CW
cwathen
Founding member
I think the problem with all UK ECPs is that what's on the screen is never one source - the broadcaster always insists that the producer delivers the programme with credits produced to their requirements, and the ECP is then made through overlays and digital manipulation to run the credits and promotion at the same time. This what causes problems like anally enforced timings and presentation - they must make sure that the credits are all produced to the same style or the ECP won't work. The US style of ECP is imo much better - a broadcaster will deliver a programme with credits in whatever style they choose, and the broadcaster will re-type the credits in whatever style they want to fit the ECP, which is then played as one coherent package. This means that the style and length of the ECP can be tailored to whatever suits the junction, because it's not reliant on combining two different sources made by different people at different times.
I think moving towards an accelerated flow system as others have suggested would be better. IMO, it's not the idea of sitting through 30 seconds of credits that sends viewers channel hopping, it's the idea that those credits signal the start of a several minute long gap before the next programme which does it. If it had become established to never used trailers or have commercials in the junction between two programmes, but for the end of a credits sequence to lead directly into an ident for the next programme, they probably would hold viewers through the credits to see what was on next.
The ECP to me has always smacked of an attempt to fix a problem by delving even deeper into it - they didn't need to add another promotion to hold viewers, they just needed to make the junction shorter by getting rid of promotions alltogether. The BBC can be incessantly annoying for this, with a programme finishing followed by a couple of trails for BBC1, another for BBC2, some other must-watch thing on BBC3 or 4, followed by a propaganda piece about how wonderful the BBC are, followed by a slide mentioning what's going on over on Radio 3, finally followed by the next programme.
Anyway, looking at this latest offering from the beeb, I'm not too impressed. From perusing the various pages on the commissioning website, I find all this a little bit gestapo like, particularly the line that credit lengths 'are not targets to be achieved, but maxima which must not be exceeded' which begs to be spoken with a german accent.
ECPs may well be here to stay, but this one is so bad that it can only have been constructed by committee in a boardroom rather by a graphic designer.
Firstly, the big long box at the top is for promotions and programme-specific messages. Their own example shows that it's too big for helpline numbers and website credits, and as to it's other use - are they actually going to run live footage in a box that's wider than a cinemascope film? Is the poor director now going to have to make sure not only that his programme is 14:9 safe, but also frame certain key shots to be able to fit into this bizarre non standard space in case the BBC wants to promote it?
The shrinking of the credits is worrying. It's firstly not clear quite what form this is going to take. Are they going to start off at their full size and use some bizarre 80's style zoom to shrink down to the box followed by a dodgy looking wipe back to full screen? Or is the whole sequence going to run in the box, in which case the copyright line will be illegible, and independent producers will not get a fullscreen logo.
The shrinking of the credits to '46.5%' (where on earth did that figure come from) of their original size means that the size 20 font recommended will be shrunk down to about size 9. On a small screen, that's going to be bad.
The design of the screen into 3 tiled areas also highlights the fact that's it's been made 4:3 in a very unsubtle way - on widesreen, it's going to look stupid.
The formal rigidity and inflexibility of it is only repeating the mistake that ITV's 2000-2002 ECP layout had; when all the elements designed for it are made use of and timed properly it works (even if it isn't pretty), but when it isn't used to it's full extent it's going to look empty and bizarre.
Unnecessary rigidity on the new credits rules seem to confirm that this will happen. Lets say it's a year from now. The ECP is well bedded in, the initial push to use it to it's full is over. But the rules remain. A programme is being transmitted late at night and pres aren't interested in running the ECP (which thankfully is at least an option).
However, the programme needs to promote a website or include a helpline number. Because that's now been declared the job of the ECP and is absolutely banned from incoporation into the credits, that now forces the EPG into use to make the promotion. So, the helpline/website will remain onscreen for the entire sequence when it doesn't need to, the credits will roll on the bottom right in their tiny box, whilst the final box will serve no purpose. It's a complete waste of screen space and will look stupid.
What's most baffling about this ECP (and which reaffirms my belief that the graphic designers were simply bringing to life something which had allready been designed) is that exactly the same information could be presented in a far better and more natural looking way, with the promotions box being a standard aspect ratio and without the need for squeezing credits.
I love the way that when contacting any broadcaster's duty office with a direct query affecting a given programme's entire run, they always hide behind their rule of refusing to discuss programmes that aren't due to be transmitted within a given timeframe, regardless of whether or not they are able to. The beeb will only go 10 days ahead too, Channel 5 used to allow 14.
Notice also that they're directing your enquiry partly to the attention of the programme's production team - which are completely powerless to do anything.
I think moving towards an accelerated flow system as others have suggested would be better. IMO, it's not the idea of sitting through 30 seconds of credits that sends viewers channel hopping, it's the idea that those credits signal the start of a several minute long gap before the next programme which does it. If it had become established to never used trailers or have commercials in the junction between two programmes, but for the end of a credits sequence to lead directly into an ident for the next programme, they probably would hold viewers through the credits to see what was on next.
The ECP to me has always smacked of an attempt to fix a problem by delving even deeper into it - they didn't need to add another promotion to hold viewers, they just needed to make the junction shorter by getting rid of promotions alltogether. The BBC can be incessantly annoying for this, with a programme finishing followed by a couple of trails for BBC1, another for BBC2, some other must-watch thing on BBC3 or 4, followed by a propaganda piece about how wonderful the BBC are, followed by a slide mentioning what's going on over on Radio 3, finally followed by the next programme.
Anyway, looking at this latest offering from the beeb, I'm not too impressed. From perusing the various pages on the commissioning website, I find all this a little bit gestapo like, particularly the line that credit lengths 'are not targets to be achieved, but maxima which must not be exceeded' which begs to be spoken with a german accent.
ECPs may well be here to stay, but this one is so bad that it can only have been constructed by committee in a boardroom rather by a graphic designer.
Firstly, the big long box at the top is for promotions and programme-specific messages. Their own example shows that it's too big for helpline numbers and website credits, and as to it's other use - are they actually going to run live footage in a box that's wider than a cinemascope film? Is the poor director now going to have to make sure not only that his programme is 14:9 safe, but also frame certain key shots to be able to fit into this bizarre non standard space in case the BBC wants to promote it?
The shrinking of the credits is worrying. It's firstly not clear quite what form this is going to take. Are they going to start off at their full size and use some bizarre 80's style zoom to shrink down to the box followed by a dodgy looking wipe back to full screen? Or is the whole sequence going to run in the box, in which case the copyright line will be illegible, and independent producers will not get a fullscreen logo.
The shrinking of the credits to '46.5%' (where on earth did that figure come from) of their original size means that the size 20 font recommended will be shrunk down to about size 9. On a small screen, that's going to be bad.
The design of the screen into 3 tiled areas also highlights the fact that's it's been made 4:3 in a very unsubtle way - on widesreen, it's going to look stupid.
The formal rigidity and inflexibility of it is only repeating the mistake that ITV's 2000-2002 ECP layout had; when all the elements designed for it are made use of and timed properly it works (even if it isn't pretty), but when it isn't used to it's full extent it's going to look empty and bizarre.
Unnecessary rigidity on the new credits rules seem to confirm that this will happen. Lets say it's a year from now. The ECP is well bedded in, the initial push to use it to it's full is over. But the rules remain. A programme is being transmitted late at night and pres aren't interested in running the ECP (which thankfully is at least an option).
However, the programme needs to promote a website or include a helpline number. Because that's now been declared the job of the ECP and is absolutely banned from incoporation into the credits, that now forces the EPG into use to make the promotion. So, the helpline/website will remain onscreen for the entire sequence when it doesn't need to, the credits will roll on the bottom right in their tiny box, whilst the final box will serve no purpose. It's a complete waste of screen space and will look stupid.
What's most baffling about this ECP (and which reaffirms my belief that the graphic designers were simply bringing to life something which had allready been designed) is that exactly the same information could be presented in a far better and more natural looking way, with the promotions box being a standard aspect ratio and without the need for squeezing credits.
Quote:
Funny how most of the waffle in a BBC Information e-mail is about what happens to viewers' comments (jack sh*t) rather than answering the specific comment or query...
I love the way that when contacting any broadcaster's duty office with a direct query affecting a given programme's entire run, they always hide behind their rule of refusing to discuss programmes that aren't due to be transmitted within a given timeframe, regardless of whether or not they are able to. The beeb will only go 10 days ahead too, Channel 5 used to allow 14.
Notice also that they're directing your enquiry partly to the attention of the programme's production team - which are completely powerless to do anything.
And they say they don't talk over credits for the sake of it.