As artists, content providers, image makers, whatever we're called today, whether we like it or not, we don't decide on the delivery device, we just respond.
Always have.
After all what photographer ever decided that lithographic printing should be a 133 or 200 line screen, or tee vee should be 720x480 or 1920 x 1080?
We didn't, we don't and honestly nobody ever asks us, clients just explain what they want and usually the information is sketchy, but once again we respond.
Even back in the original still 1ds one days, clients would ask for large file sizes which were overkill and I'd just say my camera makes a 90mb file (it did if you moved that photoshop slider all the way up). They'd say cool and life would go on.
When I moved to digital backs, at this point most clients were overwhelmed with file storage and started asking for smaller files.
Now it's more complex than ever.
This week I have either produced or viewed motion images in 600 pixel wide on a virgin america screen, 1920 x 1080 on my office led tv, 2700 or my computer desktop screens, 1920 on the powerbooks, whatever an ipad is, whatever an I phone is, whatever you tube is, whatever the wall street journal videos are, a 900 pixel high still movie poster at a new theatre, a 180 line screen printed in store poster and have sent out two double truck still ads, at 4,600 pixels across, one shot with the RED one with the Canon 5d still camera.
So my point is I'm not too sure it matters. I know when we crop in on the RED files we go back to cine-x and reprocess out at 2k with the exact crop, or just sticking withe the original 2k file and enlarging it in the edior I can't see a 5% difference. I've done this two dozen times and honestly as long as I don't crop more than 40% it looks the same.
I have one client that has this long list of video deliverables, that leaves off kps, most codecs but is adamant about having separate sound tracks.
Go figure.
I do know this . . . that by the time client's get off the 2k standard, we'll probably have motion cameras that shoot 10k, because if video cameras mirrors still camera development that's the way it will probably go.
Apple knows this also and they don't care about 100,000 RED users, they care about the 12 gazillion 5d2 and down users. That's where the money is and you can't blame them.
The only thing I see changing is streaming video where the network can identify your connection speed and computer and send out the highest ( or lowest) quality possible.
With the heavy demand of bandwidth eating up the carriers, I assume the lowest.
I also know one other thing that as the economy continues to be more challanged, all clients want their message out in the most contained and viewable way possible and their beginning to view every surface as a form of media.
In fact all in-store would be led's today if the economy hadn't tanked.
Don't think we won't see softdrink machines, petrol pumps, checkout stands, magazine racks, POS posters that upload a new video a day that moves, talks, dances or whatever and though the world may start to look like a mini time square, advertisers don't care as long as you look at the message.
http://creativereview.co.uk/cr-blog/2011/august/cool-sht-new-directions-in-advertisingWhat most clients don't care about is whether you edit and/or color in fcp 3,5,6,7 10, Avid, Edius, Premier or I-movie.
They just want what they want and it's up to you to decide how to make it happen.
IMO
BC
