| Video Source | ClimbingNarc Video Page
Related Videos
Areas: Lincoln Woods
Lincoln Woods: Part Two
GD Star Rating
loading...
loading...
Areas: Lincoln Woods
21 Responses to Lincoln Woods: Part Two
Leave a Reply
-
Narc: Hell yeah...
-
Ruomit: Still reading the narc in 2025...
-
Adam: Hi. I guess it’s been over 11 years since Mason ...
-
Jared: Use to visit this site daily. Miss you Narc! Hope ...
-
Chris Warner: Way to out the victim!...
-
chris marcolini: Did you ever find the falling block?...
-
Nate: The narc lives on, at least as an archive. Miss th...
I like seeing a local area represented, so my vote was filled with bias. That said, I enjoy the camera work and editing. Got some of the classics in there.
loading...
That executioner problem(v5 mini dagger wannabe) looked pretty cool. other than that, it didnt really weem worth it. Good looking problems, just not really exciting. Its hard to make moderate boulder problems look cool, and it was a good effort, but theyre still moderate boulder problems on a website with v14s and 15s on every other video
loading...
There is certainly something to be said for that, especially since you haven’t been there like I have, so there’s no personal connection. Also (I believe), every problem was climbed in one go, which kind of takes away from the excitement. I’ll watch a video of a v15 that is in some remote Swiss village I’ll never see, but I usually am not that excited to watch a video of moderates unless I’ve been there or want to go. As opposed to other moderate videos though, this production value was pretty good. A lot better than an iPhone set on a rock or (worse yet) getting rotated mid shot and had some good editing. And the climbing and videography/editing skills will only improve in time.
loading...
I still think the message here is whacky. Sponsored climbers, who love climbing enough to structure their lives around it, are soulless douchebags, but the people emulating them are not. It just doesn’t make any sense, and it’s kind of funny. It’s just too xenophobic for my taste, and one of the reasons I climb is to get away from xenophobic idiots. It also makes me wonder how many of these guys will be climbing in another few years, especially since it appears that looking cool is WAY more important to them than climbing to their abilities, or making any real connection with the greater community of rock climbers.
loading...
I may be missing the point here, but I’m fairly certain this has nothing to do with sponsored climbers. I took this more as a video that a few friends made of some boulders they climbed. Why hate on this video and ignore the iPhone videos? Surely the production values are not that offensively high? There are no grade requirements for people who want to make climbing videos, nor should there be. Climbing videos are (95% of them, anyhow) devoid of any message except: “I climbed a rock, and this is how it looked.” If you don’t like it, don’t watch it. Simple as.
loading...
I’m not sure how you came to this understanding. I think the name “<Sponsored" is supposed to mean nothing more than they climb and don't have a sponsorship. That leaves a wide berth for the group's abilities. So it can mean that they are complete newbies or that they are rather good, just don't have a company sending them free gear. And if they are climbing v7's, then they already have been climbing for a few years, so why would they stop any time soon? I'm pretty sure they've already gotten hooked, same as the rest of us. And I'm not quite sure how you can make a judgement on their level of connection with the climbing community based on one 5 minute video.
That, and I don't think you understand what xenophobic means. I think you're trying to say they're being judgmental perhaps? That they are making some assumption about "Sponsored climbers … [that] are soulless douchebags"? Which is actually very ironic, because you're making some baseless accusations.
loading...
Yes, xenophobic. They effectively say the world is divided into folks like them, and folks not like them (sponsored, and “< sponsored", and hence clearly a value statement about sponsored climbers). If I got that wrong, my bad. I guess I missed their message since they are "less than sponsored", yet somehow have the means to put together a video with the kind of quality that usually requires some kind of financial backing, replete with a grassroots marketing campaign and all. Sponsored climbers are not the problem IMO (especially since most sponsorships are straight up grassroots kinds of things, probably like what these guys have), I think it is all the poseurs trying to get too much credit for what they have done, trying to get attention despite not accomplishing anything that really deserves it. "< sponsored" are effectively the people that "< sponsored" is speaking out against, the people who give marketing campaigns too much influence over OUR community. Do these videos not promote that? Am I way off here? If so, good, I really hope I am the only one who sees these guys this way.
Contrast this video with Dave Grahams latest video. Dave's is just a nice, soulful, "I climb rocks and it's fun" kind of video, and he is crushing some of the hardest climbing around in it! He is not berating people who are not successful enough in climbing to get recognition for it. It makes no judgements about the dedicated members of the climbing community, and if anything has Dave Graham sharing the love throughout the video. It's a stark contrast. If "< sponsored" made positive videos like that, which would involve dropping the pseudo-positive "< sponsored" crap, this would be a message I could get behind. As is, it just reeks of all the other poseurs I have seen come through and damage the climbing community, making it a place that is vulnerable to market influence and control, allowing people to put boxes around one another, kind of like the box these guys are putting around sponsored climbers. These guys really need to do something more to explicitly separate themselves from that, otherwise they just come across as hypocrites and the kind of people I avoid at the crags. The annoying "look at me, look at me" type that these guys are apparently speaking out against..
BTW, I have seen some of their other videos, so I am not talking out my ass. For the record, they have been getting farther and farther away from that hypocritical message, which is good. I would just like to see them get a little farther away from it by dropping the "< sponsored" tag all together. Why not get some grassroots sponsored guys in there to show the distinction between them and the marketing whores?
loading...
For what it’s worth, I didn’t think this video felt smug or xenophobic (whatever that was supposed to mean). It was well done – and this idea that routes need to be hard to be in a video is super sad to me. If people are having fun and enjoying the moves on a nice route, than that exemplifies the heart of climbing to me much more than a grade – and makes climbing much more enjoyable to watch. Putting that on video (whatever the grade is) does not make it seem to me like they are trying to “look cool” but are, conversely, just trying to share the stoke. If you can only appreciate watching professional climbers on the worlds hardest routes, it seems to me like you are much more likely to fall out of the sport in a couple years because you just climb to try to look cool. Just my 2cents anyway…
loading...
I agree with you COMPLETELY considering they dropped the “< sponsored" crap. Then they would be sharing the stoke. The "< sponsored" thing taints them to be hypocrites. This video, with everything the same, with the "< sponsored" tag gone, is a COMPLETELY different video with a totally different message. THAT would make the positive part of their message actually come across. Also, I would be willing to bet most sponsored climbers, as well as recreational climbers, would really like that video and the values it would promote, so it would have a much broader appeal. The only downside I can think of is that doing that would hinder these guys ability to put a box around other climbers, all the while avoiding putting the same box around themselves.
The climbers I like to see in videos are lifers of some kind, and these guys don't fit the bill, otherwise they would know better than to create videos which ostracize large numbers of the climbing community…
loading...
Also, if I am the only one who sees this video this way, GOOD! If everyone else interprets these guys to be stoked on climbing and not judging or hating on anyone else, AWESOME! That is the message I am trying to help them send! A positive one!
loading...
They have written their agenda on their Vimeo page. Instead of just staring at the name of the group, it might be a worthwhile read:
“Less Than Sponsored is a collaborative of climbers that look to spread the joy of climbing to the masses. It started as a blog that we posted random thoughts and stories of our personal climbing experiences. When the idea of producing our own climbing videos came up, we made a promise that we would create as high quality videos that we could. After watching hundreds of videos of iPhones propped up against trees at ground level, we wanted to represent the climbing that you don’t always see in high quality climbing videos. We hope you all enjoy!”
From the above text it would seem that they want to produce high quality videos from easier boulder problems that you don’t see much in sponsored videos. i.e. the grades they climb are lower than sponsored videos show, and that’s where the “<sponsored" comes from.
I for one enjoy watching well made videos of problems where I can think "I could probably climb that." It gives me motivation to visit new areas.
loading...
Q, do you think their message would be more effective if they dropped the less than sponsored angle? Personally I like the i-phone propped against a tree videos, since anyone can produce them, thus anyone can spread their joy to the climbing community at large. Most of my favorite, soulful videos, involve an i-phone propped against a tree.
If we require that people actually make high production quality videos to spread the love of climbing, wouldn’t that disenfranchise all of us i-phone against a tree guys? Is that maybe the point of all this? To put the control of who directs our markets back into the hands of marketers and companies, since they are the ones who have the time/resources to make videos with a high production quality? It’s precisely their agenda (thanks for pointing it out) that makes me speak out against these guys. It is precisely their agenda that makes them into hypocrites. A non-hypocritical message would embrace all climbers, recreational and sponsored alike. These guys just encourage us to focus on our differences, not our similarities. However, if they dropped the less than sponsored gimmick, they would be focusing on our similarities, and thus actually be doing what you claim they are trying to do, which is bring the community closer together. Are you telling me there is no market for i-phone against a tree videos of less than sponsored climbers? Isn’t that the whole premise of DPM? Isn’t that the whole premise of i-phone against a tree videos?
loading...
So, they are producing high production quality videos to give the climbing community at large a voice? Isn’t that what i-phone against a tree videos do, give the climbing community at large a voice? So these guys are trying to give a voice to the climbing community at large by taking the climbing community at larges existant voice away? Huh!?!
loading...
I’m still really confused about how you came to this conclusion. They like to climb, and they aren’t sponsored. So…why should they not be allowed to say that with the name of their group? So they are “judging”, “hating”, “hypocrites” because they make it known that they aren’t sponsored, instead of the viewer just coming to the logical conclusion that they probably aren’t based upon their abilities? And where are they “berating” anyone in this video? Isn’t this also just them “having fun” just like Dave Graham, or any number of other professionals who make a living doing it? I think it’s cool that people who aren’t sponsored have the gear and ability to create a well produced video, and a video of them just having fun, which is the whole point of climbing anyway. If they weren’t having fun, then why would they spend hundreds of dollars on gear? To get internet props from people they don’t know and will never meet? If they were truly poseurs, then that would be all they would get out of it. I don’t climb harder than they do, but if one of my friends had the ability to produce a video this good, I’d be pretty stoked to be in it. I think it’s kind of ridiculous to say they are creating some division in the community where the cool kids don’t get free gear and the pros are worth denouncing. Everyone gets psyched on videos of the big name crushers, so how can you assume they have some sort of issue with them?
Bottom line, you saw their name, made an assumption (which is VERY subjective and lacks any evidence), and decided to label this guys. If anything, I’d say the issue is the fact that you decided you have an issue with them. If you don’t like it, okay. Then don’t watch. But don’t make accusations about a person’s character based on the name of their climbing group. And especially don’t bad mouth them on the internet. I bet if you actually knew these kids, you would have a completely different understanding of who they are. I’d like to believe the benefit of the doubt and their info on their Vimeo profile would be enough, but I guess not.
loading...
If I am the only one who sees some negative vibe sent out here, good. I just find the type of climber who whines about sponsored climbers and their existence to be the most obnoxious climbers out there. If I am the only one who sees them that way, good. I also agree that to keep up with even decently produced “send” videos of hard climbs, these videos of moderates need some plot to go with them. I have actually seen lots of videos like that on the internet that I very much enjoyed. Many of them are some of my favorite internet videos. After all, to me climbing is about hard work, determination, overcoming obstacles, and having fun. I love the videos that tell those stories.
loading...
I dont really care what their agenda is. Personally I thought the video was boring and not worth watching or posting. I watch climbing videos to get inspired by the crazy shit people are able to do with determination and hard work. Watching people do really hard/impossible looking boulder problems makes me want to try a lot harder to be the best climber I can be. Moderates just dont give off that same vibe. I think its great that the guys in the video are really psyched to climb, but who isnt? If they wanted to highlight how fun climbing is they wouldnt have only shown send videos. If its not about the grade but instead the joy of climbing why not show someone working a route. I would enjoy that a lot more than a bunch of guys sending v5s. But even that would have a hard time sitting next to most videos on here. Not all hard stuff is inspiring, but it sure as hell helps
loading...
“allowing people to put boxes around one another, kind of like the box these guys are putting around sponsored climbers.”
“A non-hypocritical message would embrace all climbers, recreational and sponsored alike. These guys just encourage us to focus on our differences, not our similarities.”
Do you not see the hypocrisy and irony in your rhetoric? This conversation has become pretty lame at this point.
loading...
Only in an intolerant of intolerance sense, which isn’t hypocritical but instead logical and rational. If you see them as purely positive, awesome. Thanks for participating in a lame conversation :).
loading...
my pleasure 😉
loading...
ps: nice (but not spectacular) video
loading...
Xenophobia refers to a fear of outsiders or some outside group. Since these guys are climbers, and pro climbers are also climbers, that doesn’t make any sense at all. The word does not mean what you think it means…
loading...