1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

USA Today Article re: Reality TV and HD

Discussion in 'TV Show Talk' started by LarryFlowers, Feb 18, 2008.

  1. LarryFlowers

    LarryFlowers New Member

    4,290
    1
    Sep 22, 2006
    Article in today's USA Today discussing Reality TV and HD. In particular, they mention Survivor and The Amazing Race:

    "The cameras "are not meant yet for that type of rough travel and the sheer cost," says Jonathan Littman, executive producer of CBS' The Amazing Race and president of Jerry Bruckheimer Television. "It's a pretty high escalation in our budget. It's not double at the moment, but it's hundreds of thousands of dollars for the total run."

    See the entire article at: http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/news/2008-02-17-reality-hdtv_N.htm?loc=interstitialskip
     
  2. Grentz

    Grentz New Member

    5,916
    1
    Jan 10, 2007
    I think ""The cameras are not meant yet for that type of rough travel" is a bit stupid to say.

    There are rugged HD cameras such as the Amazing RED camera that made big news awhile ago:
    http://www.red.com/cameras

    More like them just being cheap, when they really shouldn't be considering they are some of the most successful shows on TV. If my local news station can upgrade all their gear to HD including in the field stuff, I know Survivor and The Amazing Race can afford to... :p
     
  3. mndwalsh

    mndwalsh Legend

    177
    0
    Nov 16, 2005
    my key to the story would be to stop watching reality TV and pay the writters and get some real shows on
     
  4. say-what

    say-what Active Member

    5,795
    15
    Dec 14, 2006
    New Orleans
    If Dirty Jobs and Deadliest Catch can use HD cameras, with Deadliest Catch destroying many, I don't see the issue with Survivor and Amazing Race using them, particularly when you factor in the revenue these CBS shows generate.
     
  5. Barmat

    Barmat Godfather

    261
    0
    Aug 26, 2006
    They are just being cheap. No two ways about it. Hundreds of thousands of dollars? If Survivor cost an extra 200,000.00 to make would they cancel it?
     
  6. Stuart Sweet

    Stuart Sweet The Shadow Knows!

    37,060
    287
    Jun 18, 2006
    Agreed 100% here. Dirty Jobs uses HD cameras. Planet Earth used HD cameras. I'm inclined to believe that the producers simply don't see the value.

    Game shows were in black and white when scripted programming went color. Eventually they all came around.
     
  7. Juppers

    Juppers Icon

    596
    1
    Oct 26, 2006
    It's up to the production company currently, not CBS, and Mark Burnett is a cheap b******* on the Survivor side.
     
  8. Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    Thread moved, as it is not DirecTV specific
     
  9. Doug Brott

    Doug Brott Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    28,939
    72
    Jul 12, 2006
    Los Angeles
    Personally, I'd like to see more Reality TV in HD .. but that's mostly because I watch a few reality shows.

    Thing is all of them are SD .. Biggest Loser, last night's "My Dad is better than your Dad" .. these guys certainly can't claim "rugged" as being the issue. It's cost plain and simple and the fact that these guys don't see the value in moving to HD.
     
  10. tcusta00

    tcusta00 Active Member

    7,911
    1
    Dec 31, 2007
    I think the way these reality shows are "sold" to the network execs is that they're cheap and easy to produce so they refrain from HD cameras.

    However, when they do get to the level of sucess that Survivor or Amazing Race has gotten there's really little excuse.
     
  11. MikeW

    MikeW Hall Of Fame

    2,565
    4
    May 16, 2002
    Another factor in reality shows is there is no syndication market for them. They are seen one, make their money, then are typically discarded.
     
  12. tcusta00

    tcusta00 Active Member

    7,911
    1
    Dec 31, 2007
    Except for Game Show Network... which isn't HD (yet) anyway...
     
  13. Doug Brott

    Doug Brott Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    28,939
    72
    Jul 12, 2006
    Los Angeles
    well, that is true .. if you're interested, you're there .. after that you don't care.
     
  14. buffan

    buffan New Member

    9
    0
    Feb 11, 2008
    On Survivor, I'm not sure I want to see all those bug bites and other...ummm...imperfections in all their HD glory. Some people that start out looking good on Day 1 really don't look good at all by Day 8, or 15, or 39.

    I wouldn't be at all surprised if the producers thought the same thing.
     
  15. Doug Brott

    Doug Brott Lifetime Achiever DBSTalk Club

    28,939
    72
    Jul 12, 2006
    Los Angeles
    That's one way to look at it, but it's be great to see all of the nature shots in HD .. Heck, if they took one HD camera and filmed the "fillers" in HD and the camp/challenges in SD, that'd be better than what we have now.
     
  16. jodyguercio

    jodyguercio Active Member

    2,793
    0
    Aug 16, 2007
    Agreed 100% here. Dirty Jobs uses HD cameras. Planet Earth used HD cameras.

    Didnt Dirty Jobs destroy one of their HD camera rigs when he was doing the timber hauling with the mules when the chopped down one of the trees and it fell on it? If these two can do it, The Amazing Race can for sure and Survivor could to an extent as well.
     
  17. frederic1943

    frederic1943 Icon

    748
    1
    Dec 1, 2006
    Even if you believe they can't use HD cameras in the field. What about shows like "Big Brother", "The Biggest Loser" or "Deal or No Deal". There's no danger to the cameras there. I think is mainly because there's no syndication market for them. Why spend the money on a one time show.
     
  18. Mocco71

    Mocco71 Godfather

    365
    0
    Jan 13, 2007
    Look at their ratings... there's no reason to go HD as people watch no matter how filmed. The other shows mentioned need viewership and are trying to bring it with a better pq.
     
  19. tcusta00

    tcusta00 Active Member

    7,911
    1
    Dec 31, 2007
    At least in the case of Big brother it would probably be a bigger expense than most reality shows since they have so many cameras in every room of the house.
     
  20. jodyguercio

    jodyguercio Active Member

    2,793
    0
    Aug 16, 2007
    Yea but a one time expense as they use the same set every season and just change the decor, which cant be cheap either....
     

Share This Page