(06-01-2019 08:48 )babelover48 Wrote: The camera operator have never been Studio66's strongest point whether daytime or night shows IMO
No, on nights at least, I see it as a fairly recent disease; one resulting from ill-considered cost cutting by the operators and that, at its worst, is really crippling to the number of punters that continue to invest in the shows. (DBS seem designed to exploit a lack of cameramen if anything.) Technicians like Afroman used to know how to get in there, supporting their performers in creating the right elements in order to bring in more trade, while working within the rules. Now we get glorified policeman of the airwaves, waving tit tape at the day girls, visibily wincing with the camera and punching up the black logo of death as the lazy sledgehammer solution to all and sundry ills.
Consider how it has become like this in relation to compliance...
Are there many personelle that stick to these bts jobs at the studios long term? Are there many guys back there (or any even) that were in the industry at the times of the proper Ofcom investigations? It is now over 4 years since any operator was even found in breach on any compliance area. More than that since they held the regular gaze of the regulator.
There have been many recent examples of the downright weirdness this distance from Ofcom's judgements is throwing up. (Cara B was logoed the other day for putting a superhero stocking mask over her head!*) As ever these things are some young bod's intrepretation of vague regulations he has
no recent frame of reference for as to what would actually result in a breach. Even back in the day, Ofcom were notorious about reinterpreting their definitions whenever they felt like passing a new judgement. What chance have these guys got of guessing at them now?
All the content personelle from those days are long gone from Ofcom. And no matter what correspondence the operators receive from the regulator, nothing has been tested in years and everyone, outside of us ravenous punters, seems happy with the inevitable drift to visual tameness this produces. In general most prods will play ultra safe unable as they are to decifer the actual bounderies with any precision. No one on here or on the inside has valid experience under the current Ofcom regime because simply no official investigation has yet happened under their watch...
The lack of financial drive towards the challenging of visual boundaries is another major factor of course. (The channels seem to have come to the conclusion a good while ago that denial of decent visuals can work just as well at instigating punter interactivity as anything else.) Where there is no perceived 'need', there will never be any consistent boundary pushing worthy of the name.
* If the assumption was that this represented an overt representation of a non-mainstream sexual fetish, then how is it any different from a babe thrusting her bare soles directly into camera? Why is one kink allowed and the other not?!