Showing posts with label BBC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BBC. Show all posts
Sunday, 16 January 2011
Wednesday, 2 September 2009
nearly new is nigh? or getting back to uni, the time is coming
ITS early, i have some kind of stomach bug that makes me feel like im being sodomised by a red hot needle every hour or so and uni time is nearly upon us again.
how-bloody-ever my camera has decided to be a bit gay whilst capturing som footage for this fashion vid the other day and i cannot find a half hours worth of footage that the computer says it has captured and wont capture again for some reason. damn the way i end up having to do things. new camera time me thinks. i recokon a good old, reliable sony vx 2000. sod all this high def malarky unless your able to properly make somehting look amazing. by the time everyone gets round to high def, well we all know there will some new tech sitting on the side lines waiting to pick over the remains of HD!
so here i am with a weekend of editing infront of me and i need to spend ages finding each clip and re-capturing and re-logging it, oh the joy.
so anyway, been watching much tv recently? i have and i have been enjoying CSI, i know maybe im a bit late in getting into this but the wire is on so late and well, i dismissed CSI as another US flashy detective show with too big a budget and too little substance to keep me entertained. how i was wrong. however i can go onto BONES now which is exactly the opposite. Kathy Reichs books made into a TV series? when i read that i though wicked. when i watched i was sick, sick with disgust that a tv show like that could be released. it has that guy from buffy in, the one who was a bad vampire then a good one then an angel (or an angle, i cant remember which he turned out to be) and some bird who whilst not being ugly sure isnt pretty and far too young to play temprance brennan (sorry, i enjoy the books and thought the show could really be good) and cannot pull off the socially inept, self consumed brennan at all in my opinion.
so yeah. whilst we are on US imports what about K-Ville? i didnt catch much of it and i couldnt tell what the fuck was going on and when it was set (exactly after katrina, a while after, an alterative universe where katrina didnt hit new orleans a nuclear bomb did?) but i think i will be tuning in again at some point to catch up with and see where it is heading.
anyway im getting imprints in my legs from the lap top and the heat is making my nutsack an unpleasant place to be, why cant they put more efficient fans and colling systems on a lap top? why cant i just open it and clean it and re-lube the fan and preform general maintenance on the bloody thing with out voiding my warrenty?!?!?!?!
oh no going grumpy
peace out
how-bloody-ever my camera has decided to be a bit gay whilst capturing som footage for this fashion vid the other day and i cannot find a half hours worth of footage that the computer says it has captured and wont capture again for some reason. damn the way i end up having to do things. new camera time me thinks. i recokon a good old, reliable sony vx 2000. sod all this high def malarky unless your able to properly make somehting look amazing. by the time everyone gets round to high def, well we all know there will some new tech sitting on the side lines waiting to pick over the remains of HD!
so here i am with a weekend of editing infront of me and i need to spend ages finding each clip and re-capturing and re-logging it, oh the joy.
so anyway, been watching much tv recently? i have and i have been enjoying CSI, i know maybe im a bit late in getting into this but the wire is on so late and well, i dismissed CSI as another US flashy detective show with too big a budget and too little substance to keep me entertained. how i was wrong. however i can go onto BONES now which is exactly the opposite. Kathy Reichs books made into a TV series? when i read that i though wicked. when i watched i was sick, sick with disgust that a tv show like that could be released. it has that guy from buffy in, the one who was a bad vampire then a good one then an angel (or an angle, i cant remember which he turned out to be) and some bird who whilst not being ugly sure isnt pretty and far too young to play temprance brennan (sorry, i enjoy the books and thought the show could really be good) and cannot pull off the socially inept, self consumed brennan at all in my opinion.
so yeah. whilst we are on US imports what about K-Ville? i didnt catch much of it and i couldnt tell what the fuck was going on and when it was set (exactly after katrina, a while after, an alterative universe where katrina didnt hit new orleans a nuclear bomb did?) but i think i will be tuning in again at some point to catch up with and see where it is heading.
anyway im getting imprints in my legs from the lap top and the heat is making my nutsack an unpleasant place to be, why cant they put more efficient fans and colling systems on a lap top? why cant i just open it and clean it and re-lube the fan and preform general maintenance on the bloody thing with out voiding my warrenty?!?!?!?!
oh no going grumpy
peace out
Tuesday, 23 June 2009
Liquid Soap on the BBC news use my footage!
Liquid soap was featured on BBC points west 6:30pm edition on monday 22nd of june.
when the reporter and producer turned up we let them have a free range of the set for a bit. eventually they asked to be let up onto the rigging, i had to refuse incae they hurt themselves because of wires and ropes attached, however they asked if mark the student lighting supervisor would be able to film for them, he said yes but was immediately called down to the set and so gave me the camera, i walked around the outside of the rigging trying to get shots down into the set as the cast and filming crew were rehearsing. i think i succeeded in getting them what they wanted as they used a lot of the shots i got in their final edit that went on air.
you can watch it here !
Saturday, 15 November 2008
Paul Appleby and Interactive Broadcasting
During todays session we had probably our last guest speaker coming in to see us. This week it was Paul Appleby, who is mainly a series producer with interests in interactive broadcasting (i.e. the web, interactive shows, mobile device content delivery, etc). He currently is working for the BBC and has worked on programmes such as 'Saving Planet Earth' and other natural history programmes out of Bristol and has also been involved in the ongoing digitisation of the BBC, but mentioned that he will be going freelance soon, something to do with interactivity.
He came across as being very consumer driven, wanting to deliver content to specific audiences. He believes that interactive TV is the way forwards. Interactive TV is a little misleading as a term, interactive broadcasting describes it more fully. It would involve the use of multi platform broadcasting, e.g. a short radio or television advert run between shows informing the audience of a specific programme they might be able to catch online, as and when they want to. One down side to this he pointed out thought was that you would loose the social aspect of television, sitting down with friends to watch a programme at a set time. As a community, audiences still seem to like the social aspect, the sense of belonging to say half a million people watching neighbours each night, you know your not the only one doing it. This gives the audience a sense of connection to the show, a sense of belonging. But he also feels that more interactivity will increase this sense of community in the audience. If you miss an evenings episode because your late home from work you can catch up again on it later (not at the moment as I just remembered neighbours is now on 5 and not BBC), but the message is there that more interactivity doesn't lead to a loss of what I could only describe 'television'. That magical feeling i remember from last decade before Sky caught on in a major way, of sitting in front of the TV with your family or friends and watching a programme at a certain time, cancelling all plans on a Friday night to stay in and watch the latest episode of Red Dwarf.
Susan asked us to type up a few of the questions that were asked, frankly I've typed enough I reckon here to keep and pretty illiterate clown happy for a wee, but I suppose I better touch on those subjects as it will help give a better understanding of what Paul was telling us.
1.) I asked Paul about advertisings role in internet broadcasting and his first reaction was that someone needs to do it correctly first. Television at its basest form is a business model and is there to make money, not just for the broadcasters but also now for advertisers. Advertisers want to target more closed knit groups of consumers these days and internet 'TV' could be one way for them to do it. At the minute it seems to subsidise what companies are putting into it unless you are a specialist site providing specific content (look at Mpora.com, an extreme sports video website, which I think is flooded with adverts but they are all targeted at skateboarders, snowboarders, mountainbikers, etc). He mentioned how wrap arounds or the dreaded pop ups could be used to target certain demographics.
Also during this however he mentioned that the TV lisence needs reviewing, the name changing to something more descriptive of wat it actually does. Maybe 'BBC Content Lisence' would be a better term for it as the money used from it not only goes into production for television shows, but also radio and internet (iPlayer used a big chunk of the income from the TV lisence when it was first set up). With the correct advertising subscription fees would then become un-necessary unless paying for things like movies.
2.) I asked what new roles could pop up in the business with the emergence of interactive broadcasting and though he didn't seem to answer my question directly he suggested that there could be new roles appearing for people with the right skills. Self shooting directors/producers with internet authoring knowledge, creative types with the technological know-how to adapt to this new form of media communication. There will however be more opportunities to communicate through visual media, whether it will make you a lot of money is waiting to be seen but there will definately be openings in companies other than traditional media ones as people will realise the importance of visual communication.
3.) Also asked, thought I cant remember whether by me or one of my class mates, but this is one had been trying to ask for some time I think, was the question of how could he see interactivity playing a role in the future of broadcasting?
This made him very animated as I think its something he is very passionate about. The need to embrace web delivery and design, the fact there is more than one way to get a point of info across and easier collection of audience data were the main points. He pointed out three types of viewer, the inwardly focused viewer (I presume the type to watch designer shows etc), the outwardly focused viewer (someone who may watch a lot of factual based programmes) and the viewer focused on the now (maybe your soap opera addict) and the need to provide shows that cater to all tastes available as making a show about interior design and putting in a slot that might turn you outwardly focused viewer away will loose you ratings, but making three types of show available to audiences at the same time by the press of a little red button on your remote or the click of a mouse could possibly mean higher ratings for your channel than showing one type of show. OK he didnt go this far deep into it but after thinking about this matter I can see how the future of broadcasting may go, and it looks like it could be good.
I think that with the emergence of 'Interactive Broadcasting' (to give it a better name than 'Interactive Television') the future can only hold a new and exciting time for broadcast media in any form.
He came across as being very consumer driven, wanting to deliver content to specific audiences. He believes that interactive TV is the way forwards. Interactive TV is a little misleading as a term, interactive broadcasting describes it more fully. It would involve the use of multi platform broadcasting, e.g. a short radio or television advert run between shows informing the audience of a specific programme they might be able to catch online, as and when they want to. One down side to this he pointed out thought was that you would loose the social aspect of television, sitting down with friends to watch a programme at a set time. As a community, audiences still seem to like the social aspect, the sense of belonging to say half a million people watching neighbours each night, you know your not the only one doing it. This gives the audience a sense of connection to the show, a sense of belonging. But he also feels that more interactivity will increase this sense of community in the audience. If you miss an evenings episode because your late home from work you can catch up again on it later (not at the moment as I just remembered neighbours is now on 5 and not BBC), but the message is there that more interactivity doesn't lead to a loss of what I could only describe 'television'. That magical feeling i remember from last decade before Sky caught on in a major way, of sitting in front of the TV with your family or friends and watching a programme at a certain time, cancelling all plans on a Friday night to stay in and watch the latest episode of Red Dwarf.
Susan asked us to type up a few of the questions that were asked, frankly I've typed enough I reckon here to keep and pretty illiterate clown happy for a wee, but I suppose I better touch on those subjects as it will help give a better understanding of what Paul was telling us.
1.) I asked Paul about advertisings role in internet broadcasting and his first reaction was that someone needs to do it correctly first. Television at its basest form is a business model and is there to make money, not just for the broadcasters but also now for advertisers. Advertisers want to target more closed knit groups of consumers these days and internet 'TV' could be one way for them to do it. At the minute it seems to subsidise what companies are putting into it unless you are a specialist site providing specific content (look at Mpora.com, an extreme sports video website, which I think is flooded with adverts but they are all targeted at skateboarders, snowboarders, mountainbikers, etc). He mentioned how wrap arounds or the dreaded pop ups could be used to target certain demographics.
Also during this however he mentioned that the TV lisence needs reviewing, the name changing to something more descriptive of wat it actually does. Maybe 'BBC Content Lisence' would be a better term for it as the money used from it not only goes into production for television shows, but also radio and internet (iPlayer used a big chunk of the income from the TV lisence when it was first set up). With the correct advertising subscription fees would then become un-necessary unless paying for things like movies.
2.) I asked what new roles could pop up in the business with the emergence of interactive broadcasting and though he didn't seem to answer my question directly he suggested that there could be new roles appearing for people with the right skills. Self shooting directors/producers with internet authoring knowledge, creative types with the technological know-how to adapt to this new form of media communication. There will however be more opportunities to communicate through visual media, whether it will make you a lot of money is waiting to be seen but there will definately be openings in companies other than traditional media ones as people will realise the importance of visual communication.
3.) Also asked, thought I cant remember whether by me or one of my class mates, but this is one had been trying to ask for some time I think, was the question of how could he see interactivity playing a role in the future of broadcasting?
This made him very animated as I think its something he is very passionate about. The need to embrace web delivery and design, the fact there is more than one way to get a point of info across and easier collection of audience data were the main points. He pointed out three types of viewer, the inwardly focused viewer (I presume the type to watch designer shows etc), the outwardly focused viewer (someone who may watch a lot of factual based programmes) and the viewer focused on the now (maybe your soap opera addict) and the need to provide shows that cater to all tastes available as making a show about interior design and putting in a slot that might turn you outwardly focused viewer away will loose you ratings, but making three types of show available to audiences at the same time by the press of a little red button on your remote or the click of a mouse could possibly mean higher ratings for your channel than showing one type of show. OK he didnt go this far deep into it but after thinking about this matter I can see how the future of broadcasting may go, and it looks like it could be good.
I think that with the emergence of 'Interactive Broadcasting' (to give it a better name than 'Interactive Television') the future can only hold a new and exciting time for broadcast media in any form.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)