I guess I'm a little confused.
- Thread starter Lensmith
- Start date
- Status
cameragod
Well-known member
Saying the public won’t notice poor quality doesn’t make it true.
An ND from the BBC told me when they trialed VJ in his area they were inundated with complaints about the drop in quality. People irate about how their broadcasting fee was being spent badly. The biggest complaint was the up the nose looking at camera style of interview. A style Michael still teaches.
So can we please accept that the public do notice quality?
An ND from the BBC told me when they trialed VJ in his area they were inundated with complaints about the drop in quality. People irate about how their broadcasting fee was being spent badly. The biggest complaint was the up the nose looking at camera style of interview. A style Michael still teaches.
So can we please accept that the public do notice quality?
AlexLucas
PRO user
(Buzzer sound)
Incorrect.
The reasons why movies like that win oscars is because of the story.
And seriously, if you think that Stephen Soderbergh is just waving a camera around, you're an idiot. They think about why they do what they do, with every shot.
Chicago Dog
Well-known member
Go Daddy's been banned, but why hasn't his other name? He's just getting in lame potshots before it all comes to a close.
I second chambo's vote.
I second chambo's vote.
Lensmith
Member
A claim of being 200 percent smarter yet all you come up with are insults?
Maybe taking a break from the forum will help you come up with something more intelligent to share with the rest of us in the future.
Canuck Photog
Well-known member
VJ didn't work up here!!!
There's been a similar experience up here. First and foremost, I don't work for the entity known as the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), but I have in the past and I have witnessed their slide from being a local news powerhouses to having worse local news ratings than the local community cable channels. Here's the story. (I welcome fellow Canadian shooters to back me up on this...you saw this happen too!). In the early '90s, the CBC thought it would be wise to cut back on local news and focus on being more of a national news network. They gutted local news which up to that point had three local broadcasts a day....the cut local news down to one half-hour show a day at 6:30pm. Staff was cut dramatically and everyone was turned into VJs. Some markets kept *some* shooters, but the majority of the stories were filed by VJs with Betacams. I read in one magazine that one CBC market (Ottawa I think) lost half it's audience overnight. They still haven't recovered to this day.
It's only now the CBC is realizing the error of their ways. I know here in Toronto the VJ thing is almost dead. They're back up to full crews, multiple live-hits and the show is one hour at 6pm. There's talk an 11pm show might start now to compete with the rest of the private broadcasters. The point (and Nino is probably nodding his head as he read this): cutting costs, gutting staff and going "full VJ" ***BURNED*** the CBC at the local level. It's only now this misdirected Crown-corporation is understanding the future is in LOCAL news *not* NATIONAL shows that most younger generation people don't watch. People DO notice and WILL leave your channel if the quality goes down the toilet.
I've said this before -- I'm not against VJs in a limited capacity in local news shows, but they shouldn't dominate the staffing of such stations.
I should also note one other station in town that went VJ for a while only has one VJ left-- and she mostly does human interest stories, etc. So I think they saw the "light" on that one. (Please note this isn't a "slam" against her -- she does a fine job but I think VJs are limited as to what kind of stories they can do).
My two "Canadian cents" for ya,
CP
There's been a similar experience up here. First and foremost, I don't work for the entity known as the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), but I have in the past and I have witnessed their slide from being a local news powerhouses to having worse local news ratings than the local community cable channels. Here's the story. (I welcome fellow Canadian shooters to back me up on this...you saw this happen too!). In the early '90s, the CBC thought it would be wise to cut back on local news and focus on being more of a national news network. They gutted local news which up to that point had three local broadcasts a day....the cut local news down to one half-hour show a day at 6:30pm. Staff was cut dramatically and everyone was turned into VJs. Some markets kept *some* shooters, but the majority of the stories were filed by VJs with Betacams. I read in one magazine that one CBC market (Ottawa I think) lost half it's audience overnight. They still haven't recovered to this day.
It's only now the CBC is realizing the error of their ways. I know here in Toronto the VJ thing is almost dead. They're back up to full crews, multiple live-hits and the show is one hour at 6pm. There's talk an 11pm show might start now to compete with the rest of the private broadcasters. The point (and Nino is probably nodding his head as he read this): cutting costs, gutting staff and going "full VJ" ***BURNED*** the CBC at the local level. It's only now this misdirected Crown-corporation is understanding the future is in LOCAL news *not* NATIONAL shows that most younger generation people don't watch. People DO notice and WILL leave your channel if the quality goes down the toilet.
I've said this before -- I'm not against VJs in a limited capacity in local news shows, but they shouldn't dominate the staffing of such stations.
I should also note one other station in town that went VJ for a while only has one VJ left-- and she mostly does human interest stories, etc. So I think they saw the "light" on that one. (Please note this isn't a "slam" against her -- she does a fine job but I think VJs are limited as to what kind of stories they can do).
My two "Canadian cents" for ya,
CP
Last edited:
The difference between the U.S. and Canada is your economy is bustling. The biggest single supplier of oil to America is Canada. Whole towns in Canada are becoming gold-rush towns or oil rush would be a better word. The Canada dollar is over-valued in comparison to the U.S. dollar, something like 1.0 : 1.07. When I was in Montana in the 1970s, the reverse was true. Go into a restaurant and buy a hamburger for a dollar U.S. $1.15 in Canadian money.
With money to burn - and the accompanying ad revenue - your television stations can do whatever they feel like.
Chicago Dog
Well-known member
Fox, Fox, Fox. You once again show a rather unhealthy love for piping up nonsense whenever I'm involved. Yawn.
Well, here we go:
Nope. Wrong again. You've done nothing but cherry-pick single shows that might back up your failed argument. It's called "burden of proof," smart guy. It's basic communication theory, Fox. It's an entry-level college course, for God's sake!
You claim ratings are up. It's your responsibility to prove it. So far, you have done nothing but cherry-pick very few shows. You even tried passing off a quarter-hour rating to prove the entire two hour show was doing well. You refused to post numbers for the rest of the show, opting to reply, "They're available to everyone. Go find them yourself." Once again, you failed to understand that tricky "burden of proof" mechanic!
Short, sweet, and to the point:
Quit crying about your misguided belief that it's somehow my responsibility to prove your argument. If KRON's misunderstood, prove it or shut up. You've got three years' worth of numbers. That's twelve ratings periods!
Let's see 'em, champ. Go nuts. Numbers, numbers, numbers.
Since I'm such a good sport, here's a nice guideline for you. Your next response should involve a ton of numbers showing KRON's ratings over the past three years. What can I say? You've done nothing but bitch and bitch about how so misunderstood KRON is and how well they're doing. Yet -- you never show us.
Or, you could write up another non-response, crying about something stupid (such as your inability to understand "burden of proof"), making some witty-in-your-own-mind retort, and tacking my screen name either to the front or back of it. Whichever.
I'll take a wild stab in the dark as to which path you actually take...
You're calling me a liar? That's the best laugh I've had all day!
So which is it? Stations are going OMB/VJ because viewers don't notice quality or because they're trying to slash budgets?
If you're going to troll a board, you can't do it while riding a fence.
Well, here we go:
Nope. Wrong again. You've done nothing but cherry-pick single shows that might back up your failed argument. It's called "burden of proof," smart guy. It's basic communication theory, Fox. It's an entry-level college course, for God's sake!
You claim ratings are up. It's your responsibility to prove it. So far, you have done nothing but cherry-pick very few shows. You even tried passing off a quarter-hour rating to prove the entire two hour show was doing well. You refused to post numbers for the rest of the show, opting to reply, "They're available to everyone. Go find them yourself." Once again, you failed to understand that tricky "burden of proof" mechanic!
Short, sweet, and to the point:
Quit crying about your misguided belief that it's somehow my responsibility to prove your argument. If KRON's misunderstood, prove it or shut up. You've got three years' worth of numbers. That's twelve ratings periods!
Let's see 'em, champ. Go nuts. Numbers, numbers, numbers.
Since I'm such a good sport, here's a nice guideline for you. Your next response should involve a ton of numbers showing KRON's ratings over the past three years. What can I say? You've done nothing but bitch and bitch about how so misunderstood KRON is and how well they're doing. Yet -- you never show us.
Or, you could write up another non-response, crying about something stupid (such as your inability to understand "burden of proof"), making some witty-in-your-own-mind retort, and tacking my screen name either to the front or back of it. Whichever.
I'll take a wild stab in the dark as to which path you actually take...
You're calling me a liar? That's the best laugh I've had all day!
So which is it? Stations are going OMB/VJ because viewers don't notice quality or because they're trying to slash budgets?
If you're going to troll a board, you can't do it while riding a fence.
Last edited:
Neither.
Stations are going VJ because photogs have let technology overtake and surpass them. Photogs are like a guy sitting on a donkey in the same place you've been sitting all you professional life saying if man was meant to fly he'd have wings.
Pilots are looking down at you now still sitting on your donkey swearing at them, at VerdantFox, at me. And blaming us for your lack of initiative, your lack of resourcefulness, your unwillingness to educate, to better yourselves, to develop competitive careers rather than work jobs with a half-life of an egg-timer.
Rather than curse the darkness, try lighting a candle.
OK?
Last edited:
Chicago Dog
Well-known member
What?! You mean -- this ISN'T the norm anymore?!
Obviously, it's been a while since you've set foot in a newsroom.
Obviously, it's been a while since you've set foot in a newsroom.
Tv Shooter
Well-known member
Okay-so then we ARE basing our value on our dayrate. Just wanted to clear that up.
As for the technology leaving cameramen behind...my capital expenditures account in Quickbooks says you are quite mistaken. I've spent a small fortune investing in new HD cameras, lenses, computers to edit and feed...yes we big camera guys can feed via FTP as well. We also do live shots via broadband.
With so many more cameras available, clients expect you to know the camera you are shooting with inside out immediately. No taking a day or two with it...you best not slow down the shoot fumbling through a menu.
Freelancer take a very different view of VJ than staff guys at the local news churn. Sorry-VJ ain't in my world, not affecting the bottom line. Neither is it really affecting any other freelancer I know.
Canuck Photog
Well-known member
You wouldn't know it if you look at how the TSX closed today.
http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2008/09/29/stocks-dive.html
My point is -- even in a "good" economy -- networks make bad decisions to save $$$. This includes the disaster CBC is only now trying to fix. The VJ thing was a significant part, but not the main cause of their local news ratings dive. Cutting shows, reducing staff, going almost completely VJ in most of their broadcast areas all equalled poor quality productions.
The audience watched. The audience left.
....for the private broadcasters which was producing -- in some cases -- a superior product (and more of it, too!).
Just one more note -- I'm not dumping on the CBC (even though it sounds like it!). The MANAGEMENT made some bad decisions, but that doesn't mean those in the rank-and-file didn't do their best with what they have. For the record, I love CBC newsworld (their 24 hour news channel), as well Radio 1 and 2. Their news website is also freakin' fantastic.
CP
AlexLucas
PRO user
First of all, I am not a Hillbilly. I'm a redneck. Get it straight.
Secondly, I wish we could go on Jeapordy! together. We'd see who looks like a fool. This poor 'redneck' would school you, because this redneck reads a lot. A lot. This redneck, with his less than blueblood pedigree, has years of photography experience. And he can out edit you, on linear, or non-linear of your choice. This redneck understands optics, and grading, and color depth. This hillbilly loser is reading very thick books every day, with very big words. Books from libraries, and manuals he buys with his own money.
This dirt poor hillbilly has been saving up for three years to buy his own equipment... and is finally there.
By the way, just thought I would let you know I am of Scottish/Irish lineage. Poor, coal mining Scots. Dirt farmers. Lost a grandfather in the mines kinda guy. The people you think of when you think 'flyover states.' When you called me a hillbilly, well, where I come from, it's no different to me than calling a Jew a K%ke. Or any African Americans the N-word.
But hey, you got me. That's where I come from. Good for you. Nice hit right between the eyes. Was it my shabby clothes, or diction that gave me away?
I wish that you weren't so ridiculously ignorant.
Next time, just watch your tongue, and stop manufacturing white lies about others, to make the inside of your mind match your young, limited understanding of the world.
verdantFOX
Well-known member
cameragod:
I'm in San Francisco where KRON has been VJ for over two years now. Not one person, not one time, has mentioned to me in passing or when the subject comes up, anything about the lack of quality of KRON's VJs. Why would that be if everyone seems to notice the sudden dimmunition of quality?
I'm in San Francisco where KRON has been VJ for over two years now. Not one person, not one time, has mentioned to me in passing or when the subject comes up, anything about the lack of quality of KRON's VJs. Why would that be if everyone seems to notice the sudden dimmunition of quality?
verdantFOX
Well-known member
Dog:
You are not only loose with the facts, manipulative with the little information that you have, but yes, you lie frequently. I've pointed them out from time to time.
I've also challenged you to show me one case, just one, where information I presented was not completely accurate. You could not, or at least you did not.
You also said you would put me permanently on your ignore list. You lied.
You are not only loose with the facts, manipulative with the little information that you have, but yes, you lie frequently. I've pointed them out from time to time.
I've also challenged you to show me one case, just one, where information I presented was not completely accurate. You could not, or at least you did not.
You also said you would put me permanently on your ignore list. You lied.
Tv Shooter
Well-known member
I left off one thing-arguing on the internet is like whistling for chickens....futile.
Chicago Dog
Well-known member
Why am I not surprised, FOX?
I gave you the opportunity to show numbers from twelve ratings periods over the span of three years to back up your claim that KRON is improving.
You squandered that opportunity.
Dismissed.
I gave you the opportunity to show numbers from twelve ratings periods over the span of three years to back up your claim that KRON is improving.
You squandered that opportunity.
Dismissed.
- Status