[QUOTE=NielsGade;35398099]0:46 focuses on the reporter to show he's an authority[/QUOTE]
...on the topic of proper mic-holding distance :v:
Give this guy more time on tv!
most people can't answer questions and provide intelligent comments on camera like that
i applaud this man
And as usual, "Fair and Balanced" Fox never aired this.
It should be illegal to spread misinformation like they do. It's the biggest downside to free speech.
[QUOTE=Typhoonx10;35397955]background noise[/QUOTE]
Because it wasn't edited and aired on the news. Also pretty old but seems nobody has seen it yet.
I find it funny how he reminds the dude, "We're giving you the opportunity to broadcast any message you want to send", basically saying "Okay, we're doing you a favor, be nice to us"
That was amazing. His points were so clear and concise anyone could understand them. Nothing like some arguments I've seen from occupiers, this man knows exactly what he's protesting and why.
The way how he immediately responded so professionally, the man should work in TV or something.
Holy shit! I never thought i'd see this ever. This is great, it shows us what actual intelligent American citizens think. Now let's hope any kind of American schooled journalist finds out, at all, that this is how Journalism should work.
As far as i'm concerned, that camera guy just did tons better than any other news corp on the continent. So yeah, finally confirmation that some of you weasels actually think the focus of the media and the politicians is fucking ass.
he didn't say "um" once.
fucking badass, i want to shake that guys hand. So level headed as well unlike a lot of Americans. (no offence to all you other level headed Americans on the forum)
[QUOTE=The Vman;35399305]And as usual, "Fair and Balanced" Fox never aired this.
It should be illegal to spread misinformation like they do. It's the biggest downside to free speech.[/QUOTE]
Well they're technically not a news corporation, they legally proved they were an entertainment outlet and nothing more. It's a technicality that allows them to spray lies all over everything without failing at their jobs (presumably because, after failing to be good people, their jobs are all they have left).
[editline]2nd April 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=BlazeFresh;35400844]he didn't say "um" once.
fucking badass, i want to shake that guys hand. So level headed as well unlike a lot of Americans. (no offence to all you other level headed Americans on the forum)[/QUOTE]
I'm fairly certain it comes from his hat
[QUOTE=Bomimo;35400642]As far as i'm concerned, that camera guy just did tons better than any other news corp on the continent. So yeah, finally confirmation that some of you weasels actually think the focus of the media and the politicians is fucking ass.[/QUOTE]
You do realize they never aired this.
[QUOTE=ThePinkPanzer;35401063]You do realize they never aired this.[/QUOTE]
Yes. Someone had to put it on youtube or someone had to dig it out. This exactly why their media is so fucked up. Truth is always concealed behind agenda.
It's fake. Why would fox film an interview with such shit quality and horrible background noise?
It's clear somebody just stapled the logo to a mic for whatever reason.
Give this man his own news show.
[QUOTE=rrunyan;35401315]It's fake. Why would fox film an interview with such shit quality and horrible background noise?
It's clear somebody just stapled the logo to a mic for whatever reason.[/QUOTE]
Fox wouldn't air a interview where a guy beats the shit out of their company, luckily, a guy mustve been recording with his phone or something.
The occupy movement in general (IN GENERAL) is full of stupid fucks.
[QUOTE=rrunyan;35401315]It's fake. Why would fox film an interview with such shit quality and horrible background noise?
It's clear somebody just stapled the logo to a mic for whatever reason.[/QUOTE]
Hey dude. That background noise is always in the audio when it's recorded out in the field. You have to use some special techniques and software to lower the volume of the noise.
We should have a megathread of videos about Fox called "Fox Gets Owned By X".
Seriously, they could lose an argument with a fucking rock.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;35401459]Hey dude. That background noise is always in the audio when it's recorded out in the field. You have to use some special techniques and software to lower the volume of the noise.[/QUOTE]
I can attest to this, we have to do audio editing for ALL of our footage in the field in my media class when we film things.
[QUOTE=rrunyan;35401315]It's fake. Why would fox film an interview with such shit quality and horrible background noise?
It's clear somebody just stapled the logo to a mic for whatever reason.[/QUOTE]
I'm gonna say they remove the background noise in post production with noise cancellation just before it goes on air. Seeing as this didn't make it to air, they didn't bother.
[QUOTE=Jojje;35401699]I'm gonna say they remove the background noise in post production with noise cancellation just before it goes on air. Seeing as this didn't make it to air, they didn't bother.[/QUOTE]
Exactly, this is most likely raw footage, which always looks and sounds like crap.
Why does it not surprise me that they didn't air this?
I like how the interviewer said that they were giving him a chance to speak his mind and then decide not to air the interview.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;35401459]Hey dude. That background noise is always in the audio when it's recorded out in the field. You have to use some special techniques and software to lower the volume of the noise.[/QUOTE]No, you just use a Dynamic microphone with a close proximity effect.
No mind boggling audio techniques needed for field interviews.
Also it doesn't look like this was recorded from a Fox News camera based on the angle shot.
[QUOTE=peterson;35402221]No, you just use a Dynamic microphone with a close proximity effect.
No mind boggling audio techniques needed for field interviews.
Also it doesn't look like this was recorded from a Fox News camera based on the angle shot.[/QUOTE]
Do you know what proximity effect is? Basically it's when the sound gets "bassier" the closer it is to the microphone. A close proximity effect doesn't really make sense. Does that mean that it takes a lot less distance between source and mic before the mic starts adding low end? In that case it's practically worthless.
Also, a dynamic microphone is generally cardioid as far as polar pattern goes. This means the mic will take in sound from the front and side. That won't get rid of background noise at all.
So yea, you do need to use some special techniques and software for field interviews, at least if you don't want a lot of background noise. They aren't mind boggling, but they are still required.
It's all from the BA "Civil War" hat. (I don't know what that hat is called but it's the kind worn during US Civil war)
[QUOTE=abananapeel;35402331]It's all from the BA "Civil War" hat. (I don't know what that hat is called but it's the kind worn during US Civil war)[/QUOTE]It's called a kepi, I have one just like it for civil war reenactments. He isn't wearing it correctly, but he pulls it off casually in a way I couldn't hope too.
I coulnd't hear most of what he said.
Can someone write it down or something please?
That was spot on.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
