VJ Series on Nat Geo

[imported_blank]

Originally posted by Nino:
Given certain unavoidable budget limitations as in the Doctors series, the least that can be done in order to make the show viewable, is to use high quality people

For $3500 a week, Michael could have hired some top-notch cinematographer and even with the limitation of the equipment, those shows could have been deserving of the old NG instead of long boring news reports.

With all due respect Nino but in this case, why sacrifice on the gear budget????
With Michael's budget you could use "BOTH" high quality people and high quality gear. I'm not implying that a 13 week series can have those enormous budgets of the old National Geographic days but...
You do not need to send 43 Video journalists to the field, this is ridiculous.

I wish Michael would be "straight" with us on the budget details. He said and I quote

Some good VJs command up to $3500K per week... they all get housing and airfare and meals. And insurance.

Michael, are you implying that all 43 VJs got paid $3500K per week plus ALL expenses?

$451,500 + airfare + accommodations + meals. + post production costs.

If Michael is being totally honest here then I have to say one could produce a reasonable show from the above budget. Granted, it would have to be shot on video and not film but you could use real beta crews with that budget. You do not need 43 people all armed with cameras spraying at nothingness -- in my opinion THREE REAL CREWS would of been more efficient. But if planned right you could pull it off with one FIVE MEN CREW>

You can and you will get good deals on real beta crews if you have a proven plan - especially a plan that focuses on some kind of charity work like Doctors without Borders. In fact if Michael shares the REAL work budget with us and if the real budget is anything close to paying 43 VJs $3,500 each per week + expenses including airfare, housing & meals + the budget for the main producers (Michael and his wife) then I myself will come out with a working plan and post it here on B-ROLL. I won't even cut into Michael & wife budget since it's their idea and their project.

Planning out the airfares and accommodations for less people would save enough money to use beta gear. Having the producer produce, the DP plan the shots, the sound tech concentrating on sound would save TONS of money. A lot less wasted time, more efficient production.

That's one way of cutting the fat. And it certainly will be a hell of a lot more profesional looking FINAL PRODUCT.

For Post & EDITING - not having to wade through countless hours of 43 cameras home video will save costs enough to edit and post on digi-beta or IMX gear. Remember Michael the game plan is "QUALITY & EFFICIENCY" not "HOARDS of LOW QUALITY QUANTITY"

That's another way to cut the fat.

Sending 43 VJs to the field is ridiculous - how the hell can you plan anything with so many cameras???? --- Without having some organized pre-plan??? You can't!!!! You just end up spraying everything - wasting money.

In fact I bet I could pay a couple of "FULL" crews "FULL" wages for beta gear, DP, sound-tech and producer, Even a correspondent. I could fly in all this gear and even hire local extra hands to help with minding & carrying gear and I would still be under Michael's "claimed" budget. Granted this would NOT be like an old FILM NG production but it would look close to most NETWORK docu shows produced today...

Remember --- Just the savings on the EXTRA AIRFARE, HOUSING, & INSURANCE would probably pay for the BETA GEAR including SUPPORT GEAR.

My point to Nino is "You don't have to sacrifice GEAR quality if you pre-plan everything the right way.

My point to Michael is "You don't need to have millions of cameras rolling off at the same time --
It is very important to have the DP concentrating on photography, have the sound tech concentrating on sound, have the producer concentrating on producing etc. Michael this is a PROVEN way to do things in a very efficient way --- all you need is a pre-plan and the right people.

But I'm afraid Nino is right about one thing.
Michael’s objective is not the quality of the show as much as being able to show that his own VJs can produce programs for a well-respected name like NG and therefore help to jump start his VJ program that right now is stranded somewhere off the US shores

But I guess we all have a couple of hundred channels on the dial for a reason - so each and everyone of us can choose what to watch and what NOT to watch - only time will tell what will happen with beta crews and what will happen with VJs.... I know what I watch...

 

[Nino]

Ivan,

This is an entirely new topic and you are absolutely right. My entire discussion was that if you must use lesser equipment at least use good people.

When it comes to budgeting a production Michael has some very strange way of doing it. Many times I tried to do the math and things came out very screwy.
The numbers are very puzzling. 43 cameramen on location for 3 weeks make a total of 129 weeks of labor. If each shoot 5 tapes a day five days a week we have 3225 tapes to make 13 hours of TV. Incredible.

Okay Michael, these questions are for you, let see if your VJs and methods of productions really save money.

Why do you need 43 cameramen to produce 13 hours of TV?

Why do you need 3 weeks on location per cameraman? Based on 43 of them you had 3 on each job plus 4 as spare. This is a total of nine weeks of labor for a 60 minutes show.

How many tapes each cameraman used during the 3 weeks?

Who reviewed and made the footage decision and how long did it take to do it.

Level with us.

 

[cameragod]

But it’s not about saving money, it’s about selling a lame idea to the channel by dressing it up as an exiting new concept. Instead of trying to sell a worthless over done concept about, yawn, Doctors again, you blind them with dramatic sounding stats, 43 cameras go low profile over 3 weeks to discover the hidden, never before seen story behind the story beneath the facts that are yet to be unearthed!!! (The three exclamation marks are vital at this point.) See a much easier sell.
It’s not about the technology.
It’s not about the craft.
It’s not even about the story.
It’s about selling the same old crap in a bright shiny new wrapper. VJ’s are a new selling point for now, but they are just a one trick pony. Their use is limited and so is their future.

 

[Terry E. Toller]

Two weeks ago, I was fired by a Chicago production company to shoot a pro woman's football game. I don't know if these ladies on the production crew are graduates of the VJ school but in talking to them, they seem to think like Michael. They all shot with PD150's, no extra audio, just point and shoot...

I set two of the cameras up with shotguns with fishpoles and gave some quick audio lessons. The girl doing fan interviews was given a folding reflector. She used it to throw fill light into the faces of the crowd that was back lit.

After the game, we looked as some of the video in the parking lot. The producer was amazed at the quality of the audio with the shotgun mics. Here is someone who has been shooting for several years and has never used a shotgun!

She was also impressed at the image quality by using a reflector on the interviews. Again, she has been walking around the past few years just shooting things as they are. Sort of VJ style?

Anyway, the ladies left Sacramento with some new ideas on how to make their images and audio better. there is a major difference between a VJ and a professional.

 

[Thomas]

I the word "fired" instead of "hired" a Freudian slip? Or just a typo?

F and H are separated by G on the keyboard. Interesting.

 

[cameragod]

Yeah that’s almost as bad as forgetting to put the letter “s” in “Is.”

 

[Thomas]

Hardly the same level of ressonance.

Its one thing to be hired. Quite another to be fired. Opposite circumstances separated by one letter on the keyboard. Ironic how close they are.

Conversely, there isn't a bit of irony in the typo of I and Is. If you can find it, let me know.

Plus, ironic or not, if Terry was offended (and why should he be, the comment was made with humor intended) he could answer for himself. No need to be protected from down under. He seems capable of the task.

 

[cameragod]

I felt it was ironic that you made a typo correcting a typo. I took no offence, I’m sure Terry took no offence and I meant no offence.

A guy sat and watched as two thieves stole a gate. When his boss got there he asked why he didn’t stop them
“They already had the gate I didn’t want to say anything in case they decided to take a fence.”

 

[Thomas]

Sorry, I didn't know you guys were a team.

 

[Rosenblum]

Terry,
Just to be clear, ALL my VJs work with Sennheiser ME64s on the cameras along with Sennheiser RF Evolution series 100 radio mics. This is standard issue. Audio is very important to us. We do NOT point and shoot. Just because someone has bought a PD150 and learned to turn it on, it does not make them one of mine.

 

[omni43]

It's a shame to see these days the hacks out there that claim to be cameramen, so 20 something year old running around with a PD-150. What is really sad is that the networks are beginning to hire these people; pushing aside experienced, knowledgable people for the sake of saving a buck. The video is blu, who gives a ****, run it any way. These people care little about quality. If some kid will stand behind a camera for 20,00 a year, they'll hire them.

By the way nobody in there right mind would pay a "VJ" 3,500 a week after taking a couple of classes. That's pure fiction.

 

[cameragod]

I’ve worked on a lot of reality shoots and nobody has ever had to use subtitles because the sound is so bad. Something we are starting see a lot of lately.

Originally posted by Rosenblum:
Terry,
Just to be clear, ALL my VJs work with Sennheiser ME64s on the cameras

That is exactly the wrong type of mic for reality type shooting. The pattern is too wide and you end up with too much background noise. If that’s the sort of advice you are peddling on the three week Dojo then you are ripping them off.

 

[imported_blank]

The problem with not properly trained VJs is they don't know the difference between patterns. They think pointing the camera with any type mounted mic is all that's required for all situations.

That is exactly the wrong type of mic [ME64] for reality type shooting
Cameragod, you are absolutely right - - - for situations following around subject(s) but if
1))I'm not just following around subjects
or
2))If the subjects are wired,
or
3))If we have a soundman
I prefer having a wider pattern mounted mic for "nat sound" only.
4)) Of course if OMB to gather bites I pop out the external for ANY bite gathering.

The benefit of having a wider pattern mounted nat sound mic would be -- if say some important but not overly loud sound source should happen just off line of pattern view. I may want to pan the camera into the source. With the nat sound already into the shot it will seem smooth and natural to the viewer. With a narrow nat sound mic you wouldn't hear the sound until it would be in the mic's line of view. The only way that shot (with narrow mic) would be usable (in my opinion) would be with a video cut. Could use an audio insert, which of course would be unethical for some programming and too time consuming for certain other programming.

Of course I would never think of using a mounted wide mic for "line of view" only sounds, certainly not for any speakers. You get no argument from me CG, for Rosenblum's OMB one mic only interviews that is the WRONG type of mic. just thought I'd explain a reason for a wide mounted mic even for reality TV - of course for any quality 1) 2) 3) and 4) above requirements have to be met.

Make any sense?

 

[Michaelrosenblum]

all interviews are done with a wireless.

 

[cameragod]

Originally posted by Michaelrosenblum:
all interviews are done with a wireless.

Oh right so if a grieving mother quietly sobs out the story of how her daughter was dying you would say; “Wait I need to get a wireless on you.” Or “speak up old woman I can’t here your mumbling over the wurr of the life support machine.”
Or just not worry about it and have the voiceover tell us what she said.
Why not use the right mic and just have it as it was? I mean it is supposed to be reality TV.
I know, why bother sending out VJ’s at all. You could save a bucket by showing photos with a voice over telling us what happened.

 

[Rosenblum]

yes
that is correct
first you wire the subject, then you let them talk. In TRAUMA, LIFE IN THE ER, (TLC) which is still running after 9 years, the FIRST thing you do is select your characters, wire them, and then stick with them. Sometimes we shot for 3 weeks or a month.
Do you think that making any of these shows is simply a matter of showing up and shoving a camera and microphone in someone's face? or 'hoping' something will happen if we hang out long enough?
They are cast. They are directed to some extent, but they are very much produced.

The biggest point of confusion you make is that you think a VJ is a cameraman with a small camera. This is NOT the case. the VJ is a journalist (get the J part?) or a producer. they take intellectual control of the content as well as take the pictures (and capture the audio).

now, I know that the vast majority of established and successful cameramen (and women) who frequent this site are more than capable of producing as well as shooting. they might not want to, but they can...and probably do to a far greater extent than they realize.

THIS is the essence of the revolution. It is not really about cameras. You want to work in beta, be my guest. The greatest advantage of the PD150 is that it is so inexpensive that it opens the door to lots more people who want to try. No, the real revolution is combining shooting and producing. It brings a sense of authorship to your work, and marries the visual to the thought. (Yeah yeah, I know/ You work with this producer and you understand each other so well, blah blah.) Well, great. Keep it up. Have a great time. but if you ever want to do your own work, have your own vision for something....that is another story

 

[cameragod]

Ok Michael now I know exactly what sort of crap you peddle. Rather and hear the “character” you have cast interact with people, because you cheap camera set-up isn’t up to it, you get a bunch of directed/staged mini P2C’s from the character telling the audience what they think just happened here.
It’s bad journalism and frustratingly bad TV. Why tell when any halfway competent cameraman could show?
This isn’t a revolution. The NPPA have preached story-telling shots forever. You know those reporterless stories we love so much, well they are done by just the cameraman, no really watch some good TV.
So none of what you say is new. A lot of it is just armature night with spin.
Yes I can and do produce, I don’t need a producer or reporter hanging over my shoulder, I can be as J as you like, but I don’t limit myself by making dumb equipment choices and then kid myself I’m part of the revolution.

 

[imported_blank]

Michael.
You used to preach on here how "COMPELLING" your stuff is, COMPELLING because your people don't have to fumble for/with equipment. You used to say that "WE the CREWS" miss the shot because by the time we "SET UP" the shot is ovuh! Now = exactly what you state here. ...first you wire the subject, then you let them talk... Do you think that making any of these shows is simply a matter of showing up and shoving a camera and microphone in someone's face? Didn't you say before that TRIPODS, LIGHTS & EXTERNAL MICS just get in the way???? I am hoping that ONE DAY you will post here """"YES WE DO SET UP ON TRIPOD AND LIGHT OUR SUBJECTS""""

-------------------------------
Hey cameragod,
I think you're a brilliant guy CG - Michael should take all the free advise you are willing to give him.

A story for you CG,
The other day I had an OMB shoot inside a crowded mall. One day B-ROLL only. Establishing shots of how busy the mall was. Many cash registers opening - closing in one wide shot -. etc I wanted all kinds of "being busy noises" and visuals to be picked up in wide shots. I decided to go with an on-board wide mic. I like to call it "on the fly live sound reinforcement". Remember, a mic like the 64 is still a " cardioid" and it limits most noise after L 270 degrees - R 90 degrees (or so) off axis.

The purpose of this day's shoot was to show the "cash -cow" business to future investors. I find a highly directional mic like the 66 a little too limiting for this type of shots.

For close-up shots of say the cash register opening - clerk's hand putting bills inside etc - I used a second mic (narrow) on a floor mic stand. I rolled off both tripod and handheld shots. I find a highly directional mic like the 66 mounted on board without having soundman would be "shifting" even for some closer shots with wide-mode camera movements. That's why (time permitting) I place a stationary narrow mic (off shot) in my line of field for the closer shots. Camera movement - yet no sound shifting. OMB fun eh?

On a different day (for the same shoot) I was sent OMB to the airport to gather planes coming and going. I found the wide mic to be too wide for this - since there was way too much jet noise off camera. So I swapped the wide mic for a narrow shotgun. Perfect sound on the headphones.

In case you're wondering this was a limited budget "real gear" corporate shoot. No real budget for audio over lays or jibs n stuff or even soundman or producer for b-roll days.

Again CG, I think you're a brilliant guy - Michael should take all the free advise you are willing to give him. Just wanted to share why a mic like the 64 can have purposes even in reality TV. Oh wait - that was corporate, but I think you know what I mean. Anyway I use shoulder cams and always have a narrow external with me, 2 seconds away....

Michael should of purchased switch able "Normal": Unidirectional "Tele": Supercardioid mics but the VJs probably wouldn't know when to use what mode....

 

[cameragod]

Sounds good to me Ivan. Not that different to what I do.
For that type shoot I still like to run a directional mic on the camera for safety but I keep a transmitter with a lapel mic wrapped around it that I can hide strategically near the action. It’s omni pattern plus close proximity gives a terrific soundscape.
I used to shoot a lot of politicians on the road and sound became vital, if you missed a thing you were toast. A good directional mic is worth its weight in gold