puredrifting
Major Contributor
I don't think we're talking about the Canon layoffs anymore. We should be.
C100: Canon layoffs
- Thread starter scorsesefan
- Start date
- Status
You should repost from the NAB'19 thread because my comments on that are, "yes, sir".
In terms of the industry there are two concurrent trends as they have been since the world went digital. Then there's the third trend that has been taking place since the mid-2000's.
First is that, in the digital-electronic universe, the decline in prices and improvement in quality has been much faster than in the outgoing analog world. One sample that was mentioned in that "Fro knows photo" review of Nikon P1000 - a $1,000 camera can now provide a 4K zoom that, prior to that, was only achievable with $200,000+ studio lenses. You sit in the bleachers and get a closeup of a home plate. OK, it's not a constant zoom but it's still x125 at $1,000, camera included. Mind boggling.
The second trend is that the electronic photo-video product is getting - and I would assert that it has already gotten there - to the point that a human eye can no longer discern any differences in resolution and the dynamic range above the most basic performance. That gives very little incentives to the professional photo-videographers to invest in higher priced gear. Hypothetically speaking, Sony/Panasonic/Nikon could have made an inexpensive video camera off A7III/S1/Z6 sensor at $3,000-$3,500. FF 4K video, AF, ProRes Raw, low light/high ISO, et cetera. that would rival the ARRI quality for about 1/20th of the price. Or, if not ARRI, then C700, which is good enough.
And the third trend has been mobile/smart phones. As was posted in the Industry News yesterday, there are 8K (in faux form) 48 MPX models coming out already. That pretty much takes care of the APSC sub-30 MPX market (and there are no 30 MPX APSC cameras out there yet ... exclamation marks ... Sony's sensors top out at 24 and the only way to get above is by the pixel shifting that is currently only available on several Panny and Oly MFT units)
Now, combine all the trends and the entire industry looks kind of doomed.
PS. Publicly, the major photo-video company management put out a notion that, once folks got the taste of photography with their smartphones, some of them will upgrade into a higher performing ILC product. Certainly, this is true in some cases ... however, the mobile sales are in billions, albeit also topping out, while the ILC's are flopping. These are not concurrent but rather countervailing trends.
George Loch
Well-known member
Isn't this the same conversation when the industry went from Betacam to Dvcam? Everyone thought the professional market was doomed. In the end, it always comes down to telling a story. Gear will never be a solution, just a tool.
I still think there is a place for a C200-priced camera in the market when you consider what it takes to rig up a $2000 camera to the same function (audio, ND, battery, cage, etc.). It's not the same cost, but close enough that the integration of a proper cinema camera makes the price difference worth it.
-gl
I still think there is a place for a C200-priced camera in the market when you consider what it takes to rig up a $2000 camera to the same function (audio, ND, battery, cage, etc.). It's not the same cost, but close enough that the integration of a proper cinema camera makes the price difference worth it.
-gl
Original DV cams were in SD far below the current 6K/8K offerings. That meant that, each generation provided a combination of improvements in everything from the image quality to workflow and that allowed the manufacturers to fight against the price slide. The price slide, nonetheless, was taking place simultaneously. But, once it hit a 4K barrier, any further improvements have been mostly marginal and connected to the whole electronic industry (processing power, media, etc.). That turned competition into an all out price war. A current $3,000 stills model has the performance of a medium format camera of a recent vintage. Even the medium format cameras themselves are now available for less than $5,000, whereas only a few years ago, the entry level was $15,000-$20,000 and the high end in the $50,000. The video options such as FS-7, C200, EVA1, UMP are performing on a level of much higher priced cameras of a few years ago as well (OK, they don't have the global shutter of F-55 but they have other features).
And this leads to what PureDrifting brought up in the Industry News thread yesterday. A sub-$10,000 shooting package brings a lot more people into the business simply based on the supply&demand curve. And more people entering any labor market means greater competition and lower fees/wages. And the trend is for cheaper and cheaper gear and more and more people entering the industry. After all, there are about 140 film schools in the US alone. Multiply it by several hundred graduating students annually and you get a different labor force composition than before. The pyramid really widens at the bottom and drags everyone toward it.
puredrifting
Major Contributor
Agreed, for us old geezer pros. But look at what twenty something and even thirty somethings are shooting with: full rigged, plastic BMPCC 4ks and A7s R IIIs, S1s, GH5s, XT-3s. They're mostly not buying as many C300 MKIIs, C200s and FS7s as older pros were just a couple of years ago. The reckoning is here. I think this is why we
haven't seen a C100 MKIII, C300 MKIII, etc. The market is drying up for those kinds of cameras. Not dried up but so many more people are shooting mirrorless now instead of mid level pro cameras. Cheap and high quality images wins over three to five times the cost with slightly better images and real audio. Heck, I love my C200
but this year, I have been only using it for client work.
For my own two films I have been shooting, fun projects and other non-client work, I leave the C200 at home and shoot the XT-3, it's just a lot easier than dragging my big Sachtler, 15-20lb C200 rig. I build the XT-3 onto the Crane 2, toss it on the back seat of my car, bring a couple of Tascam DR10Ls
for sound and I am getting some amazing footage I never could have captured with the C200, even if I had a big gimbal for it, too heavy, bulky, pro looking. If I sell one or both of my films and make documentary filmmaking financially viable, I will sell my C200 and replace with with another XT-3. But as long as I am shooting for clients, gotta have an A camera and
the C200 fulfills that role perfectly. Met with a new client yesterday, they are putting together a Netflix pitch for a docuseries and want me to shoot C200 RAW AND the XT-3 on slider as a b-camera, lots of interviews and some tabletop to shoot for them. But I have a feeling mid-line cameras will stagnate to a point as the market demand just doesn't seem to be growing but shrinking.
George Loch
Well-known member
There is definitely a dexterity advantage to something like the XT-3 especially since it can record everything you want internally, but once it's 'rigged up', it loses that advantage.
You make the point I was inferring – client work is still a realm for $5-10k+ cameras. If you only do those occasionally, then renting is the way to go.
I am still intrigued by the XT-3 (I have my recently purchased Z6 in the box with an RMA on it). I am just not sure about the noise and how much I'll miss IBIS. The cost savings is a bit of a wash once you add the Fringer.
-gl
You make the point I was inferring – client work is still a realm for $5-10k+ cameras. If you only do those occasionally, then renting is the way to go.
I am still intrigued by the XT-3 (I have my recently purchased Z6 in the box with an RMA on it). I am just not sure about the noise and how much I'll miss IBIS. The cost savings is a bit of a wash once you add the Fringer.
-gl
scorsesefan
Veteran
The noise? Do you mean because it's not a full frame cam?
Run&Gun
Veteran
And that is JUST the film schools. Throw in traditional Colleges and Universities with related programs PLUS all of the people coming out of the woodwork without traditional training/coming through typical channels(because anyone can just buy the gear now) and it's just a complete s h i t-show.
George Loch
Well-known member
Yep. I have been used to FF iso performance. The new sensors can get close to 12k iso with usable noise performance.
-gl
-gl
George Loch
Well-known member
Right on George.
https://www.powerofpositivity.com/negative-thinking-affects-your-brain/
As the market adjusts, traffic to this forum has been dropping too. Some people get tired of the negative posts and downvotes- NorBro bailed recently for this reason. For the sake of your own, personal brain, see if you can (everyone) create constructive ideas and solutions to all challenges that come your way.
Regarding jobs: everyone has a word processor now- there are still writing jobs- (good) scripts are as important and valuable as ever.
Software: all the tools to build great software are now free. Yet great developers are exceptionally rare.
Film/video: there's still a need for high quality and reliable production. From my (limited) point of view the biggest challenge is marketing/connecting with folks willing to pay for higher quality vs. handing the task to their friend's cousin's 15 year old kid with a phone and 'mad editing skilz' (saw this on FB recently). The trick seems to be connecting with people/companies with a real budget.
From research on current events, it appears there might be a big purge in media in the near future, which could mean a lot of new opportunities for whatever comes next: get your marketing hat on and be aware of what's going on when this happens to start making sales / closing deals.
Last edited:
puredrifting
Major Contributor
A lot of this is what constitutes "a living" to many different people. We all have our own definition of what that means. For JCS who lives in Beverly Hills, "a living" is probably different than to what "a living" means to me, who lives in a suburb of LA where things are a lot cheaper. And a living to me, might seem like a fortune to someone who rents a low end apartment in Cleveland. It's all relative. But regardless of what constitutes a living to you, if you are in production, it's become exponentially harder to make one over the past fifteen years and will continue to the bottom exponentially.
Personally, I think the future is in creating and most importantly, OWNING content, not being a freelancer or a technician. As everyone is saying in this thread, there is an increasing amount of content needed/wanted to feed the media outlet beast, it's just who is creating it and for how much money it is being created for is the question. When the tools are getting so good for so little money, trying to make a living as a freelance DP, camera person, sound mixer, etc., going up against essentially every serious hobbyist/newphew/neighbor kid is what seems to be the dead end to me from a business standpoint.
It seems more viable as a business strategy that buying and becoming technologically proficient with all of this new cheap, high quality gear, then producing, owning, licensing or selling your own unique and commercially viable content will be a more viable long term (5-10 year) path. That takes a VERY different skill set than many in our business possess. Writing, producing, editing, visual effects, sales, pitching, schmoozing is a very different world than being a camera monkey. It's hard to say how low pro video equipment will go in price and accessibility but the writing is already on the wall that eventually, the same gear will accessible by almost anyone. The market for $40k plus cameras will definitely dwindle even smaller than it is. A huge amount of rental houses are going under with more to come. It makes sense that that tidal wave re-alignment will continue downwards to the mid level and low end. The ones who will survive will write or team with good writers, direct, produce and SELL their content. If you possess some or all of these skills, equipment becomes almost a none factor.
I totally agree, people who now make a living as owner/operators largely because they own certain pieces of gear are on notice, your day is ending. Adapt or die!
Last edited:
George Loch
Well-known member
This is spot on. The power now is in the content and the secret sauce is in your process. In fact, I see a lot of potential for producers to partner with content experts to produce industry-specific content that they co-own and license. For the entrepreneurial sort, this is good news.
-gl
George Loch
Well-known member
Yeah, not only does one not need a decent camera/gear/tech, no formal education or training is required either. Find what you can offer- likability e.g. humor on a common topic e.g. video games, and you can become the #1 YouTube channel for many years (now #1 English language): https://www.youtube.com/user/PewDiePie . More amazing, still #1-ENG after TPTB tried to take him down because they can't control him. This is a another indicator that major market disruptions are going to continue as the Old Guard and Old Business (models) are replaced by new ideas, new content, and new ways for people to provide value to each other, with less and less of middlemen controllers siphoning of energy (e.g. money).
Philosophies are related to Zen, Taoism, psychology, and quantum physics (theory and tested experiments).
Alan Watts' video related to what if money is no object, if one watches it, is about getting paid to do what you love vs. working to get paid to exist: nothing to do with communism, religion, or politics: not allowed on this forum.
Alan Watts' video related to what if money is no object, if one watches it, is about getting paid to do what you love vs. working to get paid to exist: nothing to do with communism, religion, or politics: not allowed on this forum.
Mitch Gross
Veteran
There’s a lot of pontificating already on this thread, some of which is of value and some of which is just platitudes and noise. But let’s not start with religion or politics, or frankly any philosophy. It’s both pointless and against the rules of this forum.
Philosophy (2): the sciences and liberal arts exclusive of medicine, law, and theology.
Concepts provided to show solutions to perceived limiting beliefs and biological reasons to avoid negative thought / promote constructive thought.
In a professional, moderated forum the expectation is professional conduct.
Concepts provided to show solutions to perceived limiting beliefs and biological reasons to avoid negative thought / promote constructive thought.
In a professional, moderated forum the expectation is professional conduct.
Mitch Gross
Veteran
Thanks for defining the term for me. As my brother is a noted professor on the subject, I think I kinda get it.
My point is that any conversation or topic can be extrapolated out to a point where the interaction is no longer practical or useful, or frankly even of interest to many. I think we would be better served to discuss matters on a more down to earth level.
My point is that any conversation or topic can be extrapolated out to a point where the interaction is no longer practical or useful, or frankly even of interest to many. I think we would be better served to discuss matters on a more down to earth level.
- Status