The original message is over 10k, so here is part #1.
Matt Murray
mailto:mattm@optonline.net
mailto:mdmurray@gwns.com
Here's Rich Fletcher's opinion from '97. BTW, Tunnell's was also from
'97
not '98.
From: Group Four Teleproductions
To: autox@autox.team.net
Cc: bobt@wmfilms.com
MDMURRAY@gwns.com
bshort@AFSinc.com
Subject: ProSolo2: TV or not TV?
Date: 1997-12-22 19:36
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--
------
All,
Regarding ProSolo2 as a marketable TV commodity from the perspective
of
another guy on the net, who happens to do TV for a living...
People on this net are very creative, and it shows a depth of
understanding and talents within our sport which is very broad
and -helpful.
That's
pretty cool. Collectively, we've covered all manner of creative angles
for
camera
placement, time management, drama building, etc. etc. Truth is, that's
the
easy
part. Doing television right is one hell of a lot harder than it
looks.
There are
few ways to get it right, and a million ways to mess it up, or get
rained
out, or
back-doored electronically, or marketed poorly.
Am I being "negative" on this? Not really. I hope you'll read what
follows as a realistic outlook. Oh, grab a cup of joe, this may take a
while:
What makes good TV? What would make ProSolo2 or its sponsors products
"marketable" through this medium? I was thinking about this over the
weekend, because I was shooting with Bennet Productions for FOX
Network
on the World Pro Skiing Tour. Shooting skiing is easy compared to
shooting
Solo. It's got drama: My camera had a lens full of contorted facial
concentration, agony of defeat, sexy bods on skis, Emotion, Emotion,
Emotion. Not just Motion. And even the motion thrills are greater than
in Solo. You've got steep slopes, knife edged skis, thunderous thighs
straining against the mountain, broad shoulders banging through gates,
bodies diving over headwalls, sometimes gracefully, sometimes barely
in
control and flailing... and the whole thing is literally on the edge
in
a way that people who've never skied can understand. You don't have to
have expensive telemetry superimposed on the screen. Still, with only
seven cameras
covering the course, twelve crew, equipment, lodging, travel,
etc., the shoot was probably over 20-k. That's before its edited or
aired.
BTW, this one airs January 3rd on FOX at noon EST. I'm the camera geek
on
the last headwall before the finish. ;-)
The technicalities of putting a Solo TV program together go way beyond
site production. Bob Tunnell recently illuminated this, and his
comments
were
perfectly true. I'd agree that it WILL take over $30,000 to do it well
(by
calling
in a lot of favors and good will), and more like $60,000 minimum to do
it
right and
tight. That's BEFORE you buy the airtime. What
advertiser stands to realize a decent ROI (return on investment) from
this
one shot
deal? Or, let's take Byron Short's series based model and explore it.
Any
sponsor(s) who get behind a "series" with serious money will want
certain guarantees. I can pretty much assure you that such sponsors
will
ask or
demand to be on ESPN, TNN, or at minimum, ESPN2. Speedvision would be
the
alternative choice rather than first choice. This is not knocking
Speedvision. I would personally love to give them the package, because
their programing supports things in which I'm interested . But from a
major sponsors' perspective, their numbers aren't going to play like
TNN
at ratings time. They (sponsors, agencies, Joyce Julius...) will tell
you
that if you want to guarantee the highest probability of return on
investment for whomever ponies up major bucks for this, you have to
get
a net with the widest possible cast (audience). Yes, Speedvision has a
better "target" demographic, but when you balance numbers and noses,
sponsors will almost always opt for noses. Matt Murray can jump in a
correct me on this, but the last time I checked, Speedvision didn't
have
near the reach of ESPN or TNN. He may also argue that the demographic,
albeit smaller, is the only one we care about anyway. I'd probably
agree, but I'm not paying for this thing... That having been said, if
we
go to a
"one shot deal" on a TV show, then Speedvision can offer us more than
the
others,
because their programing capabilities also allow for easier insertion
with
that kind
of show with a greater likelihood of repeated performances.
Lets talk about what happens at a ProSolo2 on site. The production
crew
will be in charge of the show. That is, cars will go when the director
signals that all cameras are in place and rolling. Need to change
tape?
Battery? White balance? Move the POV cams? Telemetry giving you
problems?
|