Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]   Go Down

Author Topic: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad  (Read 60487 times)

bcooter

  • Guest
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #180 on: July 16, 2011, 04:03:54 am »

And Red, Arri, Sony all use still images to sell their video cameras ;)
There will always be a demand for both.

You know Graham, to some extent I agree with you.  There is still demand for horseshoes, it's just not a thriving industry.

As the obvious lover of medium format, I have no issue with what works for you . . . as long as it does work for you.

Are you getting the work, billing, commissions, that you want, then that's great . . . carry on, though for a long list of photographers, the transition from stills to motion has gone from a nice option to a mandatory demand from clients.

Does that make any artist good or bad in both genre's?  I guess it depends on the artist, but you can't deny that video is everywhere and it wasn't 7 years ago, even 5. 

Yes Arriflex and RED show still images of their products, but they also show motion imagery, because that's what their cameras do, though you have to recognize as a business person, and I assume you are a business person,  there is only so much money in an overall advertising budget and how it's parceled out depends on what medium will get the most exposure.

Today, my clients feel that motion is the best alternative because they can carry their message in full and it will play across various mediums that costs $200,000 for 30 seconds, to web play that costs $5,000 to free.

Print and still photography has taken a hit  like never before.  Yes print and stills continue to be viable in certain arenas, but I know my still estimates and billing are more competitive (read that it takes 6 estimates to be awarded a project) than ever and my motion based projects are larger than ever.

So to move forward and continue to be profitable many of us chose to offer more.

As a business person there is only so much money I'm willing to spend each year in equipment so when it comes time to write checks for a stills only camera that can cost $40,000 and have limited use, I have to give it much more thought than 5 years ago because moving to higher end motion is expensive.

A RED One is $25,000, add any lens kit is another $10,000 to three times that.  then you add on camera and field monitors, sound equipment, support devices, larger more capable computers, DIT stations, continuous lights and this year alone we will have spent $185,000 at minimum.

If I add a new Epic that's another $58,000 so that kind of tells you where the money is going.

For my retoucher that was making a pretty good living off of me and my clients they are also marginalized because rather than us send out the 45 images per project for major work, I'm now spending more with effects and editorial houses . . . once again there is only so much room in the budget.

Now how does this relate to hasselblad?  I guess it depends on them and their new owners, but unless they want to continue to push more to amateurs than professionals, I would think their next product line would be continuous light friendly at minimum, offer video if they really want to gain share.

Sony, Canon, Panasonic, Olympus and Nikon recognize this and are spending more money than I can count to meet the demand.  In fact the only venerable still camera companies I know that have not added motion capabilities are the medium format brands and Leica.

That has to tell you something.

In business the tail does not wag the dog.  If the client writing the check has moved their attention to another genre we all have the option of moving in that direction or watching our billings deteriorate. 

IMO

BC
Logged

David Watson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 480
    • David Watson
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #181 on: July 16, 2011, 04:24:25 am »

Blame is irrelevant. No other system I have tried has the same issue.


Let's be fair here.  You have had an experience with your H2 system that is not at all typical of all other users.  I have owned multiple Hasselblad systems over the years and have never had any of the problems you have described.  Sometimes you are just unlucky - these are after all just electro-mechanical devices after all.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2011, 04:45:21 am by David Watson »
Logged
David Watson ARPS

fredjeang

  • Guest
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #182 on: July 16, 2011, 06:03:46 am »

You know Graham, to some extent I agree with you.  There is still demand for horseshoes, it's just not a thriving industry.

As the obvious lover of medium format, I have no issue with what works for you . . . as long as it does work for you.

Are you getting the work, billing, commissions, that you want, then that's great . . . carry on, though for a long list of photographers, the transition from stills to motion has gone from a nice option to a mandatory demand from clients.

Does that make any artist good or bad in both genre's?  I guess it depends on the artist, but you can't deny that video is everywhere and it wasn't 7 years ago, even 5.  

Yes Arriflex and RED show still images of their products, but they also show motion imagery, because that's what their cameras do, though you have to recognize as a business person, and I assume you are a business person,  there is only so much money in an overall advertising budget and how it's parceled out depends on what medium will get the most exposure.

Today, my clients feel that motion is the best alternative because they can carry their message in full and it will play across various mediums that costs $200,000 for 30 seconds, to web play that costs $5,000 to free.

Print and still photography has taken a hit  like never before.  Yes print and stills continue to be viable in certain arenas, but I know my still estimates and billing are more competitive (read that it takes 6 estimates to be awarded a project) than ever and my motion based projects are larger than ever.

So to move forward and continue to be profitable many of us chose to offer more.

As a business person there is only so much money I'm willing to spend each year in equipment so when it comes time to write checks for a stills only camera that can cost $40,000 and have limited use, I have to give it much more thought than 5 years ago because moving to higher end motion is expensive.

A RED One is $25,000, add any lens kit is another $10,000 to three times that.  then you add on camera and field monitors, sound equipment, support devices, larger more capable computers, DIT stations, continuous lights and this year alone we will have spent $185,000 at minimum.

If I add a new Epic that's another $58,000 so that kind of tells you where the money is going.

For my retoucher that was making a pretty good living off of me and my clients they are also marginalized because rather than us send out the 45 images per project for major work, I'm now spending more with effects and editorial houses . . . once again there is only so much room in the budget.

Now how does this relate to hasselblad?  I guess it depends on them and their new owners, but unless they want to continue to push more to amateurs than professionals, I would think their next product line would be continuous light friendly at minimum, offer video if they really want to gain share.

Sony, Canon, Panasonic, Olympus and Nikon recognize this and are spending more money than I can count to meet the demand.  In fact the only venerable still camera companies I know that have not added motion capabilities are the medium format brands and Leica.

That has to tell you something.

In business the tail does not wag the dog.  If the client writing the check has moved their attention to another genre we all have the option of moving in that direction or watching our billings deteriorate.  

IMO

BC

Yes yes and triple yes! (no pun intented with the US qualification triple A)

I'm more than surprised that this is not more commented in the forum. A part from Coot and very few others, almost nobody talks about motion
and it seems that almost nobody's concern...but here, people are really concerned because it's the reality. I guess that James doesn't live on Mars.

Here the situation is exactly the same as Cooter described. Clients want motion because they think they can share the message better.
And clients want motion because users want motion (or respond better to).

I think that there is a place for stills of course and, as an experienced user pointed before in this forum, a proper
high-end still campaign is generating today more profit that a low-end motion one.
But... the tendency is what james describes and it will never comes back.

The point will be soon generalized that printed campaigns will be extracted directly from stills, and it already happens. ADs couldn't care less about
res because if you play the footage and the person sees a still within the motion that can sell the message better, grainy or not grainy, res or not,
magic color transition or not, it's not their business.
it will be done. And you have as much frames-per-sec to choose from.  

The tendency is that motion leads. Then, let's see about the stills. A few years ago it was just the opposite.


The apparition of Alexa in the cine spheres is also a revolution because those guys are very film orientated.
And they don't even shoot ArriRaw for costs reasons but ProRes in most of the cases.

Now in the video houses that want to move forward are investing mostly in Red workflow and to some extend Arri, but
I'm hearing more and more discutions that the tendency goes in favor of Red because of costs but also because
Arri choosed the film-like approach and the new generation is somewhere saying "F...K the film-like look.
They get 4 or 5K with the Red at a cost of a MF back because in most of the cases those houses had already the lenses.


And Canon or Sony or Pana will bring higher resolution in both stills and probably very soon the first "consumer" Raw video.
You don't have to be a fakir, this is not guessing, it's the logical step we all know will happen soon. Just a question of months.

In all that panorama, I see clearly that the photographers here who are resisting to motion are marginalized, no matter their
reputation, and pushed to do those kind of pink-press like Bilt or Hola magazines, shooting princes and princesses in their
charity dinner, or stars in bathing suits kisses etc...but less and less serious brand campaigns fall in their hands.

In Spain, among the major newpapers, just one bet on high quality journalistic stills. Truly high-level stills I must say, but it is the only
survival of this sort of craft and they are also going motion.

The problem is not if that's sad or not, if good or not, it's simply there.

I think the MF brands can fully play a role if they change their mentalities, and not just being marginalized on Museums or Art Galleries needs. The problem that I see is that
they know that there is a market in the luxury to exploit. Fair enough. But in the end they would need capitals of bigger groups to invest
in R&D and move forward the machinery to be fully part of this revolution and not just a sort of luxury niche that reminds me a lot the high-end HiFi lamp amps.

In the secrecy of the next years plans, we don't know anything about their intentions and it seems that signs are only telling that what we've
seen so far will be what we will see tomorrow.

So the questions are probaly within the after-tomorrow, and hope they will do well.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2011, 06:15:00 am by fredjeang »
Logged

Graham Mitchell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2281
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #183 on: July 16, 2011, 06:45:07 am »

You know Graham, to some extent I agree with you....

I agree with you that the still photography market does not have the same growth potential that film does, but I don't necessarily agree that photographers should therefore start shooting video.

Video requires different abilities and a different way of thinking (a lot of photographers have tried to direct a film and fail), different and much more expensive equipment and a different production team, so it is basically opening a new business alongside your existing one. Some take the attitude that you should just follow the boom industries in life. I know people who keep switching careers to try and ride a boom wave (e.g. real estate to IT) but their heart is never in their job. To me that raises questions about why people are doing photography in the first place. I was a lawyer and investment banker and decided to do something I loved doing instead of working just for a pay check. So photography was never about making money to me, and photography has not been a well paid profession in general (especially not the last decade or two) so that leads me to believe that most other photographers are not in it just for the money either. In other words, it's not a professional that people would slide into for the money, or leave for a better offer, it's more of a calling or passion. If you are just looking for a boom industry, why video production and not something completely different and frankly more promising? Personally I think video will soon be flooded with wannabes as well as more and more people upgrade to video-capable DSLRs, and the prices for bread and butter work will tumble. There will always be a place for real talent, but you could say the same about stills photography.

Then there are other issues. Do you market yourself as a stills or video producer? I would personally be turned off by a 'jack of all trades'. For the clients who don't mind, why would they come to the photographer and add video to the brief rather than asking the film production house to add stills? Convergence is a two way street.

I'm sure you are doing what works for you and your clients, but I don't see it working for everyone.

Logged

fredjeang

  • Guest
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #184 on: July 16, 2011, 07:48:27 am »

I agree with you that the still photography market does not have the same growth potential that film does, but I don't necessarily agree that photographers should therefore start shooting video.

Video requires different abilities and a different way of thinking (a lot of photographers have tried to direct a film and fail), different and much more expensive equipment and a different production team, so it is basically opening a new business alongside your existing one. Some take the attitude that you should just follow the boom industries in life. I know people who keep switching careers to try and ride a boom wave (e.g. real estate to IT) but their heart is never in their job. To me that raises questions about why people are doing photography in the first place. I was a lawyer and investment banker and decided to do something I loved doing instead of working just for a pay check. So photography was never about making money to me, and photography has not been a well paid profession in general (especially not the last decade or two) so that leads me to believe that most other photographers are not in it just for the money either. In other words, it's not a professional that people would slide into for the money, or leave for a better offer, it's more of a calling or passion. If you are just looking for a boom industry, why video production and not something completely different and frankly more promising? Personally I think video will soon be flooded with wannabes as well as more and more people upgrade to video-capable DSLRs, and the prices for bread and butter work will tumble. There will always be a place for real talent, but you could say the same about stills photography.

Then there are other issues. Do you market yourself as a stills or video producer? I would personally be turned off by a 'jack of all trades'. For the clients who don't mind, why would they come to the photographer and add video to the brief rather than asking the film production house to add stills? Convergence is a two way street.

I'm sure you are doing what works for you and your clients, but I don't see it working for everyone.


Graham,
It's a good post also, I think you are pointing very interesting ideas and probably mixing the James post and yours could resume my feelings on convergence.

There is nothing that can last very long without passion and obviously not everybody can combine both numbers and passion.

I think it would be rather unproductive to just follow the fload (motion) if the person does not really feels it. But you know, I also met a lot of photographers, before all that video stuff, who where dead-alive and didn't show any more passion if they ever had some. They could make a living with it, staying where they were. In fact, I met more people like that than truly passionate ones.

The thing is for some, I include myself in that list, motion really brought another focus on creativity that they really feel but was hardly reachable because of costs (and not just demand-numbers reasons) . The wannabes will always flowrish in any genre, they were there way before video came.
But motion is a fully creative lenguage that will speak deaply to some and not so much to others.  
Talking personaly, the tools we have now (convergence) are tools that I feel with more passion than stills alone. I enjoy like never, I deeply feel "at home" within the current panorama. Will I do well is another story. It could not or could and for the moment learning the lenguage but as you pointed, the most important is to be convinced in terms of lenguage that it fits with one self and not just in terms of wanting to follow the fload because the market says so. I think you hitted an important point too there.

As for marketing still or video, I think that the evolution goes towards the image maker. Those barriers will be less and less relevant. You will talk about this name or this group or this studio naturally expecting stills and motion portfolio. Actually, I'm using the future tense but it's already there.
I don't think those studios will do cine movies, they will do advertising campaigns and photographers will do very well once the learning and adaptation acheived because of their senses of esthetic and light. To me it's just an extention (that requires adaptation yes) of the talents some photographers already have.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2011, 08:04:19 am by fredjeang »
Logged

bcooter

  • Guest
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #185 on: July 16, 2011, 10:09:40 am »

snip

I agree with you that the still photography market does not have the same growth potential that film does, but I don't necessarily agree that photographers should therefore start shooting video.

Video requires different abilities and a different way of thinking  

 snip

Then there are other issues. Do you market yourself as a stills or video producer? I would personally be turned off by a 'jack of all trades'. For the clients who don't mind, why would they come to the photographer and add video to the brief rather than asking the film production house to add stills? Convergence is a two way street.

snip



This is where we differ.

I thought you marketed yourself as a retoucher and a photographer.  Is this a jack of all trades or an added skill?  Is this a conflict of interest or opens you to a broader market?

Anyway . . .

I'm not looking for a boom industry, or a jack of all trades thought process.

I'm sure I'm like a lot of fortunate photographer's that have built a career, managed their resources and don't have to work as hard as I did when I started.  

The thing is I love working hard with purpose, love the image making process and my only real fear was to get stuck doing the same thing day in and day out.  I never wanted to be one of those rock guys that play the same song for three decades.

I gave going into motion imagery a lot of thought and like others, I first just fooled around with it as a secondary add on.  Then it just hit me that I  do like large production, I do not  want to work for ever decreasing still numbers at double the output and I wanted to add to my life and keep pushing.

Also as my clients move forward that's the same direction I wanted to go.

Everybody talks about the 5d and in stills it really is a 5d world.  That camera and others like it have changed how paying clients perceive the cost of still photography, even on high visibility brands, because everybody and their brother has a 5d and a copy of photoshop.

The professional buy in for motion is much higher, from shoot to post.  I mean when was the last time you did a  $164,000 still effect in post, though in the motion world that's the going price for an interesting post effect.  I know I have one in process as I write this.

As a Creative Director showed me on his I-phone one day he gets 30 e-mails an hour from still photographers, so I assume that he assumes that he has a great deal of leverage.

That's just not where I wanted to be  . . . at the commodity level.

I do market myself as someone that gets a desired result and just like stills there are some motion pieces we have shot and produced that I'm proud of and worked well for the client, though wouldn't move my career so they don't get featured on my public site and just like stills, we have motion pieces that have won awards and get nice acclaim but were not designed to be a profit making excersize.  

Often that is the nature of commercial work for either stills or motion.

Marketing I won't get into because like most people I get a lot of calls, though getting the call and securing the project are two different processes.   I have my way and there is not enough space or time to elaborate on what I do that works for me and I'm not comfortable explaining that in the public domain.

Personally I find the move into motion liberating and daunting.  It's liberating because the work can be compared to a long form editorial where you don't tell the story in one frame.   Daunting because you have to think ahead about how the session you shot today will fit into the cut you shoot in a week .

As the owner of the production company is exciting because our opinion has more value than still projects because now we work as a conceptual partner from the start to the final delivery.

We produce treatments, storyboards and in depth castings.

It also has required a steep learning curve on all fronts, from cameras, lighting, lenses and look - to the process of casting not just talent that can pose or look pretty, but can deliver a line and do it in a way that is interesting and surprising. .  

It has required becoming a signatory to hire union talent and forming new relationships with crew that have different skill sets than stills.   It's actually fun, but it's not for the weak of heart as it is a lot of work.

Right now we're into a 5 video multiple market project that we are shooting around the world.  We just finished the first stage and it's exhausting like still work never is, but for me more rewarding because so much has to fall in place in a cohesive manner.

We have now moved more into dialog work and it's another evolutionary step that is difficult to explain, but when a take works it's just amazing how good it feels, when it doesn't it's heart breaking, but the one great upside to motion is you develop a rapport with the on camera talent that we rarely did with a model.   You learn how they can stretch or what their limits are and usually I am surprised in a positive way, but like still photography you are there to serve the talent.  

If you make the talent interesting  you've done your job, though you have to be much more adaptable with motion, because you can't fix a line in post.

There is rarely a session where we don't have to deviate from script to make it work and if your the director you don't get a break, ever . . . though for me it's exhilarating.   During production I wake up at 3 or 4 in the morning, to rethink the script, or direction or the setting, or how we're going yo manage the edit.  I find that exciting beyond explanation.

But to try to keep this in context how the new wave of motion cameras relate to Hasselblad . . . well the RED is like a medium format camera.  It's large, not as nimble, requires a lot of thought and when done right produces the cinematic look we all grew up with in movie theaters.    The smaller cameras have enormous benefits in price and ease of use, though it takes a lot of post production to NOT make them look "video", so there are a lot of parallels.

We just added a Sony FS 100 which looks like a medium format camera in shape, (though has way too many buttons) but it can do some things I could never do with the RED ONE.     Both have their place.

But this thread is about Hasselblad with a new owner and probably that means a new game plan.   I would think Hasselblad, Leaf/Phase would have moved to motion cameras a lot faster than the Canon/Nikons of this world just because they were already serving the same high end professional market that RED and Arri will attract.    I'm sure the technology is different, but maybe that's the issue, the technology of medium format cameras has moved slower than other less expensive brands.  

Look at this link for RED and read the prices, the upgrades and I don't know about others, but to me it seems like the joke of it's deja-vu all over again, though it works because we'll probavly buy an epic very soon.

http://www.red.com/store/epic/product/epic-m

Just as most consumers won't see the difference between a well executed 5d image vs. a 60 mpx camera, maybe the same consumer won't see the difference between a 5k RED and a 2k Arri next to a Sony or a 5d,  though I think we both know the goal of a professional is not to shoot to what is just acceptable to the client, but what is acceptable to us.

So my real response to anyone is do what you want with whatever equipment you want, but just make sure you have a passion for doing it.


IMO

BC
« Last Edit: July 16, 2011, 10:18:25 am by bcooter »
Logged

Dustbak

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2442
    • Pepperanddust
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #186 on: July 16, 2011, 11:47:12 am »

BC,

I am following the whole video discussions with great interest for sometime now. It makes me wonder how large does your team needs to be? I for one have promises myself to never hire a single employee again in my lifetime but already find myself hiring more and more freelancers lately for all sorts of (merely) photography related work. I am wondering what are you realisticly talking about when it comes to motion teams? 

It has my interest but sofar I have no need to step in and do motion too but I find the desire is growing upon me. I wonder how far away motion is for a photographer, how much you would do yourself or would you sit back more and hire people to do things to be able to keep the overview?
« Last Edit: July 16, 2011, 11:48:50 am by Dustbak »
Logged

fredjeang

  • Guest
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #187 on: July 16, 2011, 12:41:46 pm »

BC,

I am following the whole video discussions with great interest for sometime now. It makes me wonder how large does your team needs to be? I for one have promises myself to never hire a single employee again in my lifetime but already find myself hiring more and more freelancers lately for all sorts of (merely) photography related work. I am wondering what are you realisticly talking about when it comes to motion teams?  

It has my interest but sofar I have no need to step in and do motion too but I find the desire is growing upon me. I wonder how far away motion is for a photographer, how much you would do yourself or would you sit back more and hire people to do things to be able to keep the overview?

'm not BC of course,
But I think I can share a few things anyway.

My ex boss is a big name here and I've been living from inside the transition to motion
from an assistant point of view and then myself fully involved in the pp learning curve
and now starting the prod and filming itself with other people.

Without team, I don't see it! You would go crazy. How big? Before I'd say this:

Without stability, I don't see it either. I mean by stability not hiring from time to time this or
that person but hiring or building a stable team. I could not insist more on that point.

It would be too long and I'd have to enter in details I won't publicaly but think stable at any price.
(also not only in terms of team but also in terms of softwares-hardwares).
 

The answer of how big is relative but it is really key you can build a stable team even if very reduced.

The part you can reasonable do yourself is the editing, a basic or not basic grading but there will be a learning curve.
The less basic the tougher.

The key word is organisation, planification. You'll see it in the shooting and in the post-prod.

Litterally you could do almost everything if not all on your own. Realistically it will depend very much on
the kind of projects involved and very fast the team work araises by itself.

Once the basic learning curve is acheived, every step is very serious and PP pro dedicated softwares are
indeed another planet in complexity. It's like you had learned to fly on a Cessna and they put you on a Space Shuttle.
Something very similar.

On the other hand, it's very exciting and rewarding, the chalenges are worth and if you feel passion about it,
you will overcome all the obstacles or difficulties.

But be aware that it will pump you a lot of time and energy. BC is obviously a beast of work (don't know if that term works in english, I mean
a person who has a working potential higher than normal) and also I think as he expressed in this forum, that his
private life is linked to the profession wich is very important and shouldn't be ignored. Because when one starts to wake up at 3 or 4,
or spend the week-ends in the learning etc...you know where those things can lead in terms of private life if they last for too long.
(unless the checks are suddenly raining upon your head)

So if you are married or similar I would honestly talk to the person and explain clearly your goal and the consequences during a period you will
be much less available. I'm not kiding on that point.
Because you'll have to dedicate a lot (a lot really) of time, specialy if you mostly like to work on very reduced team.

Then obviously telling the story wich is generally the weak point.

How far is motion to photography? Very close and very far IMO. In fact I'm convinced that it is an extention of qualities
that are already requiered in photography for the most part, but it is also an extention in terms of budget, power needed, complexity,
etc...

So I think that what you need to know are

1- make sure you really really want it
2- make sure you are ready for sacrifices
3- make sure you are clear and organised and bet on a stable team
4- make sure your goal is clear (even if you don't know right now the how)
5- avoid the learning by yourself, take clases with pros. Here the TV gives clases for ex.

Delegate.

IMHO.

Fred.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2011, 02:37:01 pm by fredjeang »
Logged

Dustbak

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2442
    • Pepperanddust
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #188 on: July 16, 2011, 12:53:14 pm »

Fred,

Thanks for filling in some of my blanks! Very much appreciated. Fortunately I already almost always use the same team for stills (some of these already are involved in motion, eg. sound). I totally agree on stability in the team, I am already upset when I need another MUA instead of the one I know and trust.

For as my wife :) She already handles all commercial affairs and traffic, she is great at that part and I totally rely on her to do this. From your comments I think her task would become even harder. Good point!

Thanks again.
Logged

fredjeang

  • Guest
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #189 on: July 16, 2011, 01:05:52 pm »

Yes, I'm completly in favor of stability in team now. It's an adventure, and if your wife is fully part of it, well it couldn't be better.

I think you have all the cards in your favor. I would go for it!

Best luck in that process.

Cheers.
Logged

David Watson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 480
    • David Watson
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #190 on: July 16, 2011, 02:55:51 pm »

Fred,

Thanks for filling in some of my blanks! Very much appreciated. Fortunately I already almost always use the same team for stills (some of these already are involved in motion, eg. sound). I totally agree on stability in the team, I am already upset when I need another MUA instead of the one I know and trust.

For as my wife :) She already handles all commercial affairs and traffic, she is great at that part and I totally rely on her to do this. From your comments I think her task would become even harder. Good point!

Thanks again.

Ray

I too have been following this thread with interest.  I spend most of my working year with my wife making TV programmes in the UK, working with production companies, camera and sound crews and so on.  It seems to me that there is likely to be another form of "convergence" here.  The TV crews are already using 5D's extensively and several camera men I know also make advertising films using their normal HD Canon and Sony kit but also now with 5D's.  They have bigger budgets and come with lots of experience and, in the case of facilities and production companies, businesses and balance sheets to protect.

You could argue that a photographer moving into high quality video is expanding his (or her) market but they will be stepping on the toes of existing freelance camera men many of whom will have craft skills in terms of handling and use of the equipment way beyond that which can be quickly learned by a stills photographer (but not necessarily a good "eye").  One of my best friends is a professional camera man and a keen semi-professional stills photographer.  He does a lot of work with advertising agencies and companies making TV adverts which have been conceived from a video rather than still perspective.

 i guess the key question is - who is commissioning the work?  If the commissioner has a TV or film background he will lean to conventional camera crews with a director and so on.  If he has a graphics or picture editing (stills) background for example he may well think of a stills photographer with a video capability first.

In any case almost no-one in the TV production industry owns their own equipment - it is all hired.  They cannot afford the depreciation or the risk that something will break down with no backup.  If we are on location and a lens or camera fail the facilities company will send someone right away with a replacement.

More to think about perhaps?
Logged
David Watson ARPS

Dustbak

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2442
    • Pepperanddust
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #191 on: July 16, 2011, 03:13:04 pm »

Definitely something to think about. Not so much about stepping on anyones toes, I couldn't care less. I do think about the significant raise in costs & budgets. This is a risk on one side on the other it is a threshold for everyone so not just me. This is also one of the reasons we are doing well with stills, it is a hard time for everyone so you have to really push to get ahead. This can be a good thing and for us it is. another threshold in the form of a high investment barrier isn't necessarily a bad thing either.

I hate renting things, I rather buy outright. You have to create enough work to be able to do so. So yes another thing to think over.

Maybe, I will get a 5D first to toy with...

You mentioned the cameramen with a lot more experience which is one thing I do realize. When I would go the route of hiring these people myself because of that I am getting more into the role of producing or being just the 'eye', not sure if this is where I want to go. I think I might but this is getting very close to something I have left over 10 years ago though maybe a bit more on the creative side.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2011, 03:20:03 pm by Dustbak »
Logged

fredjeang

  • Guest
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #192 on: July 16, 2011, 03:28:50 pm »

I think that if buying Red is probably the way to go and rent in the case of Arri.

Hey, don't forget the Pana GH2. I know it looks like a toy but really isn't at all and in video more advanced than the 5D2. The Red One guys in Paris are crazy about it.
You can litterally mount anything on it, even PL lenses and it's almost free of moire.

This guy is a Red guru, very respected:
(like the Stevie Ray Vaughan red air japanese in the end)

This little camera is amazing. Since I have it the 5D is getting spider webs.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2011, 03:38:22 pm by fredjeang »
Logged

bcooter

  • Guest
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #193 on: July 16, 2011, 10:14:08 pm »

snip
I hate renting things, I rather buy outright. You have to create enough work to be able to do so. So yes another thing to think over.

Maybe, I will get a 5D first to toy with...

snip


Cameras are cameras so I wouldn't worry too much.

It all depends on your wallet and your goal.

Personally, If I was starting I'd buy the Sony fs100 over a 5d if motion footage was the goal.

http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/video/related-most_popular/video-prenab2011_nxcam_nexfs100u_training/

It will autofocus with it's one kit zoom lens (which is great for tracking) has the shape of a traditional square box camera like a old hasselblad with a grip but it takes any lens, from Sony Zeiss A mount, (which are 2.8's), PL movie lenses, Nikons, Canons, Leica.

Sony also has new Emount autofocus lenses coming soon.

They're are two xlr inputs for sound (full size) an HDMI out for tethered viewing.

It does have a lot of buttons but they are fairly easy to learn in about a day and a lot of customized look settings, where you can shoot flat, somewhat like the technicolor 5d setting to anything in between.

I think there are 5 presets for color and tone and you can shoot to cards or a small dedicated disk that will give 10 hours of recording.

It goes to high gain well with little noise and the sensor is almost twice the size of the 4x3 cameras once the file is cropped to 16x0.

The camera is around 5 grand, the lenses as much or as little as you want to spend but it is a motion camera designed completely for motion work.

The workflow is about the same as stills.   The sony shoots a avchd wrapper though the codec is h264 4:2:2.   There are cheap softwares that wrap it into a .mov file and then you can batch upload through easy  free software to make a workable apple prorezz 422.

You will have to color grade it for look if you don't do it in camera though color grading comes after the edit and cs4/5 does a very good job and fairly fast in a software your familiar with.

So with camera, lenses a wireless lav and a small friction head for about 10 grand you can shoot a quality beyond anything that cost $50,000 just a few years ago without a steep learning curve.

IMO

BC
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Ventizz to acquire Hasselblad
« Reply #194 on: July 19, 2011, 04:06:37 am »

Cameras are cameras so I wouldn't worry too much.

It all depends on your wallet and your goal.

Personally, If I was starting I'd buy the Sony fs100 over a 5d if motion footage was the goal.

So with camera, lenses a wireless lav and a small friction head for about 10 grand you can shoot a quality beyond anything that cost $50,000 just a few years ago without a steep learning curve.

IMO

BC


It would be interesting to know how the low-budget music video people do their job.

Edmund
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]   Go Up