A Message From Pf Bentley

[pfpix]

Yes, this is PF Bentley, a friend of the sometimes despised and hated Michael Rosenblum!

And this is PF Bentley, former still photographer for TIME Magazine, who is also friends with many ENG shooters from all networks. Some very talented ENG shooters who cover breaking news and shoot for newsmagazines. The same great ENG shooters who I have covered 5 Presidential Campaigns with and have been along side in Haiti, Cuba and Central America. Many of you on this list might even know me.

There's been some interesting posts here on Broll.net and it's taken me a long time to sift through them. Lot of passion out there and that's good. Without passion, doing any artistic endeavor is useless. Without passion, I would have had to get a “real” job a long time ago!

I want to set the record straight on some things that have been said.

Yes, I did work for TIME Magazine for 18 years covering politics on campaigns, Capitol Hill and The White House. I won five First Place Pictures of the Year awards for TIME and countless second and third places. It was good for many years until Time got bought by Warner and then by AOL. Money dried up in every department at TIME to pay the inflated salaries and bonuses of those at the top. I quit in 2000 in disgust.

I got into video in the 1980's taking a little Sony Hi-8 to Haiti and shooting a little with it after I had taken my stills. Sometimes networks would buy my footage paying cash in nice $100 bills.
I liked video.

In 1993, fellow TIME photographer Dirck Halstead introduced me to Michael Rosenblum. I shot some test footage for him and was drafted into the first VNI Training camp. I did well and started producing some shows for Nightline when I could.

I have shot reality shows for Michael and currently produce corporate web documentaries for a variety of happy clients, doing the shooting and editing. It's a very lucrative field and I'm grateful for my skills. I have adapted my journalism and video training to this new market. My clients love me because I bring a “documentary feel” to their projects and shoot it in a VJ style. (And yes, I do use a tripod when needed – by the way have you all checked out the SmoothCam feature in
Final Cut Pro 6? Amazing.)

Yes, I do have a home in Hawaii where I grew and have an apartment and house in upstate NY, which is where my wife is from. Yes, I do make a nice living these days – much better than I did at TIME.

Now let's get down to some cold facts:

Like it or not, the Media Industry is changing and we all must adapt with it. Me too. I have re-invented myself as a “documentary filmmaker” (hey, it sounds cool and beats “that video guy”!)

We all need to take a deep breath here and face reality. The reality of economics and the reality of change. Just as press photographers went from those large 4x5 cameras to 35mm, you all have gone from film to 1 inch to ¾ inch to ½ inch to Beta. And now you'll make that giant leap of faith to HD in it's various forms.

For all of you who shoot for a local news station – I feel your pain. The pain of a talented shooter who's hard work gets cut down to 45 seconds with some “talking hair-do” airhead talent screwing it up. It's like working on a big story for TIME and they used one photograph.

Local news sucks.

It sucks in Hawaii, it sucks in LA, it sucks in NY and it sucks in every town I've ever seen it in.

Yes, every once a while a nice story gets aired, and then it cuts to the funny weather guy and the latest Hollywood gossip sniplet, that gets more air time than your great story – because we know, I really give a **** about Angelina & Brad.

I hate those happy, stupid blow-dried newscasters, too.

You are helpless. Earning a living, while cursing at the management.

Maybe instead of dumping on Michael, you might want to start to dump on your management for airing the news they way they do.

You also might want to look at the alternatives and how to adapt your talents elsewhere in new market places developing on the web where the action is. If a old still shooter can make it shooting video, think of all the experience you have.

The web needs content. You make content. Feed the beast & make a good living.

And yes, of course, Michael is the anti-Christ Devil-Man.
That we all knew. But he's my friend.

Respectfully yours,

PF

 

[TexasDave]

Care to post a link to some of your work? I would be curious to see the quality. When talking to photogs...we like to see the pictures, so we know what you are talking about.

 

[Lensmith]

Mr. Bentley,

Your perspective is appreciated but...I don't believe you are currently doing daily turn projects.

That is the basis for some people's frustrations when talking about VJ's with Mr. Rosenblum. There are many areas where VJ's can do good work. You have discovered that yourself. But you are missing a very basic point.

The crux of the issue here is this. Covering daily news for a local newscast. Not whether VJ's can or can't produce material for the web or broadcast.

There is a big difference between the two.

I would hope you understand the difference between news deadlines and corporate web documentary deadlines. Even your Nightline material, and correct me if I'm wrong, was probably not "day of".

Do not be mislead into thinking VJ's can do it all. They can not. Especially when daily local newscast deadlines are to be met, day in and day out. Let me be clear. i am not talking about feature stories. I am talking about day of news events which can't wait for the extra production time involved by one person, trying to do many jobs, competing against several people working on the same goal as a team. Even your video from Haiti that you mentioned was not an edited story you produced all on your own. You shot the video and sold the raw material. That is not being a "VJ" and covering a news event in a timely manner alone. Lots of people with home camcorders do that every day. They happen on an event. Shoot some images and then sell or give it away to be aired. They aren't doing it day in and day out. They happened to be in the right place at the right time...but they were not making a living off of their efforts.

I appreciate your talents and reputation. Please focus your thoughts on the true point of dispute and not the false assumption that we think "VJ's can't do anything".

We look forward to your future contributions.

 

[pfpix]

Comments

Thanks for the comments.

First my still photograh work is at www.pfpix.com and some samples of my feeble video work is at www.hulaboyproductions.com

You are so right - I do not cover daily news nor ever have. I know this that is a different ballgame all together. What I am saying is maybe it's time to use your skills in a better way that makes the same or more money - plus having some fun and enjoyment out of it.

Most ENG shooters are very talented and could easily transfer their skills to new markets in different mediums like the web or reality TV or documentaries, etc.

I know Michael's ideas are a flash point for many. I also see a different way to producing the nightly broadcast. I'm sure there's some middle ground in changing local newscasts into something better.

Listen, if I can help any of you make the change to smaller HD cameras and Final Cut Pro, let me know. I'm happy to answer questions and help out. I know I always took in all the information I could get from ENG crews because they did this every day.

Cheers, PF

 

[cameragod]

So once again the justification for VJ’s is local news sucks… according to yet another guy who never shot it or worked in it… well for a start that s not true of everywhere, there are some good local news stations also the majority of local news does just enough to keep up… that’s not ideal but its working for them.
What I don’t get is how tinkering with the way local news is gathered will change anything except for the worse. The current way of news gathering works. It’s fast, efficient and its strengths outweigh and bolster its weaknesses. The problem is usually the ND!!! Get someone who knows what news actually is and while you are at it, FIX THE F***ING ASSIGNMENT DESK! It’s that simple.

If a racing car is not winning races rather than drop out the engine and hook up a horse to the front (VJ’s are that slow) have a look at the driver.

 

[shootercub]

Wow!

Do you mean to tell me that a wealthy man with two homes on the extreme opposite sides of the country was able to break into the highly lucrative documentary industry?

Your product is boring and has jumpcuts and dissolves gallore.

Sure, you have the money and the time to go and shoot whatever you want. I mean you've got DREW CAREY doing one of your pkgs for you.

And the other subjects are what?? An Iraqi dog? Cool story.. Great opportunity, but you totally blew it.

Anybody with the riches and time can record the stuff you have selected to share with us. Afterall, who needs talent when you have a PD-150 and a background in stills???

Try to sell some of that crap to an assignment desk or a producer!
If they put you on the streets in a live truck, you will go down in flames.

You have to shoot for the viewer! Ten minutes of people rambling is not a breakthrough.. not even a trend! They do that boring stuff on C-SPAN for HOURS!

STORYTELLING! STORYTELLING! STORYTELLING! You can be a VJ or part of a 12 person crew, as long as the end product is a story that..
1) somebody wants to watch, and
2) somebody wants to BUY!

Bravo!
See you in the Hamptons, Geeves!!

 

[Lensmith]

I have been a fan of Mr. Bentley's work for some time. This is a man who deserves respect. He is not some neophyte without skills. I may be showing my age...but it's possible some of the younger members here may just not be familiar with this man or his well deserved reputation as a photographer.

He has gone through what many other still photographers have yet to experience. He has made a transition and should be applauded for his success.

It really isn't fair to harshly judge what he does any more so than it is for others to judge what many of us do. He is not currently shooting news. His job parameters are different when it comes to product delivery time.

He did not come here to say VJ's cover news better. He did not say he is a VJ. A big part of VJ is "J", for journalist. Mr. Bentley is not claiming his current work is journalism. He shoots in a "VJ style" which is different. What he is encouraging is something many of us with a few years in this business wonder about. "What else is out there for me to do with the skills I have?" He's making sure we know there are options. Something a lot of us, everywhere, tend to forget. His way may not appeal to everyone but he's not claiming we should all do it his way.

This man is being encouraging. He came here to defend a friend. When the focal point of the conflict with Mr. Rosenblum was explained, he better understood why some of us disagree with Michael.

Mr. Bentley is a man many of us can learn from. He has been around a lot of history and captured it with his camera. He's also written a lot of good articles about still photography and cameras which a quick Google search will help you find and enjoy. Maybe even learn from.

I'm not a hall monitor here. This is and always will be Kevin's place. But I do hope people will take a moment to get to know the large body of work this man has accomplished and see he's someone we should value here. An experienced point of view in how to enjoy life and work, and to keep doing it as the technology changes.

edit: There are numerous bios available on Mr. Bentley but I thought this one was pretty complete without crossing the "short attention span" barrier some of us have.

http://www.shutterbug.net/refreshercourse/portrait_tips/0503career/

I love shooting news. I love the hard deadlines. Some days I'm the hero. Some days I'm the goat. As a freshly minted 51 year old, I will be the first to admit that "what else could I do if I wanted to?" is always there. Frustrating days at work, no matter what your age, raise that question in all our minds. It's good to see someone who hasn't thrown in the towel. It's great to see someone move forward and still be willing to offer helpful advise and encouragement. That is what Mr. Bentley has done in typical class fashion. He has every reason to be proud of what he has done so far with his "eye".

Any of us can post any story we've done and all of us can find something wrong with it. We would only be hurting ourselves if we didn't acknowledge that all of us are learning all the time. It's part of survival in this business and life. Keep in mind Mr. Bentley is dealing with the corporate world. That means sometimes making the client happy at the expense of "storytelling theory". More fingers in the creative pie that just a photog and reporter. Don't make the same mistake other do. Don't judge his work by your own set of work conditions. That's not any more fair than others judging what we produce without understanding our own work specifics.

We've all made the same cracks about TV news that Mr. Bentley made. They're nothing new to any of us. in fact quite common from the still photo/newspaper crowd. He's been around covering news events a lot longer than many here have been in the business. He's earned the right to make his jokes. And we're all big enough to not take them too personally. Especially when a few of them come dangerously close, at one time or another, to what we know is the truth.

TV news can be improved. It does have it's faults. It's not perfect. Nothing is. But those of us still working in this crazy business can affect change in our own ways. Or, at the very least, affect a change in our lives, if need be, so we can happily keep doing what we like to do to earn a buck.

Mr. Bentley is the kind of member we should encourage, not discourage, with our comments.

 

[shade]

well said lensmith........

 

[lake4]

I doubt seriously my response will be recieved well but I will say this anyway. PF I looked at your still work on your site and my reaction is less than enthusiastic shall I say. I don't like criticizing anyone's creativeness or lack thereof, but when you post it you must expect it. Yes this is only one mans opinion, but as a time magazine photographer if I read that right, one would expect far more than tourist type PICTURES and more along the lines of PHOTO'S and IMAGES of something with more texture and feel. This "debate" on the Michael issue is really beyond my understanding so I won't comment on that. Photography is something I know.All the best to you. Often times access is all one needs to be able to fill out an impressive resume.

 

[shootercub]

No Hall monitors allowed!!

This is no longer Kevin's place. This is our place.
ALL of ours!

 

[Run 'n' Get 'em]

I'm sorry, but I'm tired of this whole thing and I can't be the only one...

MR seems like the "but two plus two really REALLY is 5!" type and will never be convinced otherwise... I give up on him and his crew...Heh, MR has a crew...

 

[Lensmith]

Often times access is all one needs to be able to fill out an impressive resume.

Just for the sake of discussion...you seem to think access is a given.

It's not.

In fact, it's one of those important photog skills many overlook but, in the end, that sets us apart.

Access to anything is never a given. Getting it takes experience and skill. Sure, once in a while a person gets lucky being in the right place at the right time. Luck. Nothing more. That's why those people don't have careers doing what we do. To get access over and over again means a person knows how to relate to people, either "work the system" or work around the system. The goal is the same. To get the best image possible.

Getting access does indeed let some capture images others can't. The question you have to ask yourself is why did they get in and you didn't? What did they do to get what you couldn't? How can you be the one to get access while others don't. It's a skill.

No, you don't "win" and get access every time. That's life. No one hits home runs every day. But the goal is to stay in the game and get another chance at bat. To stay on the team and keep getting paid. Enough of my baseball analogies.

Those who pooh-pooh a persons work because they got access don't understand that, once again, being "good" isn't just about hitting the record button, using a tripod and setting up a few lights then being clever with your edits. It's about placing yourself in a location to get the money shot.

Key word being "money".

That's what separates those with short careers from long careers.

 

[AB]

Yes Lensmith, but....

I have been a fan of Mr. Bentley's work for some time. This is a man who deserves respect. He is not some neophyte without skills. I may be showing my age...but it's possible some of the younger members here may just not be familiar with this man or his well deserved reputation as a photographer.


It really isn't fair to harshly judge what he does any more so than it is for others to judge what many of us do.

As always Lensmith, your post is very well thought out.

I have gone back and re-read the post by "PF" and am fine with it, he's entitled to his opinion.

The first time I read it however, it came across as arrogant and condescending to television photojournalists. After PF informed us of his glowing resume, he proceeded to tell us how we're doomed in local television.

All of this on his first posting.

I'll plead ignorance, I have never heard of this man before and I'm in my late 30's. He came off to me as another blow hard on this anonymous forum in cyberspace.

He then proceeded to give us samples of his video work. Sorry, it's just not that impressive. It's a simple philosophy for some of us, put up or shut up.

If you're going to come on a forum aimed at video photographers (the majority of which seem to be in local television) and insult what they do (once again, the first posting we've seen from this guy), you're going to fire some people up.

 

[Hiding Under Here]

Here's a couple of things I have never told anyone here.

I own several houses. The one I live in and a vacation home on Martha's Vineyard. And a ski condo in Vermont. I was either lucky or smart (or both) in the last stock market boom. I made a fortune on biotechs because I was able to use information I gleaned from working as a television photographer to pinpoint excellent stock picks. Because I read Investors Business Daily, I knew that a good stock picker had to eventually sell to make a profit. So I sold. And I made a profit.

I make good money as a network freelance photographer. I have covered every president from the first Bush to the latest. I was there at Princess Diana's funeral. There, too, for some O.J. stuff. Ditto JFK, Jr. and Nancy Kerrigan. Heck, we got kicked out of Nancy Kerrigan's house with Connie Chung because she kept asking questions the family didn't want her to ask. But it's the stories with the anonymous people I like best, the ones in Argentina, the Dominican Republic and France that gave me the greatest satisfaction.

It's true, I have won some awards -- EMMYs, Peabodys, Cine Golden Eagles. Even a CLIO for a commercial I wrote and shot back in the late 1980s.

Things are changing in this business. And I'm trying to change with them. But I still want to maintain my work as a DP. I love to light and I love to make rich, cinematic images. So I'm hoping that I can survive the decline in our business in a way that keeps me intact, doing the kinds of work that rewards me both professionally and financially.

Local news? I never did that. It's hard work from what I can see. But it's a grind, day in and day out. Sure what I do is hard work. But as I channel surf I get to see things I shot on a variety of national outlets. I stop and watch when I can. You have to do that to stay on top of your game -- how are they editing your footage? Does it look the way on broadcast as it did in your monitor?

You guys are cool. I hope you don't mind me sharing. I've written to Mike Rosenblum from time to time. Seems smart enough to me. Tough, too.

Oh yeah, this post is satirical; lots of untruths to demonstrate biases at play on this thread.

 

[eb]

(apologies for the long post)
Mr. Bentley,

First of all, let me say how much I have enjoyed your still photography over the decades. You, and Dirck have been at historic events and captured great photographs. Your words and opinions are respected because of the experience and talent you have.


I met Dirck in 1996. I was presenting videojournalism in Alexandria, VA. One of the stories I showed, was shot using a High 8 camera in Romania. I shot, edited, produced and wrote the piece. It was in essence VJ work. Dirck and I chatted. He put me in touch with NYTimes TV. It's been a long time, so I don't remember if I contacted them, or they contacted me. I got a letter -probably from Michael. I can't remember the contents, but I believe it was to guage my interest in working with NYTimes TV. But at that time (with a five year old) I was not interested in moving beyond my full time job. I was, and still am, working in local TV news. The reason I explain this...is because I am quite familiar with both the one man band, small camera approach...and also the two man reporter/photographer approach.

Now the "revolution" is taking place. Technology has advanced and more people have access to video cameras, laptops, software, airlines, and the internet. Anybody who denies these new realities is foolish. Technology has allowed - and will allow - an explosion of possibilities in video storytelling, movie making, video journalism, music, and book publishing. There is no such thing as "Media Control" anymore.

I think there are still uncertainties about the future of local and network TV news...and the "crews" who work there.

Yet, there are some predicting the death of local and network news. That definitive stance has irked many. While there is a dramatic change occuring...the future is still not 100 percent predictable. Is it?

Local and network news has lost viewers (at least in my market.)
Niche internet sites are growing like dandelions. These are facts, and yes, it does threaten the status quo for the old media. The corporations and networks are desparately trying to adapt. Yet I still have a job at a local TV news station. Hopefully, my corporation has no immediate plans to strip that job. CBS just invested in a fleet of high end Sony XD high definition cameras, and an integrated Avid system. That says they are dedicated to high quality gear. Now, it would be great if they would demonstrate a dedication to high quality video storytelling! That is where I think local TV news and networks are vulnerable to VJs.

There are high end productions, there are low end productions. There will continue to be...even in the news business.
I think we all know that. The problem here has been how the VJ model has been "sold." There are claims that the end is near. That our profession is not the place to be. That the future of local television and network news is in jeopordy. That, of course, is debatable. (Hence the debate.) There is also a debate about quality and speed of VJs compared to crews with big cameras. Certain approaches work better in certain situations. So perhaps apples are being compared to oranges. I have shot video with a small camera as a VJ, with a large camera as a VJ, and with a small camera and large camera as part of a crew. Both work. In certain situations, one works better than the other.

Video is new to many. It was new to you. But video is not new to those who have been shooting it for decades, day in, day out. A lot of us here, know video pretty well. How to shoot, how to edit, how to interview...and how to write.

Does local TV News suck? I think most of it does. (Edit: a generalization) It drives me crazy. As a past board member of the NPPA, I think that is one of the reasons the NPPA has low TV membership....because overall, television station producers and managers have neglected to support quality visual storytelling. It is simply not a priority. Management does not know or care for quality visual storytelling...so why work at it?

Most newspapers and magazines understand, respect and need quality still photos, because it is not considered "filler" or "wallpaper" like video is in most TV newsrooms. Newspapers do not have to do live shots in front of nothing....just for the sake of being live. There are many reasons I agree that local TV sucks....because most of it is not visually interesting. That is a big mistake. And that I think is local and network television news' achille's heel. They need to start taking quality visual storytelling seriously. Most television stations have the talent on staff...but waste it away on meaningless, unvisual filler and wallpaper. (edit: a generalization, there is quality sprinkled in.)

But I still have a steady job. And I do enjoy this profession. I keep at it, and look for visual stories...even though that is not the priority. Once in a while, I get the challenge to go shoot and edit something visually compelling. I can do that. Now my 5 year old is a senior. He'll be in college next year. My job has been steady...and I have bills to pay. This has been a great profession. My son is thinking about video journalism. Agghh! I am not sure video journalism is a solid career. Which way do I tell him to go?

There is quality in local TV news, and there is crap. Management is responsible for quality. If you work at a TV station that respects quality visual storytelling...and is commited to getting it on the air...it will happen. Those stations are few and far between, I think. Yet we all know that the majority of local TV newscasts are not trying to put visual stories on the air. They simply want the daily dose of crime, press conferences, tabloid, legislation, weather, sports, chit chat, and once in a while a visual story. Perhaps they are making enough to justify continuing in this direction. The future will tell. (edit: crime, press conferences, etc.. are needed, but shouldn't be depended on to keep viewers.)

There are different stories, different markets, different audiences. There is major league baseball, minor leagues, amateurs, and pee wees. You are a major league still photographer. Now you are working in video.

Local and network TV news need to adjust. They need to incorporate all forms of videojournalism, not one or the other.

Ultimately, trust, quality, consistancy and content will win viewers.
Content can be gathered by any camera...even an unmanned security camera. Quality, consistancy and trust depend on the people doing the work...their ethics, talent, skills...and the tools used.

Some say the current network and local TV news model is like the Titanic...a sinking ship. The strong swimmers will stay afloat. We all swim in different markets. Some swim in shallow pools, others Olympic pools, lakes, or rivers.

Your work, and Dirck's has spanned oceans.

 

[Hiding Under Here]

Come on. Let's be honest here. Local television news isn't the only journalistic medium that sucks, if, in fact, it does suck. Most local newspapers suck when compared to the writing quality of the New York Times. Hell, most journalistic still photography, whether it's presented in newspapers or magazines, is mundane and functional. Instead of illuminating, it illustrates.

Local television news isn't the only medium with problems and quality issues. Furthermore, not everybody with a camera in their car or van is a potential artist. Most of us have a function -- not a higher calling.

So all this wretching about good and bad, sucking or not sucking is bullshyte. People are doing their jobs. Plain and simple.

I like a good photograph as much as anybody. But let's not pretend that all good still photographers are Walker Evans. Nor should we ignore that there are some extremely talented people shooting television cameras. Video, documentary television, simply isn't a medium that you can carry around with you and say, "here, look at this, I shot it". Moreover, there is a communal aspect to the work. Oftentimes, multiple television photographers collaborate on stories. So it's difficult to distinguish who did what without having a context for the continuum of a television photographer's work. In the end, what we do, what every one of us does, is different on a person by person basis and depends, in large part, on the assignments they shoot, the organizations they work for and the people who manage them.

Television documentary photography hit its zenith some time ago on programs like Turningpoint (ABC), 20/20 (ABC), 48 Hours (CBS), Frontline (PBS) and others. In the mid-1990s the craft of television photography had arrived at the point where the practicioners had mastered the medium and the people who managed them were asking for excellent pictures because (they believed) excellent pictures were essential to creating experiential atmosphere in documentary storytelling. Wondrous images pulled viewers into a story. The American networks ranged all over the globe looking for important stories. Even the Christian Science Monitor joined the fray with an international magazine show (Ken a poster here was a staffer on that program) that had, at it's content core, excellent, beautiful pictures.

Where did the demand for excellent video images go? As magazine programs cycled out of favor, the networks worked furiously to find storylines that drew audiences. Instead of offering visual feasts (and feats) like Street Stories (CBS), the networks threw themselves at content with predictable outcomes -- crime and courtroom dramas. The American television audience demands one thing above all else, winners and losers. Survivor, American Idol, The Mole, and on and on and on, have, at their center, dramas that revolve around one person vanquishing all others. Court cases offer something similar. We can sit in our chairs at home and silently consider thumbs up or down after watching the convoluted story of a lawyer accused of killing his wife and kids. There but for the grace of god go we. Thumbs down. Electric chair.

Courtroom dramas do not require creative camera work. The interviews that support those stories have become rote cookie cutter exercises -- except in some rare instances. The need for compelling images has been surrendered to themes that pique the human thirst for mythology.

You see, in video, in the early days, no one really knew what they were doing. Everybody was on the lookout for tricks and techniques. As the years passed, we all learned the basics and then we became "photographers" if only for the time it took to pay off our second camera lease. Now many of us are dressed up with nowhere to go. There are few creative outlets and opportunities. Journalism is bending to the will of management that has become an anxious slave to the bottom line. It seems to me I read about a curiously similar arc in the first post on this thread.

 

[pfpix]

Thank you all for your comments both positive and negative about my post and my work in both stills and video.

I'm not putting anyone down as far as skills. I'm still learning video and Final Cut Pro and feel the day I stop learning is the day I should put the camera down and retire.

What I am saying is that no matter how good you are at your craft, the potential of your final output is being stifled by most's local news magagement's idea of what a local news station should be.
You're only has good as the final edit.

And yes, I too have to deal with corporate clients who ultimately rule what they are paying for and want. (Sort of like "my own management situation"!) This is not news or anything heavy or hardcore. But I'm having great fun with minimal stress and paying the bills.

Anytime anyone on this list want to teach me some tech tricks, I'm open for it. And if you have questions about HD gear and Final Cut Pro you can contact me on or off list.

One more thing, now that I have linked my work, can I get some links to your work? I'd like to see what you've done.

Warmest Regards, PF

 

[AB]

Fair enough

One more thing, now that I have linked my work, can I get some links to your work? I'd like to see what you've done.

Warmest Regards, PF

I said earlier it's either put up or shut up. I'm not claiming to be the best but I'll put up some of what I've got.

You'll have to sit through a :10 second commercial, sorry. I'm not sure if you have to "register" either.

The audio is a little distorted to my ear. It goes to our web people from a tape and something happens in the transfer.

Also, it's "letterboxed" because it originally airs in HD.


http://www.wcnc.com/video/index.html?nvid=103299

http://www.wcnc.com/video/index.html?nvid=101059

http://www.wcnc.com/video/index.html?nvid=118164

 

[lake4]

Ok a couple of things and I only watched the first one on "Kos." I've seen worse from seasoned photographers from local tv. Shooting and editing I thought were good enough. At about 4 minutes I was sure I could feel my toe nails growing. Too long is an understatement. I chuckle NOT at the idea of what you say here, but at your choice of words when you say, "a train CHOPPED his legs off!" My god! Felt like a speech cause I hear too much of you and it was so long. But all in all, you pass. In fact I think your skills at video are better than your still work. No shame in your game. Every local tv station in any market has photographers with your skills. Decent job.

 

[lake4]

Lighthouse story, I liked it. Good job. The only thing I didn't like was some of the music. The lighthouse song while he climbed the stairs, I would have used his out of breath nats and had him try to talk instead of that song that made me want to go kick the neighbors dog. Shooting and editing was very good in my opinion.