Lighting a press conference

market 13, governors press conference, 9th floor, security, ushered into her office with 10 other cameras as she sits behind her desk. Brought tripod, camera, lightstand, light, ready to roll in 2 min. Tops. Done it 50 times if I have done it once.

Market 5 press confernce outside infront of the zoo. 35 cameras, all networks. C-stand, 400w hmi, rolling tape, 2 min.

In promptu press conference on breaking news. At the 4th busiest airport in the nation, in the middle of the terminal. Light up, no shadows, rolling in a minute.

Use a dimmer, keep shadows off the face, just enough where it looks clean. I always have a light with me, it's part of my job. Most guys appreciate my work ethic in the field and understand that I am trying to make everyone look good, not bad.

Maybe I am lucky, but in fifteen years, in major markets both in local news and with the network I have always found a way to improve the situation.

Does that make you lazy? No, I am sure you bust your ass.

All it means is that clean pics are a top priority for me, and I will do whatever it takes to put the best images on tape.

So when it comes to pressers I say do what you can to help everybody around you and yourself.
 
Flaca Productions said:
i gotta say, maybe i'm wrong on this. i've always looked at it as a question of journalistic integrity, but there have been some interesting opinions expressed here.
Click to expand...

Please elaborate. Where does journalistic integrity come into this? I am asking honestly. Are you referring to the fact that you are altering the scene of a presser by adding light - i.e. making a natural environment artificial?
 
If I am hired to set ip a presser for a client... I call the media, set up and rent a room, set up lights, set UP a mult-box or lenny-stand, make sure all the Photogs have a prime spot, I have the room primed and ready for alll the media.

I know its is going to look good and not need a thing.

Then some Photog comes in and thinks he can do better, and tries to add lights and move things around I am going to have him / her removed from my presser.

Now if Nino comes in and thinks he can do better - I'll give him full control. Unless I know you and know you can do better DO NOT MESS UP MY PRESSER AND MY LIGHTS.
 
yeah - i see this point of view if you're the one setting up and presenting the press conference (and hired by an entity to do so) after all, would you want an interview subject walking into YOUR (beautifully lit, of course) sit-down interview with their own lights which they start putting up?!

honest question here - what if you're sent to shoot a (for example) high school play only to find that its lighting is not what you deem to be adequate? i don't think anyone would dare set up their own lights, would they? if this is the case, how does this differ from setting up lights at a press conference?
 
Flaca Productions said:
honest question here - what if you're sent to shoot a (for example) high school play only to find that its lighting is not what you deem to be adequate? i don't think anyone would dare set up their own lights, would they? if this is the case, how does this differ from setting up lights at a press conference?
Click to expand...

I'm assuming the lighting conditions in the theatre for the high school play are intentional and designed for effect. At least, when I serve as technical director for the public school district, that's the case. The difference is intent. Does the coordinator of the event intend to place the podium in front of a plate glass window with the intent of getting blown-out backlighting? I would bet that this is not the intent; rather, the scenic background is. In this case, there are three options:

1) Do nothing and get poorly lit video.
2) Mention this problem to the event organizer and allow them to make a decision as to remedying the problematic condition.
3) Set up the appropriate lighting with which to neutralize the poor condition.

Without listing a preference for any of the options, the discovery of intent is the key. If Step Above Productions has set up the room with lights and podium, then the intent is for the press to use the existing conditions, even if you think it is set up poorly (no offense, Step).

It's kinda like audio. If there is a press mic box set up so as to provide a clean audio feed without cluttering up the podium with mic flags, then the intent is for you to use their audio, even if you feel it stinks. If there is no box, then the intent is most likely (though not always) for you to use your wireless.

It all comes down to intent.

BTW, if you show up to one of my high school shows and fire up a light, I'll beat you with a Source Four.

:)
 
This thread is going into twilight zone territory.

I mean...c'mon. It's a freaking newser and people are drawing their J-swords!
LOL
 
on a side note, many moons ago, I shot a play called "the Blue Room" as you might think it was all blue lighting for most of it, so I shot preset filter 1.
The ND (who was a dork) tried to ream me out at the next morning meeting for blue pictures.
we had a "It was Blue!" ... "It was supposed to be blue" go round.
He felt it was too blue and I felt had just shown accurately how blue it how it was. Sometimes you can't win... especially if the ND is a dork.
 
Lensmith said:
Very good point Nino. You understand...but others, who think it's only about some amount of work lasting 90 seconds...seem unaware of other professional situations.

We are on the same page. I was doing my best to explain the other realities out there that some may not truly appreciate.

"Caring" comes in many forms and sometimes the amount of real "caring" is hard for others to see or undertstand. ;)
Click to expand...

I don't get how on one hand you object to anyone passing judgement (calling lazy) on someone without knowing every nuance of their situation, then you make presumptuous conclusions about those who are disagreeing with you. (others...seem unaware; some may not truly appreciate; hard for others to see or understand) Just because someone does not agree with you doesn't mean they aren't aware, don't appreciate, see or understand.

Do you want to know why I would call someone out for not making a reasonable effort? Because it's more ammo for the "any monkey can do it" argument. I appreciate that you crank out a lot of video on a given day, but I'm not in this to be a volume dealer. I'm here for the storytelling and the craft. If at the end of the day I assess my achievement based on how much I did instead of how well I did it, then it's time for a new profession.
 
There will always be shooters that take the initiative to make things better and then their is the lazy shooters that take advantage of it.

I show up to a lot of places where there are 50w can lights and if I didn't add some lighting everyone would have raccoon eyes like the "Godfather". But I make sure my Arri lights don't cast nasty shadows by placing them high, diffusing them and just boost the light level by a stop or so. I always help out other shooters with audio feeds, connectors, and/or power if I have time.

There was one shoot where I had to setup lighting because it was a dark cave with just two can lights. This press conference had six speakers so I provided a multi-box feed from my mixer. Five minutes before the shoot in walks a guy shooting HD with a broken Sachtler tripod plate, no audio gear,dead AB batteries, and no lighting gear. SO I gave him an extension cable for power, helped fix his tripod plate with my tools, gave him an audio feed, and let him use my tape head cleaner to unclog his camera's heads. Guess what? My client took his name and number and started using him for a few months because he was cheaper.
 
Freddie Mercury said:
I don't get how on one hand you object to anyone passing judgement (calling lazy) on someone without knowing every nuance of their situation, then you make presumptuous conclusions about those who are disagreeing with you. (others...seem unaware; some may not truly appreciate; hard for others to see or understand) Just because someone does not agree with you doesn't mean they aren't aware, don't appreciate, see or understand.

Do you want to know why I would call someone out for not making a reasonable effort? Because it's more ammo for the "any monkey can do it" argument. I appreciate that you crank out a lot of video on a given day, but I'm not in this to be a volume dealer. I'm here for the storytelling and the craft. If at the end of the day I assess my achievement based on how much I did instead of how well I did it, then it's time for a new profession.
Click to expand...

If you notice...I used the quote function in my earlier post on this thread. Quoting an entire post by someone whose only thought on the matter was that the photog was lazy. Nothing more. That is what I was reacting to. That quote.

The only presumptuous conclusion I made was that poster didn't work in the same market as many others and, thus, didn't know that the world is a very big place and what works in one location doesn't work in others. I feel pretty safe drawing that conclusion.

I have no problem with anyone calling someone out...as long as they have a real idea of what was going on at that location. Not sitting hundreds of miles away on a keyboard in a different market with different tools and expectations, then slinging the "lazy stone".

Valid criticism is a good thing. I don't expect everyone to agree with me for the simple fact I'm not right all the time. No one is. But being fair, with the additional experience on my part dealing with all kinds of people and attitudes...those are the elements I use to form my opinions and posts.

The charge of "lazy" became the focus of an entire thread all it's own that I started. It's used very unfairly by many. Yes, of course, there are lazy people who happen to shoot television news. There are also plenty of people who jump to conclusions with the only goal of berating others and making themselves feel superior. It's respocnes of that nature which serve no purpose in my mind. And those making unfounded charges against others will find me being the one doing the "calling out".

I'm not worried about everyone agreeing with my every thought. That's not going to stop me from sharing my views...and also accepting the views of others, if I think they were based on real knowledge, even if I might disagree.

My problem is egocentric posts just rub me the wrong way. ;)

It's a job. i can crank it out with the best of them. I can use more time to make the final product look like something at a higher level. Not everyone can do both. The ability to crank it out is just as important as it is to spend days or weeks on a single project. No, one will not look as good as the other. But it's not because one photog was lazy and the other was not.

Any "monkey" can put together an award winning visual story if they have all the time in the world.
 
Here is what I have taken out of this three page bitch fest.

There are many varibles, which market, which location, how much time, even down to the individual photographer. There are those who will light, those who won't. It all depends on the situation. There are 1,000 ways to do this, 999 of them are correct.

Going back to the original point of the thread, with my personal experience is at my last station, if one of the other stations brought lights, and I had time afterward, I would thank them and help tear down. If we got to a location that obviously needed lights, police station Captain Cook Hotel, a few other places, I would help set up lights. If I was benefiting from someone elses lighting, I would try to thank them when all was said and done.
 
No one is more surprised than I am that this topic has drawn the attention, or the level of discussion, it has. Page views for this thread now rival those usually only seen when someone mutters "VJ".

I want to make sure other posters know...even though I tend to be one of the more prolific posters here at B-Roll Online...my intention is not to drown out or run off others who might have differing points of view from my own.

I'm not shy about writing what I think is correct from my experience and point of view. However, one of the best things about this forum is we all come away with a better understanding of how things are done in different places. How different things are important in one and maybe to a lesser extent in others. It's often about priorities set by others. Out of our hands. Less time. Less equipment. Different needs for different newscasts. Quality often suffers because we have to work faster and find ourselves, sometimes, the only ones who we feel "care" about how good the product looks when it finally makes air.

What looked like a simple topic has now exposed a facet of our jobs that, while basic (lighting a press conference), can also be used as a microcosm of how we view the entire job.

Interesting.

All good as long as people's feeling aren't hurt or they feel insulted if not everyone agrees with their...or my ;)...point of view.

Having a thick skin has always been a basic job requirement for shooting television news. It's not for the faint of heart, too shy to voice their opinions.
I welcome opposing points of view to my own...but I don't want others to be too offended if we finally come to a point where we just agree to disagree...until we all work in the same market, shoulder to shoulder, together.

Best to all. ;)
 
I agree 100 % . . .

. . . with Flaca Productions , Johnny Du.Montelle and Satop . Why try to show off that you own a lightkit by lighting a press conference when 9db works perfectly . . . . . at least for most press conferences ? It's not about being lazy because if it was being about laziness I would not have been able to stick around to shoot the more than 2,900 press conferences that I have done in my career.

It's about lighting , understaning if your camera will give you an image that is pleasing to the eye using natural light . . . . without setting up a light , with the possibility that you might have to break it down right in the middle of the presser.
 
Even if we can't all agree on whether or not to light a presser...we can agree that each of us is able to make a sound argument for doing it either way - for the most part. If nothing else, threads like this one are great documentation about just how much we all care about our jobs...and how much thought we put into why we do what we do. And integrity matters.
 
Wheatstone Bridge said:
. . . with Flaca Productions , Johnny Du.Montelle and Satop . Why try to show off that you own a lightkit by lighting a press conference when 9db works perfectly . . . . . at least for most press conferences ?
Click to expand...

9db?? I hope most photographers would get a light before jacking it up to 9db.
 
Foxwood said:
I always brought in lights when I shot news. My job was to make it look good. I couldn't believe the guys who wouldn't ever bring in lights, then ask me to leave mine up after the presser so they could get one-on-ones. "Sorry, I'm leaving now."

Now that I'm freelancing, and often light press conferences for clients, I have respect for those that tote lights in, and none for those that don't.

It's a work ethic thing.

Take your craft seriously.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree with this more. You want to be at the top of your craft? Bring your own lights, expect that no one else is going to bring theirs, pretend they aren't even there, and make the shot look as best as you can. I always bring my lights to each and every presser--even had the McCain camp get upset with me because my effort truly overshadowed the pathetic attempt they made to light an event during the New Hampshire primary last year.

You are cheating yourself if you do it the easy lazy man's way.
 
svp said:
Read through about half and then jumped to the reply box to ask this single question: Why are you using the press conference for anything other than cutaways in the first place??? Its a different scenerio if your station is showing the presser live. Otherwise, its just bad to use podium sound.
Click to expand...

In some markets, nine times out of ten, podium sound is the only sound you're going to get.
 
svp said:
Read through about half and then jumped to the reply box to ask this single question: Why are you using the press conference for anything other than cutaways in the first place??? Its a different scenerio if your station is showing the presser live. Otherwise, its just bad to use podium sound. Pull someone aside for a one-on-one afterwards or go find REAL people to do your story about after the presser. That being said, press conferences are staged events put on by someone who wants some press coverage. Therefore, I contend that THEY are responsible for how THEY WANT TO LOOK. If they don't want lights and want to look like crap, let them. You spending time to set up lights for there event gives your station absolutely no advantage over the competition because they're getting the same shot you are with the same look.
Click to expand...

1) You never know if a speaker is going to leave right after the presser.
2) You never know if there's going to be a great SOT at the podium that can't be matched from a 1 on 1.

What it comes down to is this...no one involved in news is going to look at badly lit press conference footage and blame it on the organizers...just the photog.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top