Luminous Landscape Forum
Site & Board Matters => About This Site => Topic started by: Ray on December 18, 2015, 02:24:48 am
-
Interesting video, although a bit tedious at times, waiting for major points to be articulated.
William Neill certainly has the right idea, which I can relate to.
An impressive, awe-inspiring landscape, might require a wide-angle lens to capture the entire experience. But within that landscape there are numerous sub-sections which can be accessed with a telephoto lens or from close up.
This is the procedure I adopt on my travels. A good quality zoom lens with a decent range, I find essential.
-
Interesting video, although a bit tedious at times, waiting for major points to be articulated.
Which is a fundamental problem of video... there is a lot to be said for text that you can skim through to get the interesting bits.
-
Yes, that is what is wrong with this site (and some others), tedious, chatty videos.
Give me concise writing every time.
-
Yes, that is what is wrong with this site (and some others), tedious, chatty videos.
Give me concise writing every time.
+1
Why do they think older people like (most of) us can not read anymore? Is is faster to make a simple video than write an article? Could be, but then we are expected to waste our time watching the clumsy videos. Modern ways are not necessarily better than the old.
-
Sorry folks, but I entirely disagree. Reading or flicking quickly through text to find those hidden nuggets of information is one thing, a bit like studying, whereas sitting back and watching a talking head video interview, is much more informative, entertaining and inclusive.
I also think that the majority of people nowadays, find watching video a much more convenient and effective way to absorb content, than the old method of studying text, as the nuanced ideas, methods and even body language etc, can be fully communicated to the viewer a lot more easily, accurately and entertainingly through video.
Just my 2p’s worth.
Good interview Kevin BTW, I must admit I didn’t think you had the greatest of interview styles as compared to Michael, which is someone I am afraid you are always going to be compared to, as you normally seem a little on edge and occasionally lost for direction when asking questions, but with these two videos you are superb, you are relaxed, entertaining and have developed a good sense of where best to dig down to reveal the essence of what makes William Neil tick photographically. Excellent work!
I really look forward to viewing the rest of the William Neil interview segments of this series and hopefully to many more “Master” interviews, I think you might have struck gold here Kevin, well done that man!
Dave
-
Videos are simply unable to get out of the 'entertainment' box.
Unless made with professional, and good, actors, the cast can't be 'natural' and somebody who looks patently uncomfortable makes the audience squirm- or laugh - at the wrong moment. The people on show remain stiff, their little foibles infuriate after a time, and the direction/concept seems to drift all over the place. This seems to happen most with 'arty' videos where a particular person is being interviewed about his life and photography. (I say this, because that's the sort of video - apart from music - that I watch, mostly.) The questions, no doubt for the sake of the neophye viewer, are tediously basic and, worse, the interviewer often reveals great ignorance about the person he/she is interviewing. Another problem, as great, is that the person being interviewed is not always able to relax, either, and discomfort is catchy! Then you have the occasional opposite: people such as David Bailey, who has the chutzpah to handle anyone, backed up with a sense of humour even about himself.
I understand completely that doing the thing at a professional level is going to cost the Earth; possibly that's why the BBC manages to acquit itself so well when it takes on the challenge: it has both the funding (thank God) as well as the professional expertise to do the job it sets out to do. Perhaps that's also partly due to the source of much of its staff: you can't produce miracles if you can't believe in them.
Rob C
-
There's videos? No one said.
-
Why do they think older people like (most of) us can not read anymore?
I bet you can walk, and yet you do use cars, planes etc. for transportation -- whenever appropriate. Horses for courses.
I would agree that this particular interview turned out to be underwhelming, for whatever reason (do not want to dig into that...). But, overall, I for one think that video is perfect medium for interviews; here's one example (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=106479.0) of an interview where video did make a difference, and a hugely positive one at that.
-
Videos are simply unable to get out of the 'entertainment' box.
Rob C
Perhaps Rob, it has something to do with where people are on the Photographic learning curve? People who are already fairly confident in their knowledge, might just want the entertainment of video interviews, with the possibility of it being peppered with a few meaningful insights, sort of like topping up or even reinforcing what you already know or intuitively understand. I admit that videos lean more towards the entertainment style of learning than the text studying style of learning, but the videos here on Lula are just one part of the full spectrum of material available and I do think interviews such as these, certainly add something different and just as informative to the mix.
Dave
-
Perhaps Rob, it has something to do with where people are on the Photographic learning curve? People who are already fairly confident in their knowledge, might just want the entertainment of video interviews, with the possibility of it being peppered with a few meaningful insights, sort of like topping up or even reinforcing what you already know or intuitively understand.
Agree, but not only that...
Rob, you made a good point in another thread that it's important to understand what makes people "tick". I bet videos convey that better than any other medium.
-
Then you have the occasional opposite: people such as David Bailey,
I very nearly added to my post "with occasional exceptions", thinking of Bailey. In motorcycle racing, it's one reason Valentino Rossi is so huge: he has this constant high-voltage feel about him, you could ask him about how he chooses his socks in the morning and he'd say something riveting. And previously Barry Sheene, who happened to steal one of DB's women... not purely a coincidence I suspect ;D
-
... Give me concise writing every time.
"F/8 and be there."
If concise is the goal, nothing else should ever be written about photography.
-
Hey Kevin,
While you were in Yosemite did you run into the Yosemite Marching Band?
Yosemte Marching Band (https://vimeo.com/18242035)
-
"F/8 and be there."
If concise is the goal, nothing else should ever be written about photography.
Even more concise: "Be there":)
-
Even more concise: "Be there":)
Ditto, see item 3 here (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=106591.msg877328#msg877328).
-
Quote Paulo: "Be there":)
:) !
-
"Be there" - and you could be anybody - tourist, visitor, onlooker, living there... "F/8" part indicates, as metaphor, you are a photographer.
-
More like f64 to honor photographers like Edward Weston and Imogene Cunningham.
-
~there...present.
Tao Te Ching, Chapter Thirty-three
-
First of all, when I wrote my earlier post here, I hadn't realised that the OP was about a video on this website; I have not seen it, and my views were not based on it - obviously enough when you are aware that I didn't see it!
But in general: I do not think video is all that good as a learning tool; equally, I once had a Photoshop manual and had to get rid of the thing - I couldn't get anywhere with it, perhaps because it took up from beyond my own knowledge level at that period. For me, and I'm willing to believe it's different for others, the ideal way to learn is one-to-one with somebody simply doing the thing in front of my eyes, letting me try it too, and then helping to iron out my mistakes. In a crowd/classroom situation, I don't see how it would work unless every student had a computer and dedicated teacher, returning it, more or less, to 1+1.
From the point of view of learning/appreciating what makes a photographic mind work, then video is great: I can think of stream-of-consciousness from Sarah Moon as she talks her way over some photographs, going into the anguish, despair, disappointment, fear and then huge joy as something starts to happen; the rapid acceleration from there to the climax of that moment - it's all stuff I know to be genuine because I have lived it and understand her emotions clearly: they are mine. It's wonderful because it lets me see that at least an artist whom I admire absolutely, doesn't just walk into a situation, click once, and wander away with an instant masterpìece. You have to build it, bit by bit. And of course, I'm not writing here about technique - that's a given: it's about maximizing the essence of what's possible between the two people, the model and the photographer. And the funny thing, when I hear her say of a moment when she feels, during a slow shoot, "I don't want to be a photographer anymore," I understand it so well, even as I know that negativity only lasts until the moment the reward hits your eyes, whereupon it becomes the greatest high there is. So yes, Zorki5 is right: it's a wonderful medium for getting into a soul.
Island Dave is also correct in saying that video adds; I suppose, as he suggests, much depends on where the viewer stands, and what he wants to draw from the watching experience. The BBC runs an occasional series "What do artists do all day?" and one such was devoted to Albert Watson doing a shoot (for P1, afaik) on Skye. I've watched it numerous times, not because I'm into landscape (I'm not), but because of Watson. He has something that makes watching easy, and a rewarding experience, regardless of genre, and he ends up with amazing pictures. However, it's funny seeing a pro who has a dedicated "tripod assistant"... How the other micropercent lives!
Rob C
-
I've been a visitor here for 8 years and read many articles but can't remember watching a single video.
I bought a couple of the old Reichman/Schewe video series which provided useful information at the time and were always entertaining because of the interplay/tension between the co-stars, but more recent offerings haven't impressed at least in sample form.
Addition: Oh dear, another post about the good old days.
-
I bought a couple of the old Reichman/Schewe video series which provided useful information at the time and were always entertaining because of the interplay/tension between the co-stars, but more recent offerings haven't impressed at least in sample form.
Addition: Oh dear, another post about the good old days.
Why not? They were often bloody good ones! At least, many of mine were.
;-)
Rob C
-
Wow, I'm a bit surprised at the "give me text and forget the video" comments. In terms of "learning content only" I guess there's some value, I suppose, for those who learn best that way. But I don't think that these videos are about "learning content" only, or perhaps even primarily. In an age where we've gone from having conversations to sending text message and 147 character sound-bites, what I have come to call "signaling" as opposed to relating/engaging, this sort of video conversation/story is wonderful. Animals "signal," humans (used to be) story tellers. Since we've entered an age where material reductionism seems to hold the field, we're as a result, sadly, losing our humanity.
I find it refreshing to watch a video like this. To get a sense of "the person" is as important to me as any content that I might walk away with. Hearing a bit of his life story, how it has shaped his thinking, to see and experience his body language, mode of expression; to get a bit of his personality, temperament, etc. is very nice.
Chances are I'll never have the opportunity to meet William Neil, but Kevin has given me the privilege of visiting with him and learning from him about more things than technical stuff. KUDOs to LULA for this. Much like the conversation with Brooks Jensen, this kind of vicarious interaction with creative folk enriches my own experience as a "story telling" human being.
My .02
Rand
-
Know nothing about you Rand but glad that there are still some of you out there. So glad you spoke this opinion...it echoes many I hope, who gratefully accept any and every opportunity to "experience" and "understand" and see a bit of what is rapidly deteriorating before our very eyes. (perhaps they [eyes and their sockets] too will be replaced on 5 gallon heads by tech sensors), as sense and vision appears to be on the road to devaluation/obsolescence as the tech thumb has risen and changed in function...
-
Wow, I'm a bit surprised at the "give me text and forget the video" comments. In terms of "learning content only" I guess there's some value, I suppose, for those who learn best that way. But I don't think that these videos are about "learning content" only, or perhaps even primarily. In an age where we've gone from having conversations to sending text message and 147 character sound-bites, what I have come to call "signaling" as opposed to relating/engaging, this sort of video conversation/story is wonderful. Animals "signal," humans (used to be) story tellers. Since we've entered an age where material reductionism seems to hold the field, we're as a result, sadly, losing our humanity.
I find it refreshing to watch a video like this. To get a sense of "the person" is as important to me as any content that I might walk away with. Hearing a bit of his life story, how it has shaped his thinking, to see and experience his body language, mode of expression; to get a bit of his personality, temperament, etc. is very nice.
Chances are I'll never have the opportunity to meet William Neil, but Kevin has given me the privilege of visiting with him and learning from him about more things than technical stuff. KUDOs to LULA for this. Much like the conversation with Brooks Jensen, this kind of vicarious interaction with creative folk enriches my own experience as a "story telling" human being.
My .02
Rand
+10
-
I'm surprised the thread has been devoted entirely to the slightly negative part of my original post, which was more of a 'by the way', postscript comment.
One of the main points I got from the video, which I can relate to, is the concept that an awe-inspiring scene which might have been photographed many thousands of times as a result of the reputation of the place attracting countless visitors, tends to be photographed with a wide-angle lens, producing results which might be very similar to coutless other shots from the same location.
However, within such a scene, there can also be countless, interesting subsets, or smaller scenes, which can be accessed through the use of a telephoto lens and/or by spending more time walking around within that environment which is usually photographed as a whole from some viewing platform.
-
I'm surprised the thread has been devoted entirely to the slightly negative part of my original post, which was more of a 'by the way', postscript comment.
One of the main points I got from the video, which I can relate to, is the concept that an awe-inspiring scene which might have been photographed many thousands of times as a result of the reputation of the place attracting countless visitors, tends to be photographed with a wide-angle lens, producing results which might be very similar to coutless other shots from the same location.
However, within such a scene, there can also be countless, interesting subsets, or smaller scenes, which can be accessed through the use of a telephoto lens and/or by spending more time walking around within that environment which is usually photographed as a whole from some viewing platform.
Isn't the above kinda obvious? It's in need of explanation for folks to know that? Folks in LuLa?
Rob C
-
Isn't the above kinda obvious? It's needs explanation for folks to know that? Folks in LuLa?
Rob C
I guess that must be the explanation, Rob. ;)
-
I am more interested in getting to know the man rather than the f-stop. The whyness over the howness. I like this video series and look forward to the last two installments.
-
I am more interested in getting to know the man rather than the f-stop. The whyness over the howness. I like this video series and look forward to the last two installments.
That's pretty much what I seek from photographer-related videos too; but the list of those who interest me enough is short.
Rob C
-
That's pretty much what I seek from photographer-related videos too; but the list of those who interest me enough is short.
Rob C
But surely you do have some sense that there might be photographers out there who aren't on your current list because you haven't yet encountered their work?
-
Wow, I'm a bit surprised at the "give me text and forget the video" comments. In terms of "learning content only" I guess there's some value, I suppose, for those who learn best that way. But I don't think that these videos are about "learning content" only, or perhaps even primarily.
Good point. I have been thinking of LuLa mainly as a source of instructional videos, but there is certainly a world of value and interest out there in taking a broader approach.
-
But surely you do have some sense that there might be photographers out there who aren't on your current list because you haven't yet encountered their work?
I'm sure that there are thousands of them; however, my time is getting shorter, as it is for everyone else, and I already have a massive 'favourites' list on the computer to which I seek to add no more! I forget some of those already on said list and rediscover them with surprise...
Partly, my interests are limited to specific genres of which the main men - or women - are already on the list, and as the vast majority are of my own generation or before, and as the whole digital world and its over-retouched android models don't turn on my imagination, modern wonders are, to me, not. In fact, I am ever more amazed at how well photographers working in fashion, before I even knew what it was, managed to do what they did with what was to hand in their era. Stylistic quirks I imagined belonged to the 50s/60s were alive and well decades before. There's a wonderful world in history!
If you go over to PJ work, I think the same truth holds there, too: what was going on before digital was plenty good enough! As I'm not much concerned with landscape, most of the contemporary people are, and will ever remain unknown to me. Ditto the 'art' stars and great 'conceptionalists' and masters of the 'installation'.
My wee head can only enjoy so much. It's interests are not universal.
;-)
Rob C
P.S. On top of that, where on Earth could I store my musical loves if all the available space was used up?
-
Interesting you should think this - I think this is a very personal view. Part of my day job is making corporate videos for our internal Youtube type channel. I've being doing this for several years now and have been able to build up a significant amount of data about usage.
When we started, our basic stats looked promising, there was lots of traffic to the video channel. But we were suspicious based on the informal verbal feedback we had received, so we implemented a different kind of stats recording. Instead of merely counting views, we collected stats on how many people watched the first 10%, the second 10%,third 10% etc.
What we saw was a bit of a shock. Basically, people watched the first minute, then skipped to the last minute. If the video was more than about 3 minutes long, they rarely bothered at all.
Now, admittedly this is in a corporate environment and these videos weren't intended to entertain. What we learned was that when people are busy, they are impatient and in a hurry. When they are impatient and in a hurry, they want key information as fast as possible. A well written web page, carefully chunked and with good headings, with the most important info at the start supports the scanning behaviour of people in a hurry. Video doesn't, it is too linear and real time. Video is a tedious and painful medium for conveying info to people in a hurry.
Where video does work well, is for entertainment, when you have time to kill. It is also good for conveying visual sequence based guidance (such as how to assemble something). It is a specialist medium.
Text is still the most effective medium if you only have one channel available to you.
p.s.
Quite amusing that you like Michael's onscreen presence so much. Ever since I first subscribed to the DVD journal, my partner throws up her hands and runs out of the house every time Michael appears. Not meaning to be unkind to Michael but she find him to be a most boring, droning, unlistenable speaker. Personal tastes play a part, as do accents and nationalities to different listeners. I don't mind his presenting style so much, but I do wish he'd get a move on, everything does seem to be stuck in molasses. Playing at 1.5x speed might be better!
Sorry folks, but I entirely disagree. Reading or flicking quickly through text to find those hidden nuggets of information is one thing, a bit like studying, whereas sitting back and watching a talking head video interview, is much more informative, entertaining and inclusive.
I also think that the majority of people nowadays, find watching video a much more convenient and effective way to absorb content, than the old method of studying text, as the nuanced ideas, methods and even body language etc, can be fully communicated to the viewer a lot more easily, accurately and entertainingly through video.
Just my 2p’s worth.
Good interview Kevin BTW, I must admit I didn’t think you had the greatest of interview styles as compared to Michael, which is someone I am afraid you are always going to be compared to, as you normally seem a little on edge and occasionally lost for direction when asking questions, but with these two videos you are superb, you are relaxed, entertaining and have developed a good sense of where best to dig down to reveal the essence of what makes William Neil tick photographically. Excellent work!
I really look forward to viewing the rest of the William Neil interview segments of this series and hopefully to many more “Master” interviews, I think you might have struck gold here Kevin, well done that man!
Dave
-
Part of the problem, I think, is in photography itself: it's identity is in the doing, but its manifestation in the done. In between lies nothing much to talk about. Unless your bag is gear, when it could just as well be anything mechanical/technical else at all.
Dave Millier is spot on regarding the subconscious judgements made by the viewer on watching a new video: even hangin' on, in hope, for five minutes can sometimes be tedious, regardless of who is on the screen. I can imagine few more painful minutes than watching some sporting star talk about his 'job'... However, I can certainly enjoy listening to people like Keef the Stone talking about life: there's a great one on the BBC that coincided with the release of the book Life. Not only do I enjoy some of the music, not all, but it is of a time so important to me, personally. I distinctly remember standing in the reception of some studio in London with Satisfaction throbbing away inside an inner, distant room that I never got to see... I think you have to bring a helluva lot of yourself into any video you are about to watch.
Not really a matter of being anyone's fault - more just how it is.
Rob C
-
Quite amusing that you like Michael's on screen presence so much. Ever since I first subscribed to the DVD journal, my partner throws up her hands and runs out of the house every time Michael appears. Not meaning to be unkind to Michael but she find him to be a most boring, droning, unlistenable speaker. Personal tastes play a part, as do accents and nationalities to different listeners. I don't mind his presenting style so much, but I do wish he'd get a move on, everything does seem to be stuck in molasses. Playing at 1.5x speed might be better!
Dave, my wife would certainly agree with your partner, so perhaps Michael’s somewhat technical style is not very ‘photographer’s wife friendly’, as she finds his style to be and I quote, “a bit full of himself”, and I suppose I can see what she means, but when you know your stuff as well as he does and it is backed up by the decades of experience that he has, then I suppose it might be quite difficult not to come across as being self confident.
But the real reason I think Michael and Chris really nail it in the video journals and other videos on Lula, is their deep and obvious belief and love of what they are doing and the natural enthusiasm they both put into doing it. Michael comes across as a photographer who is both genuinely and deeply into photography, he speaks from within and tells it like it is as he sees it, whereas a lot of other online photo vids these days, seem to me to be presented by people who are doing a job and even though sometimes it’s a really good job they are doing, it is still a job to them and that job happens to be photography. This might be a subtle and possibly negligible difference to other people, but it certainly comes across to me and is why I like the video journals so much, because they are based on genuine photography, done and presented by a genuinely enthusiastic photographer and all captured seamlessly by Chris, a genuinely enthusiastic videographer, who also happens to be very good at showing us great compositional single shot images, but using a video camera.
If you are prepared to dig around on the net, then you can occasionally find other examples of this thing that I am referring to here as ‘genuineness’, but you have to dig deep to find them, so here is an example of a video by Wayne Gudmunson in Iceland (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt_e1d7ZBAk), which I also enjoy watching and that ticks all the boxes for me. :)
Dave
-
I've been a visitor here for 8 years and read many articles but can't remember watching a single video.
+1
-
I don't know if it was the interviewer or the interviewee but it felt awkward watching the two video clips.
To me, it felt more awkward to read such a putdown than watching a quite interesting video.
If the first video felt awkward, why to watch the second?
-
... my partner throws up her hands and runs out of the house every time Michael appears. Not meaning to be unkind to Michael but she find him to be a most boring, droning, unlistenable speaker....everything does seem to be stuck in molasses...
I envy you.
You must be a really, really, really very good old buddy with Michael when you can say such things to his face publicly. I am sure you guys just laugh it off, hug it out and go for a drink, right?
-
To me, it felt more awkward to read such a putdown...
Indeed, Les.
(Anti) social etiquette of the Age of the Internet? That the lines between what we say to people's faces publicly (as is the case in this example), and what we say about someone in the circle of our friends and privacy of our home got so blurred that they seem non-existent.
-
I envy you.
You must be a really, really, really very good old buddy with Michael when you can say such things to his face publicly. I am sure you guys just laugh it off, hug it out and go for a drink, right?
Nobody needs a buddy like that. It appears that lately, some members replaced their mood stabilizer prescription with a much more economical $12 Lula subscription and their aggression release sessions with the forum platform.
-
However straying from the usual drag also brings with it increased risk in the wilderness (I've come face to face with a sleepy rattlesnake at 3') so I'm loathed to talk about going "off piste" there lest it lead to others putting their safety at risk.
There's nothing to fear but fear itself. ;)
-
I don't know if it is possible to have a "secret location" at somewhere like Yosemite.
There are plenty of secret locations I have in Yosemite, even in Yosemite Valley. Keep in mind Yosemite Valley makes up less than 5% of the national park. The most dangerous place you can be in Yosemite is on the road! I've had my own life endangered when a car stopped on a blind corner to take some photos. The most dangerous animals in the park are the mice which can carry Hanta Virus.
-
The part 3 video feels much better to watch and it is again great to see talk about using longer lenses to isolate items of interest ("What is the image about?")
-
The first two parts seemed to deal with the background and backstory of the man, video #3 is more about how he shoots. For many people, this is what they want. For those who are interested in the concept of photographing pieces of the landscape, I suggest David Ward, British photographer, the book, 'Landscapes Within'
-
That the lines between what we say to people's faces publicly (as is the case in this example), and what we say about someone in the circle of our friends and privacy of our home got so blurred that they seem non-existent.
I agree the post in question crossed a boundary. OTOH, Michael is putting himself out there as a performer, on a paid site. When I see him on a video I see the writer and photographer whose work I have admired for years, and I have no issue with his delivery style. A visitor to the site who may or may not become a subscriber lacks the advantage of knowing who he is, and it may be of some value to him, as a business man, to know that not everyone is impressed. Of course he needs to stay true to himself, but still, there might be...room for improvement.
Edit: "not everyone's wife is impressed".
-
I agree the post in question crossed a boundary. OTOH, Michael is putting himself out there as a performer, on a paid site. When I see him on a video I see the writer and photographer whose work I have admired for years, and I have no issue with his delivery style. A visitor to the site who may or may not become a subscriber lacks the advantage of knowing who he is, and it may be of some value to him, as a business man, to know that not everyone is impressed. Of course he needs to stay true to himself, but still, there might be...room for improvement.
True. And then there are just bad manners and a lack of civility. "Just being honest" seems as to have become code for license and narcissistic indulgence.
Rand
-
Indeed, Les.
(Anti) social etiquette of the Age of the Internet? That the lines between what we say to people's faces publicly (as is the case in this example), and what we say about someone in the circle of our friends and privacy of our home got so blurred that they seem non-existent.
Where does one post reviews of video that they view on LL if not here?
And if there is something that we don't like, we should ... keep it to ourselves?
How else does one improve except through feedback - both positive and negative?
Maybe what others perceive as being "tedious" came across completely differently to me.
I've never felt as awkward watching 1&2 as I have watching any of the clips Michael has done.
It felt more like Kevin was a Spanish Inquisitor than an interviewer. I couldn't see any real dynamic between them - the body language was just as loud as the conversation. The third clip is better. If clip 1 & 2 were shot before 3, then maybe something to learn is to do the 1&2 sort of clips last.
-
And if there is something that we don't like, we should ... keep it to ourselves?
How else does one improve except through feedback - both positive and negative?
Maybe what others perceive as being "tedious" came across completely differently to me.
Over the years, I've seen many on-line or in-person presentations by various artists Some are better in delivery than in substance, some excellent on both counts, and some presenters may have had a bad day. Either way, all deserve respect - in contrast to the armchair critics who would be better advised to channel their energy to more constructive expressions.
-
I only watched one segment.
I was struck by how Kevin was fixated on boiling it down to 'quick tips' while Mr. Neil seemed to me to be politely pushing back and talking about process.
'Work the subject, try things out, look for the picture'
'So you're saying to use a longer lens for isolation?'
'Huh?'
The thing is that quick tips only get you a little way. Eventually you have to start working the subject and trying to find the picture.
-
Eventually you have to start working the subject and trying to find the picture.
Which is also a "quick tip". Something along the lines of "don't stop working the subject even after you took a shot that you think is good or even great; keep trying different angles, framing, light etc."
-
I think of a tip as a self contained, immediately actionable, thing. 'Use a long lens' is a tip.
'Working a subject' is a direction that unpacks quite a lot, which for me places it somewhere pretty far away from the 'tip' end of the spectrum.
-
Andrew, here is a tip for you: "same difference" ;)
-
Over the years, I've seen many on-line or in-person presentations by various artists Some are better in delivery than in substance, some excellent on both counts, and some presenters may have had a bad day. Either way, all deserve respect - in contrast to the armchair critics who would be better advised to channel their energy to more constructive expressions.
So how do we show that respect?
I'm confident that as Kevin gets more experience with interviewing and talking to new people on camera that he'll get better at it - like everything, practice makes perfect.
-
...Where video does work well, is for entertainment, when you have time to kill. It is also good for conveying visual sequence based guidance (such as how to assemble something). It is a specialist medium.
Text is still the most effective medium if you only have one channel available to you.
I agree. I prefer text (books, ebooks, websites) because it can be randomly accessed, referenced, indexed, annotated, browsed and re-visited easily. Compared to text, videos (other than guidance or training for sequential activities; professionally produced entertainment, or edu-tainment) are a frustratingly clumsy medium of educational reference for me because of the difficulty of indexing, marking, organizing and retrieving desired bits of information.
-
I'm confident that as Kevin gets more experience with interviewing and talking to new people on camera that he'll get better at it - like everything, practice makes perfect.
To me, they both looked OK. Natural, relaxed and more knowledgeable than some other TV or youtube personalities.
I'm aware that some may like the delivery style of Scott Kelby or Donald Trump, but as a Canadian with European heritage, I prefer the more subtle and meaningful reportage.
The good thing is that fortunately we have a choice what to subscribe to and watch. I am thankful to Lula, Kevin, and Chris for such content.
Compared to text, videos (other than guidance or training for sequential activities; professionally produced entertainment, or edu-tainment) are a frustratingly clumsy medium of educational reference for me because of the difficulty of indexing, marking, organizing and retrieving desired bits of information.
Very good point.
One possible way to facilitate search and indexing would be to add some relevant tags and keywords from the video to the accompanying article to make it searchable.
-
I have been known to offer the tongue in cheek tip 'open your **** eyes!' which is, as I see it, what Mr. Neil is saying. Walk. Look. Observe how the relationships between objects and masses in the frame change.
This is what photography is. The rest is just technical details.
If Kevin wants to be a better interviewer then, with respect, he needs to pay more attention to what's being said by the interviewee. I felt as if Kevin was cherry picking what Mr. Neil was saying, and commenting on what were minor details. Settings. Equipment. Things that new photographers think are interesting. Mr. Neil was talking about things which, to be honest, most new photographers find largely incomprehensible.
This disconnect made the video rather weird. Is it a video for beginners, or for people who've been shooting for a while? Or both? I don't know.
-
I only watched one segment.
I was struck by how Kevin was fixated on boiling it down to 'quick tips' while Mr. Neil seemed to me to be politely pushing back and talking about process.
'Work the subject, try things out, look for the picture'
'So you're saying to use a longer lens for isolation?'
'Huh?'
The thing is that quick tips only get you a little way. Eventually you have to start working the subject and trying to find the picture.
Heck, you're missing half of the fun of two different human beings interacting. William in his context has become a thoughtful, reflective shooter. Kevin is like the perennial kid in a candy store (we should all be so lucky). So when William is sharing his stream-of-consciousness approach to the thoughtful approach to exploring a subject, the "kid in the candy store" latches onto some exciting "data points" from that and exuberantly flings them back at William for confirmation. That's fun. That's how humans tell stories to each other.
If we start parsing which "personality/approach/way of being-expressing" is "the better of the two" we all end up being poorer for the exercise.
My .02
Rand
-
Heck, you're missing half of the fun of two different human beings interacting. William in his context has become a thoughtful, reflective shooter. Kevin is like the perennial kid in a candy store (we should all be so lucky). So when William is sharing his stream-of-consciousness approach to the thoughtful approach to exploring a subject, the "kid in the candy store" latches onto some exciting "data points" from that and exuberantly flings them back at William for confirmation. That's fun. That's how humans tell stories to each other.
If we start parsing which "personality/approach/way of being-expressing" is "the better of the two" we all end up being poorer for the exercise.
My .02
Rand
))
-
The most dangerous place you can be in Yosemite is on the road! I've had my own life endangered when a car stopped on a blind corner to take some photos.
On the 27th December, I saw 2 cars (without tire chains) that had skidded into the rocks (along seemingly straight sections of the Yosemite valley loop road). Being roadside didn't feel safe.