BBC Young Musician 2024

[LMcD]

Does he leave mushroom for anything else?

Might you by any chance be alluding to Lonnie Donegan's No. 1 hit 'My Old Man's A Dustman'? 'I say, I say, I say, my dustbin's absolutely full of toadstools...'

[Dave2002]

The answers are less than you might think and more than most people assume.

I really don't know - but maybe a smallish team of 10 - including a couple of the experts - and not all based anywhere near London could be done for relatvely affordable costs.

"Gold plated" productions, with prima donnas expecting to live in the centre of London and have lots of technical support could cost orders of magnitude more.

[Ein Heldenleben]

[QUOTE=Dave2002;n1319230]I really don't know - but maybe a smallish team of 10 - including a couple of the experts - and not all based anywhere near London could be done for relatvely affordable costs.

"Gold plated" productions, with prima donnas expecting to live in the centre of London and have lots of technical support could cost orders of magnitude more.

[/
Thing is there’s not much market for that low midrange material unless it’s dirt cheap and then it’s virtually impossible to make money on it .
Not sure you grasp just how much higher end factual costs . I’ve made programmes with smaller teams than ten but they’ve never been aimed as global sales and had outside investment . Peak time network factual history was about £250,000 an hour a few years ago and the teams are much bigger than ten . David Olsuga is mentioned above. Those UK based films are very research intensive for starters. A science series shot across several continents aimed for global sales could be considerably more - £500,000 to 750.000 per hour . A so called “blue -chip “ natural history could easily be millions per hour. The presenter is a small fraction of the total cost to be honest so it doesn’t matter where they live.
Never worked with a “prima Donna “ - these days they don’t get employed .

[duncan]

Thing is there’s not much market for that low midrange material unless it’s dirt cheap and then it’s virtually impossible to make money on it

A friend who is a freelance documentary director works with tight budgets and small teams (3-4) but, in his words, it's hard to sell anything that does not feature "sharks, Nazis, or pyramids." Or, ideally, a combination of them.

[Dave2002]

[QUOTE=Ein Heldenleben;n1319258]

I really don't know - but maybe a smallish team of 10 - including a couple of the experts - and not all based anywhere near London could be done for relatvely affordable costs.

"Gold plated" productions, with prima donnas expecting to live in the centre of London and have lots of technical support could cost orders of magnitude more.

Peak time network factual history was about £250,000 an hour a few years ago and the teams are much bigger than ten ..

Are your figures based on running time of the final program?

I suppose it depends on the market, and quality factors.

One Arts programme I saw many years ago in Sweden simply had a few people in a room sitting on chairs, and the background was a clothes line hanging from a few posts, with clothes hanging from it.
It was a discussion programme, something like R4 Front Row.

Another - again I think in Sweden - seemed to be about 24 hours in the life of a public toilet.

OK Sweden is different - a smaller population than the UK - and not trying to sell those programmes world wide.

OTOH I also watched a video editor in a Swedish TV studio spend around 20 minutes - maybe more - just repeatedly going over a 10-30 seconds intro for a Nature programme.
I could not see what improvements if any were done by that.

At that rate it would have taken days to finalise the programme before transmssion, and that material was already recorded and available.

[french frank]

As always it’s largely down to money .

But then, consider what the BBC does manage to find money for.

[Ein Heldenleben]

A friend who is a freelance documentary director works with tight budgets and small teams (3-4) but, in his words, it's hard to sell anything that does not feature "sharks, Nazis, or pyramids." Or, ideally, a combination of them.

Aka Pharaohs and Fuhrers

The other must have is the Titanic .


….and dinosaurs

[Ein Heldenleben]

[QUOTE=Dave2002;n1319269]

Are your figures based on running time of the final program?

I suppose it depends on the market, and quality factors.

One Arts programme I saw many years ago in Sweden simply had a few people in a room sitting on chairs, and the background was a clothes line hanging from a few posts, with clothes hanging from it.
It was a discussion programme, something like R4 Front Row.

Another - again I think in Sweden - seemed to be about 24 hours in the life of a public toilet.

OK Sweden is different - a smaller population than the UK - and not trying to sell those programmes world wide.

OTOH I also watched a video editor in a Swedish TV studio spend around 20 minutes - maybe more - just repeatedly going over a 10-30 seconds intro for a Nature programme.
I could not see what improvements if any were done by that.

At that rate it would have taken days to finalise the programme before transmssion, and that material was already recorded and available.

I’m talking about films that are globally saleable - those Swedish arts docs would be if no interest outside Sweden,
I’ve heard of one hour natural history films ( 49 ‘ ) being in edit for 12 weeks - a few years back.That excludes viewing and logging - (weeks ) grade ( maybe three days ) and dub (one day).
That’s less than one minute cut in a day . Equally in current affairs I’ve seen 8 mins done in a day. Mind you they often look it …

[Dave2002]

[QUOTE=Ein Heldenleben;n1319274]

I’m talking about films that are globally saleable - those Swedish arts docs would be if no interest outside Sweden,
I’ve heard of one hour natural history films ( 49 ‘ ) being in edit for 12 weeks - a few years back.That excludes viewing and logging - (weeks ) grade ( maybe three days ) and dub (one day).
That’s less than one minute cut in a day . Equally in current affairs I’ve seen 8 mins done in a day. Mind you they often look it …

Of course the Swedish art progs would have been of virtually no interest outside Sweden.

Your natural history film - 1 minute per day - but presumably more people involved - not just 1 person per day,

I understand the need for something being made as near to perfection as possible, but is it always necessary? Perhaps in a competitive global market it is.
OTOH, there may well be other programmes which are just good enough - with much lower costs.

You appear to have squashed the notion that costs are dominated in any serious way by people "needing" to work in or close to the metropolis - which is interesting.

[Ein Heldenleben]

[QUOTE=Dave2002;n1319285]

Of course the Swedish art progs would have been of virtually no interest outside Sweden.

Your natural history film - 1 minute per day - but presumably more people involved - not just 1 person per day, There

I understand the need for something being made as near to perfection as possible, but is it always necessary? Perhaps in a competitive global market it is.
OTOH, there may well be other programmes which are just good enough - with much lower costs.

You appear to have squashed the notion that costs are dominated in any serious way by people "needing" to work in or close to the metropolis - which is interesting.

There would be dozens involved in a major Nat hist Prog series

no it’s not always necessary and yes there are better progs with much lower costs

you don’t need to live in London but most Tv Progs are researched , commissioned, edited and post produced In cities - like pretty much everything else these days .

[Dave2002]

[QUOTE=Ein Heldenleben;n1319289]

There would be dozens involved in a major Nat hist Prog series

no it’s not always necessary and yes there are better progs with much lower costs

you don’t need to live in London but most Tv Progs are researched , commissioned, edited and post produced In cities - like pretty much everything else these days .

You mention series.

Series are going to put up the costs [more programmes], but also [perhaps] drive down costs per programme, and also allow teams with expertise and appropriate kit to form.

As you mention, a lot of team members work in cities, and that is certainly useful if expensive kit is required for each worker. OTOH, a lot of work can nowadays be done from other locations, via communications links.

Just looking at programmes - as a viewer - it does seem that nowadays many programmes are not made by TV companies, but rather by production companies which produce and sell the programmes to TV companies.
Depending on the size of those production companies, they may have facilities.in diverse, or multiple places. Presumably in the UK there are employees within TV companies, but also a lot of work is done in the production companies,and then there is a market for the programmes which are generated.

The relationship between TV companies and production companies could be complex, and viewers might not normally concern themselves about such details.

[Serial_Apologist]

The relationship between TV companies and production companies could be complex, and viewers might not normally concern themselves about such details.

Quite - thus further defraying related issues regarding who is involved in making critical judgements as to the suitability of said companies even before the public can have a handle on such matters.

[LMcD]

But then, consider what the BBC does manage to find money for.

Including grossly overpaid consultants and advisors who tell them how to control their operating costs?

[DracoM]

Yes, yes, YES!

[Nick Armstrong]

Haven’t watched the adjudication yet, but having listened to the extracts in this evening’s BBCFour quarter-finals, the lad playing harp is a complete magician and if he doesn’t go forward, I’m boycotting the rest of this competition!