John Bennett wrote:
On Thu 07 Jun 2012, MB wrote:

Perhaps a petition about why ITV chose to cover a tennis match rather
than a major state occasion like this.

Have you thought about how many cameras and cameramen are needed to
cover an event like this?


I bet Sky News did it with a quarter of the resources expended by the
BBC and still produced much better coverage.

On 07/06/2012 16:05, Bruce wrote:
John wrote:
On Thu 07 Jun 2012, wrote:

Perhaps a petition about why ITV chose to cover a tennis match rather
than a major state occasion like this.

Have you thought about how many cameras and cameramen are needed to
cover an event like this?


I bet Sky News did it with a quarter of the resources expended by the
BBC and still produced much better coverage.


Given they were both using the same event cameras that seems unlikely.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On Thu 07 Jun 2012, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/06/2012 15:36, John Bennett wrote:
On Thu 07 Jun 2012, MB wrote:

Perhaps a petition about why ITV chose to cover a tennis match
rather than a major state occasion like this.

Have you thought about how many cameras and cameramen are needed
to cover an event like this? It's quite mind boggling! I remember
Princess Di's funeral when I know they were employing wedding
cameramen with sub broadcast equipment to make up the numbers.

Who are "they"?

It was the BBC and I know of some local "amateurs" who were contracted
for the day using their home made OB unit!

No wonder some of the coverage was poor and it always will be with
the dumbed down, casualised TV industry we now have.

I think ITV made a very good decision not to even attempt to cover
it. As an ex-BBC cameraman myself

Ah, /that/ John Bennett.

Could be:-) We've worked together!

what upsets me most is that Sky apparently did a better job than
the BBC! This does not bode well for the BBC and gives ammunition
to its knockers, but I'm sad to say they have brought about their
own demise.

I'm glad I had left before it started going tits up! Did you watch
"Tales of Television Centre" last week? Reminiscing about the Glory Days
of the Beeb!

Cheers John

--
John Bennett johndotbennettatsmartemaildotcodotuk

On 07/06/2012 16:32, John Bennett wrote:
On Thu 07 Jun 2012, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/06/2012 15:36, John Bennett wrote:
On Thu 07 Jun 2012, MB wrote:

Perhaps a petition about why ITV chose to cover a tennis match
rather than a major state occasion like this.

Have you thought about how many cameras and cameramen are needed
to cover an event like this? It's quite mind boggling! I remember
Princess Di's funeral when I know they were employing wedding
cameramen with sub broadcast equipment to make up the numbers.

Who are "they"?

It was the BBC and I know of some local "amateurs" who were contracted
for the day using their home made OB unit!

That I hadn't heard of! I know there were a few single-camera guys who
were co-opted onto OB cameras and found it not as easy as they expected.


No wonder some of the coverage was poor and it always will be with
the dumbed down, casualised TV industry we now have.

I think ITV made a very good decision not to even attempt to cover
it. As an ex-BBC cameraman myself

Ah, /that/ John Bennett.

Could be:-) We've worked together!

Yup.


what upsets me most is that Sky apparently did a better job than
the BBC! This does not bode well for the BBC and gives ammunition
to its knockers, but I'm sad to say they have brought about their
own demise.

I'm glad I had left before it started going tits up! Did you watch
"Tales of Television Centre" last week? Reminiscing about the Glory Days
of the Beeb!


Yes, most entertaining :-)

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

Dire is the word - the best word but not the only word.

But for the BBC on Monday there was only ONE word. An embargo was placed on all adjectives except one. Even "robust" was forced to have one day off.

That word was MAGNIFICENT.

Buckingham Palace looked magnificent. The crowd was magnificent. St Paul's was magnificent. Admiralty Arch was magnificent. The dinner at the Abbey was magnificent.

Except that it was all delivered in that straight-out-of-Viz Cockney ****** Style that the BBC drools over: A fink da kaween is gonna be leevin in a ower or summit innit??

Thank God for subtitles.

In article , Graeme Wall
scribeth thus
On 07/06/2012 16:32, John Bennett wrote:
On Thu 07 Jun 2012, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 07/06/2012 15:36, John Bennett wrote:
On Thu 07 Jun 2012, MB wrote:

Perhaps a petition about why ITV chose to cover a tennis match
rather than a major state occasion like this.

Have you thought about how many cameras and cameramen are needed
to cover an event like this? It's quite mind boggling! I remember
Princess Di's funeral when I know they were employing wedding
cameramen with sub broadcast equipment to make up the numbers.

Who are "they"?

It was the BBC and I know of some local "amateurs" who were contracted
for the day using their home made OB unit!

That I hadn't heard of! I know there were a few single-camera guys who
were co-opted onto OB cameras and found it not as easy as they expected.




Http://www.sislive.tv/broadcast-solu...2/06/sis-live-
help-deliver-coverage-of-the-queens-diamond-jubilee-events/
--
Tony Sayer

On 07/06/2012 21:00, tony sayer wrote:
In , Graeme Wall
scribeth thus
On 07/06/2012 16:32, John Bennett wrote:
On Thu 07 Jun 2012, Graeme wrote:
On 07/06/2012 15:36, John Bennett wrote:
On Thu 07 Jun 2012, wrote:

Perhaps a petition about why ITV chose to cover a tennis match
rather than a major state occasion like this.

Have you thought about how many cameras and cameramen are needed
to cover an event like this? It's quite mind boggling! I remember
Princess Di's funeral when I know they were employing wedding
cameramen with sub broadcast equipment to make up the numbers.

Who are "they"?

It was the BBC and I know of some local "amateurs" who were contracted
for the day using their home made OB unit!

That I hadn't heard of! I know there were a few single-camera guys who
were co-opted onto OB cameras and found it not as easy as they expected.




Http://www.sislive.tv/broadcast-solu...2/06/sis-live-
help-deliver-coverage-of-the-queens-diamond-jubilee-events/

SIS bought all the BBC OB units a few years ago. Though John and I were
discussing Di's funeral when the Beeb still had it's own location
facilities.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.
Railway Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

On Thu, 07 Jun 2012 12:11:13 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 07/06/2012 11:47, Recliner wrote:
I wonder what the net cost was to the BBC? The pictures were sold to
the worldwide media, so it might actually have made a profit. I also
think the Beeb did a better job on the Monday and Tuesday, so perhaps
it had focused its efforts on those days? And I wonder if the rain
killed some of the cameras, thus limiting the views available?

Not as far as I know.

It seems that some cameras were indeed killed by the weather, as this
account by Clare Balding indicates: "Balding, a freelance presenter
and not a BBC employee, said staff did the best they could but were
beset by technical problems.

She explained: “There were cameras on nine boats and we had three
working. There was a lot going on that was very, very difficult to
deal with. So you do what you can."
From
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/h...e-Balding.html

The whole article is worth reading, as she puts the problems in
context. And I agree with the Telegraph that she was one presenter who
did do a good job that day (from the Gloriana).

On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 12:04:25 +0100
Recliner wrote:
It seems that some cameras were indeed killed by the weather, as this
account by Clare Balding indicates: "Balding, a freelance presenter
and not a BBC employee, said staff did the best they could but were
beset by technical problems.

Perhaps I'm being naive here - but shouldn't outside broadcast equipment
be rainproof? After all , it is going to be used, errm, outside.

B2003

On Fri, 8 Jun 2012 11:11:59 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:

On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 12:04:25 +0100
Recliner wrote:
It seems that some cameras were indeed killed by the weather, as this
account by Clare Balding indicates: "Balding, a freelance presenter
and not a BBC employee, said staff did the best they could but were
beset by technical problems.

Perhaps I'm being naive here - but shouldn't outside broadcast equipment
be rainproof? After all , it is going to be used, errm, outside.

Yes, you'd think so. I assume the equipment on boats may get wetter
than in normal land conditions, and being battery-powered may not
help. They had the further problem that they lost comms when boats
went under bridges.