NG
The BBC seem to have removed the sponsorship logo from the countdown clock. They also seem to have dipped out before the very lengthy sponsorship list on the credits. (I think there may be issues with the BBC carrying these)
noggin
Founding member
TVArchive posted:
Some images of the night...
From BBC's coverage, keep an eye on the little box that seems to have appeared on the top right of the aston (above the 07 on the right)...
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/esc2005v1.jpg
_________________________________________________
TVEi's coverage, clean astons, including the sponsorship that the BBC had to hide (a couple of occasions saw the box not faded up in time on BBC exposing all...)
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/esc2005v2.jpg
_____________________________________________
And the widescreen scoreboard/two-way, the following image is how I saw the coverage on a 4:3 set...
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/esc2005v3.jpg
Who's the broadcaster presenting the results in Monaco then?!
From BBC's coverage, keep an eye on the little box that seems to have appeared on the top right of the aston (above the 07 on the right)...
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/esc2005v1.jpg
_________________________________________________
TVEi's coverage, clean astons, including the sponsorship that the BBC had to hide (a couple of occasions saw the box not faded up in time on BBC exposing all...)
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/esc2005v2.jpg
_____________________________________________
And the widescreen scoreboard/two-way, the following image is how I saw the coverage on a 4:3 set...
http://www.rp-networkservices.com/tvforum/uploads/esc2005v3.jpg
Who's the broadcaster presenting the results in Monaco then?!
The BBC seem to have removed the sponsorship logo from the countdown clock. They also seem to have dipped out before the very lengthy sponsorship list on the credits. (I think there may be issues with the BBC carrying these)
NG
Hmm - not sure I agree. Looking back at most of the 90s contests they were very static and slow, and don't hold up at all well in comparison to the more recent shows. Birmingham in 1998 was a very nicely directed contest with some amazing camera work - though I wasn't a fan of the stage and lighting.
This year the Steadicam worked quite hard, but there was only one used, and it was certainly used quite sparingly on some songs. However the show WAS covered heavily with jibs.
There was a single radio Steadicam, two peds at the front left and front right of the stage, two medium sized jimmy jibs working VERY hard at the front, a rail cam above the stage, a rail cam at the back of the stage (that popped up and down) shooting back into the audience, a rail cam to the left of the stage, a scissor jib to the right, a twin rail cam mid way back, two cameras on tripods on a rostrum mid way back, a VERY long jib at the back high up mounted on a large rostrum, and a scissor jib at the back to the right. There were a few more cameras dotted around, as well as the green room.
Most of the movement came from the jibs - though the Steadicam worked hard on some of the songs - and got applause of his own during some performances.
The "look" of the recent contests has been heavily influenced by the Swedish team who have covered them. In coverage terms they look VERY simlar to the Melodifestival selection contest - which itself is a series of huge OBs from stadia around Sweden (often sports stadia). Often the Swedish entry is shot-for-shot very similar on Eurovision to the presentation on Melodifestival...
noggin
Founding member
Telefís posted:
Yes - these 'Palaces' of Eastern Europe are a rather strange phenomenon - used for sport and conferences etc.
But their rectangular, cavernous shapes make Eurovision so predictable ever year now. And as you say, the camerawork has become equally standardised: stedicam has just taken over the event - what I tend to call the lazy director's option.
Okay it can look fantastic, but not for every single shot!
Now everything has to have movement, and fast dissolves between every shot, with increasingly little attention paid to the nuances of songs. Suppose that's partly down to the fast nature of most songs now, but it's a shame how ubiquitous everything has become; most people probably couldn't tell the difference between the sets of the past 4 years.
But their rectangular, cavernous shapes make Eurovision so predictable ever year now. And as you say, the camerawork has become equally standardised: stedicam has just taken over the event - what I tend to call the lazy director's option.
Okay it can look fantastic, but not for every single shot!
Now everything has to have movement, and fast dissolves between every shot, with increasingly little attention paid to the nuances of songs. Suppose that's partly down to the fast nature of most songs now, but it's a shame how ubiquitous everything has become; most people probably couldn't tell the difference between the sets of the past 4 years.
Hmm - not sure I agree. Looking back at most of the 90s contests they were very static and slow, and don't hold up at all well in comparison to the more recent shows. Birmingham in 1998 was a very nicely directed contest with some amazing camera work - though I wasn't a fan of the stage and lighting.
This year the Steadicam worked quite hard, but there was only one used, and it was certainly used quite sparingly on some songs. However the show WAS covered heavily with jibs.
There was a single radio Steadicam, two peds at the front left and front right of the stage, two medium sized jimmy jibs working VERY hard at the front, a rail cam above the stage, a rail cam at the back of the stage (that popped up and down) shooting back into the audience, a rail cam to the left of the stage, a scissor jib to the right, a twin rail cam mid way back, two cameras on tripods on a rostrum mid way back, a VERY long jib at the back high up mounted on a large rostrum, and a scissor jib at the back to the right. There were a few more cameras dotted around, as well as the green room.
Most of the movement came from the jibs - though the Steadicam worked hard on some of the songs - and got applause of his own during some performances.
The "look" of the recent contests has been heavily influenced by the Swedish team who have covered them. In coverage terms they look VERY simlar to the Melodifestival selection contest - which itself is a series of huge OBs from stadia around Sweden (often sports stadia). Often the Swedish entry is shot-for-shot very similar on Eurovision to the presentation on Melodifestival...
NG
Most EBU members are commercial based broadcasters to some extent nowadays.
I can't think of one, other than the Beeb, who are 100% commercial free now ?
Don't think SVT carry commercials either.
noggin
Founding member
Markymark posted:
deejay posted:
Aphrodite007 posted:
I think the EBU prefers non-commercial broadcasters though.
Most EBU members are commercial based broadcasters to some extent nowadays.
I can't think of one, other than the Beeb, who are 100% commercial free now ?
Don't think SVT carry commercials either.
BO
I was in Malta during the contest this year - everywhere was watching it! They did very well though!
I watched on BBC Prime then after it just cut off like BBC ONE, I then switched over to TVE for the rest (and their own extended credits). Did anyone not think that the male host was a little annoying after shouting "HELLO?!?!??" after the countries didn't start speaking the second that he finished?
I.e. we now go to <country>. Hello <name>. (half a second later) HELLO!?!!
Maybe someone should have educated him about delays...
Overall not a bad contest!
I watched on BBC Prime then after it just cut off like BBC ONE, I then switched over to TVE for the rest (and their own extended credits). Did anyone not think that the male host was a little annoying after shouting "HELLO?!?!??" after the countries didn't start speaking the second that he finished?
I.e. we now go to <country>. Hello <name>. (half a second later) HELLO!?!!
Maybe someone should have educated him about delays...
Overall not a bad contest!
TE
And not only did they nick the 1997 set concept Phen, they also stole the prized camera angle of that year - the jib-arm shot from the base of one of the sweeping arms, rising it up to follow the curve in a most dramatic fashion!
Hmm - not sure I agree. Looking back at most of the 90s contests they were very static and slow, and don't hold up at all well in comparison to the more recent shows.
Ah now noggin, it's hardly fair to compare the technology of the 90s with the steadicams and tracked cameras of today!
But I accept there is a huge difference, the former largely being the better I think though.
Suppose everyone has their own way of doing things, my preference being for largely pedestal-based shots, reserving steadicam and jib-arm for openings, choruses and ends of performances which adds emphasis and drama when they're kept for 'special parts' of performances. They're the 'big guns' as it were, and should only be used sparingly; like antibiotics, the more you use them the less potent they become
There's nothing like beautiful picture composition in performance - but increasing this is being thrown out the window in favour of wistful 'floaty', or fast-moving shots that 'cover' everything nicely - no need to bother with that irritating practice of havijng to frame shots
There's no doubting the spectacular effect the trackcams to the front generate though during dance routines - and the way the tilt up from the racing shiny floor to a wide of the action on stage - amazing!
Also the use of those half-second dissolves is very effective on consecutive cuts - just not all the time though! It can get very boring and aquire a production a slushy American Pop Idol look - suffice to say a road to be avioded at all costs.
Here's a link to my favourite Irish entry ever in 1993 - Niamh Kavanagh, down in Cork.(takes about 20secs)
Magnificent composition and vision mixing. A classic look - mixing the best of movement and timeless picture composition. (though yes, some of the ped movements could do with improvement!)
Thanks for that listing - I'd managed to suss out all of them on the night too with the exception of the sisscor jibs - what are these and what did they do?
Thanks.
And not only did they nick the 1997 set concept Phen, they also stole the prized camera angle of that year - the jib-arm shot from the base of one of the sweeping arms, rising it up to follow the curve in a most dramatic fashion!
noggin posted:
Hmm - not sure I agree. Looking back at most of the 90s contests they were very static and slow, and don't hold up at all well in comparison to the more recent shows.
Ah now noggin, it's hardly fair to compare the technology of the 90s with the steadicams and tracked cameras of today!
But I accept there is a huge difference, the former largely being the better I think though.
Suppose everyone has their own way of doing things, my preference being for largely pedestal-based shots, reserving steadicam and jib-arm for openings, choruses and ends of performances which adds emphasis and drama when they're kept for 'special parts' of performances. They're the 'big guns' as it were, and should only be used sparingly; like antibiotics, the more you use them the less potent they become
There's nothing like beautiful picture composition in performance - but increasing this is being thrown out the window in favour of wistful 'floaty', or fast-moving shots that 'cover' everything nicely - no need to bother with that irritating practice of havijng to frame shots
There's no doubting the spectacular effect the trackcams to the front generate though during dance routines - and the way the tilt up from the racing shiny floor to a wide of the action on stage - amazing!
Also the use of those half-second dissolves is very effective on consecutive cuts - just not all the time though! It can get very boring and aquire a production a slushy American Pop Idol look - suffice to say a road to be avioded at all costs.
Here's a link to my favourite Irish entry ever in 1993 - Niamh Kavanagh, down in Cork.(takes about 20secs)
Magnificent composition and vision mixing. A classic look - mixing the best of movement and timeless picture composition. (though yes, some of the ped movements could do with improvement!)
Quote:
There was a single radio Steadicam, two peds at the front left and front right of the stage, two medium sized jimmy jibs working VERY hard at the front, a rail cam above the stage, a rail cam at the back of the stage (that popped up and down) shooting back into the audience, a rail cam to the left of the stage, a scissor jib to the right, a twin rail cam mid way back, two cameras on tripods on a rostrum mid way back, a VERY long jib at the back high up mounted on a large rostrum, and a scissor jib at the back to the right. There were a few more cameras dotted around, as well as the green room.
Thanks for that listing - I'd managed to suss out all of them on the night too with the exception of the sisscor jibs - what are these and what did they do?
Thanks.
BO
Four pictures down on this page http://www.eurovisiondiary.com/?May_8 you can see a picture of the sisscor jibs they used at this years ESC.
NG
Thanks for that listing - I'd managed to suss out all of them on the night too with the exception of the sisscor jibs - what are these and what did they do?
Thanks.
Not sure if "scissor jib" is the right technical description. They were Arri jobs that effectively allowed on-shot extension in a similar manner to a Technocrane. Rather than telescoping they scissored to alter the extension. Suspect they had a more restricted range, but worked in smaller spaces.
I can see your argument about keeping jibs and steadicams for "big moments" - and that is certainly one way of doing things. For me the 1998 ESC that Geoff Posner directing in Birmingham is a really good masterclass in music direction.
However times have changed - and although some of the composition and wide shot / wide shot cuts weren't great (though they were mainly limited to the semi-final) - I think the energy level of the "Swedish" style has a lot going for it. Be nice if it was done by a different team for a change though.
noggin
Founding member
Telefís posted:
Thanks for that listing - I'd managed to suss out all of them on the night too with the exception of the sisscor jibs - what are these and what did they do?
Thanks.
Not sure if "scissor jib" is the right technical description. They were Arri jobs that effectively allowed on-shot extension in a similar manner to a Technocrane. Rather than telescoping they scissored to alter the extension. Suspect they had a more restricted range, but worked in smaller spaces.
I can see your argument about keeping jibs and steadicams for "big moments" - and that is certainly one way of doing things. For me the 1998 ESC that Geoff Posner directing in Birmingham is a really good masterclass in music direction.
However times have changed - and although some of the composition and wide shot / wide shot cuts weren't great (though they were mainly limited to the semi-final) - I think the energy level of the "Swedish" style has a lot going for it. Be nice if it was done by a different team for a change though.
TE
Thanks for that link squawkbox - really interesting stuff.
Any pics of the gallery anywhere?
Agreed noggin that there's no doubt it's a striking style - and looks exceptionally well for the most part, the seamless flow of movement can be just stunning.
Did you see Malta's performance, where she came to the 'big bit' and screamed her head off - the pulling out and up of the jib-arm at a skewed angle was just spectacular! The resulting applause was definitely more for the shot that for her!
That jib-arm pictured at the back of the auditorium is incredible! I've never in my life seem one as long as that! - if you'll excuse the terminology
Presumably it is the one used for the floating shot before and after ad breaks etc - the left hand side one must have been used for the introductory auditorium shot for each performance.
Any pics of the gallery anywhere?
Agreed noggin that there's no doubt it's a striking style - and looks exceptionally well for the most part, the seamless flow of movement can be just stunning.
Did you see Malta's performance, where she came to the 'big bit' and screamed her head off
- the pulling out and up of the jib-arm at a skewed angle was just spectacular! The resulting applause was definitely more for the shot that for her!
That jib-arm pictured at the back of the auditorium is incredible! I've never in my life seem one as long as that! - if you'll excuse the terminology
Presumably it is the one used for the floating shot before and after ad breaks etc - the left hand side one must have been used for the introductory auditorium shot for each performance.
TE
By the way I totally agree about Birmingham in 1998 - the camerawork was beautiful and was excellently directed.
And yes the set was nothing short of dreadful - my jaw just hit the floor when seeing how poor it was coming from the BBC - probably the worst set since Malmo in 1992:
http://www.eurovision-spain.com/imagen/escenarios/1992.jpg
(though 1994, in the effort to accomodate the scale of Riverdance, was pretty bad too)
http://www.eurovision-spain.com/imagen/escenarios/1994.jpg
The lighting patterns directed onto the floor of 1998 was the set's only saving grace - looked really good as I remember.
And yes the set was nothing short of dreadful - my jaw just hit the floor when seeing how poor it was coming from the BBC - probably the worst set since Malmo in 1992:
http://www.eurovision-spain.com/imagen/escenarios/1992.jpg
(though 1994, in the effort to accomodate the scale of Riverdance, was pretty bad too)
http://www.eurovision-spain.com/imagen/escenarios/1994.jpg
The lighting patterns directed onto the floor of 1998 was the set's only saving grace - looked really good as I remember.