When is enough, enough? A vent.

Exactly. I've laughed before when I heard someone berating a DJ because he was playing off a computer and not using records. I inquired, "You must be a DJ!" He asked, "How did you know?" And I responded "Because you have that elitist attitude that since someone is doing your job in an easier way, getting the same or better results, that they are inferior because they aren't doing it the hard way."

And the irony to all this, this person is now using MP3s off of a computer.

There are people that get caught up with the traditional technology and being purists. There are people that get caught up in bleeding edge technology and look for the best specs. At the end of the day, the average person cares not how you got to the destination product, but only about the product itself. Period. The people that do care are so much in the minority, it's just noise really.

Sadly, and I know someone will bring this up, that people DO judge based on appearance, like shooting a DSLR compared to an Alexa, but I've always conceded with the fact that if someone is going to judge me on my equipment alone and not look at what I have done, I am probably going to be in for a world of pain dealing with them. I shoot on whatever tool does what I need at the price point I can justify to myself, and NO ONE ELSE. :)
 
I understand this entirely. I have a Canon 60D and a HPX-170. Between those two, I can shoot literally anything you could want. But I admit, I have the gear lust. I have tried to discipline myself to purchasing equipment that will go through iterations of camera bodies though.
 
I think something all together different is happening too, because the gear became so irrelevant (as Barry said, anything you shoot on will look good straight out of box) some other definer of quality is taking place. It's not the image quality anymore (if it ever was) but... Truth is, the over abundance of media and media making gear drastically shorted out attention span, how many of us have netflix cue filled with hundred of fantastic films that still are waiting to be seen... And then when heir turn come how long really does it take to watch even a fantastic film? How many attempts before the film is seen? I think film (movies) in a traditional sense is dying and something all together different will replace it.
 
Isaac_Brody said:
On the flip side, this will make everyone with a solid foundation in cinematography that much more valuable and hirable. I agree it's annoying, but it's also pretty obvious when people are bullshitting, and that doesn't go very far on jobs.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I was going to say in response to your post, RPO.

What stand out above anything are your work and your reputation. The pretenders will be found out among the competent, at the end of the day.
 
Yea, and those villagers many of them talented, will eventually want some additional features.
 
Patryk_Rebisz said:
I think something all together different is happening too, because the gear became so irrelevant (as Barry said, anything you shoot on will look good straight out of box) some other definer of quality is taking place. It's not the image quality anymore (if it ever was) but... Truth is, the over abundance of media and media making gear drastically shorted out attention span, how many of us have netflix cue filled with hundred of fantastic films that still are waiting to be seen... And then when heir turn come how long really does it take to watch even a fantastic film? How many attempts before the film is seen? I think film (movies) in a traditional sense is dying and something all together different will replace it.
Click to expand...

I worry that you're right. I think there's less room for nuance. I feel like we're either seeing really big tentpole films, or youtube clips. And the stuff in between that is interesting and surprising is being lost.
 
Which is great if that's the case, because that means there is a vast, uptapped market just waiting to be exploited.

Let's not lose site of the big picture though. Take any YouTube video with a lot of hits. Doesn't matter if you watched the entire clip, or just the first ten seconds. It counts as a hit, so a lot of these YouTube numbers are simply inflated. I'd worry more about getting 50,000 sit-throughs then 50 million clicks with an average viewing time of 15 seconds.
 
Gary Huff said:
Which is great if that's the case, because that means there is a vast, uptapped market just waiting to be exploited.

Let's not lose site of the big picture though. Take any YouTube video with a lot of hits. Doesn't matter if you watched the entire clip, or just the first ten seconds. It counts as a hit, so a lot of these YouTube numbers are simply inflated. I'd worry more about getting 50,000 sit-throughs then 50 million clicks with an average viewing time of 15 seconds.
Click to expand...

My experience in the Wife's Wedding biz did not lead me to the conclusion there was a major opportunity with going 'digital' and bringing photo finishing to the desk top.

The "competition' for the 'mid' level weddings descended into a cost plus marginal percent, because 'cousin joey', or 'whomever' had a camera, and took 'good enough', got the job. The Wife because of several reasons, started doing more seminars... And would only occasionally do a wedding for a 'reasonable' price...

In addition, another trend emerged which as the growth of umbrella type 'photo services', such as "Lifetouch", started getting more traction.


Speaking of which, Lifetouch also has a 'media' arm which inlcudes video services, scriptwriting services... etc...

Well, ok, I'll say... maybe there's opportunities if you like the idea of franchising...
 
j1clark@ucsd.edu said:
The "competition' for the 'mid' level weddings descended into a cost plus marginal percent, because 'cousin joey', or 'whomever' had a camera, and took 'good enough', got the job. The Wife because of several reasons, started doing more seminars... And would only occasionally do a wedding for a 'reasonable' price...
Click to expand...

I agree, but there are plenty of higher-priced weddings out there for the right person (I choose not to do any weddings if I can help it).
 
I thinking looking at the music industry and when mp3.com became popular, there was a HUGE overabundance of musc that came out of that. Lots and lots of garbage because there was no vetting system. Then after that, came MySpace, again, with the same issues. I think these start out as novel ideas that people love, but when they become overwhelmed with bad quality and they start to have a hard time finding good quality material, they lose interest and these services fall apart. I think if a lot more independent material makes its way into distribution methods we have now, these same things are going to happen. I absolutely agree things are changing, but how they change will be a huge evolutionary process. People don't like to waste their time.

I'm excited to see where it goes though.
 
Rick Burnett said:
I thinking looking at the music industry and when mp3.com became popular, there was a HUGE overabundance of musc that came out of that. Lots and lots of garbage because there was no vetting system. Then after that, came MySpace, again, with the same issues. I think these start out as novel ideas that people love, but when they become overwhelmed with bad quality and they start to have a hard time finding good quality material, they lose interest and these services fall apart. I think if a lot more independent material makes its way into distribution methods we have now, these same things are going to happen. I absolutely agree things are changing, but how they change will be a huge evolutionary process. People don't like to waste their time.

I'm excited to see where it goes though.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if I had a crystal ball... I was shooting a wedding at a local venue for the rich and famous, and happened to over hear a guy pitching the MP3 company in a pre-public offering... had I a couple 100 K just hanging around, I could have been a millionaire by now... wait... to have a couple 100 K just sitting around... wouldn't I have to be a millionaire already???

I personally have high hopes for small venue internet distributed film industry... all it takes is a couple of 10's of K's worth of a Cristie Projector, enough local ordinance compliance to get a theater for a seating of 100 or so... (where are those millionaires when you need them...)

I've thought about pitching such an idea to people like Kim Jorgensen who in the early 70's started buying old theaters and developing what has become the 'art house' circuit... but I don't move in such circles these days...
 
On another forum, in debating the merits of a 5D as opposed to Canon's APS-C cameras, the following was said by a user other than myself, arguing for reasons to get a 5D, arguing that one of the reasons for it being superior is it's sensitivity.

"You can never have enough light."

Not kidding. He actually later went on to say that he doesn't actually own a 5D. Everything he said other than what I just posted was factual, but that quote in a nutshell proves that yes, apparently there are people who actually do want cameras that can see in the dark, as it were. I found it rather amusing having read your post just days before that conversation came up.
 
Last edited:
wow, much emotion in here

"everything looks good out of the box", actually i completely disagree, now when you have the ABILITY it gives far more room to be less forgiving than any SD resolution, and yada yada. now it SHOWS if people bother putting any love into their craft or just heading out with the kit lens. commented a staff pick on vimeo about that the authors extreme use of shallow DoF on the 5D hurt his narrative with him constantly missing focus, and hey guess what, my constructive crisisism gets deleted. Cinematography SERVES storytelling and never vise-versa, but i do beleive we all should be more judging and stop this effin pat on the back culture especially on vimeo, then if people actually bothers to develop their craft is another matter...

whatever floats your boat. and hey of the audience likes it while a few fed up people like us has an issue, so what? if talent has ever floated to the surface, it is now, for sure. and since it's not about pixels anymore cinematography is more relevant than ever.
 
phudsontx said:
Buying a camera without buying the support gear (lights, grip, tripod etc...) is akin to buying gasoline before you can afford the car.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I own the camera, tripod and audio gear. I rent the other support gear ;-). On a lot of shoots all I need is a camera, mic and tripod. Various shoots have different needs in terms of support gear but there is always a need for a camera, mic and tripod. The camera is the tool that is most complex imho and a lot of times I am hired because producers feel that I know how to operate that camera because I am an owner not a renter.

Plus my living space does not afford the luxury of a grip truck's contents, hehehe.
 
I have a few cameras including the 5D mark2, and I always use my lighting and the tools that I have to control my lighting.
Most of the time I'm basiscally lighting to establish some sought of mood etc. So, for me choosing my 5D for a shoot just because I can push the ISO etc. wouldn't work for me.

One of my up and about handycams is my HV30, and if I want the best image I can get out of it. I just light the shot.
 
Last edited:
I don't read all this thread, but this is there are the most important post's in all this place right now. All this shout&scream about DSLR, all this crappy video's i watch on youtube/vimeo tagged "canon 5dmk2/550d/d7000/gh2 etc... Always lack of creativity, poor acting, lighting...
I feel bad about all this young people, they don't wont to learn something, all they want is to get (i hate this word) "FILM LOOK". Around the world, not only in US, i live (for now) in Poland (sorry for my english but i'm still "learning") and there is the same. Disscusion about lenses, ISO, but none of them talking about seorius/inportant things.
But this kind of people will always make crappy videos, because they don't have that "sensivity" to do 'art'. The same witch photography. Kid's own latest dslr's and they don't even care about light, when there is possibility to shoot in 1600-3200 iso without any problems, make shitty photo's of people (long focal lenght / small apreture) and they think they do art.. It's so easy, so common, so weak
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top