I originally wrote this page long ago (8, 9 years?) before the advent of the self-shooting PD (producer/director) and AP (assistant producer) with whom I now find myself in competition. So before you read what I wrote then which is aimed specifically at people who want to work as camerapersons, I'd like to just make some comments on current working practises because I fundamentally disagree with most current thinking which says that a new entrant into the industry should not specialise but should be a jack-of-all-trades production/technician everyman.
I believe that the modern approach is causing a dramatic increase in the number of underwhelming television programmes. Asking a director to direct, produce, write, shoot and record the sound inevitably involves huge compromises in every aspect of the film. Nobody is good enough at everything, and even if they were, nobody can concentrate on each aspect 100% at the same time. It's so patently obvious that I shouldn't have to mention it. But amazingly, that is precisely what many directors are being asked to do in the race to produce cheaper and cheaper telly. UK television has always led the industry. No more. Quality and craft are being spread way too thin.
It's my opinion that everyone should learn to do one job really well. Top end television is still made by teams of really good people, each masters of their craft and it is the best recipe. Budgets may allow that only occasionally but you should want to be part of the best team, want to make great television or films, rather than just be part of the sausage factory of TV pap that fills blank airtime.
It would be very unfair to say that there is a career out there for you. There almost certainly isn't. The rise of University courses offering so called media degrees has caused untold damage to the industry. It fuels the lie that there are great television careers to be had and every year another 10,000 hopeful media graduates are dumped out in the world with very few opportunies for real employment. Ours has become a cynical and exploitative industry where the few young people lucky enough to find a placement are used as cheap or even illegaly unpaid labour with the carrot of paid proper employment always being dangled some way in front.
Market forces have meant that even for experienced production staff, salaries are dreadful and working conditions terrible: and while this eventually drives many experienced people away to other industries where their often considerable skills are more likely to be remunerated with wages that will house and feed a family there is always a massive queue of young people ready to take their place. That brain-drain is the ultimate cause of the appalling fall in production and technical quality of modern television and why where once we led the world we're now falling behind. The recent debacle with Jonathan Ross and Russel Brand only happened because the senior management were not sufficiently skilled or experienced to exercise mature judgement.
Modern television is run by young modern management with the bottom-line financial and viewer-rating targets at the forefront of their interest: which maybe is how it should be. But the downside of this is that those same people rarely have sufficient knowledge of the basic craft of programme making to tell good from bad.
Like most crafts, camerawork and the other television skills require a mix of natural ability and many hours of practise. Bizarrely the modern viewer seems very willing to put up with some very poor work on TV in a way they could never do if the same lack of ability and practise were offered by say the music industry. So many potentially good documentaries are ruined (for me at least) by the total failure of the camerawork to do justice to the story. Bad direction, poor script-writing, some truly dire acting are things you would never see in the high end American dramas we watch so avidly, but watch any UK equivalent and you'll see examples of this in every episode. Why do we put up with it? Because the people in decision-making positions are making a pigs-ear of it. They think that to make something successful it has to involve a celebrity. Why force a celebrity onto a director when the job calls for an actor?
Anyway I digress. My advice if you're really determined to get into this industry despite my warnings above is to concentrate on one aspect. Learn to do something really well, and don't try to run before you can walk. And if it's the camerawork that interests you read what I wrote all those years ago (below). I hope some of it is of use to you...
I receive a lot of emails from people asking for advice on how to get into the TV industry, how to become a cameraman, which courses to attend etc. It's difficult to respond to everyone so I thought I'd try writing a webpage that attempts to offer some opinion and advice to wannabee TV folk.
So much has changed in the TV industry over the last twenty years that my thoughts may be mostly irrelevant. The TV industry is wide and varied and I only have experience of certain areas, so again, what I think may be wrong for you. However, with the disclaimers over, here goes ...
CAMERAMAN is a broadly used term, applying to feature film d.o.p, to studio pedestal operator, to news VJ, to the home movie maker. Programmes and their budgets come in many sizes, and directors' ambitions vary from realistic to absurd. In other words, there are a lot of variables. Most cameramen will find a niche that they fit or that fits them after a few years of searching. How they get there depends on the route they take into the business.
CATCH 22 The standard of camerawork is a major factor in the quality of a TV programme. At a basic level very poor photography is only sustainable for a few seconds within a TV programme: think of home-movie footage of news events, or the "You've been framed" type programmes. If a cameraman's footage is poorly focussed, composed, or exposed the whole programme may be lost. Therefore programme makers are unlikely to risk offering the camerawork to people whose work they don't already know to be good. There is generally no shortage of cameramen and a known quantity will nearly always get hired before an unknown one. The great Catch 22 in my industry is that no-one will give you a job if they haven't used you before, UNLESS they are desperate AND have heard good things said of you by others in the industry AND have seen your work and liked it. It's a problem one encounters all the time, but one that particularly frustrates when trying to move out of one pigeon-hole to another. Anyone who has attempted to jump between news and documentaries or documentaries and drama will tell you this. One lucky break occurred for me while looking to move over to documentaries from news and current affairs: the phone rang in the middle of the night and a good friend asked if I could take over the shooting of a documentary from him the next morning. He had food-poisoning ! I went on to make several films with the director of that programme. One conclusion that you should draw from the above: it pays to be thick-skinned, because you may have to take a lot of rejection. You might be the most talented cameraman in the universe (not true ! I am !) but until people begin to know your work, only patience and perseverance - and the odd lucky break - will get you through.
That's all very well, and is my advice to anyone already experienced and skilled in the art of camerawork. But how do you gain those skills and that experience in the first place ?
Well there are hundreds of ways really. You could go to COLLEGE and study photography, media studies, film making. Those courses didn't really exist when I was at school, but they sound like a lot of fun, and you get to put some initials after your name (initals have no practical effect in the real world though). I've attended several of the short courses at the National Film School in Beaconsfield and was rather jealous of the long term students whose lifestyle seemed to involve lots of watching films and talking about finishing some amazing project (for finish read start). One student there had managed to stretch his three year degree course to seven ! Whether such courses make a big difference to how much the industry wants people is open to debate. I'm sure there have been many successful students who have gone on to great careers behind the camera. However I'd be willing to bet that many students leaving such courses find them of little practical value in the search for that elusive first break and may feel left behind by the kid who went and made the tea at his or her local facility house, and was able to gain experience on the job. If y
(Edited Feb 2012) If as a young person you are seriously considering doing a media degree as a way into television and saddling yourself with £50,000 of debt, then please don't! There are better ways of doing it. I strongly urge you to read
this online discussion
before signing up. £50,000 of debt for 600-700 hours of second-rate teaching ? That's over £ 70 per hour ! Universities are using media degrees to prop up their finances and subsidise less profitable (but much more worthy) courses like medicine which work out at about £20/hour. Do not buy in to this ! Having a degree in media will give you no great advantage over any other degree when it comes to finding a job in media. In fact a degree in history or science is probably far more useful as what you need to know about cameras, sound and lighting is far more effectively learnt on the job than in the classroom. Having a traditional degree in science or humanities will also be far more useful should you later decide that media is not the career for you.
Now go back and re-read this paragraph!
If you don't want to go the college route there are other ways into the industry. Inexperienced people are taken in and trained by some businesses. FACILITY HOUSES, which are hire companies dealing in TV and camera equipment, use an army of technicians who check, clean, fix equipment before and after each rental. It's a dirty job, often with fairly unsociable hours, but as a way of getting hands-on practical experience of loads of different camera equipment it's a fantastic start. Those technicians will eventually go out on shoots with the equipment as assistants as they get more experienced. Some facility companies have trained up their technicians from scratch to become full camera assistants, sound recordists, and even camera operators. There are several of these companies operating in London and they do recruit frequently. Here are some of them, in no particular order of importance:
The Cruet Company, Video Europe, Electra, Shift 4, Prime Television,
Digital Garage, Hammerhead, Cine-Europe, Cine-Video, I.C.E.
Another way in is via BROADCAST and/or PRODUCTION companies that have in-house camera departments. The BBC is one obviously, as are the ITV companies, Channel 5, Sky, MTV, and the big production companies like Mentorn. The entry procedure will be more formal, as will the training, but the advantage is that there is a constant need for people to staff their in-house programmes. A foot-in-the-door attitude is needed here. Write to them and ask what areas they recruit into. Again, persistence pays off with companies like these; don't be put off by rejection. Keep pestering them.
The TV NEWS business is fantastic training ground for many aspects of television. A good news cameraman is a different beast to the cameraman found in slower paced television. Often as much of a journalist as a photographer, his skills may be those of persistence, instinct, speed and bravery. News nowadays requires multi-skilling and the ability to work alone. But every day is different and demanding and there is no better way to learn fast and to see the world (with all its warts). Again be persistent. Try to get to know people. Offer to make the tea. Most news cameramen have to work one-man-band these days, at least some of the time. Anyone who offers to help lug all that heavy equipment around is going to be popular. And remember to investigate all the foreign news companies working in London: there are lots.
If DRAMA and FEATURE FILMS take your fancy this is one area of the industry where there is a clear hierarchy in the camera department. Large features will have large camera departments, usually with a camera trainee attached. If you can latch onto such a team then a formal career path is available. From trainee, to clapper-loader, focus puller, operator, d.o.p (director of photography). But the industry is small in this country, so it probably helps to know someone. Oh, and if you do get to the top, give us a job !
From the occasional jobs I've done in the MUSIC INDUSTRY I suspect it's also who you know and what you've shot before which are the most important aspects. The same goes for ADVERTISING.
A lot of television is made for trade and industry puposes. Training films, information films, etc. This side of the industry, known as the CORPORATE sector, offers possibilities. Large corporations will have their own audio-visual departments, and may enjoy relatively large budgets. The skills needed are similar and they may well have a formal recruitment strategy.
SOME GENERAL TIPS. Be prepared to work for next to nothing for a little while in order to gain experience (edited February 2012) but do please read up on the rules governing work experience. There has been a lot of abuse of interns by unscrupulous employers who pretend to be offering work experience but are really just exploiting young people as free labour. This is illegal and frankly abhorrent, but sadly very poorly policed by the authorities. There are strict rules governing what constitutes work experience and if you find yourself being royally shafted do please consider reporting the abuse. The internet is full of advice on this topic: This site is a good place to inform yourself on the issue... There are thousands of small production companies out there working to very tight budgets who will welcome extra hands if they're cheap. Once again, be prepared for rejection, it happens to everyone, be prepared to work hard (12 hour days are fast becoming the norm), take criticism on the chin, watch and listen. Keep an open mind about photography. There are no absolute rules. There are a thousand ways to light a scene, no single one is right. Listen to the people who edit your material. Ask them what more they would like and then on the next job remember to include it. Look at what you like on TV and ask yourself how the cameraman achieves that look. Television is a team effort. Some of the best shots start as suggestions from the sound department, the sparks, the PA. Things that you may think break the rules sometimes end up working wonderfully. Experiment, but remember to deliver the basic shots first. Unless you're shooting on film, most editors will be glad if you give them more than they need. And remember, above all, it's who you know that counts so don't upset anyone unnecessarily.They may be in a position to hire or fire you in the future.
That's about all I can manage at the moment. My apologies if I don't answer any emails directly, but I hope this helps you. Good luck with whatever you do.
I almost forgot to say that this really is one of the BEST JOBS you could have. At the risk of sounding arrogant, I have glimpsed the minds and lives of presidents, prime-ministers, rich people, poor people, the most worthy and the most dastardly of people, I have travelled far and wide, and I've had the satisfaction of seeing my work crafted by skilled directors into some great documentaries. And still they pay me to do this ...?!
Back to Contact Me or my homepage
