refocusedmedia
Veteran
http://www.nextwavedv.com/the-entitled-filmmaker/
A great read, and some sentiments certainly echoed around here.
A great read, and some sentiments certainly echoed around here.
The Entitled Filmmaker
- Thread starter refocusedmedia
- Start date
I agree (which is why the comments about Canon revolving around the 5D Mark III hack are so annoying). It's not a simple, "Well, I think the C300/C100 is overpriced and won't buy it," no, it's a straight out attack that Canon is holding you back as a filmmaker or something (though it seems to me your kids and backyard are getting quite enough coverage already).
And it misses the point that everything has gotten cheaper...a helluva lot cheaper. My Super35mm sized sensor in the C100 shoots 4k and downrezzes to 1080 that it spits out in a damn good 24Mbps AVCHD image? For less than $6k? Or add $700 on top of that and get ProRes HQ 422? That's pretty impressive.
But, no, people want raw video on a Photographic Full Frame sensor and full automatic control for less than $1000. For what purpose? Probably more backyard ****.
And it misses the point that everything has gotten cheaper...a helluva lot cheaper. My Super35mm sized sensor in the C100 shoots 4k and downrezzes to 1080 that it spits out in a damn good 24Mbps AVCHD image? For less than $6k? Or add $700 on top of that and get ProRes HQ 422? That's pretty impressive.
But, no, people want raw video on a Photographic Full Frame sensor and full automatic control for less than $1000. For what purpose? Probably more backyard ****.
That article is spot on.
I think a lot of people forget that this is a career choice for most in which the "expensive equipment" is an investment which will pay itself off rather fast if you're talented enough. I'm not going to just drop 5.5k on a C100, shoot a few things, then let it sit in a bag but instead look for ways that I can start making money with it.
The cost of equipment has already reached a point to where there are so many solutions and alternatives to the high-end stuff.
I think a lot of people forget that this is a career choice for most in which the "expensive equipment" is an investment which will pay itself off rather fast if you're talented enough. I'm not going to just drop 5.5k on a C100, shoot a few things, then let it sit in a bag but instead look for ways that I can start making money with it.
The cost of equipment has already reached a point to where there are so many solutions and alternatives to the high-end stuff.
David G. Smith
Steak Knife Member
I don't know... I kind of think for a person to go off on an internet rant about young or inexperienced filmmakers after saying, "When I started getting involved in video six years ago, the world was a bit different" is pretty pretentious.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
When I started getting, very briefly... involved in thinking about making films... everyone was buying a Bolex 16mm watchworks windup and had to wait a week to even see images on a 1/2 size image with a magnifying glass, cuz who could afford a real editing setup... these young whippersnappers have it so easy all they had to do, some 6 or 7 years ago, is buy a used video camera, a crappy computer, and eh walah... their a filmmaker.
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
Who wants 'automagic control'... all I'm asking for... right now is deeper bit depth... like 12-14 for under 1Kbuk... as for back yard s*%t...
I want more doggie pictures...
Drew Ott
Wish I were banned.
+1
Six years? He thinks that gives him authority? "Back in my day!" Hah!
I don't agree with anything he said in his blog post. He's making a broad sociological claim about a new sense of entitlement from filmmakers based on evidence that exists within his own blog about software updates and camera codecs. The internet forum realm of software updates and camera codecs is almost a non-issue for people who are actually out making narrative films.
The conversations around here where people complain about prices of new cameras are so distant from reality that they are almost delusional. I don't mean to upset anyone, but a debate about whether or not the C300 is overpriced is NOT real filmmaking. A long thread debating price-points on new cameras is not where real filmmaking is happening. It's so distant from the actual concerns of people making films that I'll repeat again--it's delusional.
David W. Jones
Veteran
Who wants 'automagic control'... all I'm asking for... right now is deeper bit depth... like 12-14 for under 1Kbuk... as for back yard s*%t...
I want more doggie pictures...
Good looking dogs!
filmguy123
Veteran
Two sides to every coin. I agree in many senses, but in a practical sense there is certainly no denying that companies intentionally hold back features that don't cost more. IE Sony FS700 can't shoot in between variable frame rates even though this is nothing but a software switch to allow shooting at 36fps, 48fps, etc. You have to move up a much more expensive camera. Companies havce charged vastly more for ability so shoot in certain codecs even though its merely a bandwidth issue solved by advances in mobile tech, proved by emerging companies BlackMagic and even GoPro allowing 120fps 720p AVCHD files in a pocket size camera (file size/data throughput remains the same on larger sensor cameras).
Adobe switching to creative cloud is just a misnomer. It's not REALLY a cloud service. It's literally the same thing it's always been (auto updates, etc.) + 20gb of online cloud space (whoopy in the age of google drive, dropbox, etc.). But they call it "cloud" because it's less awkward than saying "to play with Adobe, you must pay $600/year" rather than a one time software cost.
This is very annoying for someone who may be a freelancer and only does 2-3 jobs a year, and then tinkers as a hobby. I understand Adobe needs to recoup costs, and this is probably resulting from less than satisfactory numbers of people upgrading on a yearly cycle.
Of course, the game is changing. The days of $800 matte boxes that comprise no more than $80 worth of materials are over, since the film-making market is getting so much bigger. Granted many things have been and will continue to be (to a certain extent) novelty pieces of gear that have a high mark up to make it worthwhile to develop and do R&D on, but the truth is a LOT of this video gear has had exorbitant markup for sometime.
The consumers or bloggers most butt hurt about the prices dropping seem to be people that want to rely on expensive gear to differentiate them rather than their talent.
BTW, I got into video 12 years ago and do it full time professionally and have "paid my dues" so to speak on expensive gear. I'm merely pointing out that I very much observe many big companies who charging $20,000 for technology that could be profitable (including R&D) for $4-$6k. And they're getting called out by new entrants into the market, and it's about time. And prices will continue to drop as this becomes less and less of a niche market.
Adobe switching to creative cloud is just a misnomer. It's not REALLY a cloud service. It's literally the same thing it's always been (auto updates, etc.) + 20gb of online cloud space (whoopy in the age of google drive, dropbox, etc.). But they call it "cloud" because it's less awkward than saying "to play with Adobe, you must pay $600/year" rather than a one time software cost.
This is very annoying for someone who may be a freelancer and only does 2-3 jobs a year, and then tinkers as a hobby. I understand Adobe needs to recoup costs, and this is probably resulting from less than satisfactory numbers of people upgrading on a yearly cycle.
Of course, the game is changing. The days of $800 matte boxes that comprise no more than $80 worth of materials are over, since the film-making market is getting so much bigger. Granted many things have been and will continue to be (to a certain extent) novelty pieces of gear that have a high mark up to make it worthwhile to develop and do R&D on, but the truth is a LOT of this video gear has had exorbitant markup for sometime.
The consumers or bloggers most butt hurt about the prices dropping seem to be people that want to rely on expensive gear to differentiate them rather than their talent.
BTW, I got into video 12 years ago and do it full time professionally and have "paid my dues" so to speak on expensive gear. I'm merely pointing out that I very much observe many big companies who charging $20,000 for technology that could be profitable (including R&D) for $4-$6k. And they're getting called out by new entrants into the market, and it's about time. And prices will continue to drop as this becomes less and less of a niche market.
Stephen Mick
Totally Usable
+1,000
There's a reason most of the traffic we see here is in the camera-specific forums, and NOT in the filmmaking "craft" forums. People are far too interested in pointless discussions of 8-bit vs. 10-bit, and not nearly interested enough in visual storytelling. A visit to the graveyard that is the "User Films" section bears this out.
By and large, we have become a collection of gear-heads and techno-files. Filmmakers we are not.
There's a reason most of the traffic we see here is in the camera-specific forums, and NOT in the filmmaking "craft" forums. People are far too interested in pointless discussions of 8-bit vs. 10-bit, and not nearly interested enough in visual storytelling. A visit to the graveyard that is the "User Films" section bears this out.
By and large, we have become a collection of gear-heads and techno-files. Filmmakers we are not.
Well, there's the other side of the coin - people complaining about entitled filmmakers, "kids these days" and the like. I mean, why do you care, unless they are harassing you personally for free services and the like... I swear there's been a ton of threads here recently about clueless wannabees who expect professionals to work for free on their crappy projects. How is this new? There's always been clueless people - you just laugh and keep on walking. I wonder how many people who complain have been personally asked for free services? I have personally never asked anyone (except my wife and my best friend) to help with anything on my projects, let alone professionals who make a living out of film work. Yet, you see people get incredibly angry as if their personal services were at stake (I'm not mentioning names here, but it's the same few guys in every thread).
j1clark@ucsd.edu
Veteran
I don't like to ask people to work for 'free' either... and especially would not ask the Wife to do anything... I get yelled at enough about the work not being professional when I do plumbing or carpentry jobs around the house... why ask for more in something I actually like to do...
Interesting observation. Seems the more real work I do, the less I want to know about gear. I am a camera op, so my best way to learn is to get an idea and shoot something. Try it several ways and compare results afterwords.