I excitedly ran back into my new bosses’ office, eager to
show him the video I shot for one of my first news stories.
“Your video is blue,” he said.
People looked like they were ghastly ill, or worse, very
large “Smurfs.” And if memory serves, I
think the tripod moved during one of my interviews, so only half of my
subject’s face was showing.
“Go back out there and do it again,” he commanded.
That scenario played out almost sixteen years ago at my
first television station in Grand Junction, Colorado. As a cub reporter, I had to shoot, write, and
edit my own stories. In the business we
call that the “one-man-band.” But as
broadcast journalists work up to larger television markets, the camera becomes
someone else’s responsibility. Reporters
focus on writing scripts and developing sources, while photographers delve into
their craft of taking compelling pictures, and then later editing their video to hopefully make the story “pop.”
Technology has evolved greatly since my days of lugging a
heavy camera around the mountains of western Colorado, and because of that, many
large television companies are implementing what is known as the “VJ,” or
video-journalist. In some circles these
people are labeled as “multi-media journalists” or “backpack journalists.” (Because the camera, microphone and computer
can all fit in a backpack.)
Last week, I had to learn how to ride the bike again.
Recently, after a union vote, our company began implementing
the multi-media model. It’s been…interesting. There have been training sessions, and my
first jump back into the photography pool was bright, literally, as my
interview looked like he was walking on the sun. It’s a good thing the story never aired;
otherwise my employer would have been responsible for supplying thousands of
sunglasses to our loyal viewers.
But things got much
better the second time around, and I found myself crawling underneath a house
to get an interview with a man who was cleaning out sand months after
super-storm “Sandy” battered the Connecticut coastline. (See story here.)
Story number three was in a graveyard, where I amazingly didn’t
trip over any headstones as I followed an army veteran putting flags in the
ground before Memorial Day. (That story
can be seen
here.) It should be noted I did not
edit these stories, as that too, will take some more schoolwork. (Much,
MUCH more…)
The move to MMJ’s is the source of much debate in our industry. Some believe it takes away from what a
reporter should be doing, because he or she is too caught up in how the video
looks and the audio sounds. Some argue it's not safe to have one person at a crime scene responsible for interviews and videography. On the other
hand, since the one holding the camera is the one who will be writing the
script, those in favor argue that the two talents complement one another best and are skills that just one person should cultivate. And I recognize that from an employers point of view-- instead of
having a news staff of ten reporter/photographer teams, a company can now
have twenty reporters, theoretically increasing the news coverage output, without increasing cost. But can a reporter truly match the skill-set
of a photographer or editor who has been doing this for twenty or more
years? Some say yes – others say no. There are stations who boast the move has been
successful, others who have abandoned the idea and stuck with the traditional two-man-crew format.
My days as a young “one -man band" in 1997 are memorable. I got
sick shooting out of a Cessna 172 airplane; I gave a homeless man a ride into
town in a company vehicle with his dog “Sh-t-Stain;” I trashed the transmission
on the station owned Saturn wagon by driving over boulders; I lost the
camera lens on a mountain while downhill skiing (but found it later); and the list goes on and on
and on…
But I did re-shoot my story that first turned out blue,
and ever since then, I've had the sincerest appreciation for WHOMEVER puts their
eye in a viewfinder, trying to get a perfect picture so a story can be
picture-perfect.
No comments:
Post a Comment