VJ's .. to train or not to train?

[Sasquatch]

Where do other Chiefs stand on training VJ's at their stations?

I have 11 (8FT + 3PT) News Photographers in my department. All of which I am responsible to oversee the quality of work as well as provide ongoing training. Our station also employs as many as 6 VJ's. None of which officially fall under my supervision.

Question. Does it serve my department or station well for me to make any attempt to bring up the level of photography amongst the VJ's? Would you?

 

[cameragod]

When I was working in the UK we had 12 “VJ’s” that to be honest couldn’t shoot anything we could use. Well they were called VJ’s but they were a bit different than Michaels model. They were set up with a cellphone, a mini DV camera kit and car, based all over the UK and often sent as a first response to get the pictures as stuff was happening and to see if it was worthwhile sending a real crew.
The concept was that as well as first response they should be able to do the odd feature piece. It didn’t work. The features were unscreenable and nobody wanted the VJ”s first response pictures in the stories. An audit by the ND showed that for every 3hours of raw VJ footage coming in less than 5 seconds was making it to air.

I was freelance at that stage and they hired me at twice my normal rate to come in and train the VJ’s to shoot. It was frustrating. I’ve trained a lot of people. The only thing I ask when I’m training is that the trainees actually want to learn. Of the 12 I felt only 3 had the right stuff and prepared to learn something. The others nodded along with what I showed them but they just didn’t get it and then went their own merry way making the same mistakes over and over.
After training the 3 were a hit. I had the excited ND drag me into his office to show me the vastly improved raw footage of the 3. One even did a few feature stories that didn’t suck and went to air.
Ironically they were gone in six months moving on to bigger and better things but for short time a few of the VJ’s were actually useful and not an embarrassment…
What was the question?

 

[Baltimore Shooter]

An audit by the ND showed that for every 3hours of raw VJ footage coming in less than 5 seconds was making it to air.

HAHAHAHA!!!!!!

ROFLMAO

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Warren

 

[SandRat]

Why not, if it improves your on-air look? That's what you're there for...sure, you've got a staff to manage, but what about doing what's best for the station. Not only that, but whatever local video appears on your station's news is a representation of you as a chief. It doesn't matter if it was shot by a full time photojournalist or a one-man-band.

 

[John M.]

Viewers don't distinguish between video shot by VJs and that shot by photographers. They see video. That doesn't make you obligated to train the VJs but the quality of their shooting reflects on everyone at your station who shoots. In your situation, I'd see which VJs had the aptitude and interest to become decent shooters and focus my attention on helping them.

 

[Sasquatch]

Make things better.

Viewers don't distinguish between video shot by VJs and that shot by photographers. They see video.

Well said. I'm tired of being embarresed by what I see on our cast. That's why I wanted the job (as chief) to begin with.

 

[sneakybastard]

It's a crap shoot. If you train someone to do 2 jobs at one time, then you might risk losing one of your valuable full time photogs, however, as the chief photographer, you are ultimately responsible (at least in my opinion) for the quality of all video that makes the air.

Pick you battles, but don't compromise your shooting staff that makes the newscast worth watching. As Rosenbloom puts it, "anyone can shoot". As I put it, "Yes, a monkey can pick up a camera and pull the trigger, but can they tell a story with nothing but pictures and sound?"

I worked for one of the first VJ shops (News 24 Houston), pre-Rosenbloom and his "brilliant, industry changing ideas", and that station is now out of business mostly because the video and storytelling was so hideous that is was the joke of the market, both to the viewers and the competition.

Bottom line....take pride in your position and your work, but there is only so much you can teach a "reporter/writer" type. Do everything in you power to keep the educated, good shooters around, as we are a slowly dying breed.

 

[overscan]

In the 80's when our station started using VJ's, we were given the job of training them. Some of them new nothing, some of them were shooters that became VJ's.

Each of them wanted to find a signature. One of them used reflections, mirrors, windows for their standups. One used to crouch in front of his camera. One used a small format camera with a Manfrotto arm attached to his Beta.

The result was a real mish mash of styles that didn't go over well with the viewers. People would complain about shakey shots and poor camerawork in general. The photogs were not great reporters and the reporters were not great photogs. People often commented about our credability (or lack of it).

Over the years our ratings started a slow slide. I don't know if they were the cause of it, but over time they were slowly phased out and we currently only have one.

In answer to your question, sneakybastard is right, you probably should train them in order to have some sort of a consistant look. Hopefully you can avoid what we went through.

Good luck!