Nathyn
Low Budget Ninja
And all versions of student software comes with the same thing. But honestly no one's going to drop the kind of money being dropped for stuff then be told how to use it. And at the same time these companies create this stuff with more and more professional add ons because they know people are using these cameras for professional uses. Check out the Cannons. These are hold overs from days when pro equipment and consumer equipment didn't cross paths. But now it happens all the time. And everyone on DVXU who buys an Panny HCM150, JVC HM100, Sony or Canon camcorder or DSLR is being it for professional purposes under the guise they can use it because they bought it. Simple as that.
Now if the argument is that there's a conspiracy to suddenly sue everyone whose made pro features or does pro work with these cameras, the defense would be too easy. You could argue misrepresentation (they represent many of these cameras as "prosumer" meaning suitable for professional work and the amount of pro work down with these make it a perfect argument) or basic unconscionability. Basically unconscionability means if you get into any contract, in this case buy something then find out the terms are "grossly unfair" (such as buying a video camera then being told you can't video with it as you please) then the court would simply toss it out as being unenforceable or flagrantly unfair. We learned about this kind of thing in entertainment law, but you can find more about it online under "unconscionability" or "voidable contracts". There's all kinds of things about contracts, like did you know a judge can't force an entertainer to perform, even if contracted, you can only sue if they don't. Things like that.
Here's an example, right now I don't think ANY Canon comes without 24p now except the standard def cameras. 24p HD is used mainly by student and indy filmmakers, but what student filmmaker will stop to read the manual and go, "Oh, I can't make my feature that I bought this camera to make. Okay, cool." Most people assume: I've bought a video camera, I'll film what I want. Most people don't even read the manual unless they get stuck.
Now the company sees this and has two options. "We'll force them to used the camera the way we want them to." or they say "Well, we know what this groups wants so we'll add more that feature(s) so you will buy our camera." You in return do just that. They look at the cash piling up, the next version has more pro features. The HR10 has 24p, but no mic jack. That became a problem for indy filmmakers for obvious reasons. The HG10 does have one + 24p and the works and these are still selling second hand. They still have a value. You can use this camera to shoot a feature. I added my Beachtek now I had XLR capabilities. The HR10 doesn't have nearly the same value simply because it has no mic-jack.
Sony is the best example. They weren't interested in the 24p/film schoo/indy filmmaker market, they simply didn't add 24p to their cameras. (And people didn't buy). Sure the Sony lovers bought, but a lot of other people bought Panasonics and Canons. I would've tried to buy an Sony FX100 if it did 24p. Sony was so adamant about it they tried to trick people via a horrible faux 24p mode. They'd rather do anything than add 24p to a prosumer camera and now many prosumer Sonys have 24p. It's a money thing.
Apple, Sony and Adobe say, "Oh, they're using these for pro-work now. Okay so we'll add more features to our software to stay current." Basically this is only a technicality. Canon, Sony nor Panasonic expect you to abide by that and their own actions show that. They would never shoot themselves in the foot that way as the major market for 24p is indy filmmakers. At the same time I suppose they could use that to stop someone whom they didn't want to make a film from making a film if they took them to court but again, they'd shoot themselves in the foot. Besides, if Canon wanted to sue, they wouldn't sue me or you, they'd sue the makers of Crank2 who used their cameras to make a big screen film and profited from it. BUT THIS IS WHAT THEY WANT! After seeing Crank2, I made the decision then and there to go with Canon! The look of the film did it for me. This is a "Canon" look I've seen before actually and I like it.
If film-schoolers didn't fall in love with FCP in school or wherever then they risk that you may stop using it. When you come into money, what do you do? Upgrade. You buy everything! I'm shooting on an HG10, since I like Canon, Panasonic, JVC or Sony (I like their look) it's a good chance I'll upgrade to their new models and buy the whole FCP suite versus FCX.
Believe me Adobe, Apple nor any of these companies expect that you will buy FCP, Photoshop or whatever as a student and not use it professionally. Students don't have money and need to make it. You ever notice even student editions have upgrade paths? You ever know anyone to get sued for this? No. Because the companies get paid regardless. They just want you to buy, versus getting a cracked version for cheap or free. Student and Pro versions offer upgrade paths, cracked versions don't. You get support with any real version, but not with cracked versions. It's really nothing to worry about and these companies aren't stupid. Don't you think if it were a big deal these companies would simply make it where nothing could be output without "student edition" on it.
-Nate
Now if the argument is that there's a conspiracy to suddenly sue everyone whose made pro features or does pro work with these cameras, the defense would be too easy. You could argue misrepresentation (they represent many of these cameras as "prosumer" meaning suitable for professional work and the amount of pro work down with these make it a perfect argument) or basic unconscionability. Basically unconscionability means if you get into any contract, in this case buy something then find out the terms are "grossly unfair" (such as buying a video camera then being told you can't video with it as you please) then the court would simply toss it out as being unenforceable or flagrantly unfair. We learned about this kind of thing in entertainment law, but you can find more about it online under "unconscionability" or "voidable contracts". There's all kinds of things about contracts, like did you know a judge can't force an entertainer to perform, even if contracted, you can only sue if they don't. Things like that.
Here's an example, right now I don't think ANY Canon comes without 24p now except the standard def cameras. 24p HD is used mainly by student and indy filmmakers, but what student filmmaker will stop to read the manual and go, "Oh, I can't make my feature that I bought this camera to make. Okay, cool." Most people assume: I've bought a video camera, I'll film what I want. Most people don't even read the manual unless they get stuck.
Now the company sees this and has two options. "We'll force them to used the camera the way we want them to." or they say "Well, we know what this groups wants so we'll add more that feature(s) so you will buy our camera." You in return do just that. They look at the cash piling up, the next version has more pro features. The HR10 has 24p, but no mic jack. That became a problem for indy filmmakers for obvious reasons. The HG10 does have one + 24p and the works and these are still selling second hand. They still have a value. You can use this camera to shoot a feature. I added my Beachtek now I had XLR capabilities. The HR10 doesn't have nearly the same value simply because it has no mic-jack.
Sony is the best example. They weren't interested in the 24p/film schoo/indy filmmaker market, they simply didn't add 24p to their cameras. (And people didn't buy). Sure the Sony lovers bought, but a lot of other people bought Panasonics and Canons. I would've tried to buy an Sony FX100 if it did 24p. Sony was so adamant about it they tried to trick people via a horrible faux 24p mode. They'd rather do anything than add 24p to a prosumer camera and now many prosumer Sonys have 24p. It's a money thing.
Apple, Sony and Adobe say, "Oh, they're using these for pro-work now. Okay so we'll add more features to our software to stay current." Basically this is only a technicality. Canon, Sony nor Panasonic expect you to abide by that and their own actions show that. They would never shoot themselves in the foot that way as the major market for 24p is indy filmmakers. At the same time I suppose they could use that to stop someone whom they didn't want to make a film from making a film if they took them to court but again, they'd shoot themselves in the foot. Besides, if Canon wanted to sue, they wouldn't sue me or you, they'd sue the makers of Crank2 who used their cameras to make a big screen film and profited from it. BUT THIS IS WHAT THEY WANT! After seeing Crank2, I made the decision then and there to go with Canon! The look of the film did it for me. This is a "Canon" look I've seen before actually and I like it.
If film-schoolers didn't fall in love with FCP in school or wherever then they risk that you may stop using it. When you come into money, what do you do? Upgrade. You buy everything! I'm shooting on an HG10, since I like Canon, Panasonic, JVC or Sony (I like their look) it's a good chance I'll upgrade to their new models and buy the whole FCP suite versus FCX.
Believe me Adobe, Apple nor any of these companies expect that you will buy FCP, Photoshop or whatever as a student and not use it professionally. Students don't have money and need to make it. You ever notice even student editions have upgrade paths? You ever know anyone to get sued for this? No. Because the companies get paid regardless. They just want you to buy, versus getting a cracked version for cheap or free. Student and Pro versions offer upgrade paths, cracked versions don't. You get support with any real version, but not with cracked versions. It's really nothing to worry about and these companies aren't stupid. Don't you think if it were a big deal these companies would simply make it where nothing could be output without "student edition" on it.
-Nate
Last edited:
that the digital camera manufacturers are trying to destroy the indie filmmakers by introducing bogus cameras. These bug-riddled silicon chips surrounded by cheap plastic will end up the filmmaker costing a fortune in editorial and encoding headaches that ultimately cannot be solved. The camera and editing technology changes several times within a year. You edit a 1080i60i movie today (which is supposed to be HiDef 1920x1080) and then you're told, oh, that's not really HD; for "full HD" you must buy this camera (which is only $1000 more) and you will end up with a 24p (like 24 frames per second). The as soon as you buy this camera, you are told, uh, the 24p doesn't mean it's 24 frames per second, there is another one that shoots 24pA. Then you buy that and then you're told, oh, you got to buy the 24pN if you really want to end up with 24p; but that's not really true, it's really 23.976 fps and to get true 24 fps, you must shoot it with P2 memory.... meanwhile you're into camera for $55,000 already.
rogar-BigGrin(DBG)
