All of these shot, written, edited, tracked and produced in 1-day turns by VJ Aaron Rocket. More to come from the team…
[youtube=http://youtube.com/watch?v=6GAdl1K6Kcs] [youtube=http://youtube.com/watch?v=VC91DdC_vvc] [youtube=http://youtube.com/watch?v=Hawksb807io] [youtube=http://youtube.com/watch?v=liaFk5cdvSI]
10 Comments
pencilgod October 11, 2007
BTW this isn’t Toyota to Porsche its Skateboard to Toyota.
pencilgod October 10, 2007
I’ve been posting my work for you to look at for over 5 years but you couldn’t be bothered to click the links huh? I’ve even posted bad days. http://www.b-roll.net/forum/showthread.php?t=18554
I’ve had some very nice reviews of my work from Hollywood cinematographer’s actually Event 16 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0831289/
they don’t rate the acting or the script but they liked the camerawork.
rosenblumtv October 10, 2007
Stephen
It is, in fact, good enough.
There is a spectrum of quality in all things. Toyota to Porsche. As I have never seen your work, I don’t know where you are on the spectrum, but my guess is if I showed it to a Hollywood cinematographer, he might react to yours as you react to these.
These kids are for the most part just starting out. For many, this is their first job – and what an opportunity. Make a piece for air every day. What a challenge. For an extremely small local news operation. I think its a great first job – they’re learning a lot.
I wish someone had given me a shot like this when I was starting out. Trust me, in a few years, they’re going to be great – and earning a lot more and in much bigger markets. So yeah, its good enough.
pencilgod October 10, 2007
So which is it Michael? Good or good enough? There is a world of difference.
“If you think that quality suffers with the VJ format, just take a look at what these folks are turning out daily….â€
You challenged us to look at the quality and it’s poor. Now you say it’s ok to make rubbish as long as it sells? That’s hardly a ring endorsement of the VJ model.
Are these really the best you can do?
Look let me help you out with just a few basic things. None of them are technical just good working practice.
A 4 min story should not be a 1min story that repeats the same information 3 times. You need to keep reengaging the viewer with new information.
Interviews are the building block of a story. Instead of shooting them against a white brick wall or a tent, what can you put in the background to tell a story? A picture is worth a thousand words. Have you interviewee doing something that ads to the story. You might find they relax a bit more and give better grabs if they are doing something they know and it looks relevant.
Don’t show me signs and then read them to me, that’s bad shooting, bad editing and bad writing all in one shot. In fact just don’t shoot signs I don’t watch TV to read.
All the editing suffers from lack of pacing. Pacing is the dark art of editing. If you don’t have that skill and none of them do, they can fake it. For news style story a shot longer than 4 seconds needs a compelling reason to be there or it drags the whole story down. Two short shots have more energy than one long wide, a motivated move or pull focus can be longer but will seem shorter, it’s doing something.
Get them to do that consistently and then we can work on the technical nightmare, no need to send me a cheque.
Cliff Etzel October 10, 2007
pencilgod said:
I say the very same thing about broadcast news. IMO, this has more substance and creativity than the cookie cutter pablum being dispensed by the current crop of TV shooters. They’re willing to try something new – to make mistakes, and not be penalized when they do – can the same be said for the current crop of broadcast shooters?
I doubt it.
rosenblumtv October 10, 2007
2-5 mins, yes.
We have every hope and expectation that this will roll out across the Fios Network. That decision, of course, rests with Verizon.
Peter Ralph October 10, 2007
Does each person go out and research, shoot and edit a five minute piece every day?
Is this a revenue stream for Verizon or an experiment that they are prepared to sponsor for a year or two?
rosenblumtv October 10, 2007
Dear Stephen
Let me explain something to you.
Your opinion of the quality of these or other pieces, interesting though it may be, actually does not mean a thing.
The only opinions that matter here are those of Verizon, the viewers and the advertisers. All of them seem to be quite happy with the content and the stories.
At that end of the day, that is all the I am really concerned with.
Here’s a good Latin phrase you might take a moment to learn:
De gustibus non disputandem est.
pencilgod October 10, 2007
When Michael touted the total VJ model one of its supposed strengths was to be the stories would get better and the quality wouldn’t suffer. Well guess what. These are awful. Not even as good as local news at it’s worse. These aren’t TV stories. Its badly shot wallpaper pasted over a badly written radio script. What is the benefit? Why would anyone watch?
Cliff Etzel October 10, 2007
Good solid content – Much better production values compared to the last posting on this topic.
Not all video projects need to be shot with technical perfection – these examples are more down to earth and informative – something you don’t see in traditional news broadcast – no matter what those who ascribe to that world view say.