Hey everyone, Carl and I are looking for feedback on Bitondo Bros Productions. Please take a look at our work and let me know how we can improve the photos, video, and articles we make. As much as I enjoy hearing "good job" and "I liked that," right now I'd like to hear "That part sucked, it would be better this way," and "It might be interesting if you could do this," and "This name/description is better than what you currently have." I now present the Collected Works of Bitondo Bros Productions. Major video productions: How is music, tempo, transitions (or lack thereof), visual content, overall effect? Apocalypse Pond: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WU-AsnnbksQ Into the Deep: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZjiaYk08yE Big Gun Navy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hIWhMLHhTA Last Man Standing trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLQO3-0o0DU Spahkreuzer in Action: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSU8nQ7o0u4 The Bottom Line: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvugEmj3pO0 Kelley's Heroes Tank Club: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAm-_YUwHWw Battle Photos: These all had lighting and color adjustments and many were cropped. How are the subject, frame, color, lighting, and could you tell they've had minor touchups? 2007: http://www.westernwarshipcombat.com/gallery/album71 2006: http://www.westernwarshipcombat.com/gallery/album47 2005: http://www.westernwarshipcombat.com/gallery/album46 Sunken Ships: http://www.westernwarshipcombat.com/gallery/Sunken-Ships Battle Reports: Is it interesting, funny, and provide enough detail? Scuttlebutt August 2007 Scuttlebutt December 2007 Scuttlebutt May 2007 Construction Threads: (same boats, three forums, three threads in various states of completion) Are photos and description sufficient? http://www.rcnavalcombat.com/rcnavalcombat/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=585 http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_6186270/tm.htm http://www.microrccenter.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=40037 Ship Comparison Threads: (see my or my brother's big posts, they're meant to be an article) http://www.rcnavalcombat.com/rcnavalcombat/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=41 http://www.rcnavalcombat.com/rcnavalcombat/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=47
OK, since you asked... ***WARNING: Long Post*** First, I'd like to applaud your efforts up to this point. You guys have done a tremendous service for the hobby, exposing & promoting it to probably greater numbers of people than any other source to date. I'd like to see you take the next step, & I'll tell you what I think the next step is. Some explanation & background info. is needed 1st, though. I'm sure I remember reading some time ago exactly what you guys are taking in school. Is one of you in film/video? What does film school teach about the relationship between dialog & action? By "dialog", I mean information that is conveyed through spoken word, either by on-camera actors or off-camera narrators, exclusive of background music, sound effects, etc. "Action" is what actors & objects are doing visually. Although a lot of people think of "action" in terms of explosions, car chases, fights, & other highly-stimulating visuals, it includes much more subtle things such as gestures, expressions, & simple movements of objects. In other words, all things visual except the background, just like "dialog" involves all things audible except the background. What they'll tell you at film school is that 75-90% of the story is conveyed through dialog. This begs the question, when looking at any (not just Bitondos') video that I've seen of the hobby: Where is the dialog? Here's an experiment that you can try, to make the point: Turn on the TV to any random program. Mute the sound (no closed-captions, either; that would be cheating), so that all you have is the action. It's pretty hard to keep track of the story. All you have is a collection of images, with nothing explaining what's going on. You may be able to tell that "something" is going on, especially if there are things like fights, explosions, chases, etc., but unless you've seen it before you'll have a pretty hard time following the story. Especially in scenes where there are just people talking. Now, turn the sound up & turn off the monitor (or close your eyes, turn away, leave the room, etc.), so that all you have is dialog. It's pretty easy to keep track of the story, even with no picture, just from the dialog alone. People are talking, telling you what's going on. You could "watch" a whole movie, with only sound & no picture, & still get the gist of what the show is about. It's the dialog that makes or breaks a script or screenplay, not the action. That's because dialog conveys the vast majority of the story. Try it again with some different types of shows, such as news or sports. Without dialog, the action is just a collection of images. You might see a burning building, some wrecked cars, people standing & moving their mouths, etc., but that won't tell but a fraction of the story. Whose car? Whose house? Is everybody OK? Where did it happen? None of that information can be gleaned from the action, but all of it can be found in the dialog. Sports coverage can be a little better, if you know something about the sport and the teams. But try it with a sport that you don't know anything about. Ever talk to a foreigner about US football? We all know about it because we've watched it since forever. To somebody from another country, it just looks like a bunch of guys mostly standing around. Every 40 seconds they all fall down, then get up again & stand around. Every now & then somebody squirts out of the pile & takes off running with all the rest chasing him. Sometimes one guy throws a ball down the field, & sometimes another guy catches it. To somebody that doesn't already know plenty about it, football isn't very interesting to watch, & we have the same problem promoting warship combat. In the US, we "know" how to watch football. We know, because we've been trained all our lives to know, by the coverage of the sport. Even though most of us have never played the game ourselves, beyond the high school level (if that, even), we're all "experts". We can sit at bars, lunch counters, or offices on Monday & dissect yesterday's games in great detail. Every single one of us is "smarter" (at least on Monday) than the coach was, & have no problem second-guessing "that fool" (who has been been a full-time professional coach for how many years, now?). The same things go for the announcers. We complain about the "idiots" who comment on the game, but forget that these are the people who have trained us & taught us everything that we know. I hear people all the time, complaining about John Madden - but he's the highest-paid announcer, & his games are always the highest-rated. I'm sure the TV executives that hired him are smirking all the way to the bank! They know what brings in viewers - that's their business, after all. They pay Madden a huge amount of money, not in spite of what viewers think of him, but because of it. He gets people interested, & gets people talking. It's related to the old adage, "Any publicity is good publicity". People love to bitch & complain, & if you give them ample opportunities to do so, they'll tune in. But they need to be educated, so that they can bitch & complain from a position of knowledge - even if it's knowledge that they've been "fed", as opposed to gained from personal experience. That's where the coverage comes in. "Coverage" is what we need to achieve. We need to have the sport (or hobby, if you will) covered like a sport. For anything that we try to do, it's usually a good idea to look to those who are at the "top" of their game for inspiration & guidance. As far as sports coverage is concerned, I think the 2 best, in terms of using coverage to advance the popularity of their sports, are (US) football (especially the NFL) & NASCAR (stock car racing). Even though we can't reasonably expect to get to their level, there's still plenty that we can learn & apply. Let's be clear about one important thing: Coverage of major sports like NFL & NASCAR doesn't just "happen". Despite certain appearances, network coverage of major sports is not just a matter of "following the news, as it happens." They try to package it with the appearance that the networks are just "neutral observers", following the story. In reality, major sports coverage is entertainment, not news. Sports is entertainment, & major sports are a big business. Sports coverage is also a big business, and a huge money-maker for a network. Sports need coverage, & networks need programming; what's good for one is good for the other, & it's in the interests of both to build the audience. The current state of the art of major sports coverage is a cooperative joint venture between the sports & media. As noted, US football isn't terribly interesting to watch unless you know "how" to watch it. Stock car racing is just a bunch of cars, driving around an oval course (how interesting could THAT be?). Both the NFL & NASCAR have done absolutely masterful jobs of building their audiences. Although both sports are drastically different, they have each used the same basic method. That method is to educate their audiences incessantly, to the point where "everybody" thinks that they're an expert in one (or both) sports. Even though most of us have never played football in any organized program, we all know about pass vs. run blocking, throwing lanes, pass patterns, blitzes, "nickel" & "dime" packages, 2-deep coverages, & all sorts of arcane details of the game that we really have no business knowing. Most of us have never driven at 200 MPH, bumper to bumper with 30 other cars, but we know about loose, tight, pushing, drafting, wedge, & a whole lot of other things that we have no direct experience with or practical use for in our daily lives. We know about these things because the sports - through the networks that cover them - have gone out of their way to develop innovative ways to teach us these things. They do that because they know that the more we know (or think we know) about their sports, the more "involved" we become. The more involved we feel, the more we watch, & the more caps, jerseys, & giant foam fingers we'll buy. This is the big lesson to learn from the major sports: Coverage needs to constantly be educating the audience, not just "showing the action". Those of us who are involved can watch video of a battle & appreciate it because we already know what's going on. Others just see ships sailing around, some splashes, & occasional sinks. It's like watching a sport on TV with the sound muted. If you already know the sport & the players, you can follow along because you "know" how to watch it. If it's some sport that you don't already understand, it doesn't make any sense (although there may be some cool moments, now & then). That's because, With action only, they're only getting 10-25% of the story. The remaining 75-90%, told through the dialog, is missing. How To Apply The Lesson Commentary needs to be applied to the videos. The end result should follow a standard pattern & format, that should be familiar to anybody who watches major sports often. The good news is that it doesn't need to be live. Since it doesn't have to be covered live, the whole thing can be scripted, even. I'd suggest even going so far as to "stage" a battle for coverage purposes over multiple days, like a holiday weekend, to be sure that every shot that's needed gets taken. Some of the battle participants could even do double-duty as "correspondents". Since the whole thing is scripted & set up, non-live, "commentators" could add their parts later, well after the action has been shot. The Cast "Play-by-play" announcer: One of 2 primary announcers, his job is to describe the action. This announcer provides most of the story, explaining to the viewers what is happening (supported by the "live" action). "Analyst": Interjects comments describing why things happen the way they do, providing crucial insights for the viewers. One of these 2 should be the "straight man" (usually the announcer; even-demeanored), while the other is a "character" (usually the analyst; excitable). Classic examples: Madden (NFL) & Darrell Waltrip (NASCAR). There should also be a pair of "sideline (pondside) reporters", one each covering the Axis & Allied teams. They should be equipped with headsets & microphones (for show only, need not be functional). Ideally, one of them should be a woman. Battle Coverage As A 3-Act Play 1. The "Pre-Game" Show: Setting the Stage (In "studio") Announcer & analyst talk back & forth about how important this battle is & how exciting it will be. If it's the 1st battle of a year-long campaign, recap the prior year; one side looks to repeat as champion, while the other is out to avenge; everybody starts with a clean slate, etc. Otherwise, review current standings in the campaign; who's leading, by how much; who won last, looking to build momentum; who lost last, looking to bounce back. "Analyze" what each team needs to do to win, what's at stake, who can't afford to lose, etc. Load up on the sports cliches - sure, it's trite, but people love that! It's familiar, even to those who don't follow the sport^h^h^h^h^hhobby, & they'll understand because it follows a pattern that they know. Describe what to expect of the battle. If there's a scenario, describe it. Use extensive visual aids, such as maps, diagrams, shots of buoys, ports, or whatever. Describe what each team would need to do, & how the expert commentators expect them to go about doing it. Go over details such as time limits, objectives, key rules, & various things to watch for. Introduce the teams & players. "Personalize" the whole event. It's not about ships, it's about people. Viewers can relate to other people better than they can relate to model ships. Show at least a head shot of each captain, as well as view of their ship. Give a little insight into each ship's strengths & weaknesses as well as its typical role in the battle. Cut to sideline reporters for additional insights into each team's plans. In-depth feature on one or more captains & their ship(s). This is where we can get down to a deep, technical discussion of some area. Don't need to cover everything at once - we didn't learn everything about football or stock car racing in 1 show, after all, so no need to do it here. Each battle, cover a different captain/ship & eventually we'll get to everything. Talk about how some problem was solved, some key shipboard system, strategy, etc. Include "pre-battle" video from shop. Show home/family life, other hobbies, work, etc. to further "personalize" the show & help viewers relate on a human level. Show a young child operating a R/C boat, with comments about the "next generation" getting ready. All of the above could be a tight squeeze into 10-15 minutes, so there's no shortage of material - & we haven't even shown any battle scenes yet! None of this needs to be live, or anything close. It could be shot days/weeks before/after the actual battle. 2. "Live" Action! Announcer & analyst retreat to the "booth", & are mostly/entirely off-camera. The less that's happening on the water, the more needs to be said by the "booth" personnel. Most viewers won't have a clue which ship is what, who's on which side, or anything else that's going on, so they'll have to be told (announcer). The analyst gives the announcer time to breath by explaining why they're doing what they are. When there's something especially interesting, replay the video while the analyst explains it all over again. Multiple cameras would be a big help, to show the same exchange from multiple angles. It might be easier to get certain shots if the action is scripted. Plan what each ship is going to do, when to shoot, etc. & practice it a few times (non-shooting). Then, when each can do it reasonably well, do it again with cameras rolling before firing any shots. Then, once more with shots fired. From this collection, edit into "replays" including slow-motion (I was surprised at how well that worked when I saw it in the NTXBG Inside R/C episode) as well as a "telestrator" to track ships' movements, point out angles, shots, hits, etc. Since nothing has to be covered live, an entire battle could be scripted & staged. Just a handful of ships, & 4-6 actual "engagements" might be enough to provide enough pseudo-live, replays, & other fodder for commentary to account for 15-20 minutes of "battle" coverage. Cut to the sideline reporters for brief interviews with captains, especially after major events such as a sink: "What did it feel like to sink?", "When did you know you were in trouble?","Describe how you set up the killer shot", "What happened?", "What's next for _____?" Answers should include stuff like, "I'm just here to try to help my team", "Today just wasn't my day", "Anything can happen", etc. Heavy on the cliches, again. Try to build up to a climax at the end. Build tension by having a win within somebody's grasp, while somebody else tries to hang on. Ideally, it should come down to 1 ship getting sunk or making it back to port in dramatic fashion. Announcer & analyst gush about how much better the battle was than even they expected it to be. 3. "Post-Game" Show The Indianapolis 500 has the winning driver down a bottle of milk. Other sports spray champagne or beer all over. Maybe some sort of similar gimmick can be found to celebrate a battle win? Sideline reporters interview winners & losers (more trite cliches). Emphasize sportsmanship & camaraderie; handshakes all around after initial celebration. Announcer & analyst sign off "until next time..." with Axis & Allies together, sharing BBQ with families, etc. Add "stock" graphic-laden intro & credits, & this could resemble what millions of people watch every Sunday. Use background music sparingly, only for transitions, intro, & ending. No question there would be a lot of work involved for somebody. Since the whole thing could be staged (in fact, it would probably be near impossible to produce truly live) shooting could be spread out over multiple days (watch for continuity, to be sure that weather is the same, people wearing the same clothes, etc. if you want to shoot a "battle" on multiple days). While it's probably more than 1 or 2 people could be reasonably expected to pull off, I think it could be done with the full cooperation & commitment of a club. JM
Up until now, the videos I've made have been music videos. The purpose has been to give a general feeling of excitement, patriotism, and fun. The music provides the emotion and hopefully makes new viewers curious about us when combined with video of our hobby. John, you are suggesting something wholly different from what I have done so far. Your idea is to have commentators analyze a battle to help viewers understand what is happening as well as add a connection with participants, and thus make them more interested in the hobby. I think it's an excellent idea! I never watch sports TV (you're right, who wants to watch cars drive in circles?) so I would have to study a bit first. I'm worried about the length of the video you suggest, because the time required can increase very rapidly as the video gets longer. Being somewhat lazy, I don't know that Carl or I would be able so follow through the whole project. Instead, Carl and I came up with an idea several weeks ago to do a news cast (now that I think about it, a short sports show is a more appropriate description). It will still allow me to have a visible human cast, battle analysis, pond-side interviews complete with cliche one-liners, and I already have some music for a canned opening and transitions. Best of all, by using a smaller format, I can learn how much time it takes to film and edit, as well as improve my editing and filming, so can can expand it later if the commitment is feasible for me. To that end, Carl and I did some staged filming at the Gunnery and Maneuvering event on Sunday of Warspite sailing with Atlanta and Cadorna doing some live-fire exercises, as well as "return fire" using pebbles thrown from the shore (who wants their boat shot at during a non-combat event?). Hopefully this footage, as well as another demonstration of Hood's fire control system will be used in the next video. Carl will try to put together the first newscast as his entry in the Youtube competition. edit: do you have any thoughts on the photos and battle reports?
The Welcome to the MWC DVD I made last year has "voice over" on the battle video to explain what is happening. I also give a general history of how this all started and and some of our rules. I also have interveiws with a few other people on it. I thought it turned out pretty good for an rookie video guy like myself. Just wish the video quality was better. But VHS to computer to DVD loses a lot.
I get 404 errors trying to access the photos on the Western Warships links. Comments on battle reports probably apply more to the newsletter in general than to your reports specifically. Your battle report narratives get right into it, without wasting words on meaningless stuff, which I think is good. What might help, for those readers who don't personally know the players or ships, might be some more "back story" that fills in details about the participants. Maybe, once a month profile a captain/ship in detail. Like with the videos, try to "personalize" the coverage more, focusing on the human individuals more & present the ships in relation to how they were selected, built, & used by their captains. In general, for all forms of coverage: People: Personal Ships: Impersonal Focus on the more "personal" aspects of the sport, which others can relate to. Less on what the ships were doing, more on what the people were doing. Less on what the ships did, more on what the captains intended. Less on how many holes were counted, more on people's reactions. Etc. Use tables to summarize scoring, like the "box scores" in the newspaper sports section. Most common responses when asked what we like about the hobby is camaraderie, so emphasize that (i.e. give people what they want). In general, you do a very good job of promotion, I think, but anything can be improved on. My comments are in no way intended to diminish what you do. As one who is always trying to "push the envelope" myself (which, I admit, makes some people uncomfortable) I hope that you'll be always be able to improve, & that your best work is always ahead of you, not in the past! JM
I believe the webmaster is doing an upgrade to the photo system right now. Thanks. Carl and I both look on your comments as "this can be improved," not "that sucks."
OK, I'll try to remember to check it out later. Feel free to remind me if you think I've taken too long. Good. You guys strike me as the type that are interested in "pushing the envelope", otherwise I wouldn't bother. JM
Ok. For the most part, I found that the videos, like mine for the most part, are of footage that we really wanted to just get out there. I know except for maybe two, I did very little editing to the video, just got rid of the "dead" time.... which I am sure you guys have to deal with as well! For the most part you've gotten your point across. Big gun. Quick sinks. I would like to have heavier, more intense music. Your selection is not bad... at least it is not Bee Gees. I don't think there is a wrong way to do this, we are taking the pond and broadcasting it to a wider audience. Now. If I may. Entertainment. That's where videos take off. Take for example your LMS video or my recruitment video: Visit this site Recruitment video for 2008. I plan on making a new one with this year's footage. Both required a little more thought and a good musical score. There are some entertaining things we plan on doing this year. I've had to get a new camera as I am going for more than one angle. Going to introduce Mega Bloks, Dry ice fog, explosions, more sinks and hopelly some funny story lines. Could be I'm just crazy. I want a good story. For the most part my videos have been about the personalities of the ships and their captains. Like introductions to our little group up here. Next I will go a little more Movie themed. I think it will peak interest. I also intend on three serious productions. One of all sinks... there may be two of these. The new recruitment video and a documentary style "Here's what we do" video. Just my two cents.... letting you know what the crazies up north in their igloos are doing! Can't wait for the ice to melt. Almost time. It's like waiting for Christmas. Here are a few of the other videos I have. Visit this site Bismarck Slowly cruising our main fighting grounds.... Visit this site The man who swore he'd never sail an axis ship, succumbed to the power of Biz. Visit this site Yammie the seaweed-munchin seacow takes a slip under the waves... Visit this site John and his prized convoy ship... the Pundua... there are still pieces out there somewhere.... Visit this site The mighty Scharnhorst, masking tape patching and all, goes for a dip. Visit this site Personal jab...er...tribute, to Stokes and the Yamato. Visit this site Ohhhhhhh GirlFight! GIRL FIGHT!!!! Visit this site My Northy *sighs* Visit this site South Carolina doing her sub impression.. Thanks for your vids. Looking forward to watching your next one.
I've been studying up on my warship filming technique: http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=vxDvQfY9bms http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=8CsZONf549g http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=crPhCUeMqbA http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=tVHSZUUUOeI http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=nXRlBDiIAvc I'm filming lots of new stuff, and hope to have enough to put together a new video in the next month or two. Be prepared! Now if I could only get a decent scriptwriter...
Have you considered doing something like interspersing historical with model combat footage? Example: Grainy, B/W sequence of BBs firing fades to sharp, colored sequence of model ships firing, etc. Another idea might be to do something in the style of the WWII-era newsreels. They were intended to inform & promote, & might be a fun style to emulate. JM
I doubt many people would really care about the loss in quality going from VHS to a digital format, including DVD or being stored on a hard disk. Digital can be used and copied more easily. I have a large archive of video on my second hard drive. Of course, the tape is higher quality for storage, so I keep all my original tapes packed away as an archive in case anything happens to my computer. One member recently finished transferring a large stack of 10+ VHS tapes of old video to DVD, so it can be copied for other members. There's footage from around 1988! WW2 era newsreels may be a good inspiration. I found one guy who's got "With the Marines at Tarawa," "John Ford's The Battle of Midway," "To the Shores of Iwo Jima," "The USS Yorktown: The Fighting Lady," and others. Take a look: http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=2bn442RCT&p=r
I just went to the photo gallery through the main site, and it seemed to work. Go to Visit this site then click on Photo Gallery on the menu to the left, then click Event Photos.
