After compiling the results of interviews with our panel of church tech directors about image magnification (IMAG), the responses were so extensive this article would have been at least 6,000 words-or more than four times longer than it is.
The length and depth of the responses demonstrate that IMAG is a lively, sometimes controversial topic. Sadly some churches still want to do video for the wrong reasons. Some want to do it because it's cool, some think it's expected if they're doing contemporary worship, some thing it's a first step toward television, others think they have to do it if they're going to compete with the megachurch down the street.
The technical directors we interviewed come from a wide range of churches across the country. They include: Jonathan Davis, technical director, Bethlehem Baptist Church Minneapolis, Minn.; Robb MacTavish, video director, Flatirons Community Church, Lafayette, Colo.; Marcus Hammond, media director, Pleasant Valley Baptist Church, Liberty, Mo.; Mark Hanna, video director, Hope Community Church, Cary, N.C.; Nicholas Rivero, video director, Nashville, Tenn.
CPM: When is IMAG needed, and when is it not?
MacTavish: IMAG is needed when the farthest seat in the house either has an obstructed view of the stage or [presents] difficulty connecting with the what's happening on the stage. IMAG is not needed when the sole intent is to be ‘cool' or attempt to falsely increase the production value of the service.
Hammond: IMAG is not needed when the facial expressions of the speaker/pastor can be seen with the naked eye from the row of seats furthest away from the speaking position.
CPM: When deciding for or against IMAG, do you consider room size alone, or room size and configuration?
Rivero: I base my overall decision for or against IMAG on room size. I could go into depth about what size of a room is necessary, but I don't like to use IMAG for anything smaller than 2,000.
MacTavish: Different room sizes and configurations can drive the need for IMAG. Most commonly when the depth of the room exceeds 100 feet, or the line of sight of the stage is limited, IMAG should be considered.
CPM: Can IMAG be a distraction in some rooms?
Hanna: Absolutely. In fact it is far easier for it to be a distraction than to be done well. The only ‘up' side is that it's also the most forgiving. Lighting and sound mis-cues get noticed; with worship-based IMAG, your congregation is used to seeing lots of camera shots. Therefore, some mistakes will be chalked up to creativity and some will be lost in the success of the service.
MacTavish: IMAG can be distracting when a system is designed with less than professional quality equipment; enthusiastic directors are cutting too fast or too often; or inexperienced camera operators are unable to track a person, maintain a steady shot or hold focus.
CPM: A simple IMAG system might only have two cameras; where would you put them?
Rivero: If I have two cameras, I'm going to aim to cover the logistical side of IMAG. I'm going to put them both front and center to best cover speakers, personalities, and the less creative side of IMAG.
Davis: The other way you could go is with a straight-on shot and an additional side cover shot at something like 45-degrees off axis.
CPM: As you add cameras (say going to three, four or five cameras) where do those go?
Hammond: Any additional cameras would be for special applications, such as wide establishing shots, tight baptism shots, music cutaways (keyboards, drums, etc.), and special cues in various places around the room, or even outside of the room.
MacTavish: These additional cameras would be located either in front of the stage, or on stage; handheld or stationary; with or without an operator.
CPM: How about screen placement? Is front or rear projection preferable or does it depend totally on the room?
Davis: Screen placement and projection type are as dynamic as the rooms they serve. Sometimes finding something that works is more difficult than it appears and you have to run through seemingly odd solutions to find what ends up being the right fit for the room.
MacTavish: The most desirable screen placement for IMAG is stage left and stage right, slightly turned toward the viewing audience. Screens should be placed at the highest viewing point possible, without being blocked by lights, speakers, catwalks, or other installed fixtures. Projector placement normally is determined by the room. Although rear projection screens cost more, they can be beneficial due to the gains in brightness, contrast and overall clarity.
Hammond: I prefer a center screen with IMAG and/or graphics on side screens, mainly for the purpose of keeping the eye of most viewers (seated center) focused toward the center, which is where the pastor is speaking from. Screen height is very important. So many churches have their screens near the ceiling, which forces people to look up-and that can be disconnecting from what's happening on the stage. Screens at eyes level, just above the heads of the talent, are ideal if possible. I prefer rear projection, partially for aesthetics, but also for the controlled projection environment it allows.
CPM: Where do you put master control? In the room or somewhere else? Are there advantages/disadvantages to master control being in the room or somewhere else?
Hanna: I definitely prefer being able to see the stage, mainly because if you can't physically see the stage you are completely reliant on cameras to know what is going on, and that means there will be things you never see.
MacTavish: The disadvantages of the master control being in the room are the multiple potential distractions: the video monitor wall, use of the verbal communication system, and general commotion caused by the operators. One advantage is being part of what's happening in the room.
The disadvantage of master control located in an enclosed room is the potential disconnect with the action happening in the room. The advantage is an enclosed environment in which the IMAG team can actively communicate without the concern of disruption to the audience.
A hybrid approach would be a fully enclosed master control room, overlooking the stage, behind a glass wall or window [that] would assist in connecting with what's happening in the room.
CPM: For smaller churches just getting started with IMAG, what advice would you offer?
MacTavish: A good team will require excellent equipment, adequate training and an eye for the camera. When looking at equipment, a solid foundation such as fluid head tripods, cameras, long lenses, switchers, and a verbal communication system are all important-but most important is to not commit to a system that can't be successfully run by volunteers.
Rivero: Do it right. I highly advise against trying to do IMAG without planning appropriately for it.
Hammond: I recommend focusing on quality equipment, even if you have less of it, rather than lots of low-quality cameras with small sensors and low-lumen projectors. Start small, but high-quality.
Davis: Doing IMAG creates new expectations for a congregation. Personally, I'd run a couple of tests before saying ‘yes we are going to move in this direction.' Take an opportunity like a couple of special services. Perhaps Good Friday and Easter Sunday. Rent the appropriate equipment to do it well and see how it goes.
Hanna: It's expensive and it's easy to mess up, so don't do it unless you have to. But if you have to do it, do the research, talk with other tech people, find out what they use and why and then figure out what is going to work best for you in all the areas that matter to you.
CPM: What place do pan-tilt-zoom [PTZ] cameras have in church IMAG? Can PTZs and live camera ops live in harmony together?
Davis: A PTZ operator and live camera ops can easily work well if there is a good director calling the shots. Having that director close with the PTZ op is also a benefit, as it helps the director recognize the limitations of what a PTZ is able to do.
Hanna: It is possible to have a system that uses PTZs, tripods and handhelds. However, you need to make sure the cameras all produce a similar-looking image. If the cameras all look really different, it is very distracting.
Rivero: I think you can do both. I always recommend having at least one manned camera because of the flexibility to quickly cover any curve balls. I would not put all the pressure on one controller and one operator; it limits your flexibility because PTZs can't move as quickly or precisely.
CPM: Can you share some final words of wisdom regarding IMAG?
Hammond: Shoot for the environment, whether that be broadcast or IMAG, or both. You can have all the equipment you ever wanted, but if you don't have quality people to run it and the knowledge and training to adequately maximize its potential, you're not getting the full value out of the gear. Regular training and team building/recruiting (we always need more cam ops) are essential.
Rivero: Practice. More than anything, get people on cameras. Also, never be negative towards your crew, ever. Your crew is a direct reflection of you as a director. Always be uplifting and encouraging more than anything.
Davis: A good director working conservatively can make bad camera ops look good. Test moves and takes before you do them, think outside the box and rehearse hard moves. IMAG isn't the solution to your problem; it's just a tool that can be very beneficial or detrimental. It is meant to complement what is already going on, not steal the show.
MacTavish: Very generally speaking, my words of advice: cut more intentionally and less often. Don't do IMAG until it's absolutely necessary. Entering into the world of IMAG is costly when you consider the financial impact of cabling, screens, projectors, cameras, lenses, tripods, switchers, recorders, monitors, maintenance, and most importantly ... the number of staff and or volunteers it takes to run it all.
