Business Week weighs into online premium debate

An interesting story relating to the debate about paid content in online news has just been written by Jon Fine at Business Week.

Fine writes: "Expect the ecosystem of the Web to start feeling a little different once the summer slips away. Publishers, stung by an economic downturn and ongoing disappointment with online ad revenues, will begin charging for at least some of their Web content. Eager to help make this happen are two proposed e-commerce systems, Journalism Online and ViewPass."

You can see the full article here

I have posted on this issue before, mentioning Rupert Murdoch's believe that premium content could be on its way to online news sites.

It's harder to make money if you operate these online services, not only because you haven't been able to charge for them so far, but also because you can't command the same advertising rates for a banner ad as you can for a full-page splash in a paper

The important question for those of us in the video field is, how will this impact us? Up to now, it has been far less lucrative to produce material for internet news outlets and online newspaper websites than traditional television. They have no money to pay a lot for video.

But as dead tree news outlets look to find a way out of their financial misery, premium content online is looking more likely. If this model works, and the revenue coming to these sites is substantial, should videographers be able to command more money?

Using tight shots as illustrations, avoiding unnecessary moves

I've written in the past about how I dislike wide-shots. Well it wont come as surprise to those of you who read that post that I enjoy using tight or close-up shots.

While a wide variety of shots is usually required in a news piece, most times a package can be made significantly richer with the incorporation of close-ups whenever possible.

I've watched many news packages on television - mostly, it has to be said, on local shows - that use virtually no tight-shots at all. Such shots often take time and patience to construct and frame properly which may be one reason why they're not used.

I'm going to use a piece that I just produced for AFP Television on cowboy churches in North America. AFP's usage policy does not allow me to embed the video here, so to see the piece you will need to click here and it will take you to the relevant YouTube page.


You'll notice that the story starts with a mid-shot rather than a typical wide-shot. The barn was nothing to look at and would have made a really tedious opening picture. But immediately after the opening shot, I get into the tight-shots - firstly of the preacher himself, then his congregation.

Throughout the piece, I use tight-shots. Other than a handful of mid-shots, most every other picture is a close-up. When a story is rich in color, which this one is, tight-shots take the viewer much closer to what you're trying to show. It adds character to the story. People's faces are expressive - you get a much better feeling for who the people are that you're shooting than you would if you simply used a series of wide-shots. I think it makes it personal, in a good way.

Here are a few keys to shooting and using tight shots effectively:

1) Make sure you have something to show. Random close-ups of not very much wont work. Close-up shots for the sake of it are silly. Use them when you want to illustrate something, like the expression on someone's face, or what they're wearing. Here you will see I used a tight-shot of a pair of boots to illustrate the Western clothing that people had on.


2) Frame it up correctly. Because you are using the whole screen, make sure you're thinking about the dimensions of your finished project. If you're shooting in 16:9 but producing a 4:3 project (as was the case with this story), be sure to shoot 4:3 safe when doing tight-shots, otherwise part of your subject will be lost.

Also, be creative with your framing. Don't always assume you have to shoot the subject of the tight-shot so that it appears in the middle of the screen. Use your judgement about what looks good. You'll see that most of the face close-ups that I use are on either the right or left third of the screen. Make sure you use a mixture of left and right so you can cut them together easily during editing and avoid jump cuts.

Get imaginative with your framing and you'll soon figure out what you like.

3) Use a shallow depth of field. You're using a tight shot to show something to the viewer. Don't distract the viewer with lots of surroundings. Open the iris fully and adjust light using filters, shutter speed and gain. If your shots are a little over-exposed due to the wide iris setting, you can fairly easily adjust during editing. Blurring the background really helps the subject of the shot to pop out of the screen.

4) Tighten up your interviews. You'll see I use fairly tight framing for the interview subjects too. This is a personal preference of mine, but I just really don't want to see a whole lot of the person speaking, except their face - the bit that the noise comes out of! Generally, wide interview shots look messy. But if you do go tight like I do and you're shooting your own interviews, make sure you keep checking the viewfinder - your interviewee may only move a couple of inches, but that's enough to completely screw up your framing.





If you watched this piece closely, you might have noticed that I didn't use any moves such as pans, pushes and pulls. I don't mind moves if they actually illustrate something or are used to break up the monotony of really boring b-roll. But just using moves for the heck of it is dumb. In my humble judgement, this piece just didn't need it. You have to ask yourself; 'what am I pulling out to reveal?' or 'when I pan over there, what am I panning to?' Don't just use a move for no reason.

There are lots of ways to bring what you see first hand to the viewer as effectively as you can, but the tight-shot is one of my favorite tools. If you're a journalist, you're a story teller, so tell a story. If you're a videographer too, you get to use the power of pictures to tell a story. What could be better than that?

Taking a teleprompter on the road

As a one-man-band reporter there are many pieces of gear that you simply must have to do your job. But there are other things that you don't necessarily need to have, but might be useful. One item that might fall into the latter category is a teleprompter.

I've helped jerry-rig a teleprompter to an HDV camera on the road in the past. It's not necessarily easy. In any case, I think that a good and experienced reporter should, usually, be able to work without this particular aid when in the field.

That being said, there is an interesting article on this subject over at videographer.com called "Prompting on the Go: Tech Options for Mobile Teleprompting."

In it, the author James Careless writes: "Showing reporters and anchors in the field delivering news as confidently as in the studio adds a cachet professionalism to any news broadcast. Today, this technology has been miniaturized to work with DV and other small-format cameras and is appropriate for more than just newscasters. The polish offered by teleprompter-supported presentation is now within the grasp of anyone shooting video in the field."

It would interesting to hear the experiences of any solo journalists/videographers who use a teleprompter when traveling.

How to create the illusion of a large variety of shots

Because some readers come to this blog for tips and techniques, I thought it might be helpful if I occasionally posted some news videos that I have produced for TV outlets. So from now on when I complete a story that merits talking about, I will post it here.

Today I'll talk about a piece I produced just this week for Voice of America. It's on US immigration benefits available to rich foreign investors. You can read the text story and download the video here at the VOA website.

This story is my favorite kind to do because it was pretty much, what I call, a one-shot deal. Those are the stories you can put together in one location at one time - no need to keep going back, no need to travel to multiple locations to shoot interviews or gather b-roll. I did do one additional interview in a different place, but very nearby. When you're a one-man-band who makes money according to how much you produce, these are the best kinds of stories to knock out because they're quick.



In this story, the bulk of the b-roll was of a resort - and not particularly visually compelling. So against my instincts, I opened the piece with an edited-down sequence from a promotional video made by the resort. I chose to do this because the upsound really said what I wanted to say right at the top.

There are interviews with two spokesmen for the resort. I did not need to interview both as they both said the same things, but using clips of two different people to make separate points can really keep the pace going on a short to medium length piece.

The interview locations were fairly challenging. In the first soundbite, you will notice that the speaker is inside. In the second, outside. This is just to keep up the variety. For the inside interview I simply used a fairly plain kitchen backdrop with a short depth of field to blur it. For the outside interview it was a very sunny day and the subject was in the shade. To remedy this I used a powerful light on his face, and boosted the mid-range spectrum in post production to bring out the subject without burning-out the background. In my experience, it's better to focus on keeping the background under control during the shoot, and lightening the face in post-production, rather than trying to darken a background in post-production while keeping the face illuminated.

To set-up the third soundbite (the lawyer), I use a lot of establishing shots in his office. Generally, I dislike boring office set-up. In this case, I didn't have many pictures from elsewhere, so I made sure I had a variety of set-up shots and cutaways to chose from.

Because the resort itself was not televisually that interesting, I was forced to use some file to cover part of the piece; generic GVs of Shanghai and Beijing, and fairly recent b-roll of immigration lines at Houston international airport. I prefer not to use library shots, but in this case there simply wasn't enough original AND interesting b-roll to sustain a 2:30 piece, even though I shot well over an hour of material.

Report: DTV transition figures from Nielson

TVB - televisionbroadcast.com - has an interesting story on preparations for the transition to DTV across the US. Below is a cutting from the article by Deborah D. McAdams.

The full piece can be seen here.

"Nielsen issued numbers today indicating that households are preparing for the DTV transition at a rate of around 100,000 per week. Currently, around 3.1 million households would lose TV service if analog transmissions ceased immediately, around 200,000 less than the estimate of two weeks ago.

Final Cut Express 4
Apple Final Cut Studio 2 (Mac)

Nielsen says this figure, comprising 2.7 percent of U.S. TV households, represents those that rely exclusively on the over-the-air delivery of television. If the preparation rate holds, roughly 2.9 million households will lose TV reception on June 12 when more than 900 TV stations across the country will stop broadcasting in analog.

Among demographics, African Americans represent the highest ratio of unprepared households with 5.4 percent. Hispanics are next with 4.7 percent. Among Asian households, 3.2 percent are unprepared. Five percent of households headed by folks younger than 35 were not prepared compared to 1.5 percent for those over 55.

Market-by-market, Albuquerque-Santa Fe, N.M. has the highest rate of unready households with 8.4 percent, an improvement of only a fraction of a percent since May 1. Dallas-Ft. Worth is next with 6.37 percent Unreadiness, also just a slight improvement since the first of the month. Those markets most prepared, with less than one percent of households not capable of receiving DTV signals, include Providence, R.I./New Bedford, Mass.; Oklahoma City and Baltimore."

TVB is a great website for comprehensive news about the broadcasting industry.

She works hard for the money, so hard for it honey.

I just found this interesting video at provideocoalition.com. It seems to explain the problems that freelance videographers often face when it comes to getting paid:



This raises an interesting question - why do clients often feel in a position to barter with videographers when other services usually have a fixed fee or price list which noone would think to question?

Of course, videographers are not the only ones who have to deal with these kinds of negotiations. There are plenty of other professions that involve the same sort of thing.

LaCie 301371 500GB Rugged All-Terrain FireWire 800/ FireWire 400/USB 2.0 Portable Hard Drive

But videographers are providing a very tangible product in a specific period of time. The only answer I can come up with is that we, collectively, make our own lives difficult by not having adequate rate cards. In addition, I think that because so many people claim to be videographers and/or editors, there is so much competition that many feel unable to turn work down when a client offers an insufficient amount of money.

This is a problem of technology. Nowadays anyone with a camcorder and Mac can call themselves a videographer and set-up a production company. A lot of these companies are just terrible. As the video says, it's analogous to the difference between a swanky restaurant and a taco stand in terms of quality. But most people in PR or outside the video community do not generally understand what a good video production looks like. Therefore, they do not understand why some videographers charge more than the taco stand guy!

LaCie Hard Disk 1 TB FireWire 400/USB 2.0/eSATA External Hard Drive, Design by Neil Poulton 301315U

I saw an abysmal promotional video last week, but the client who paid for it was clearly very happy with it. It's a frustrating part of life for those of us in this field.

She works hard for the money, so you better treat her right!

The one-man-band salesman

On this blog, I focus a lot on the technical side of being a one-man-band reporter. However, most of us in this field also need to be journalists in the traditional sense. We have to find stories and we have to write them.

I've had several emails recently asking for some tips in this area, so I thought I would tackle one of the most useful skills to have involving writing - pitching story ideas to editors.

If you're a freelancer this is a particularly helpful skill to have. But even for those of us who work for news agencies, being able to pitch up stories to commissioning editors at client networks is important.

This post is not to going to suggest the types of stories you should be pitching. This will always vary from client to client. You should be aware of the kinds of stories and video your customers are interested in. But what I am going to do is list a few suggestions that might help you get a higher number of pitch acceptances.

Sony VCT-60AV Remote Control Tripod for use with Compatible Sony Camcorders
Manfrotto 785 Modo Maxi Photo Video Grip Head Tripod

1) Give the pitch a catchy title of about two or three words - a sort of headline. It's a nice teaser.

2) One of the crucial things to remember before you pitch a story is that news directors and those who work on assignment desks are often very busy. They are not going to have time to read something lengthy from a stringer sending them a story idea. For this reason, it is absolutely critical to get to the point immediately in your pitch. Think of your pitch as a lead-in to a story, complete with top line to hook the reader/viewer in. In this case, the audience you are writing for is the person you want to commission your story. Spell out the story in the first line - in fact, spell it out in the first few words.

Here is an example of a top line to a pitch I recently wrote:

"A police force in Florida has begun deploying paragliders in its fight against crime." It is short and to the point. Don't try to be clever and dance around the subject. Write it just like a script - hitting the story should be the first thing you do.

Secondly, keep the pitch very short - no more than four very short paragraphs. No busy commissioning editor is going to read more than that. Think of how journalists in newsrooms look at press releases. They will look at the top two lines at most. Sell the story quickly. If the interesting stuff is far down your pitch, noone will see it.

3) Include in your pitch something that will make a journalist interested. This is the NEWs business, so generally the stuff you try to sell should be NEW: Point to why it's new, how it's different from other stories that have already been done, explain how your story will highlight a new trend, talk about how it applies more broadly - say, on a national or international level. Usually, these basics apply to any type of story you are trying to sell.

4) Your pitch should include a brief line talking about what you plan to include in the piece. Don't promise specific interviewees unless you already have them lined-up. But talk generally about which elements you will include, such as the b-roll you plan to shoot or pull from your library. In TV, making clear that you plan to use interesting pictures is absolutely crucial.

Here is an example:

Westcott Photo Basics 501 Backlight Kit
[3721] Pro 600 watt "Cool-Flo" Fluorescent Photo/Digital Video Lighting Kit--Steve Kaeser since 1989
CowboyStudio 2275 Watt Digital Video Continuous Softbox Lighting Kit BOOM Set with Carrying Case - 2 Light stands, 2 Softboxes, 1 Boom Kit, 11 Photo Bulbs

"The story will look at how the Cuban-American community is receiving the shift in policy from the Bush administration to the Obama administration. The story, which will include lots of footage shot by FSN inside Cuba, will look at how Cubans on both sides of the debate in the US are greeting the possibility of talks between the two nations."

5) Pitch stories that are easy to shoot. The first stories you should try to sell are the ones that you can complete quickly, preferably in one shoot. These are the most economical ones to do because they take less of your time, and will probably net you the same income as a piece of the same length that took a week to produce. Give an indication in your pitch of when you might be able to deliver the story. Make it a realistic target date. Don't promise something you can't deliver.

6) Make clear that you are open to suggestions. An editor may like a story idea, just not your proposed treatment of it. Show willing to work with the person who commissions items, and offer to be flexible on how you go about tackling your story.

7) Give it a shot! Even if a story doesn't particularly interest you personally, pitch it anyway - within reason. Whoever looks at your pitch may like it. If it's an easy story to do, it's worth pitching. I have lost count of the number of times I have suggested stories that leave me cold, only to have them enthusiastically commissioned by clients.

These are the general rules I go by. As ever, they're not the bible. If anyone else has any useful advice to add in this area, lets hear from you.

News Videographer: Shoot in HD where possible

A couple of months ago I wrote a piece about why it is important to shoot in high definition even if you plan to down convert to SD when you edit. Here was the original post.

My points mainly concerned the positive quality benefits of shooting in HD of HDV even when producing a standard definition project.

However, Angela Grant over at the excellent News Videographer blog - one of my favorites - has revealed that she too always shoots in HD using a Sony HVR-Z1U. She gives a couple of strong reasons for doing so. Among her points are:

"For me, I always wanted to shoot in HD because it gave me the choice of pulling framegrabs for publication in the newspaper. Also, it’s nice to have the choice to process your video as either HD or SD. Plus, this is the format of the future. Why buy outdated technology? You may as well join the bandwagon now, and not later."

Angela often does as I do and captures her HD footage in SD. But she suggests capturing in HD and converting during export if you have time.

GM bankruptcy could help solo-journalists?

There have been several reports citing the risks to TV stations from the bankruptcy of General Motors.

As most of us who work in TV know, car advertisements make up a large part of the revenue of stations. For local network affiliates, cutbacks have been fairly severe in recent months, mainly due to big reductions in the advertising budgets of local car dealerships.

Well, it seems the networks and station groups are set to suffer too. According to this report in Broadcasting and Cable, several ad agencies that buy airtime on behalf of GM are among the top twenty creditors cited in the bankruptcy court filing.

While cutbacks in newsroom staffing at the networks and affiliates is not a good thing for the industry as a whole, this passage from the Project for Excellent in Journalism's report on the State of the News Media in 2008 offers an interesting perspective:

"...while the evidence suggests that overall staffing continued to drop [in 2008], the three networks appear to be responding to the long-standing decline in foreign bureaus by re-staffing with one-person bureaus, bringing overseas bureau numbers back up to the mid-teens."

The full report can be seen here

This, of course, refers to foreign bureaus. But it does seem to suggest that TV executives are using the one-person bureau model as a solution to staffing issues in tough economic times. Deep cuts in overseas coverage has been evident over many years, amazingly even since September 11th 2001. But it appears that the leaner, meaner times we live in has given the solo-journalist model a boost, and is even helping to sow the seeds of growth in bureau openings.

Maybe the bankruptcy of General Motors will work in favor of the one-man-band. That may be a stretch, but when you consider that TV companies are owed tens of millions of dollars by GM via its ad agencies, it may well result in the need to economize more in the nation's newsrooms. Hopefully those who make the decisions will elect to reduce costs by changing the way their organizations work, rather than just cutting.