DSLR News Report on CNN.... aweful.

Ryan Patrick O'Hara

Ryan Patrick O'Hara

Veteran
Sorry if whomever shot this is a member here, but golly gee, there is room for improvement on this CNN report.

Step 1) Stop using DSLR video if going hand held on a long lens.

Step 2) Get a camera operator who doesn't shake like a beaten dog.

Step 3) Hold a frame.

Step 4) Close down the aperture just a little on many shots.

Step 5) Re-evaluate cutting from a wide shot to a wide shot only a small amount off axis. Edit 101.

Yikes. What was going on in this report?

http://money.cnn.com/video/news/2010/10/04/n_cc_ilitch_detroit.cnnmoney/
 
I'm not convinced that was a DSLR on the shaky footage. Definitely a small handheld camera, but a lot of news outfits these days are using HVX200's and HPX170s. An inexperienced handheld operator, even shoulder mounted, can get that kind of shake, especially at zoomed in focal lengths. I got bored, so I watched the first minute of video then kinda skimmed through, but there are a couple of shots (one namely at the end) which looks handheld and somewhat shaky but appears to have a servo type zoom. Did you just guess on the DSLR's from the look of the footage or did they show the cameras?
 
I'm wondering why the exposure was so extremely bright, maybe it's some sort of newscast look? If it wasn't done on purpose, surely the camera's meter didn't tell the person to expose it like that....
 
Very POOR produced package... but who's to blame the producer or the editor? Why put edit crappy B roll video into the pkg when they could have used better visuals than the awful footage that was used?
 
well I would think that it would have to be a larger type sensor to get shallow DOF so it's not likely to be an HPX system. It also looks a bit low in dynamic range as well. I would have guessed DSLR too.
 
Right, but I was just thinking that they achieved the "somewhat" shallow DOF from zooming in so tight + wide aperature. It really could be a shoulder cam zoomed in with an inexperienced operator. The background is pretty far behind them.
 
The 2-shots show a fairly wide field of view in relation to the foreground/background, and the cutaways exhibit extreme CMOS skew (more than would be caused by EX series), pointing to DLSR footage.
 
Ryan Patrick O'Hara said:
Sorry if whomever shot this is a member here, but golly gee, there is room for improvement on this CNN report.

Step 1) Stop using DSLR video if going hand held on a long lens.

Step 2) Get a camera operator who doesn't shake like a beaten dog.

Step 3) Hold a frame.

Step 4) Close down the aperture just a little on many shots.

Step 5) Re-evaluate cutting from a wide shot to a wide shot only a small amount off axis. Edit 101.

Yikes. What was going on in this report?

http://money.cnn.com/video/news/2010/10/04/n_cc_ilitch_detroit.cnnmoney/
Click to expand...

Dude... this is happening WAY too often. I mean, I guess I'm not qualified to say that but every time I see a DSLR commercial I just turn the channel. It looks TERRIBLE!
 
well I've seen good stuff, and I've seen really bad stuff too. It's one of those tools that reflects the user's skill more than blindly enhancing it.
 
Last edited:
It's really crazy what goes on in the cinema though, before the film or previews start, there's always a billion commercials for local lawyers, car lots, doctors, ect ect and they all look so awfully produced (yet surprisingly crystal clear, half the time, pointing to the fact a good camera was used). I mean these things are always 2 stops overexposed, there's like a big flood light illuminating a face with the eyes staring up into oblivion, there's never any sort of depth of field, the focal lengths are always wrong, and overall, I could make a better commercial if I was blind.

(^ That's one thing I'd like to do with my education, I'd love to get a such a general feel for things that even if I were to go blind, that I could direct a film well and know generally how to set up a shot very passably.)

The thing is though, I personally think that sometimes it's all part of a conspiracy. I sometimes think that the people who've invested thousands upon thousands in more expensive cameras sometime in their lives (probably going on to be the folks who choose what footage to use for their news channel or show) get all egotistic about it, and then choose the most awful DSLR footage and reels they can find for their broadcast just to make fools out of the DSLR trend, to make folks continue to invest in cameras quadruple the price. Sure, newcasting is never "pretty", but look at something like this, then look at Feburary or such, shot on a DSLR. The less educated of folks look at reels like this CNN report and think "Oh crap DSLR's make things look awful and overexposed, not gonna buy that!" - Happens too often.

I mean really, how could something like that suck so much without someone letting it suck on purpose, either the shooter himself or whomever chooses the footage out of a multitude of interviews and projects? Most people know how to get in their back yard and film better stuff than that. Do these people get hired by newscasting stations just because they have a degree from some backwoods filmmaking course or college? Ugh.
 
Kholi said:
Dude... this is happening WAY too often. I mean, I guess I'm not qualified to say that but every time I see a DSLR commercial I just turn the channel. It looks TERRIBLE!
Click to expand...

I hear you man, The low cost of cameras these days gives people the opportunity to shoot projects they have no business shooting. IT'S like, "well I can afford to buy a 7d now im a pro."

Since everybody and their brother can go to BestBuy and get a decent cam, it's flooded the market with amatuers undercutting pro's. It's actually killing the market. And it's frustrating. I had a guy call me to bid a job, he later called the next day or so, and says " Never mind, I just bought a 7d, im going to do the project myslf. Now of course im thinking "your an idiot, because you know nothing about audio, video, lighting, scripting, editing, ect... But now you have a Cano 7d your a capable DP? It made me sick.
 
This clips has to be a joke. Even a totally inexperienced person should be able to handle that a lot better.
 
Exposure and audio was horrendous. It's badly reflecting on the news organization that has any pretense to portray itself as professional while delivering product that's anything but... Same thing is happening with the story-videos on New York Times website - not only the technical quality is crap but the presentation, editing and even it's content is horrible - in a way it's a reflection of our times.

Here is an interesting quote i read recently: "With this much media being generated each minute the value of each item is inevitably reduced. (...) Nothing stands out, and the youth of our generation no longer appreciate the difference between "the good stuff" and the average schlock. This isn't a function of declining standards or lack of taste -- although an argument can certainly be made along those lines -- but is, I think, simply a function of being numbed by too much stuff."
 
Patryk_Rebisz said:
Exposure and audio was horrendous. It's badly reflecting on the news organization that has any pretense to portray itself as professional while delivering product that's anything but... Same thing is happening with the story-videos on New York Times website - not only the technical quality is crap but the presentation, editing and even it's content is horrible - in a way it's a reflection of our times.

Here is an interesting quote i read recently: "With this much media being generated each minute the value of each item is inevitably reduced. (...) Nothing stands out, and the youth of our generation no longer appreciate the difference between "the good stuff" and the average schlock. This isn't a function of declining standards or lack of taste -- although an argument can certainly be made along those lines -- but is, I think, simply a function of being numbed by too much stuff."
Click to expand...

+1
 
We would like to thank Mrs. Johnson's 5th grade AV club for the swell video.

What a nightmare can't believe that is on the CNN website.
 
nah, a lot of these reports are planned, shot and edited by the interviewer/newsperson. They don't even get a PA or cameraman anymore. They just set up the camera and do their thing.
 
maranfilms said:
I had a guy call me to bid a job, he later called the next day or so, and says " Never mind, I just bought a 7d, im going to do the project myslf. Now of course im thinking "your an idiot, because you know nothing about audio, video, lighting, scripting, editing, ect... But now you have a Cano 7d your a capable DP? It made me sick.
Click to expand...

This happened to me years ago. I quoted $2000 for a $6000 project and instead the client went to Best Buy and spent $1600 on a HD camera and supplies. He called me 4 weeks later. His girlfriend had shot the footage almost entirely in portrait not landscape. I charged him $1500 for just the "fix" edit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top