3 hours ago, Khan said:

Certainly, exterior scenes enhance the storytelling, but I don't think it matters, so long as the story itself is engaging.

 

I think it matters a hell of a lot. Days literally looks like total crap every time I tune in, but once you get past that the stories are actually pretty good. It's a shame as I really like Days but I would like it to look soooo much better.

Edited October 1, 20178 yr by Edward Skylover

8 hours ago, vetsoapfan said:

There were exterior scenes on various soaps during the 1950s to 1970s. TEON probably did more than any other soap, although outside footage was still relatively rare on that show too. OLTL on location in Central Park for Joe and Viki's second wedding in the early 1970s, and RH went to Ireland when Mary married Jack in the mid-1970s.

Re OLTL

Was the ceremony shown eg the voes etc or was it another case of visuals only as seemed to be more common in the 70s.

 

1n 72 ATWT went on location for Toma and Carol's wedding.Irna Phillips seemed fine with this as she commented favorably on this in an interview at that time as a new way of telling a story.

8 hours ago, Edward Skylover said:

I think it matters a hell of a lot. Days literally looks like total crap every time I tune in, but once you get past that the stories are actually pretty good.

 

But, if you notice the aesthetics BEFORE you notice the stories, then could you REALLY say that the stories are good?  I would think that the storytelling and acting would grab your attention first, and THEN the sets, costumes, lighting, music and other stuff.

 

I always go back to Bill Bell's words: all you need for a good scene are a man, a woman and a waterfall -- and who in the hell needs the waterfall?

Edited October 1, 20178 yr by Khan

1 hour ago, Khan said:

But, if you notice the aesthetics BEFORE you notice the stories, then could you REALLY say that the stories are good?  I would think that the storytelling and acting would grab your attention first, and THEN the sets, costumes, lighting, music and other stuff.

 

I always go back to Bill Bell's words: all you need for a good scene are a man, a woman and a waterfall -- and who in the hell needs the waterfall?

 

I see what you're saying. I do think the stories are more important than the aesthetics but I do think the aesthetics are important as a separate thing. The stories are what keep people watching, if it looks good that will draw people in. I HATE the way Days looks, but I really like the show. You can't take it seriously though as the exterior scenes look like a fairground.

 

It's a bit like finding a boyfriend. You're drawn in by what they look like but the real connection comes when you get to know them and form an attachment.

The sets can be so bad they pull away from the performances though.  Even with amazing talent.  Sometimes cheap looks like it.

 

I can handle the downgrade from the lux early 1990's, when most of the soaps sets looked as good as primetime.  But sometimes the sets are so harsh no performance can shine through.  That restaurant/club on GH that is very dark and the walls are dark blue often makes the actors look blue with the shitty lighting.  One time it looked like Anna's white jacket was blue, her teeth looked blue, her skin looked like she was ill.  That distracts from an amazing actress.

2 hours ago, titan1978 said:

The sets can be so bad they pull away from the performances though.  Even with amazing talent.  Sometimes cheap looks like it.

 

I can handle the downgrade from the lux early 1990's, when most of the soaps sets looked as good as primetime.  But sometimes the sets are so harsh no performance can shine through.  That restaurant/club on GH that is very dark and the walls are dark blue often makes the actors look blue with the shitty lighting.  One time it looked like Anna's white jacket was blue, her teeth looked blue, her skin looked like she was ill.  That distracts from an amazing actress.

 

I agree. Certainly now I've started paying more attention to Days, the acting isn't that bad - but the sets and extremely bright lighting do everything in their power to ruin the actors' performances.

Those external scenes in that park on GH never look good. And the show is set in New York and that park is so obviously California it doesn't mess. 

B&B has been doing outdoor shots regularly for probably ten years now. They have regular outdoor sets and everuthing looks seamless. Not only do they have that but they also go on out of town location shoots regularly. I loved when they used to send Steffy to Aspen was it? They should be the model for everyone especially Y&R. I can't understand how they're on the same network but Y&R's location shoots look so cheap and raggedy. B&B is lucky to have Ed Scott. I can't begin to express how foolish it was to let him leave Y&R. 

 

ATWT used to do regular location shoots in its final years and they looked good. Guiding Light of course did the experiment where they transformed completely to the British model of having standing outdoor sets and going on location every episode but it was ahead of its time. It also didn't help that the stories were SO bad that it just didn't work. Had the stories been better it would've been easy to put up with the learning curve but eventually I do think the show looked fine. 

I would think Y&R given it's ratings would have a bigger budget than B&B. I guess it helps B&B is only a half hour show in comparison. Must make all the difference

I agree on DAYS' sets and how it detracts from the overall experience of the show. @Edward Skylover DAYS' production values began to tank around early 2009 when their budget was slashed (which coincided with the ouster of Deidre Hall & Drake Hogestyn, plus the dismissals of Mary Beth Evans & Stephen Nichols... plus rumors of Kristian Alfonso & Peter Reckell taking drastic pay cuts). Before there was Horton Town Square, a lot of scenes in 2009-2010 took place on the Salem pier. 

 

I equate Horton Town Square with Guiding Light's Main Street, used from 2005-2008. HTS at least looks clean and makes sense, aesthetically speaking. GL's Main Street was a hodge-podge of ugly. 

 

With the decrease of set usage and an increase of redressing sets and calling them different locations, it blurs the sense of watching a real town; a real community. It also blurs my memory of when certain scenes took place and certain places with certain people. It all becomes a big blur of BLUE ROOM. That g0ddamn blue room, redressed to be a hospital waiting room, various hospital offices, Horton Center's office, Club TBD's back office, a judge's office to decide custody cases, a freakin' motel room, a supply closet... everything, you name it. Next year, it'll be a revamped Brady Pub. 

 

Another part of what decreases the overall soap experience is that everything is way too coincidental now. We thought soaps were full of coincidences before, but nowadays when there's only 2 or 3 public meeting spots, it's SO conveniently easy to run into someone, to spy on someone, to overhear someone, to find someone who's hiding, etc. etc.  Can't find a convict on the run? Just check Horton Town Square or that park bench with the giant bush walls. 

 

And something that really detracted (that they've improved upon in the past couple years) for me is when they stopped bothering to include ambient outdoor noise. Whenever a character was "outside," it was/is dead silent. No chirping birds, no low howls of the wind, no crickets at night, no natural ambiance. Dead silence just augments the fact that they're standing inside a cold studio. 

 

Okay, end of production values rant... for now.

 

Edited October 2, 20178 yr by Gray Bunny

18 minutes ago, Gray Bunny said:

I agree on DAYS' sets and how it detracts from the overall experience of the show. @Edward Skylover DAYS' production values began to tank around early 2009 when their budget was slashed (which coincided with the ouster of Deidre Hall & Drake Hogestyn, plus the dismissals of Mary Beth Evans & Stephen Nichols... plus rumors of Kristian Alfonso & Peter Reckell taking drastic pay cuts). Before there was Horton Town Square, a lot of scenes in 2009-2010 took place on the Salem pier.

 

Thanks for the info. I wonder if there are any old eps I can watch anywhere.

9 hours ago, Edward Skylover said:

 

Thanks for the info. I wonder if there are any old eps I can watch anywhere.

There are playlists on youtube with years of episodes. But they are not public because for the last two years, Sony has been taking down every DAYS related clips and channels on youtube.

On 2017-10-01 at 4:56 PM, Khan said:

 

But, if you notice the aesthetics BEFORE you notice the stories, then could you REALLY say that the stories are good?  I would think that the storytelling and acting would grab your attention first, and THEN the sets, costumes, lighting, music and other stuff.

 

I always go back to Bill Bell's words: all you need for a good scene are a man, a woman and a waterfall -- and who in the hell needs the waterfall?

My friends and family who don't watch soaps usually mock them for how cheap they look. Sure they make fun of the acting (mostly because of actors like Ronn Moss and Drake Hogestyn) but it's always the production values they comment on first.

I loved when Emily and Royce went to the Amalfi Coast in Italy on ATWT. But my favorite "outdoor shot" was when Frannie was trapped with Daryl on that ski transport during the (endless) Carolyn Crawford murder mystery.

17 minutes ago, Scrapple said:

I loved when Emily and Royce went to the Amalfi Coast in Italy on ATWT. But my favorite "outdoor shot" was when Frannie was trapped with Daryl on that ski transport during the (endless) Carolyn Crawford murder mystery.

I loved both as well.

On 01/10/2017 at 8:03 AM, Paul Raven said:

Re OLTL

Was the ceremony shown eg the voes etc or was it another case of visuals only as seemed to be more common in the 70s.

 

 

They showed the ceremony itself, as I recall. The filmed material was gorgeous.