Groups > sci.electronics.design > #742612

OT: Artemis II network TV coverage

Path	csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!border-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!border-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.netnews.com!postmaster.netnews.com!dca.netnews.com!not-for-mail
X-Trace	DXC=YSkmL2_a?biO7B^IE@GQfnU5[F2hIijDo7J470dMQQ7k^dBJd4@>=od[IgjAdO5KJih]J;WohKJ`aJk6NUC2PhcfmUh60W[bTIl]AWKk[506ne
X-Complaints-To	support@frugalusenet.com
Date	Wed, 1 Apr 2026 22:54:38 -0400
MIME-Version	1.0
User-Agent	Mozilla Thunderbird
Newsgroups	sci.electronics.design
Content-Language	en-US
From	bitrex <user@example.net>
Subject	OT: Artemis II network TV coverage
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
Lines	14
Message-ID	<69cdda6f$0$25$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> (permalink)
NNTP-Posting-Host	127.0.0.1
X-Trace	1775098479 reader.netnews.com 25 127.0.0.1:49447
Xref	csiph.com sci.electronics.design:742612

Show key headers only | View raw

Just the worst camerawork/editing I think I've ever seen on a space 
launch! Total amateur hour.

Booster cam glitches out, launch pad camera doesn't pan up, rocket out 
of frame, wobbly, zoomed too close or too far, digital artifacts, 
several pointless cuts in the span of a few seconds, then they cut to 
the crowd right at SRB sep.

The broadcast footage of STS-1 in 1981 was way better. Even Apollo 11 
was way better..

'Integrity' is a terrible name for a ship but though the rocket will 
never look as sci-fi cool as the Shuttle it's not entirely unattractive, 
in kind of a chunky, orange sort of way.

Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

OT: Artemis II network TV coverage bitrex <user@example.net> - 2026-04-01 22:54 -0400
  Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-04-02 00:36 -0700
  Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> - 2026-04-02 10:22 +0100
    Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-04-02 09:53 +0000
      Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> - 2026-04-03 13:34 +0100
        Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-04-03 17:11 +0000
          Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> - 2026-04-04 17:13 +0100
    Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage bitrex <user@example.net> - 2026-04-02 16:10 -0400
  Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-04-02 08:12 -0700
    Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-04-02 16:17 +0000
      Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-04-02 09:24 -0700
        Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-04-02 18:05 +0000
    Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-04-02 17:02 +0000
      Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2026-04-02 11:26 -0700
        Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-04-02 19:37 +0000
    Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Buzz McCool <buzz_mccool@yahoo.com> - 2026-04-02 11:34 -0700
      Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-04-02 12:13 -0700
        Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-04-03 07:44 +0000
    Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage someone <cffbf4deb9142bce48974efc0e64dede@example.com> - 2026-04-03 16:45 +0000
  Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-04-04 18:18 -0700
    Re: OT: Artemis II network TV coverage Jan Panteltje <alien@comet.invalid> - 2026-04-05 07:40 +0000

csiph-web