BBC3 and "Wedding Stories"

[tom hardwick]

Have any of you watched BBC3's "Wedding Stories" on a Sunday night (9:30pm)? I'm struck dumb, appalled at the atrocious footage that gets broadcast. If I were to shoot and edit wedding videos like that I'd be deservedly out on my ear, with a size 10 boot up my bum.

It really is a mess, and I just wish the two vidoeographers were reading this to offer some sort of defence. The most basic failing is one of anticipation, where horrible jerky, overshooting zip-pans are left in simply because the (poor) editor has so little good footage to work with.

About the only reasonable attribute seems to be colour balance, but that could all be down to the editor anyway. The rest of the video work is just bad, with poor framing, auto-focus hunting, auto exposure that flounces around all over the place. Don't they know the first thing about shutter speeds and apertures? Haven't they got a decent wide-angle converter between them? Haven't they learnt how to hold a camera steady?

I'm sorry, but it's truly a lesson in what not to do; how not to film a wedding and its preparation. And this rubbish gets paid for by you and me. They need smacking.

tom.

[johnxl1s]

it was unbelievable.

[Alan Roberts]

I haven't seen it, but I can imagine. Programmes are no longer made with professional camera operators and/or engineers involved. The advent of DV cameras meant that any journalist could go out and get material which, if the programme thread wanted to, could be made into a programme. The problem is that they don't understand the kit. Some go on training courses, but that costs money (I know, I get some of it). You wouldn't believe some of the tales I hear about videographers, out on a job, phoning in to ask dumb questions (like "how do I start and stop it?").

To be fair, I don't think the BBC's unique in this, I've seen some truly awesome Channel 5 stuff.

But there's another factor here. BBC 3 is a "yoof" channel, where anything goes. Traditional styles and values are deliberately sidelined in favour of immediacy. In anoither thread here I've already said how little of BBC3 is relevant to me, and this is one of the main causes, I don't like the style, and that puts me sufficiently removed from wanting to ignore the style and look for the content. It's a fashion. They'll grow out of it. Eventually. I hope.

But for the present, if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys.

[markwilliams32]

yeah, the footage was really bad.

[The-Video-Company.co.uk]

Switched the channel, and wathed UK Style instead.

Now where did I put those pastel drapes?

[Tall Paul]

I wathed my dwapes and can't do a fing wiv em

[Z Cheema]

The new "Battle Star Galactica" has some amazing wobbly shots to make you sea sick, in fact so bad it is a deliberate annoyance you notice the camera more then the material, which if anyone can tell me the story please would be helpfully none of us understood the story line, assuming there is one...

[harlequin]

well you just about to catch it replay now on sky one mix , for the double opening miniseries and the first ep is repeated on thursday night sky one mix.

[Alan Roberts]

When the technique's m ore memorable than the content, there's a problem. As far as I'm concerned, you shouldn't be able to remember any of the tricks, or even notice them, you should be looking at the story.

[amukidi]

Yeah, but before any of you become too self-righteous, bear in mind that some of the most excrutiatingly bland and dreadful stuff ends up on wedding videos! More cheesy transitions than you can shake a stick at and cloying, vomit-inducing picture-in picture scenes and soft edges. However experienced and knowledgable anybody is with a video camera, if they have no visual awareness and creativity, the end result is simply going to be crap - albeit superbly exposed and focussed crap! An inherent problem with the Camerman/Editor/Director Jack of all trades scenario..... Not intending to open a can of worms here - just to turn the mirror round a bit!