The best(and sometimes the worst) promos around! Have something you'd like to share? Email me at firstname.lastname@example.org
The first looked horribly out of date for 1998, while the second looked a few years ahead of its time. Also, the '98 version looks like someone had way too much fun with After Effects, and the lighting was boring to me. The '99 version has much better lighting/video coloring and more subtle digital compositing.
Simple answer - first one was done in-house. The second one was hired out to the firm that later evolved into Hothaus (who is still working with the station to this date).
99 IS way better. Seems to move faster even though they're both :60's.I was a Special Projects Producer in that market in the late 90's and remember them both.Now as a vo guy working to get imaging work like that, it's interesting to see the two styles.Thanks for posting!
The 99 version was definately done by Hothaus. Great use of wide angle lenses, timelapsing provides great pacing, superb dramatic lighting on talent, excellent VO work and tight editing. Custom music I believe by Stephen Arnold. What a difference going "out of House" can make.
Post a Comment