TV coverage for archery?

[Thunk]

Originally Posted by Joester

Why do you want to watch archery on TV?

It's just not very interesting to watch at all...

I love reading, but I'm not pushing for TV coverage of people reading.

Only archers are going to want to watch competitive archery, and then not all archers at that.
If you want to promote the sport through television, then wouldn't you be better off contacting documentary makers and people of that ilk?
A programme about archery is always going to be more interesting that any tournament coverage.
Are carefully constructed documentary will capture interest and impart information much better than all but the most lavishly filmed tournament.

So what makes golf more interesting than archery?

[Neo]

Originally Posted by Thunk

So what makes golf more interesting than archery?

I agree I for one watch the biatholon ski archery when ever it appears on tv, they put polker on tv every god damn night for people to watch and those stupid quiz programs where you call in for 75p to win 100 quid. These slots could be filled with other more interesting coverage.

there is so much trash on tv anyway if you put archery on people would watch it. Especially if it was done properly with coverage from different countries with a bit of culture and history built into it.

[phil_r_58]

Originally Posted by Exarcher

I doubt the BBC will ever be pushed !. I worked for them for 15 years and still work in the Film and TV industry. I have talked with senior producers at Horse and Country TV about coverage of archery, they seemed more interested in the Field Archery discipline as it is closer to their image.
The whole problem with TV coverage of the sport is the number of cameras needed to cover an event. The channels look at the profile of the event, the number of veiwers, the manpower and hardware needed to cover the event and overall how much TV time they fill for what cost. The only economic way of filming an archery event is to slow it down to one archer shooting at a time which still needs two cameras either manned or on a remote control (expensive !) to cover the archer and the target being shot at.
For years FITA have changed the format of championship events to try and attract TV which is why the 70m head to head has evolved.
I talked to the Canadian TV producers who were covering the 1997 FITA World Championships when I shot there. they found, apart from the finals where they only had two archers to cover, that the rest of the tournament was immpossible to get the coverage they needed. On a field where there are more than two archers they found they always missed the important stories.... the 'underdog' knocking out one of the favourites or the World Record pass shot by 'an unknown'. FITA officials had given the TV producers a list of names to watch ( heavily U.S biased ) but on the whole these archers didn't perform. This meant the coverage of the event looked poor because some of the noteable peformances had no pictures to tell the story.
I've thought long and hard for years how to get archery onto TV and to be honest I think it would mean changing the sport to something akin to darts or become a multi million pound professional sport like golf with millions of participants world wide. Archery has come a long way since I shot my first arrows in 1967 but it's still got a long way to go before it will ever have more than a few minutes TV coverage a year.

I tried to get the Universities media staff interested in filming an archery shoot a few times. A field shoot, to be made interesting would have to be done like golf, with a team of cameras around the course, the same as the ones on each hole of a golf course. I did see a field round at the IFAA World and Europeans filmed a long time ago in Germany. The cameras did some general shots before the shoot, then followed a couple of groups around. The whole thing was then edited down, to just the highlights, so it looked like a golf round. The final thing was about 30 minutes, and shown on the German equivalent of "world of sport" on a Saturday afternoon. One of the German Archers brought a video to the hotel we were stopping at in Sweden a couple of years later. It actually looked pretty good, even to some non archers in the TV lounge at the time. So it can be done, if there is a desire to do so.

[Snarkhunter]

Originally Posted by Neo

...they put polker on tv every god damn night for people to watch and those stupid quiz programs where you call in for 75p to win 100 quid. These slots could be filled with other more interesting coverage.

there is so much trash on tv anyway if you put archery on people would watch it. Especially if it was done properly with coverage from different countries with a bit of culture and history built into it.

Neo, you are forgetting a key point: most archery would need to be handled as an outside broadcast (even when indoors) and this is expensive. Not only are TV quiz shows cheaper (one muppet presenter, a few techies and a producer) but with people phoning in at 75p per minute they can even make money! I suspect that the poker has the backing of gambling companies and are viewed as extended advertisements for gambling.

[grimsby archer]

Originally Posted by Snarkhunter

Neo, you are forgetting a key point: most archery would need to be handled as an outside broadcast (even when indoors) and this is expensive. Not only are TV quiz shows cheaper (one muppet presenter, a few techies and a producer) but with people phoning in at 75p per minute they can even make money! I suspect that the poker has the backing of gambling companies and are viewed as extended advertisements for gambling.

I dont see why it would have to be that expensive. When Image Studios made our programmes for Ch7-NTL they brought 3 handheld cameras, 2 camera men, a producer who doubled up as a camera man, a presenter (I did this job in the second series) spent a few hours filming and then cut it all together back at the studio. Stuck me as being pretty simple, but the results were good, even if I say so myself.

Of course, if you really want a tv programme to capture the imagination of the nation, try this format:
30 seconds video of people doing archery with a voice over and onscreen graphic that reads something like "April 27th is National Archery Day! Your chance to have a go at archery. To contact your local archery club log onto www.gnas.org"
Show this 3 times a day for 3 days, back it up with a quarter page ad in a national newspaper and get someone from the GNAS office to streak down Downing Street carrying a National Archery Day banner on the Friday night.
Then you get every club in the country to put on a have-a-go session on that day.
Peice of

[Exarcher]

Just guess the real cost of ....

'3 handheld cameras, 2 camera men, a producer who doubled up as a camera man, a presenter (I did this job in the second series) spent a few hours filming and then cut it all together back at the studio'

On broadcast TV, In pounds shillings and pence and I'll get back to you with the real costs.... But here's a clue.... it runs into several thousands ( that's assuming it's U.K based and the camera crews are local and don't need overnight accomodation and minimising their travel and food expenses ). Crews and edit suites charge by the day (plus overtime when applicable), plus expenses.

TV channels don't do things at a loss... they are in in it to make money for themselves and their shareholders. They need to sell the advertising slots within the programme and get goood viewing figures with an equally good AI ratiing ( audience appreciation ).

It's all well and good trying to do something 'on the cheap' ( and invariably at a loss ) to fill a few minutes of web based TV but that will never be viable to broadcast to the masses. Televised archery needs personalities, champions, excitement, winners and losers.... but most importantly it needs well produced programmes that will attact both viewers and advertisers. Good coverage is essential with both knowledgable and professional commentary (we need to attract and educate the non archers not put them to sleep).

How many potential world champions are out there that have just never been tempted to try shooting a bow and arrow. Archery is a very minority sport and will remain so unless it drags itself out of the 14th century. Jay Barrs once remarked to me that the only archery could attract interest on TV was to put the best archers in a field and shoot at each other until the last one standing was the winner. Brutal, but probably closer to the truth than anybody is prepared to admit.

I expect a tirade of posts from angry people. but honestly, I am an archer who has shot for over 40 years, who only want's the best for the sport. I am lucky to have shot at the highest levels but I also know the TV industry quite well. Loads of documentaries have been made, some quite well, they mainly cover the historical derivations of our sport, with maybe a couple of minutes at the end showing the more modern aspects. But I bet none have had any effect on potential new archers approaching clubs. The feature film 'Robin Hood Prince Of Theives' was probably the last media based thing to really attact the masses to the sport and that doesn't really have any commonality other than a bent bit of wood joined at the ends by a slightly shorter peice of string !.

I don't know how the sport is going to attact more TV coverage, but I await your suggestions......................................

[worthipa]

Originally Posted by Exarcher

I don't know how the sport is going to attact more TV coverage, but I await your suggestions......................................

It's not going to, I don't understand why we keep beating ourselves up over TV coverage, everything you say is spot on.

Like I've said before in these threads there's no money in archery so no one's bothered (except us). You might attract a Regional News crew every now and again for a novelty item but that's your lot. We should think ourselves lucky that this year's an Olympic year we might see a bit more archery on telly because of that, but it certainly won't be because they're going there to film archery as much as we might like to think so. And we should also thank our lucky stars for Kia Motors, Sportoto, Turkish Airlines and Longines or we wouldn't be seeing the Archery World Cup on TV either.

[Watch_Man]

It was good to see the BBC giving coverage of 'Aerobic Gymnastics' this morning, apparently they think it may become an olympic sport. Whatever next - pie eating!

[the_compound_kid]

As i am still at school i dont get chance in the day time to see Day time tv. But this is probable wrong but horse riding and clay pigon shooting is somthing that many people woth a lot of money do so thats bound to get on t.v and horse riding makes more money than archery i would think.

[maxwell9699]

If we are honest most archery tournaments are not tele-visual, however the head to head shoots are both exciting, nail biting and importantly tele -visual.
If you search on UTube there is extensive coverage of Olympic archery and the world cup series from last year.You need to use different wording in your searches ie Archery, Olympic archery, amazing archery, archery trick shots etc. One search that throws up some very intersting video is to search under slow motion archery.There is coverage from the top shoots and if you are interested the banal and dangerous. For example TV coverage of people catching arrows in mid air. (definitly do not try this at home)