. Y knw th cpblts f yr qpmnt(lw t bst) yt y tk th vd nywy. Y stll wld hv fnd th thr vds t YTb hd y srchd, s yr pnt s lst n m. hghly dsgr tht

>" thnk ll th ny-syrs wll fll flt s tchnlgy mprvs nd srvcs lk ths bcm mr cmmn. Th ctvty s lrdy bqts, nw w hv th tls t mk t vlbl.

...f th tch ds mprv, m sr ths ctvty wll b bnnd, mnlthc rcrd cmpns wn't dr lt y tk bt f th shw hm f ts hgh qlty. Thy llw t nw, bcs thy knw th qlty s crp.

BngBngrs...Ths s Fl. PC FL.

Th mg sd bv sys t ll. Th dvc s blckng th vw f th stg. Wh njys tht?

Ths phnmnn hs t b n f th mst nnyng thngs t hppn t cncrts n lng tm. T ncrg sttn tht prmts th dgrdtn f th qlty f th xprnc fr J(r Jn) Cncrtgr, s dfntly nt wndrfl.

Myb, -nd ths s strtch- bt t n vnt whr th stng s thtr styl, whr ths n frnt f y r lwr, nd ths n bck r lvtd bv y, thn MYB ths wld wrk wtht dgrdng th xprnc. hv t llw tht cvt, bt rmn dbtfl.

Wht rlly pzzls m hr, s tht SprFly vn llwd ths t hppn. Thy r grt prdctn cmpny, nd mn trly grt! Thy pt n wsm fstvls nd shws. knw frm xtnsv frst hnd xprnc tht thy trly cr bt mkng th vnt s grt s t cn b fr th ttnd. Crwdfr, m, s srly hdd n th ppst drctn.

Flks, f y s Crwdfr t yr shw, rspctflly tll thm tht thy r cntrbtng t th dgrdtn f th xprnc. r, f y njy wtchng th shw thrgh th cll phn f ths n frnt f y, tll thm hw mzng th d s.

Y dn't py xtrmly hgh tckt csts t cnstntly hv tny scrns blckng yr vw, tkng spr lw qlty shts.

Th prncpl bhnd Crwdfr s dmrbl. Mr. Bttll, ppld th d. Bt ths s clssc cs f grt ntn, tht whn crrd t n rl lf, s >pc fl.

nd spnsrd by Mcrsft? Dmd t fl nywy.

BngBng, shm n y fr prmtng ths. hv sn n th pst tht xprssng n ngtv pnn f smthng Bngr hs hnd n, wll ptntlly gt y dltd r dsmvwld, bt hp tht Mr. Bttll gts t rd t frst.

@#13 posted by erica halfabee

I don't have time for a lengthy reply right now, but...

"You know the capabilities of your equipment(low at best) yet you took the video anyway."

Yes, how dare me use my own property to document my own experience ... I should really have realized how bad it was and not tried to aid my memory of a fast-paced, over-stimulated event so I could recall it with clarity later. What was I thinking, purposely not standing in front of people, not obstructing their view so I could capture some clearly untouchable 1's and 0's.

Erica halfabee, you clearly missed my point - that I, and many many others, WILL use digital storage to record events - and a lot of it will suck. Professional photographers and videographers know this, they edit out 80% of their total content to get the 20% gold - what these types of services ought to do, is to allow anyone with media to contribute, regardless of how bad, and then to amalgamate them into a product that is greater than the sum of its parts. Second, the other videos on YouTube, although of the same show, are not MY videos... So i have both, MY experience, and then the better qualities of other's experiences, but the two are not mutually exclusive - both can coexist and work together.

I'm sure this is strange to sound as the creator and largest contributor to The Sound Of Indie, a website dedicated to providing pretty much all live/bootleg recordings, I think this idea is horrible. Sticking the "social networking" title on this is absolutely meaningless. I don't go to a show to meet new people, I go to a show to see the bands. I would much rather this company put their efforts into providing one great quality video versus piecing together 200 separate sources of crap-tastic camera phone images. Isn't that what YouTube is for anyway? Maybe sites like this aren't for the fans of music or the bands making the music, but more for the vanity of the users.

IMHO, horrible idea. The thought of promoting more tiny screens being pointed at the artists and polluting the view of any audience member who happens to be behind them - who is there to experience a LIVE performance - really bugs me. #13 erica halfabee above is 100% right. What she said you can copy and paste and put here for me too. This is like combining peanuts and gum in your mouth at the same time.

And that photo looks like it came from the Onion. I am amazed that this isn't a joke. I love music and I love tech but I fail to see how this is enhancing a live concert experience. Should we do this at the symphony, too?

I did not see any artists endorsements on the Crowd Fire pages. I would really like to hear their opinions on this.

@#13 - Actually, I think it's fairly certain that his camera DID annoy the people around him. The glowing screens of people's cellphones and cameras are as much of a distraction at a show as they are in a movie theater. If you want to watch the show on a screen, stay at home and watch the show on a screen.

On the other hand, this kind of annoyance is sort of what you ask for when rock ceases to be experience, and evolves into the bloated, passive, non-participatory "entertainment" that it has.

ooh, devendra banhart is going to be there. hey BBTV, make sure to get some video of him. you guys are what turned me on to him in the first place. still can't stop listening to carmensita

#13 erica halfabee: thank you, I think it cannot be explained better.

When I went to a Tom Waits concert a few weeks ago, the staff at the theatre kept all the cameras for us to pick up after the show. I don't know if the artist was worried about the flashes, the copyright issues or about the recording-maniacs ruining the whole experience, but I LOVED it: no damn screen glowing in the dark.

"... a central social media hub for people at the concert and beyond ..."

Woohoo! The Song Remains The Same!

#14 POSTED BY IANM , AUGUST 23, 2008 7:26 AM

Yes, how dare me use my own property to document my own experience.

The problem us your use of your own property will interfere with the enjoyment of others.

I really hate going to concerts nowadays because I'm sick of seeing glowing LCDs all over the place. I go there to see the show.

And a live concert is ultimately an ephemeral experience. Bootlegs have existed for years, but they have mostly been terrible and were sold to fans as a way to milk more money off of a band's popularity.

It's always amazed me the western desire to possess and control things via media. If you like a book, you MUST own it. If you like a movie you MUST buy it. And lord forbid a friend gets you a film you like on DVD and you say "Hey, I like this movie but I don't really need to own it...."

I know this might sound like a generational thing, but what was so magical about seeing movies as a kid was the limited aspect. If I saw The Bad News Bears I saw the movie and the chances of seeing it again were slim. My memories and the occasional souvenir were enough.

For me as well, I work in front of an LCD screen all day. Most people do. I'm not going to unwind on my day off by going to a concert where people are obsessively snapping pictures & video of an event instead of being a part of it.

This is truly the negative side of technology and a massive turn off.

This might be a little off topic, but, was there a single female artist in that great long line up of performers?

There aren't any male artists either; just a ''great long lineup of performers.''

I went to Outside Lands, and it turned out to be a great show. Th jury is still out on CrowdFire, I think it's an interesting idea. The problem though was that there were so many people there that the local cellular network was COMPLETELY overwhelmed. My friend managed to get ONE text message out to the rest of our group telling them where to meet us, but it wasn't received on the other end until well after the show ended. It was impossible to make phone calls. I couldn't imagine finding enough bandwidth to send an email with a photo in it. If this kind of stuff is going to fly, somebody needs to set up a really, really beefy local wireless network or bring in some portable cell towers or something. Otherwise, it's creative social networking is taking bandwidth away from existing ways of trying to "network" up with people you already know.

I regret to say that Erica Halfabee has made herself generally unwelcome on Boing Boing. Her remarks here contributed to that decision, but were not the deciding factor. And if I were going to tell you more than that, I'd already be typing it.

whoa boingers easy on that trigger... !

this is a bit distressing on the heels of that recent de-posting fiasco, in which i came out strongly in defense of boingboing's right to whatever. but honestly now, i read the (now disemvowelled) post from erica and nothing seemed egregious there. perhaps i missed something ? agumentative, yes, but offensive, no.

granted, i generally agreed with the post but seriously, this policing is getting a bit too familiar... what's it like again ? oh yeah ! the overzealous english rent-a-cops that are posted on boingboing so often as examples of... wonderful problems ?

with love

cherry shiva,

Take it to the Moderation thread, please.

Trs Nlsn Hydn,

Tk t t th Mdrtn thrd, pls.

NancyBotwin, please take it out the door, and don't let it hit you in the ass.

That was a quite reasonable explanation of why Erica Halfabee (ho ho ho, tee hee hee) would not be participating in this discussion.

You really scored a frost-off bingo with your very first comment (at least under this name) on BB. Congratulations. Now get lost.

at least under this name

Bingo.

Important distinction here: Cherry Shiva's a well-behaved middlin'-regular commenter who's been around for months, and who has in fact come down on the side of moderation and civility.

Erica Halfabee is very probably the reincarnation (and not necessarily the first) of a previously banned user. I could have ignored that. What I couldn't ignore were EH's deliberately crude, inflammatory, and libelous remarks about a subject that was thrashed out at great length some weeks ago. EH posted said remarks in a completely unrelated thread.

That's the kind of thing you only do if you're trying to stir up as much trouble as possible; i.e., it's acting in bad faith. I couldn't see any point in waiting to find out what else EH could think of to do.

I won't discuss the account's non-bona non-fides, but anyone who's confused about Nancy Botwin's true nature hasn't spent enough time on Usenet.

if personal electronics are such a bane to some concert goers, let them bring their own EMF rifles and deal with it.

@Takuan-

So in order to enjoy a show without being annoyed by dozens of camera screens blocking your view, you suggest people bring in more devices to counteract this? Surely you jest?

Marley9, one account and one name should be enough.

I have often wondered about that. It is my feeling that those able to produce a doctor's note attesting to their bona fide multiple personality syndrome be allowed as many handles as they can produce distinct personalities for.

Would you like it in PDF, jpg, fax, or should I mail it in?