Old Timers: TV cameras shown in "Dog Day Afternoon"
 

Okay, you old timers... speak up! Who's had hands-on experience with those bizarre-looking TV camera portable packs like the ones shown in "Dog Day Afternoon"? Who made them? Is that the battery on the back (big as an entire Lowepro Nature Trekker)?

The only problem with being an old timer is memory recall. I want to say it was Philips or Norelco but something tells me it was some other company that isn't around anymore. The backpack had electronics in it but I don't recall if there was a battery there or not. I'm probably wrong but I'm wondering if the battery was seperate, like on a cart.

At that same time my station bought a little camera similar to a VHS camera, including the "quality". It recorded on something like audio tape. Didn't last very long as it was replaced by newer equipment later.

Sony, JVC and Panasonic all had portapacks suitable for ENG in the '70's. Do you have a date or picture of the units in question?

"Dog Day Afternoon" was released in 1975, which means it was filmed in 74 or 73. The cameras look like something right out of Johnny Quest or Lost in Space...the cameras are big light blue plastic square cut things, and attached to a big square, light blue plastic backpack. Really bizarre-looking.

VMI rings a bell as the possible manufacturer.

My best guess without seeing the camera would be the Sony VO-3800 3/4" U-Matic portapack. It was released in 1974 and weighted about 30 lbs. It was usually matched with the Sony DXC-1600 video camera. State of the art ENG in those days. Here's a link to pictures of the camera. Does it look like this?

I saw the movie not that long ago and also marvelled at those cameras. The electronics pack snaked over the back, permanently part of the camera, not like a separate deck/recorder. I seemed to remember the name "Norelco" written in old-school curly script on the back but that might have been the power of Rob Belic's suggestion!

The old RCA TK76 cams were light blue and "boxy looking". They also weighed a ton.

Could this be the camera, or are we talking an earlier generation?

Mike Avery

Jeff,

Not that model...that actually looks like a video camera. These are like Charles said... they "snaked" over the back (imagine the Varizoom shoulder mount, but actually seamlessly built into the camera). It looked like a plastic boxy thing that simply had a hole in the front for the lens and a hole in the back for the viewfinder, and then nothing else was really distinguishable as a camera. No separate lens unit or anything...not visible anyway...probably inside the casing.

Mike, here's the one you mention...that ain't it either. That still looks like a camera. The ones in "Dog Day Afternoon" looked much more futuristic than these. And if one of them was laying on the ground, I bet you'd have to take a second glance to figure out what they were.

Now I'm thinking it was IVC. They made a line of video recorders also. But I can't find anything on the web about it. I'll just bet I have an ad for this thing at home somewhere (I'm out of town).

How about this John?

Jeff,

The backpack is getting closer, but the camera still isn't the right one. Here's a very rough quick sketch, just to give you more of a hint. This is based on memory...but the thing that stands out is the fact that you didn't see any dials, switches, a distinguishable lens...nothing. Just a blue plastic casing with a hole at the end for a lens.

If you can find it anywhere you'll find it here.

In the early days of portable video cameras the camera and the decks were separate units.

[HA! I just noticed that Jeff points to the same site!! Honest, Jeff, I found this independently!]

I'm beginning to wonder if parts of it weren't a Hollywood prop. The Norelco portapack may have been used because it was used by Andy Warhol and was popular with certain art segments.

I remember something from another movie at a political convention, maybe '72, with the same cameras. Not to say that they weren't the identical props...!

Anyone remember the crazy helmet-cams from Albert Brooks' first movie, "Real Life"? Just watched that recently--it's actually become a very relevant movie with the advent of reality TV. And it's kinda cool when he holds up a circuit board and says "our camera doesn't use film, it records high quality images digitally onto these chips" or something like that. Worth a Netflix rental if you haven't seen it and find Albert Brooks amusing (which I do, certainly his earlier films).

Actually, I do remember ABC reporters on the floor of one of the political conventions (1976?) wearing those goofy backpack rigs with tall antennas poking out their headsets.

How far we have come...at least in technology...not politically <g>.

You may have seen them as blue but originally they were white. Yes, they are the same ones used at the conventions but no, they aren't on that website.

BTW, my old stations, KSD-TV and KSD Radio, were shown on one of those links. I wasn't there when those photos were taken (!) but there is a picture of a cartoon show I was on as a boy scout! That guy still does the occasional commercial here. Ol' Texas Bruce and "The Wrangler's Club"! (Yes, that was the 50s).

IIRC, those cameras were the first for ENG. Ikegami came out with theirs afterwards, I believe, and those bulky ones disappeared due to their weight.

I'm surprised that thelabguy site didn't show that since he likes ivc recorders so much, but I'm still guessing they were originally made by ivc.

Lads, I do believe this is the item, although I wish the picture of the poor guy wearing it was seen from the back so we could get a better look at the backpack. John Locke, what do you think?

True enough Rob, they are not blue--I wonder if they were painted for the movie (white=bad)

Charles,

The top two Norelcos aren't it, but the bottom photo of the Phillips PCP-90 is the closest yet. It's very angular though, and those in "Dog Day Afternoon" had that smooth 60s Jetson-rounded edges. Overall, more "plasticy" in appearance. But that's definitely the closest so far.

Norelco / Phillips PCP-90
 

If you scroll down to the bottom of the page, I believe you may have your answer.

I have no idea why they would have ever called this monster a "mini-cam"!

http://www.hesca.org/history/

also:

http://www.pharis-video.com/p3578.htm

Scroll down for various pictures.

Great movie!

RB

P.S. I'm not that old, the answer was only a couple of mouse clicks away!

Rick,

That's the same one mentioned in my last post. ;) It's close...but no cigar.

???
 

I don't know John.

If you zoom in (on the DVD) to the cameras you will clearly see the Norelco logo above the WNEW-TV lablel on both the camera and the backpack.

If you did a video comparison between the movie and the pictures in the pharis-video website as well as in the DeepFreeze website, you will see many features that are consistent with each other. Except for the lens configurations, the profile of the cameras are exactly alike.

Also, the waist belt harnesses are also consistent from the movie to the picture on the pharis-video website.

Remember that these cameras are being used as props in the movie so, the actual cameras may have been gussied up a bit for the big screen, if not, as Jeff suggested, they may have been made specifically as props. This would explain two things... A: Why the cameras are in pristine condition, if they are in-fact, actual news field cameras, and, B: The seemingly, smooth, one lens look of the cameras in the movie as opposed to the interchangeable look of the pictures.

If the cameras were specially built for the movie, I'd doubt that they would have put a real manufacturers name on the item. We use to go to great lengths to "greek out" brand names on items that were conspicuous in the picture.

I know pretty much nothing about old video cameras, but if you'd like to discuss the old Mitchell BNC, R35, or PanaVision PSR, now we're talking my cup of tea! (OK, maybe I am dating myself a little bit!) :(

RB

John,
Check your email. I just sent you a shot of the Dog Day Afternoon cameras (directly from the film footage).

Ding, ding, ding...we have a winner! Here's a shot of the cameras Ken sent.

Exactly!

Yeah but--yeah but--that's a still from the film, right? So...wasn't the question, what kind of cameras are these?? Have we decided they are prop versions of cameras of the day (which I agree that is what they look like)?

Charles,

Yeah...I'm waiting for someone to chime in and give some details. You think they're props?

They look more like flamethrowers or something. I wouldn't
want to stand opposite of those! <g> Heh.

I fired the question and still that Ken provided to Chuck Pharis who manages that vintage camera site and appears to be an authority on these things. Here's his response:

Hi, I have to say they look like a Norelco PCP-70, but the
lens is different. I have never seen a camera like that
before. If they were in a movie, there is a 99% chance,
they are a prop, and empty inside. em!I have three PCP 70s,
and they weigh a TON! See how the operators are holding
them!! NO WAY!!!! They look to me to be made out of wood. I
see no doors on the sides, so I am sure they are props.
See ya,
Chuck

Haw! Good props! I sent John several other stills from the film showing the camera even more clearly. I suspect that Chuck is right. The actors in the shots are swinging the cameras around like they're PD150's; there's very little feeling of mass to the handhelds or weight in those packs.

Still, on closer shots, they're darn convincing props. But I guess that's Hollywood!

Thanks for following-up on that Charles. It's very interesting and a stark reality check to see just how far video has come in 30 years.

It's only in recent years that prop TV cameras have become indistinguishable from the real thing. I well remember replica cameras that lacked much of the detail while approximating the shape. When you see press briefings or news events in movies these days, you might be assuming that you are seeing working Betacams since they appear to be just that. Chances are they are prop replicas that use actual Betacam shells, and are even weighted to about half the weight of the real thing. They use real Anton Bauer batteries and Mini-Cool lights so that when the trigger button is pressed, the tally light and Mini-Cool switch on. Otherwise all the switches are glued in position and the tape door does not open. Cost of each camera: $7000. And that's for a non-functioning camera, folks! Our main man Chris Hurd visited me on set while we were simulating a White House press conference and was particular impressed with these props.

Usually when I'm shooting a scene where these cameras are being held by extras, I end up having to explain how to hold them properly to at least half of the extras. Why is it, exactly, that the natural tendency is to hold these type of cameras with one hand on the viewfinder and the other on the top handle?

Hey! I wrote to Chuck Pharis about this and never got a response! You Hollywood-types have all the pull... ;)

Thanks for getting that information. Very interesting.

OK, I wrote a very detailed explanation of what you are looking at in this picture, but it seems to have mysteriously disappeared from this list. So, I will try again.

These cameras are the result of a joint project of CBS Labs and Thompson Electronics that took place in the early Seventies. Up to this time, the most popular "portable" production cameras were the PCP 60 and PCP 70, both from Norelco, which was the dominant manufacturer of television studio cameras at the time. (RCA, which also manufactured cameras, was confined mostly to NBC network and their o and o stations.)

One of the first results of the CBS/Thompson effort, the portable camera was the three tube monster you see in the picture. Actually, it was an improvement over the Norelco's, which were extremely heavy, in order to protect the tubes, and required the operator to carry a backpack filled with circuit boards and other electronics. All of this attached to a cable the size of a "horsec..k," which was the popular jargon for this cable.

The CBS/Thompson camera at least cut down on the weight factor considerably. The profile of the camera followed the outline of the tubes: the green tube pointing straight ahead, with the red tube on top and the blue on bottom, I believe. All three tubes were focused on an optical prism block, which received the image from the lens, which was inside the housing you see in the picture. The operator viewed the picture on a crt viewfinder that was mounted vertically, and the operator saw the image through a mirror, similar to a periscope. You can see just the top of the viewfinder in the picture.

The backpack is mostly microwave, and the signal was sent to a line-of-site dish that was hand-held, and from the dish was hard-wired to the remote truck.

Most likely, for the production of the movie, the local CBS outlet rented a remote truck, cameras, operators, etc, to the production. This would allow the production to get actual video footage at the same time the film cameras rolled, to insert into monitors/tv later on. I don't remember, but I would not be surprised if there is film footage that was shot inside the remote truck for the film.

At any rate, I promise you those are real cameras, and not "fabulous fakes." And people bitch about the weight of a PD150?

Wayne Orr, SOC