It's meant to be BBC News from the 1950's to now, but you brush past over 40 years worth of output, briefly showing a couple of out of context clips from the 50's and totally missing out the 1960's, 70's 80's and almost all of the 90's! Oh and you spelt 'millennium' wrong
Who exactly is this aimed at and what is the point you're trying to get across? If it's just that 'news has changed over the years' then you really need to try harder as the video doesn't really say much except the bleeding obvious. It also concentrates more on what the news has looked like over the last 5 years.... which everyone knows! The contrast with the past is more obvious if you show lots of the past.
Like so many college videos (and I fell into this trap when I was a student) you need to concentrate more on the content and less on the way it looks. If your aim is to show how news has changed then show how news has changed, don't concentrate on fancy graphics and production techniques, do your research and present that on the screen.
It's meant to be BBC News from the 1950's to now, but you brush past over 40 years worth of output, briefly showing a couple of out of context clips from the 50's and totally missing out the 1960's, 70's 80's and almost all of the 90's! Oh and you spelt 'millennium' wrong
Who exactly is this aimed at and what is the point you're trying to get across? If it's just that 'news has changed over the years' then you really need to try harder as the video doesn't really say much except the bleeding obvious. It also concentrates more on what the news has looked like over the last 5 years.... which everyone knows! The contrast with the past is more obvious if you show lots of the past.
Like so many college videos (and I fell into this trap when I was a student) you need to concentrate more on the content and less on the way it looks. If your aim is to show how news has changed then show how news has changed, don't concentrate on fancy graphics and production techniques, do your research and present that on the screen.
Well... the aim was to
compare
the 50s to the 2000s, if you read the title of the video! Also, I don't know how you feel they're out of context, seeing as the videos all come form the correct areas of sites like TV Room + and TVArk. It's just meant to be an overview... The intention was never to include the decades in-between. And there isn't much material out there for the 1950s. So if you have access to all of that, then do please tell me!
The aim was to look at the graphics & their production, not the actual news content. It also accompanies a report on it, which is more in-depth. So thank you for your rant and I apologise for my one spelling mistake!
Last edited by Dan Gooding on 26 February 2010 7:12am
I agree that the compilation is a bit heavy on the last decade and too light on the 50's. However, as you mention Dan, it's probably because there isn't so much 50's footage available in the public domain.
Otherwise, loved the background music compilation, which you have managed to mix perfectly. And a very balanced selection of images for the montage of the last decade. Nice production, in fact. Thanks for sharing it.
One other comment: although the 1999-onward segment featured quite a bit on the use of on-screen information capture and the use of advanced newsgathering technique and graphical display, that era also saw the return to a simpler set appearance (I.e. the backdrop was very often an actual live newsroom featuring real people in real time and - therefore - not very imaginative).
As far as advanced set technology is concerned, the previous era (early nineties to 1999) probably was more or equally significant in terms of computer generated studio presentation (the proverbial "Virtual Era"), whilst perhaps not as glitzy and advanced in ticker-esque onscreen gadgetry!! But IMO, the early nineties was also somewhat revolutionary from a visual perspective.
Once again, thanks for sharing your work with us, Dan. (Whatever DID happen to George Eykyn, by the way....?)
Well... the aim was to
compare
the 50s to the 2000s, if you read the title of the video! Also, I don't know how you feel they're out of context, seeing as the videos all come form the correct areas of sites like TV Room + and TVArk. It's just meant to be an overview... The intention was never to include the decades in-between. And there isn't much material out there for the 1950s. So if you have access to all of that, then do please tell me!
Ah, I misunderstood the title (and you did use theme tunes from the intervening years) so fair enough on the inbetween bits.
However the random shots of 50's news, 2 of which are titles, and a photograph of a designers hand aren't really enough to demonstrate what news was like in the 50's. I know there isn't much material available.... but in that case why did you attempt to make a video!?
I assume you're doing Media Studies? If so part of that is knowing your medium. I remember making a video when I was at uni many years ago, we travelled miles filming interviews but towards the end we just couldn't justify it being a TV programme as the visuals just weren't up to it and so it was converted to radio instead and worked much better (although obviously I'm not suggesting that this could be done as radio!)
Quote:
The aim was to look at the graphics & their production, not the actual news content. It also accompanies a report on it, which is more in-depth.
I realise what angle you were trying to look at but it failed because of the lack of material. Your written report - illustrated - is probably a better way of presenting your case than a load of non-exsistant video clips. But then it all depends what the brief to your project is?
Quote:
So thank you for your rant and I apologise for my one spelling mistake!
It was constructive criticism, if you didn't want it why bother asking for it? I personally don't care about the spelling mistake so no need to apologise to me.... just correct it for a couple of extra marks from your tutor!