> Quicktime H.264
(47.3mb)
> iPod Compatible
(2.9mb)
> Watch in Flash
(2mb progressive)
> Quicktime H.264
(36.7mb)
> iPod Compatible
(2.9mb)
> Watch in Flash
(1.4mb progressive)
> Quicktime H.264
(23.8mb)
> iPod Compatible
(1.9mb)
> Watch in Flash
(952kb progressive)
> Quicktime H.264
(31.7mb)
> iPod Compatible
(1.9mb)
> Watch in Flash
(1.4mb progressive)
> Quicktime H.264
(5mb)
> iPod Compatible
(2.1mb)
> Watch in Flash
(676kb progressive)
> Quicktime H.264
(31.8mb)
> iPod Compatible
(1.9mb)
> Watch in Flash
(1.5mb progressive)
The Sci Fi Channel in Australia launched a new set of on air idents last week. Being the thematic channel that they are, these idents are very much “on message”, reflecting the channels programming, but also through the use of the CCTV concept, creating a strong and unified image for the channels brand.
Speaking of the channels brand, the Australian off shoot of Sci Fi are yet to commit to adopting the recently announced Syfy rebrand, which although heavily criticised, I personally think is one of the more elegant and creative name changes of late.
As interesting as clipping my toenails.
reply
I thought these IDs were really different to any other IDs that are out there. BDA Creative did a really great job producing something out of the box that over time will be really engage the viewer. They just stand out from the glossy logo crap that assults you on some channels in every Ad break!
reply
Nice concept and well executed… really cuts through amongst other overly flashy/effects driven idents!
reply
Stupid idea, bad execution, awful result.
reply
Chowchillah Reply:
April 25th, 2009 at 11:55 pm
“Stupid idea” my butt. These idents are brilliant and epic. And not just Gilgamesh epic. Kinda like “Cloverfield-on-an-acid-trip” epic.
Very well executed.
reply
Marco Reply:
April 28th, 2009 at 3:58 am
What a poet!
No, really, let’s examine it.
It’s often difficult to see what’s actually is happening. The final trick is so tiny or subtle or cheap, that one needs to watch the clips at least two times. This is not good for a communication job, that should be straight. If the intent is to tease the viewer, this doesn’t mean that the viewer has not to be caught at his first glance.
And by watching the clip two times is not due to any catch at all: because the second time I watch the clip and understand what the hell is that final trick on the screen, then I feel disappointed, because it’s less then what I expected.
The quality that theoretically should mimic a poor/actual shooting, simply looks cheap and dirty.
Lastly, do they in some way reinforce or communicate the channel brand? I don’t think so at all.
Look at the ‘repeat’ movie: what’s the sense? it is so poor and weak…
That’s just my opinion.
Being different from the mass, from the common things we daily see, doesn’t mean that’s good regardless of any other principle.
reply
Skintw Reply:
April 28th, 2009 at 9:39 am
Surely the point of of these viral style Idents is to ‘get people talking’ … without even realising it you’ve done just that – well done Marco you clever man!!
So Marco how do you know what the production process was, hey? How do you know it is bad quality. Did you ever think it was a conscious decision and although it was shot well and cleanly and beautifully, it was then treated and played with by Designers and Animators? Are your expectations for greatness just that you are an overly critical movie goer who likes the big obvious effects driven scenes. The kind that you don’t have to think about, that you get in one sitting? Perhaps you should just shut up and put up some of your own work and let us critique it to oblivion and back. Maybe think about appreciting what they are trying to do and not just say it looks cheap and weak.
reply
@ Skintw:
Nope, talking about them don’t give them power or turn them more meaningful. The game is not played here where we’re just discussing about it, but on screen, when the viewer will judge the idents.
@ Harry: what??? what’s the point here? Should I be a director, designer, creative or something like that to get the chance to express my opinion? come on….
who allow you to say that I’m a fx-fan? do you know me?? do you even actually read what I wrote???
I never wrote I don’t like handy cam like shooting or simple shooting or poor quality if this would *really* serve the right cause. In these idents the basic look is just a fault due to a strong concept that’s missing . It would exactly the same if we would see a cool fx and design work on a poor concept clip: in that case the fx wouldn’t not save the final critique from being negative. So, please, don’t talk about fx, movie stuff and other amenities, but talk only about the real concept and how the brand here is being treated.
reply