Discussion: Photography and Editing

One thing I realized as I went about reviewing this topic is I really had taken this subject for granted. Its one of those things when the stories are good you pretty much discount what goes on behind the camera, and praise the reporter. But when things go bad, you think who did that? I have adapted the philosophy if you aren't thinking about the photography and editing when watching the story, then those behind the scenes are doing a good job. I had a hard time thinking how I would review and critique the three stations. I finally realized, especially when it comes to photography and editing, style is key. Everyone has opinions when it comes to style and if they agree with all your opinions, then I think that is problematic. So I expect people to disagree with my opinions. With that here is the delayed discussion about photography and editing. I'll first start out with some basic things I was looking at, ratings, and then discussion will follow.


Overall Photography mechanics

Of course you want good color, sound and interesting angles.

Consistency

One thing when going into this I thought, consistency was important. From a blog in Washington I pulled off the idea of consistency. This could be applied to all facets of TV news and I will include this with future discussion topics. The Washington blog wasn't breaking down the different parts of the newscasts, but mentioned when talking about reporting the idea that individuals will have their own styles, but they should correspond to the station's own personality. Of course, different subjects will bring on different challenges and reasons to do stories differently, but the idea is when you watch a story you should be able to tell what station it is.

Overall Finished look

This goes to editing for the most part. Even if it is a day of story, when a station can make it look like some thought went into the post production and editing process, like graphics and pictures, it only adds to the story.

Extra Bonus points

Lighting for especially promoted stories, where you know they had several days to work on them.


Photography


#1KWCH


#2 KSN


#3 KAKE


Editing


#1 KSN


#2 KWCH


#3 KAKE


KAKE

Now those from KAKE will probably be upset. I will say to start I think it has more to do with their overall news philosophy. I am sure they can and do material just as good as those at the #1 spots, but on a day-to-day basis, this isn't so. When watching their newscasts you get this fast on the run kind of a style with breaking news and such. With their editing and photography, you get the feeling they don't get much time to fully devote to their stories. They have a record and spit it out philosophy although one positive is consistency. As far as consistency with reporting and photography goes, I think KAKE does this well. Although I am not a fan of their style, I think if you didn't have a bug on the screen, know who their reporters were, a majority of the time after watching one of their stories you could identify that as KAKE. They could stand to spend more time on lighting and overall execution for stories they tease. For instance, this past week they teased a story about a baby who was hit at a Wranglers game. Much of the video came from the night of the incident and might have even been home video. I'll totally discount that part, but the interviews could have been lit making it seem like a bigger story since they promoted it throughout the week. Maybe it was not shot by KAKE, since the people lived, I think, in Kansas City. If this is true, than why was the story called a "special report?" If it was so "special" to KAKE, than send your own crew there and do the story right.


KSN

One thing they do lack is consistency. I think they need to decide if they want to be more like KAKE or KWCH. Maybe that is characteristic of a station that has or been ranked #3 for a long time. On one newscast you can see a piece that looks very rushed and not put together all that well, but then the next story could look like something you would have seen on the NBC nightly newscast. On the other hand, during their special pieces, often seen during the sweeps ratings period, their photography comes off as very professional and just as good if not better than KWCH on a consistent basis.
What inconsistencies they may have in photography, are more than made up in editing. I wonder if they have the same equipment as the other stations. In someways this doesn't matter, because they do a nice job in using the pictures of the story as well as text and other graphics to really create a nice finished product. Earlier I mentioned KSN lacked consistency in the overall product. On the other hand they are far more consistent when it comes to editing. While on KAKE and KWCH you may only see the special editing effects during sweeps, it seems as if KSN does these sorts of things on a far more routine daily basis.

KWCH 12


Its starting to sound like a broken record. Their #1 ranking in the ratings and conservative approach definitely shows in the photography and to a lesser extent in editing. They really don't take many chances and shoot solid and quality stuff. It seems they don't over think a shot, and it comes out natural and better that way. Some of the interviews will have different colors in the background as if they are lit. This appears to happen far more often on KWCH than with the other two.
As for editing, I said earlier that I like a consistent philosophy with everyone pretty much shooting with the same idea in mind. Sometimes KWCH can get a little carried away in editing. Case in point several weeks ago they did a story on watching the grass grow. As much as I praised the photography and editing in an earlier post, but one cannot get carried away. http://wichitatvnews.blogspot.com/2007/07/slow-news-day-watching-grass-grow-is.html. I will say with the dull topic, the photographer and editor most certainly resurrected this piece from the grave, no matter if others want to argue that it is a viable story idea. However, sometimes the constant editing of sound breaking up the reporter's voice became distracting and makes one start thinking about who is editing or shooting that. I feel a good photographer or editor is doing their job if that isn't even a question. I think KWCH could stand to incorporate more graphics into their pieces. The lack of graphics and the breaking up of the reporter's voice, moved KWCH to #2 in editing.

So let the discussion begin. This might be hard to do, but take a few steps back and try, just try to give a real quick unbiased look at things. -Hal