2008 Republican National Convention in HD

[LL3HD]

Originally Posted by mr. wally

fox is showing just how unfair and unbalanced their coverage is skewed. last night they didn't have any coverage of the convention on s.f. bay area affiliate before obama's speech when all the other 3 major commercial networks did.

bet they won't do that when the reps start next week.

Boy you sure got that prediction wrong. FOX News bypassed all of the key events tonight (up until right now where they picked up with the First Lady). If you wanted to see anything gong on tonight you had to be tuned in to either CNN or MSNBC, to name two.

By the way, is there a thread for the GOP?

[ABCTV99]

Is anyone even watching the GOP? I'd be curious to see the overnights. This show is like a funeral in comparison to last Tuesday. I mean I know they're trying to run counter to all the Hollywood histrionics of Denver but all the best information dissemination and speech giving in the world doesnt matter if the presentation is poor. This looks like a cheap concert in comparison. Flat lighting, simple backdrop, ugly plain podium. Not to mention the two most boring listens (of any political pursuasion) on a Tuesday night imaginable, one of which has the charisma of Droopy Dog (I found him equally boring in 2000). The RNC did a much better job in 2004.

[URFloorMatt]

The PQ looks better across the networks at the RNC. Fox provided the pool feed for the DNC. NBC is providing the pool feed for the RNC.

The stage presentation does not seem very well thought out. Anyone who's seen V for Vendetta or has read Big Brother will find it all a bit... off-putting, to say the least.

[LL3HD]

Obviously the “storm” derailed this convention, however, under the circumstances I think this understated look is working in their favor.

[Ken H]

Originally Posted by LL3HD

By the way, is there a thread for the GOP?

There is now.

[LL3HD]

Well, it was a good backdrop for Fred Thompson to hit a few out of the park. I liked the sequence and choice of slides presented on the huge screen, especially the one with Tim Russert. Meanwhile, Senator Lieberman (wasn’t he the Dad on Alf?) slowed down the Straight Talk Express to a grinding stall.

[icemannyr]

That giant video screen was causing a bad morie pattern on all the SD feeds.
Also that blue sky behind the American Flag looks green.

On some of the close up shots, depending on what is on the video screen the background looks awful.
It seems there was no thought on what the close up camera shots would look like.

[nickdawg]

If only AVS Forum thread post counts determined the election...

[Ken H]

Political comments are not allowed and have been removed.

[MeowMeow]

Originally Posted by URFloorMatt

The stage presentation does not seem very well thought out. Anyone who's seen V for Vendetta or has read Big Brother will find it all a bit... off-putting, to say the least.

Citizen Kane, for that matter.

I'm not certainly it's radically worse than what the Dems were running last week. The Dems' stages looked a little more HD-ready, ala American Idol. I'd imagine some of that is because the Dems have money to burn for once.

These big graphics-driven presentations are the norm now. Another step closer to Idiocracy. I'm sure President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho's acceptance speech in 2016 will look much better in HD.

[MeowMeow]

Originally Posted by ABCTV99

This show is like a funeral in comparison to last Tuesday.

In fairness, the Dem convention was just as dead Tuesday night until Brian Schweitzer spoke. Schweitzer's speech is what they mean when they call a speech a barn burner. By the time Schweitzer was done ginning them up, that crowd was about ready to start a fight club in the basement of the convention center.

[sebenste]

Getting back to picture quality, the stage layout and how it looks...

I only have a 26" SDTV for now with a DTT-900 converter box, watching a PBS letterboxed feed from WTTW-DT in Chicago, which is 720p with 3 subchannels. Video looks just as good as the DNC's, but given my equipment, that's expected.

I've worked on many video productions, from camera op, video engineer, etc, but not a producer role yet. Even so, I've learned over the years that having a screen behind a speaker is terrible UNLESS it is used exclusively for the background look, or on the very occasional times when you are showing a picture, in which case you shoot wide. Rule of thumb: remember your audience, and almost all of it is NOT in Minneapolis.

I turned it off tonight (Tuesday) because the background was almost like a strobe with the moving pictures on it, as well as going from bright to dark instantly on cuts between photos. It was completely distracting to me.

As for being well thought out, or not: if they had kept the screens above or to the sides of the speaker's podium, all would be well. The straight-on shots would be fine, cutaways from below the podium looking up would be a neat angle, and wide shots would be cool to see what they're looking at in-house.

I greatly appreciate the fact that the Reps understood that a rock concert is not what we need in a political convention today. However, some simple design changes---such as a better looking podium and the screen above the speakers---would have been a great improvement for the home viewer...its intended audience. You may have 10,000 at the site, but millions upon millions watching in the U.S and more across the planet. And because the message is so important...where this country goes for 4 more years...you don't want anything external distracting from it. This podium arrangement does distract from the message, IMO.

I freely admit I may be wrong in my opinion, and I'd be interested to hear what others think. Sorry if I'm only letterboxed SD on this HD thread, but I tried to keep this relevant to the discussion.

[ABCTV99]

Yea it's very poor. I'm not sure who's producing this convention. In the past Don Mischer produced both the DNC and the RNC (and it showed with similar production values suited to the different tastes of the parties). This year I think he only did the DNC (maybe because of budgetary and time constraints -- or the Reps fired him because of the 'drop the f-ing balloons' controversy four years ago) but the difference is striking. Even the talent flow on and off stage doesnt appear well choreographed. It's very awkward.

The DNC was tailor made for TV (by the people who do big TV shows including the 1996 & 2002 Olympics). Every camera angle, the lighting design, the stage flow, the color scheme were tailor made for a HD audience watching at home by experts in the field. Contrast Hillary's entrance to Lieberman's, the backdrop, the hairlight, the podium that rose out of the ground and then retracted to allow an unobstructed view of the candidates and their families after the speech (all things the RNC had in 2004 mind you). Maybe the Reps have a rabbit in their hat, but from a pure production standpoint come on?! A freakin slide show? Are you kidding? The DNC had Ken Burns and a war veterans video by freakin Speilberg. And those were captivating watches despite political affiliations. Surely the RNC could've found some more firepower to help tell their side of the story especially going up against a campaign that's writing the book on political stagecraft and imagery.

Edit: Ricky Kirshner produced the DNC this year. He collaborates with Don Mischer on the Super Bowl halftime show every yaer and with Glenn Weiss on several major awards shows (Tony's, Daytime Emmys, etc) and 4th of July Specials. David Nash is producing the RNC (E.V.P. of Production at Radio City and Director of Technical Operations at Lincoln Center). Also I was mistaken Don did not produce the 2004 RNC the balloon drop malfunction was at the DNC.

[dad1153]

All I want to know is who at the GOP has dibs to take that gigantic HD screen home with him/her after the convention ends. Looks purty, and watching NFL Football on that thing would be incredible. Too bad this Thursday they'll still be showing GOP convention stuff on that thing instead of the Giants game. Both the people at home and at the convention center would be more thoroughly entertained watching the game than political speeches.

[btokars]

Why didn't DISH have a dedicated RNC pool feed in HD? They had it for the DNC and it was very good. Just the video and audio, no graphics. I was/am surprised by the fact that it was/is missing.

[Lodef]

Timing is everything. First the hurricane at the start and then opening night for NFL football at the end. Maybe they should have went before the Dems, so much for planning. Anyway with that being said I think tonight will get huge ratings as everyone checks out Gov, Palin to find out what she is really all about. I know I will.

[Marcus Carr]

Originally Posted by LL3HD

(wasn’t he the Dad on Alf?)

You read my mind.

[kblee]

Originally Posted by btokars

Why didn't DISH have a dedicated RNC pool feed in HD? They had it for the DNC and it was very good. Just the video and audio, no graphics. I was/am surprised by the fact that it was/is missing.

Yeah - the separate HD channel added for the DNC was very nice. Maybe they'll get one up for the RNC before the week is over. I'm not holding my breath, though.

[Marcus Carr]

Also no HD stream online for this convention.

[CosmoNut]

Last night was incredibly bizarre. From the boring, not-well-thought-out staging to the delivery of the speeches, I was uncomfortable watching the whole thing.

I want to think that somebody dropped the ball with the video screen being the background for speakers because MOST of the speakers had the ugly blue sky background that totally threw off the camera shading. Confusingly, though, someone had the foresight to design a really decent background image for Laura Bush. The producers should have used that for everything.

But part of me wonders why there wasn't even any multiplexed video on screen. Hell, CNN's Situation Room has more complex video displays EVERY DAY than this convention has.

Let's face it: Any good chef will tell you that the food is just as much about the sizzle as the steak itself. I think the Republicans are trying to be too "humble" by removing all sizzle from their convention and expecting that the "meat" is going to clench the presidency. Let's see if it works.

[LL3HD]

The backdrop video screen did not work well (as stated here by many) specifically on the close ups. I thought it worked beautifully on the long shots.

There should be some type of material that could be raised or lowered separating the speaker’s head from that video screen.

The tight shots from the sides and rear of the stage, with the audience in the background, should be the preferred choice.

[bpade]

If they avoid what was done last week, then this week's production will be more professional.

[richiephx]

I personally liked the simplicity of the entire presentation.

[xlr231]

All I get is OTA broadcasts and I thought the coverage was horrible. ABC, NBC and CBS kept airing the analysts instead of the speeches, Fox had on local programming, and PBS had it on an SD subchannel despite the fact the program on their main HD channel was not HD.
One of the networks, I think it was NBC, aired the president's speech without audio from the convention floor. So it looked like he kept pausing for no reason in the middle of the speech, then they quit airing it in the middle. I had to switch to PBS to see Fred Thompson and missed the 1st part because the other networks didn't have it on and I hadn't realized it started.

[LL3HD]

Another observation, the audio is much better this week with hardly any of that annoying “bleed in” from the arena’s ambient sounds. The network booths are better situated or designed (?). However, last week the dems arena was constantly packed and there were more musical acts.

[pdx77]

Originally Posted by xlr231

All I get is OTA broadcasts and I thought the coverage was horrible. ABC, NBC and CBS kept airing the analysts instead of the speeches, Fox had on local programming, and PBS had it on an SD subchannel despite the fact the program on their main HD channel was not HD.
One of the networks, I think it was NBC, aired the president's speech without audio from the convention floor. So it looked like he kept pausing for no reason in the middle of the speech, then they quit airing it in the middle. I had to switch to PBS to see Fred Thompson and missed the 1st part because the other networks didn't have it on and I hadn't realized it started.

I was watching it on PBS last night and it looked like it was HD to me. I think overall PBS has the best coverage of the conventions with the minimum on screen graphics they use.

[AAF]

PBS was refreshing since they don't clutter the screen with graphics. But they cut coverage early on Sen. Leiberman.

[rezzy]

OTA, Dubyah was completely ignored by everyone except PBS; thought that was a bit strange. Last night was pretty much a funeral (I was trying to figure out who died), but it was only the first night.

[reuthermonkey]

Yeah, only PBS seemed to have most of the coverage live. The speeches on the networks were delayed - just so the talking heads could spout their worthless opinions. The quality on PBS was pretty good (HD here in KC), so I've got no complaints with their coverage.

[mr. wally]

Originally Posted by LL3HD

Boy you sure got that prediction wrong. FOX News bypassed all of the key events tonight (up until right now where they picked up with the First Lady). If you wanted to see anything gong on tonight you had to be tuned in to either CNN or MSNBC, to name two.

By the way, is there a thread for the GOP?

too early to say if i got it wrong. have to see if fox provides coverage before mccain gives his acceptance speech. compare apples to apples.