Fourth of July 3-Alarm Fire

[SeagateNews]

Looking for some feedback on this pack... it runs 2:24. I've already got some feedback, but I'm still not sure how I feel about it.

I shot everything (except the standup) and I'm the reporter, too, so feel free to critique all aspects of the story. I already know what I would have changed, and I'll post those (and related excuses... haha) after I get a few replies.

It's the first story in the block...

http://www.myfoxtoledo.com/myfox/MyFox/pages/sidebar_video.jsp?contentId=6920212&version=1&locale=EN-US

 

[nguyen.jason]

Hey man its Jason, Nice to see someone from the 419 posting on here. I actually was pretty up to date with this. I still have alot of friends back in Toledo some who used to live at Hunter Ridge.

After watching your peice, I felt it was longer then it needed to be. The walking shot under the water was way to long for me. Actually most of your nats were two long. I would have liked to seen quicker edits. I know one man banding and seeing you out there while I was there is hard.

I would have also liked to see the stand up done during the morning if you aired this, that morning, in the mist of all the people saying more to that effect. There was alot of people left out. Hearing from them is what really makes this story sing.

Alot of the video was good looking video but I would have wanted to see it more on sticks and more detailed up close shots of the people on the side walks.

Later on in the pkg you talk about people being ok, where is the people that are ok at? Wheres the hole in the fence that you mentioned? I don't know what kind of conditions you were in it seemed like you were able to move pretty freely, but I would have liked to see that.

You were informitive in your tracks but try to add some feeling in there, I always thought that the way you track to the emotion of the settings will make your story that much better.

Sorry if it seems like I ripped ya, but I know you can do better then this, I've seen some of your other stuff. Keep on truckin and say hi to Kristi for me.
j

 

[Spot remover]

Here are a few general things

Cut tighter- there were many empty silent spaces between nat breaks, bites and track. Keep the rythmn tight and steady.

More nat sound- a quick "pop" (1 second or less) of flames, sirens, people, hoses, etc.. Slip these in between bites, at the start of the pkg., etc.. At an average length of less than 1 second, a half dozen of these will add less than 5 seconds to the length of the story.

BTW, a higher level of nat sound under the track would have helped, too. There were times when this fully involved fire was silent.

Poor standup- daytime, quiet, too long and spotty lighting. The start was too wide, as well. Get as close to the scene as you can so zooming is kept to a minimum and encourage your reporter to keep it short and informative. He seemed bored, too.

Monotone delivery- your anchor and reporter were no help at all. Here we have an enormous fire, hundreds homeless, chaos all around and your reporter sounds bored, disinterested and uncaring. My gosh, it's a firestorm and your guy is a slow, monotonous, unemotional drone. I'm not saying he should be screaming, but a little inflection and some energy would have been nice. I know you can't help this, but it didn't help you. I'm of the opinion that reading a reporter track is 20% acting and 80% journalism.

The package was too long. This may be a function of a FOX hour long newscast or a newbie reporter, but there was a ton of fat that could have been cut off the package in the form of breakout Vo's and vo/sots.

Good stuff: Nice framing, great action shots, good video of the cat handed to the owner and obvious attempts to use nat sound to improve the piece.

As an exercise, have the reporter (or another reporter) retrack the piece with energy and inflection, recut it tighter with nat pops, eliminate or shorten the old lady nats, drop the standup and I think you'll see the difference.

good luck!

 

[SeagateNews]

Not justifying, just explaining to (hopefully) lead to tips on how I can improve...

My gosh, it's a firestorm and your guy is a slow, monotonous, unemotional drone. I'm not saying he should be screaming, but a little inflection and some energy would have been nice. I know you can't help this, but it didn't help you.

Heh. I am the reporter... and one of the things I always worry about is sounding too excited over a story like this. I slowed it down and tried to let the emotions I was feeling get into it. Sounds like I may have inadvertently done the opposite.

I was there seeing all this... and I tried to fit my track with how I felt. The goal of the story was to take people there, since we had followed police, fire and the residents so closely.

The package was too long. This may be a function of a FOX hour long newscast or a newbie reporter, but there was a ton of fat that could have been cut off the package in the form of breakout Vo's and vo/sots.

This was a bad call on my part -- we wanted 1 pack to cover the "last night" aspect, and then everything else was "today". It's our half-hour, 10 pm show -- nearly 12 hours after the fire happened. It's our only weekend show.

Another aspect of this was the idea of not just doing it as a traditional story, but including the longer nats (walking, firefighters and police talking) to "take people there" and kind of put them in the middle of it.

One thing I really regret is not getting any sound from the crowds of people. The people I talked to either started crying uncontrollably, yelled at me to get away, or (in one case) nearly started a riot -- so police asked us not to go into the crowd.

I really hate the stand-up. Security wouldn't let us close, we had to shoot it during the day, and I just tried to include too much info (this is a pack-wide problem).

I was on my 24th sleepless hour when the fire was over, and we couldn't shoot anything in the morning (I would have had to wait another 3 hours, minimum)... this is why the stand-up was during the day.

Alot of the video was good looking video but I would have wanted to see it more on sticks and more detailed up close shots of the people on the side walks.

I shot most of the fire video on sticks, the only time I took it off was to follow the people (and when we were evacuated). The cop video was shot when I first walked up -- they didn't even have water on the fire at that point, and I was trying to get the cops kicking the doors in. Crowd shots, again, caused some issues. 1000 some people, less than 10 cops -- they (and we) were worried at the responses we got every time we turned the cameras around.

Later on in the pkg you talk about people being ok, where is the people that are ok at? Wheres the hole in the fence that you mentioned? I don't know what kind of conditions you were in it seemed like you were able to move pretty freely, but I would have liked to see that.

They wouldn't let us back there -- we were evacuated. That entire section was full of fire trucks, and all those buildings burned. The off the shoulder shot of the burning building is what we saw as we were led away -- then they decided to cut the hole in the fence after they saw what we were going through.

And glad to hear from you, Jason! I wouldn't ask for advice if I didn't expect it.

I'd like to think that if I had allowed myself more time (and hadn't needed as much time to recuperate), I could have done a better job. I may recut it just to make myself feel better...

 

[Tom Servo]

Heh. I am the reporter... and one of the things I always worry about is sounding too excited over a story like this. I slowed it down and tried to let the emotions I was feeling get into it. Sounds like I may have inadvertently done the opposite.

As long as you keep the histronics and "OMG it's HORRIBLE" approach out of it, having inflection in your voice is not necessarily sounding too excited over it.

Another aspect of this was the idea of not just doing it as a traditional story, but including the longer nats (walking, firefighters and police talking) to "take people there" and kind of put them in the middle of it.

But that's just it - a fire is chaotic. Loud sounds, flashy lights, people running here and there, water shooting from hoses at mach 2, sirens.... If the viewer actually went to that fire to sightsee, he wouldn't have been calmly walking after an old lady for so long. He'd have been looking left, right, up, over here, over there..The sound of splintering wood would jerk his head around to see the front piece falling. Quick cuts shows the viewer that it was chaotic and fast.

One hint that works well for me to let you get quick cuts as well as cutaways - get lots of closeups of the fire trucks' lights. - let 'em fill the screen. Then sprinkle them into the package as quick, one or two flash (of the light) cuts.

One thing I really regret is not getting any sound from the crowds of people. The people I talked to either started crying uncontrollably, yelled at me to get away, or (in one case) nearly started a riot -- so police asked us not to go into the crowd.

As you get more experience you'll learn how to get crowd nats without pissing them off. You don't just go running up to the guy that's lost everything and jam a microphone under his chin. Most of the time you don't even have to talk to them - they'll be talking to each other- you just roll on it.

I really hate the stand-up. Security wouldn't let us close, we had to shoot it during the day, and I just tried to include too much info (this is a pack-wide problem).

I didn't think the standup was necessary at all, but then your shop might require it no matter what in which case, you do what you can. If you can't get close to the scene, rethink your standup and do the next best thing...i.e. "and the fire victims were sent here, to the armory where a temporary shelter is being set up by the Red Cross."

 

[NEWSSHOOTER3]

Stand Up

First off the stand up KILLED ME!

But, most of all, the story had no real emotion. There was a l o n g pause somewhere in the middle that also slowed this down. I realize that this was supposed to be a "natural" break, but it was too unnatural.

However, your shots were steady and your sound seemed crisp.

Not to sound the "NPPA alarm", but I needed more "quicks"...

 

[David R. Busse]

I love a good fire...

...and I would echo a lot of the previous comments. The narrator sounded like he was taking a nap, not telling me about a fire that left a bunch of people homeless. I don't expect you to go over the top with excitement, but this was just TOO monotone. You sounded like you were reading me the classifieds out of the Toledo Blade.

I did like the way the piece started. Get there early-on and you simply can't beat the line you used (or something like it)..."when firefighters arrived, this is what they faced..." something like that.

Now I gotta ask...after being in the fire service during college and going to a lot of fires over the past 35 years...how the hell did this particular fire get so big and spread so quickly? Bad construction/design? Trouble with water supply? Experienced arsonist? I know talking heads are the bane of our existence, but we needed SOMEBODY official in this story telling us just how bad it was, just how challenged the firefighters were, why it got away from them so fast, yadda yadda yadda. I understand that the local riff-raff were reluctant to appear on camera, but didn't the cops have anything to say about the access problems or any public danger encountered here? Did the firefighters have to go to extraordinary lengths to get water in sufficient volume?

The standup was awful. Poorly shot, poorly written and absolutely out of place. If you MUST include a standup, by all means put it in some context. Nothing wrong with a one or two-line standup bridge done in the heat of the battle...I like those. But in this story, it was like hitting a visual brick wall at 80mph.

Now, about the fire shooting...for the most part, it was exceptionally well-done. We all know that thereal story at a fire ain't always the flame, but it's TV coverage of a fire and you DO need to get plenty of the flame stuff and you did it well...nice composition and some rock-steady images.

Just don't let dependence on getting rock-steady images deter you from your prime objective: photojournalism. Know when to abandon the sticks for hand-held, spontaneous stuff. In that respect, your work here shows me that you mostly "get it." I would only remind you that good natural sound in a breaking news situation like this one is not limited to screaming bystanders, cops giving directions and the roar of fire engines in the background. Good natural sound often requires you to be up-close, hand-held, preferably with a hand-held shotgun mic at the ready. And remember, your most important eye on a spot news story is the one NOT in the viewfinder; the most important ear the one away from the camera (that's why I refuse to wear headphones while shooting, but that's a different story altogether).

Keep it up. Half the job in spot news is just "being there" at the right time and it looks like you've got that part nailed.

 

[SeagateNews]

For all intents and purposes, the "narrator" (yours truly) was taking a nap. I spent 9 hours at the fire scene, got a quick nap, and went into work to get this done in three hours. That and I was thinking that sounding too excited would be inappropriate -- though, bored almost seems worse. I really hate to make excuses, but this was definitely one of the times where I wish I would have had hours and hours to do this... but that is why I got into this business. Of course, I didn't think it was this bad when I wrote it...

David, the fire spread so quickly because of a lack of water, a lack of space for additional equipment, a lack of firewalls, and the proximity of each building. They almost lost a whole other row. That's what I tried to sum up in the incredibly out-of-place standup because the sun had come up by the chief could really talk to us. Either way it was going to look a bit weird, unless I hadn't shown the video and just used the audio.

Some details not in the story... my dad, a former FF/paramedic and now police officer, said he was listening to it and, until a Deputy Chief arrived, the Battalion Chief was focused on the buildings that were already lost -- not trying to get ahead of it.

Back to the package, I was trying to summarize too many things in that story, plain and simple. That's what led to the standup, at least partially. As for the rest of the package, I think I was trying to make it "not the usual news story"... but failed. Still, I learned from it.

I really feel like I missed a great opportunity for an amazing story here... but it'll definitely keep me thinking before all of my other stories. Thanks for the feedback, everybody!

 

[David R. Busse]

For all intents and purposes, the "narrator" (yours truly) was taking a nap. I spent 9 hours at the fire scene, got a quick nap, and went into work to get this done in three hours. That and I was thinking that sounding too excited would be inappropriate -- though, bored almost seems worse. I really hate to make excuses, but this was definitely one of the times where I wish I would have had hours and hours to do this... but that is why I got into this business. Of course, I didn't think it was this bad when I wrote it...

David, the fire spread so quickly because of a lack of water, a lack of space for additional equipment, a lack of firewalls, and the proximity of each building. They almost lost a whole other row. That's what I tried to sum up in the incredibly out-of-place standup because the sun had come up by the chief could really talk to us. Either way it was going to look a bit weird, unless I hadn't shown the video and just used the audio.

Some details not in the story... my dad, a former FF/paramedic and now police officer, said he was listening to it and, until a Deputy Chief arrived, the Battalion Chief was focused on the buildings that were already lost -- not trying to get ahead of it.

Back to the package, I was trying to summarize too many things in that story, plain and simple. That's what led to the standup, at least partially. As for the rest of the package, I think I was trying to make it "not the usual news story"... but failed. Still, I learned from it.

I really feel like I missed a great opportunity for an amazing story here... but it'll definitely keep me thinking before all of my other stories. Thanks for the feedback, everybody!

Don't be too down on yourself here. You get better at this job by doing lots of it. You really did a great job shooting this...everyone needs a good piece of spot news on their resume tape, and this will probably be yours (for a while anyway).

All of us need to keep in mind that the bigger story at a fire often lurks behind you, away from the flames.

I can understand the problem with the daylight standup and chief sot. Some creative writing here could make it work. I really think the bigger problem with the standup was that it was too wordy. Bridges work best when they are brief...2-3 sentences max.

So let me ask this--since hindsight is 20/20, what would you have done differently given the chance to shoot this and tell this story again? That's where the real learning process happens...

 

[SeagateNews]

Simple: I would have thought of it as a traditional news story, not as whatever story I thought it was going to turn out to be. I tried something different, and it didn't work -- simple as that.

Had I thought of it in the more traditional sense going into it... I still would have had the necessary elements... plus, more than likely, some soundbites... while taking the nats back a little to a more acceptable lengths.

I would have fronted it live or done an as-live instead of including a day time stand-up... definitely.

Per my station's consultant, who based my entire session on this package, I would have changed a lot of things on the reporter side of things, as well... more action-oriented writing, more excited tone (which I usually have), and more of a newsgathering feel.

Like I said, it was an experiment, it didn't pan out just as I had played it out in my sleep-deprived imagination that day, but I did learn a lot, even if it was a bit hard to read some of the critiques.

But it's better than doing the same thing, missing the same opportunity for such a great story, another time... and, again, I appreciate everyone's input!