Woodworking TV

[jlawrence]

It could be done in a 'home' workshop. Just using multiple cctv type cameras mounted everywhere. There would be a lot of post production needed to patch it all together though.

 

[lurker]

It could be done in a 'home' workshop. Just using multiple cctv type cameras mounted everywhere. There would be a lot of post production needed to patch it all together though.

Why do I have visions of Steve M. wetting himself laughing :duno:

 

[wizer]

I think Norm had a phenomenal run, but then woodworking is almost like the default bloke hobby in the US. Over here, the woodworking hobby market is phenomenally small. Like I've said before. I think the hobby is on the up. But it's still a tiny market. The good thing about even poor programmes, is that they get people interested.

 

[Steve Maskery]

It could be done in a 'home' workshop. Just using multiple cctv type cameras mounted everywhere. There would be a lot of post production needed to patch it all together though.

Why do I have visions of Steve M. wetting himself laughing :duno:

Protection duly fitted.
S

 

[Ironballs]

I think where a lot of these programmes on Discovery succeed is on the human element and often, sadly, where there is conflict. Man in shed is not going to achieve that.

I personally would like something along the lines of what Philly said, but with an emphasis on modern design, can use traditional techniques but the design has to be modern and striking. Can't see TV execs being interested in knocking out repro secretaires or bureaus

 

[wizer]

I don't know. Whilst we bemoan the lack of woodworking programmes on the TV. Is it really such a problem? There's much better information on the web. Those old programmes will always be re-run to help attract new blood to the hobby. But, personally, is really only a small issue.

 

[Alan Holtham]

As usual, thanks to all for the helpful comments. Its early days yet so lets see what everybody else thinks.

However, as others have pointed out the pure woodworking fraternity is very small and no matter how passionate we are there is perhaps only a limited potential audience. The answer of course is to give the programme more general appeal to appease the broadcasters but then you immediately alienate the enthusiasts.

Striking the balance is the key and of course you cannot please all of the people. Which is why I have posed the question. I am lucky enough that making the programmes is only a relatively small part of the problem, getting the right content and then getting them placed so that they can be viewed by a wider audience is a massive mountain to climb, but I am getting my climbing boots on!

Thanks again to you all, lets here some more views.

Cheers,

Alan

 

[Alf]

I dunno, I think there is probably a market for showing how things are made, even for the non-woodworker. There's something essentially fascinating in watching something being created virtually before your eyes. But getting the right mix of information and entertainment is the (tricky) key.

 

[Smudger]

And yet, ****, there are programmes on tattooing and two guys putting up sheds!! Perhaps new programmes on woodworking would create a new generation and large audience base. Norm's programmes must have started many people on the craft; I know he started me off once I knew what was possible.

Sorry, Ken, I missed your post. I completely agree about Norm. The first one I saw he was demonstrating a biscuit jointer for the first time, and I was blown away! I never thought I'd have one (now up to 3). It enthused me, I read his books, and then I got involved here and discovered hand tools! I'm sure that a good programme would do the same for the 'next generation'.

I still can't make a simple box, but I enjoy it no end, thanks to Mr Abrams.

 

[StevieB]

OK, I will have a bash at answering this. A large number of people seem to have been inspired by Norm to take up woodworking as a hobby. He is often, whether rightly or wrongly, held up as the 'gold standard' for TV woodworking. The question is - why? He doesn' tend to have segments outside the workshop other than introducing the piece he is going to make, he doesn't have changing camera angles and jaunty music. What he does have is realistic furniture projects, he shows you the construction methods he uses and leaves you with the feeling that 'I could do that', or at least 'I understand how he did that'.

Now look at the other end of the spectrum - Tommy Walsh, shedheads and bottom of the pile Rico Daniels and Anton Fitzpatrick. What is it about those that we do not like? For me Rico Daniels as the Salvager doesn't seem to take any care in what he does. Doesn't measure properly, doesn't finish anything properly and uses odd materials to create one off but impractical pieces. Anton Fitspatrick is the same - doesn't seem to take any care over anything. The tool section with Mike Smith is simply a joke.

Then in between these two extremes are things like John Revel, Smith and Sweetman, David Free and Paul Bradburn. These have elements of both extremes - Smith and Sweetman is too 'cheerful chappy' for me. John Revel I quite like but he never actually shows you how he does anything. A guest presenter such as Ron Fox presenting routers is fine, but lets see the router used as well in the construction of the piece being made. David and Paul seem to have gone down the Norm route fairly closely - there was a rumour it was called the great british woodshop specifically for the US TV market. I liked that you could see the piece being made properly. Over reliance on the Trend M+T jig was a little annoying though - I don't need 3 minutes on how to set it up on every show.

So on to what I would want in a programme. As stated - use of affordable tools. I am going to take a stab that this programme may be sponsored by Record - so use a table saw most people can afford - a grand is probably an upper limit for most serious hobby woodworkers and if you want to interest the general DIY fraternity you are mostly looking at the sub £200 B&Q special. A 5k Rojek is not going to be realistic. Same applies to bandsaws and handtools - a shelf of LN planes look good on TV but is not feasible for most of us. You need to decide where to pitch it. This is where Norm falls down - just pop the hugely expensive tiger maple jointed boards through your 3ft stationary belt sander becomes fantasy land for most people. I will ignore finishing then donkey brown or battleship grey.

Regarding space - within a 1 car garage would be great, but just not feasible for filming purposes. I don't have a major problem with that, although you could do a single programme on solutions for a small workshop I guess.

Projects - difficult one this as everyone wants different things. But if possible go for things the majority of people in small shops could make. Bedside table, CD rack, Bed frame, coffee table, jewellery box and so on. Making a dining room table or a 7ft tallboy, while interesting, is not something most people will ever do themselves. Steer clear of the Anton Fitzpatrick / Boys in the Wood / Rico Daniels Micky Mouse type stuff though please!

Projects or tools - John Revel did tools quite well I thought, at a basic level anyway. Anton Fitzpatrick and Mike did them very badly. I can see a programme with the first 10 minutes say on a particular tool and then a project made using that tool eg router, or table saw, or japanese pull saw, or bevel chisel and so on.

Projects or workshop set-up - I would tend to projects. John Revel already did workshop setup, albeit a cow shed not a 1 car garage, but workshop design is so personal and so fluid that no programme will be able to address everthing everyone wants.

In the shop or out and about. Again difficult one as these are to me, two different things. I would happily watch half an hour of an expert in their workshop. eg Andrew Crawford on boxes, the next week David Charlesworth on handtools, David Savage on fine furniture and so on. People who would inspire. 5 minutes of this in the middle of a Norm style show would not be enough - this is what John Revel did to a certain extent and led to a very 'jumpy' programme.

Think that is quite enough from me for now!

Steve.

 

[wizer]

I like that idea Steve. A woodworking show that is aimed at serious beginners. i.e those that are just about to get serious about it and turn it into a hobby, rather than DIY. This means entry level, but good quality tools. Not massive - out of reach equipment. A good mix of hand tools (not gloat worthy ones). Like I said elsewhere, I think smith and sweetman could have had a good format on their hands. Viewing a 'student' learning on the job would be valuable IMHO. The student should be intelligent, but not cocky/gobby. The teacher should be comfortable in front of the camera and capable of teaching both the viewer and the student. If it's real then it will work. If it's a couple of no hopers larking about on the camera, many remote controls will be embeded in tv screens (at least in my house anyway). Seeing a student learn over 6 or 10 episodes how to make say 3-5 pieces would be much more interesting than seeing a Tall Boy made in under 30mins. It's not realistic.

 

[Smudger]

An excellent and thoughtful post, Steve. I agree with you on all points.

I also like Tom's idea of the teacher/student or master/apprentice format. Why it didn't work too well in S&S was that Dennis was just too inarticulate in front of the camera, and so the lad took over all the explanations. To be fair, he wasn't too bad apart from the gluing and what seemed to be amazingly high material costs. With the right personnel I think it would work - after all, Dave Wellman (New Home DIY) manages to 'teach' a bit without being patronising or smug (à la Tommy Walsh).

Do you think that the format should be 30 minutes? Programmes on Choppers, tattoos and Hot Rods are longer. Should the project be completed in a single broadcast?

 

[wizer]

If the presenters are taking their time, I have no problem with a project taking more than one episode. It's the build I'm interested in, not the end result. Or rather: not the 'unveiling'. That said, I see no problem sitting through 1 hour of woodworking. As you say, it's the same as all the other shows. If Shed pics it up, then it'll probably be played back to back all day anyway. That seems to be a format that works for them.

 

[studders]

I'd quite like to see a UK version of the woodworkingonline podcasts. Maybe with a slightly different angle though, perhaps showing how things are designed and made rather than 'How to set up your table saw' type things although there is a place for them too I suppose. Problem is I don't think there is the volume of sales over here to justify a commercial group doing it. That leaves us with amateur productions which, in too many cases, are very amateur and, sometimes misleading or dangerous.

 

[jlawrence]

Actually, thinking about it, what is needed for the cameras etc.
A decent size room so they're not tripping over all the various machines ?
Why not just use say a triple garage within which is created a single garage size shop. That would leave plenty of room for moving the cameras etc around.

 

[wizer]

I really don't think the size of the workshop is an issue. It doesn't matter where they shoot it. It's the content\format that matters.

 

[Smudger]

I really don't think the size of the workshop is an issue. It doesn't matter where they shoot it. It's the content\format that matters.

Quite. Something the size of a school workshop, I should imagine, in order to get cameras, lights and sound in. But we wouldn't be looking at the building, we'd be focusing on the job in hand.

 

[bugbear]

I think where a lot of these programmes on Discovery succeed is on the human element and often, sadly, where there is conflict. Man in shed is not going to achieve that.

Have you seen the "birth of ..." series on Quest? Guy does stuff without conflict. Mainly scenes of man using a spanner!

No artificial deadlines, no pseudo-conflict, no phone-votes.

My main objection is the lack of detail - there's an awful lot of "this will need a lot of work" ... "doesn't it look nice now I've done it" edits.

BugBear

 

[OPJ]

Steve, for what it's worth, you workshop does look a reasonable size on TV... I guess the camera lies!

I can vouch for a lying camera; its a bog standard garage ( I doubt a modern car would fit) with a little bit of extra depth. Cats are safe from being swung.

In which case - Steve, I think we need a workshop tour before you leave!! :wink:

 

[Steve Maskery]

You've had it, Olly!
I have tried every which way to get new camera angles to show stuff, just for the sake of variety as much as anything else. But it very difficult. The 'shop is just 10' wide at its narrowest, and only 12' at its widest. Shots across the room are very difficult. So that's why you are always looking down towards the personnel door or up towards the vehicle entrance. Both cause lighting problems, hence the "Workshop Essentials" board covering the windows.

Even to get these camera angles, I have to move machines out of the way. Fortunately most things are on wheels (TS, SCMS, BS, etc) so whilst it is inconvenient it is not actually that difficult. The biggest pain is if I have to set the scene for one shot, then reset for another, only to have to reset for the first again.

If I were making a TV series in a proper studio, I'd build a WS which had the footprint of a home WS, but which had no roof and only 2.5 sides. That way all the filming gear could be outside the actual working area. Stuck in a "real" workshop, even with a little set-up like mine, it is very cramped indeed.

Cheers
Steve