Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: Tim Lüdin on May 14, 2009, 04:10:41 pm
-
Hi guys
A few months back we were all discussing the future of photography because of the RED-One Camera.
We talked about the possebility of merging still and moving cameras into one tool fits all thing.
As a RED-One owner I several times stated that I think this could be happening sooner than we like or want it.
Even in the High-End Market where we usualy use MF cameras.
Now check the link to Greg Williams's work. He shot the last Bond movieposters and had a double spread sheet in the Vogue all shot on his RED-One. The Future is already here. Crazy
He calls those kinda pictures Motos. They can be used as billboards and moving images at the same time. They did it on the new Bond already.
Go check it:
http://www.gregfoto.com/portfolio/index.php?album_id=44 (http://www.gregfoto.com/portfolio/index.php?album_id=44)
So what do you think guys? Crazy times...
-
My honest opinion - it means nothing. And in other news today, the city of Ghent is going vegetarian: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8046970.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8046970.stm)
-
I saw the Esquire cover on the stands last night. I walked by it, and thought, "Big f'ing deal. So what if it was shot on a Red; it's still just another bad celebrity cover". I guess I understand your point, but I simply don't think that Technology is ever going to really influence who gets hired for a gig. You get hired for your eye, and your attitude, and your ability to make things happen. Nobody ever scored a big national gig because the AD said, "Oh, wow, he knows how to run a video camera as well". I just feel like when you start placing emphasis on the gear or technique, your priorities are misplaced in a big way.
-
I saw the Esquire cover on the stands last night. I walked by it, and thought, "Big f'ing deal. So what if it was shot on a Red; it's still just another bad celebrity cover". I guess I understand your point, but I simply don't think that Technology is ever going to really influence who gets hired for a gig. You get hired for your eye, and your attitude, and your ability to make things happen. Nobody ever scored a big national gig because the AD said, "Oh, wow, he knows how to run a video camera as well". I just feel like when you start placing emphasis on the gear or technique, your priorities are misplaced in a big way.
I'm not a tech geek at all if you mean that.
I was just surprised that a high-end mag like the Vogue or Esquire starts to accept files from a RED-One.
Or even accepts a editorial shooting with a RED-One at the first place.
If someone would have told us something like that 1 or 2 years ago everybody on this formum would have jumped on him.
I'm just excited that the change is coming so fast. And that technology realy doesn't count that much anymore. Just go out and take the damn picture. And we are in the MF forum here. Always talking about 40K backs etc.. Damn my whole RED kit cost about 50K and I could shoot a Hollywood movie with it and a vogue editorial the next day.
Now try that with your new Hassy 3d what ever 60MP back.
You gotta admit that this has to bring out a little techgeekeness in everbody of us.
Tim
-
I could shoot a Hollywood movie with it and a vogue editorial the next day.
Do people really have to talk about Red in this forum? There's a dedicated forum for video and this subject has already been covered ad nauseum.
And as for the Red replacing a medium format camera... As for as I know you can't even use flash with it, right? Or expose for 30 seconds ...or 1/4000? Not to mention the size and weight of the thing. Case closed.
-
Hi guys
A few months back we were all discussing the future of photography because of the RED-One Camera.
We talked about the possebility of merging still and moving cameras into one tool fits all thing.
As a RED-One owner I several times stated that I think this could be happening sooner than we like or want it.
Even in the High-End Market where we usualy use MF cameras.
Now check the link to Greg Williams's work. He shot the last Bond movieposters and had a double spread sheet in the Vogue all shot on his RED-One. The Future is already here. Crazy
He calls those kinda pictures Motos. They can be used as billboards and moving images at the same time. They did it on the new Bond already.
Go check it:
http://www.gregfoto.com/portfolio/index.php?album_id=44 (http://www.gregfoto.com/portfolio/index.php?album_id=44)
So what do you think guys? Crazy times...
the moving heads are pretty cool. a very nice gimmick indeed.
the stills taken with megan fox remind me of my Canon S40 Powershot 4mp, circa 2003.
the images per se are nice, yet they could as well been grabbed by an assistant between takes. with a new DSLR they would have turned out better.
the esquire cover seen on the new stand, looks like a Canon photocopy circa 1994.
I would not be surprised if those immage would have turned out better with a 5d2.
it will work, one day..... maybe soon, maybe later. who knows. it does not really matter, because when it will be ready, we can just get it.
-
Do people really have to talk about Red in this forum? There's a dedicated forum for video and this subject has already been covered ad nauseum.
And as for the Red replacing a medium format camera... As for as I know you can't even use flash with it, right? Or expose for 30 seconds ...or 1/4000? Not to mention the size and weight of the thing. Case closed.
yeah! the things look like something in between Terminator and Robocop.
-
Do people really have to talk about Red in this forum? There's a dedicated forum for video and this subject has.
So Graham, what do you want to call this section? The almost 645 medium format section. How about the 12 year old 6x6 camera section?
Recently you posted some wierd issue you had with your Sinar software so how bout moving that to the software, computer section?
Really, does it make a difference what is on the front end of a digital sensor, moving or stills and what's with the head in the sand attitude?
Whether you or anyone like it or not moving images are here to stay and the faster still photographers expand their skill set and branch out into new mediums the better they off they will be in art and commerce.
B
-
. As for as I know you can't even use flash with it, right?
Right, but it does accept more light in general If there really were a trend in this direction, people would have to start replacing their lighting equipment, it's true.
-
Really, does it make a difference what is on the front end of a digital sensor, moving or stills and what's with the head in the sand attitude?
So you don't see the value in having subforums at all? I find the Red camera very interesting, like many other things, but I don't understand why people keep posting about it here. It's like going to a Ferrari forum and posting about electric cars like the Tesla and constantly predicting that Ferrari's time is up, how they all wasted their money on old technology, etc.
-
So you don't see the value in having subforums at all? I find the Red camera very interesting, like many other things, but I don't understand why people keep posting about it here. It's like going to a Ferrari forum and posting about electric cars like the Tesla and constantly predicting that Ferrari's time is up, how they all wasted their money on old technology, etc.
I see the value in discussing all forms of professional photography, especially on the high end.
Quite honeslty the RED is not much different than the meidum format business model. It's expensive compared to Canon and the japanese makes, it has a superior image quality and raw format, but is also requires a lot of proprietary software to view and process the files, and in ways is slower and less mobile than the newer high def video cameras.
It doesn't mean it doesn't have a place, but like medium format it can get maginalized quickly depending on what the Japanese makers decide to produce.
As far as imagery for commerce and editorial, don't think for a moment that video and even video screen grabs are not coming at us. I see more and more of my work, even very large budget production work purposed for web display over print and that requires less megapixels and more flexibility.
Once the computer is the main medium, video will become even more commonplace.
Lately, like most of us, I am inundated by retouchers, suppliers and crews all looking for work.
The first thing I tell every retoucher or digital lab is to learn final cut pro, avid and the process of of color correcting, cataloging and storing moving imagery.
Also like everyone else I see a lot of resistance from clients on cost or better put, ROI. They want video, they want stills and they want them both, pretty much during the same produciton.
Clients that push back over still digital fees will not blink at adding a dp, a sound specialist and the post produciton required to cut a video, web or broadcast.
I know this will go against the grain of some of the people here, but for the commercial/editorial photographer our rolls are changing to that of digital artists vs. still photographer, at least for the ones that want to survive or better yet, prosper.
We have done this to ourselves. Still production at almost any level has grown to the point it mimicks small motion/cinema produciton. We have larger crews, larger studios, more expensive equipment and longer post production periods, which all adds up to costs. What I use to shoot for 20k 7 years ago, just scratches the surface of what it takes today, so when projects get into the 6 figure range clients expect more.
The photographer, digital artist, post production company that can accomodate this will have a very strong sales position to make, so after the long answer, I'll go back to the short answer, of yes I do see a great deal of parallels between the two mediums, in style, function, production values and final consumer display.
B
-
I saw the Esquire cover on the stands last night. I walked by it, and thought, "Big f'ing deal. So what if it was shot on a Red; it's still just another bad celebrity cover". I guess I understand your point, but I simply don't think that Technology is ever going to really influence who gets hired for a gig. You get hired for your eye, and your attitude, and your ability to make things happen. Nobody ever scored a big national gig because the AD said, "Oh, wow, he knows how to run a video camera as well". I just feel like when you start placing emphasis on the gear or technique, your priorities are misplaced in a big way.
I feel the same way about the Esquire cover, but I doubt if Esquire feels the same way.
Yes it's just another celeb hack job on white, but it's a start of combining interactive motion with print stills and this is just the beginning.
You may not get hired for your ability to work or own a camera, but you do get hired by what you show to potential clients and if you want to show stills then fine, keep at it, because I know you have had great success, but that doesn't mean it will last and definatley doesn't mean that client expectations aren't changing fast.
Who would have thought 7 years ago that you would show a client every frame on a 30" monitor? Today, that's commonplace.
Who would have thoght 7 years ago that mid level, under the radar commercial still phtogrpahy produciton would break 6 figures?
Who would have ever dreamed that retouchers would charge more for an image than a photographer?
It's changing whether any of us like it or not.
B
-
Thanks B for the backup, couldn't have said it any better.
Look guys I didn't start this thread to talk about the RED in general. I took it here because Greg Williams is a high-end shooter who usualy uses
MFDB. And now he starts using let's say other tools, that only a few months ago nowbody every would have thougt of.
I also brought it here because of you guys. This is the forum section I read and where the "cool" people hang out. People who have realy some things to say. People who work in the same
field or level I do. People I realy got to like a lot over the last 7 years.
So this isn't about the RED it's more about the future and where we all could be going soon.
Remember, RED will bring out the Epic series with 24MP FF, 60MP MF 645 chip. And yes it will have a flash plugg and it will synch perfectly with your strobes.
And it will come out this year. So again, the future will be here sooner than expected. Like B said, the market is changing allready.
What do you think will happen when tools like the Epic will hit the market?
It wont affect every part of the photographic market but it will have an impact on some for sure.
I also think that photographers must become DPs and vice versa. And in the end we all will become camera artists or digital multi media producers how ever you wanna call it.
Probably sooner than some here would like it.
Tim
-
Ziocan, you should go back to the newstand and have another look.
I have that Esquire sitting right here, and the IQ on the cover looks as good as the rest of the Esqurie covers. That is to say, it looks quite good. Nothing to complain about. Plus, look how much BUZZ it generated for Esquire. In this day of sagging news stand sales, that BUZZ is a Very Big Deal. Men's mags are dropping like files. Even Playboy is cutting back their number of issues per year. No more 12 monthly issues...
On the other hand, I think some of the images inside the Esquire spread are a bit soft looking. But then again, some photos in many spreads printed in magazines end up looking soft regardless of camera or format. But again, I think this issue is a BUZZ generator, and not supposed to be the pinncale of printed IQ. And it leads the readers of the magazine to their web site to check out the videos too...not bad marketing, IMO. If I knew that Esquire was going to have some cool moving image stuff on their site every month, shot by a good photographer, I'd be there every month to check it out. the video has got a cool look, and I'm glad they did it in greyscale instead of color.
I agree some guys in this thread seem to have head in the sand syndrome about video being viable for print guys now, and about it being a good tool for still guys to learn, and it's a little silly. You're too sensitive ;-)
[And on a side note, I was recently in touch with someone who was shooting MF stills for peanuts and competing with 5 billion other guys in NY all doing the same thing, and he recently bought the Red and now shoots video. Oh, and he just bought a house with all the money he's generating by shooting the video now. Would not have happened if he'd stayed shooting girls on a seamless for the web in ny. There's too much competition, and the rates are not where they should be.]
-
To me it's crazy that BC has to come out and spell it.
This is not what's happening in the future, it's already happening.
I can tell you that 80% of what I do involves motion and stills at the same time.
it's true the tool (Red) doesn't matter...
what clients appreciate is that they get what they need with one crew, one production and most important, one vision, when the director is also the photographer, there is nothing left to be miss communicated, and there is a continuity between the stills and the motion.
I leave you with this image, a DSLR and a video camera co-existing on set for a national campaign.
(if I had a image of a MFDB and motion camera together handy I would post that as well...)
I think it's time to be a bit more open minded.
am
-
To me it's crazy that BC has to come out and spell it.
This is not what's happening in the future, it's already happening.
I can tell you that 80% of what I do involves motion and stills at the same time.
it's true the tool (Red) doesn't matter...
what clients appreciate is that they get what they need with one crew, one production and most important, one vision, when the director is also the photographer, there is nothing left to be miss communicated, and there is a continuity between the stills and the motion.
I leave you with this image, a DSLR and a video camera co-existing on set for a national campaign.
(if I had a image of a MFDB and motion camera together handy I would post that as well...)
I think it's time to be a bit more open minded.
am
Sorry but looking at your set up I cannot help but asking, What would you be shooting video for? Do you have some kind of motion going on in that set up? I guess maybe smoke or vapor from coffee or something?
Could you explain what the video is for?
Just curios
Thanks
Snook
-
To me it's crazy that BC has to come out and spell it.
This is not what's happening in the future, it's already happening.
I do not disagree with the fact that that world is headed toward motion. Look at the NYTimes today; those awesome stories shot in BW and with added audio interviews; they're incredible. Every one of them.
Just completed a print job, where the client was also doing Flash web banners. They wanted me to quote the motion too, but honestly, how much does one man want to be responsible for? Seriously. Jack of all Trades; Master of none. Should I have done the Catering too? What about the Makeup and Hair?
There are just so many hours in the day, and there are a million details just for the stills part. In this last job, I watched the film crew, and the myriad of Details for their job alone would have made my head explode.
It's so easy to just sit here and say, "Oh, we'll do the video too". Until your ass is on the line, and it's time to actually do it. "How hard could it be...?" Yeah, right. Anyone can do anything HalfAssed; it's quite another feat to really nail even the Stills portion well, week in and week out.
Just one opinion, from a very small brain.
-
Snook
there were 8 spots in total, 6 of them actually have people interaction in them...
they were used for 3 weeks of national broadcast and web.
The stills were used primarily for web and then used as POP (point of purchase) at the stores.
I direct the motion first and once we have it, pull dolly back and shoot the stills according to layout.
now, if we were at a point where technology allowed it, I would have loved to just shoot the video and pull frames from it for the stills.
but we're not just quite there yet for my taste.
am
-
Snook
there were 8 spots in total, 6 of them actually have people interaction in them...
they were used for 3 weeks of national broadcast and web.
The stills were used primarily for web and then used as POP (point of purchase) at the stores.
I direct the motion first and once we have it, pull dolly back and shoot the stills according to layout.
now, if we were at a point where technology allowed it, I would have loved to just shoot the video and pull frames from it for the stills.
but we're not just quite there yet for my taste.
am
End of the year we will be.
13.5 stops of dynamic range. Motion or still. All in one body called "Epic". You choose the chipsize and the lenses.
Cheers
Tim
-
gwhitf
your actually completely right.
this is not something I did for fun, I saw the writing on the wall 3 years ago and since then been putting myself through so much learning to catch up with this world.
by no extend do I do everything on set, even though I could easily DP it, we had a DP on set that day.
this is the beauty of the film world that I've embraced as a photographer, you can hire the best of everything to be on your set.
I didn't DP that day because it's my job as the photographer/director to constantly listen and interact with client / agency and the crew.
so yes absolutely no time to set up stands or flags or....
But I will tell you being a one stop shop for clients is great and it certainly doesn't hurt the billing either!
again this is how I do things, but I feel that every photographer is the captain of their own ship so there is no right way....
am
-
There are just so many hours in the day, and there are a million details just for the stills part. In this last job, I watched the film crew, and the myriad of Details for their job alone would have made my head explode.
It's so easy to just sit here and say, "Oh, we'll do the video too". Until your ass is on the line,
There are some still photographers that feel the same way about retouching, placing a light, setting the shutter speed on the camera, or even driving to the studio, so everyone works differently.
There is also directors like Sodenberg and Robert Rodriquez that don't have any issue picking up a camera and shooting a scene, or Wonka Wai shooting a still advertising campaign for IZOD.
When those guys cross the lines of job description or mediums they're called visionaries.
Talent works in both stills and motion and I don't think being the caterer really equates to learning how to shoot a different format of camera.
But yes, trying to physically do both can be difficult and it takes a learning curve.
The KEY to this is to NOT become marginalized. Right now if the still campaign drives the look of the video and your the still photographer then life is good, but more and more the motion is driving the stills.
At that point you don't want to be the guy that comes in and just still photographs what the Director or DP left them. At that point the still photographer is working with table scraps and nobody wants to be in that position . . . plus it pays a lot less.
You want to be the chef, not the bus boy. (oops we're back to the food analogy again).
I've shot projects where I employed two camera operators and a DP but still picked up the motion camera to shoot a sequence I didn't think translated well from just explaining what I wanted, so shooting it got the point across, also it was my project so I want it to look the way I want it to look.
motion (http://www.russellrutherfordgroup.com/video/source/hair.htm)
Everybody's different, everybody has different dreams, but I also know that everything changes.
When I saw the first still image on a computer, manipulated in photoshop I said If I have to spend my days staring into a teevee screen then I'll quit, cause that's not my role. Well I was wrong and now I spend a lot of time working with a lot of different teevee screens.
We adapt, or we disappear.
Personally I hope no still photographer moves to motion, I hope all motion guys stay out of shooting stills, but I also want world peace, lower taxes and my own Gulfstream.
JRR
-
James
I should have just asked you to write what I had in mind cuz I think you just said it so much better than I did
am
-
James
I should have just asked you to write what I had in mind cuz
Iill tell ya, anyone that makes equipment needs to start looking at lights instead of cameras, especially hmi's that are small and light, like those Broncolors.
I've got one of them, will buy more, though getting information from Sinar Bron is like finding out where Putin has dinner.
In fact if any of these dealers are still talking to the Mac group, tell profoto to ramp up production on thier HMI's. They had them, they dropped them.
JRR
-
There are some still photographers that feel the same way about retouching, placing a light, setting the shutter speed on the camera, or even driving to the studio, so everyone works differently.
There is also directors like Sodenberg and Robert Rodriquez that don't have any issue picking up a camera and shooting a scene, or Wonka Wai shooting a still advertising campaign for IZOD.
When those guys cross the lines of job description or mediums they're called visionaries.
Talent works in both stills and motion and I don't think being the caterer really equates to learning how to shoot a different format of camera.
But yes, trying to physically do both can be difficult and it takes a learning curve.
The KEY to this is to NOT become marginalized. Right now if the still campaign drives the look of the video and your the still photographer then life is good, but more and more the motion is driving the stills.
At that point you don't want to be the guy that comes in and just still photographs what the Director or DP left them. At that point the still photographer is working with table scraps and nobody wants to be in that position . . . plus it pays a lot less.
You want to be the chef, not the bus boy. (oops we're back to the food analogy again).
I've shot projects where I employed two camera operators and a DP but still picked up the motion camera to shoot a sequence I didn't think translated well from just explaining what I wanted, so shooting it got the point across, also it was my project so I want it to look the way I want it to look.
motion (http://www.russellrutherfordgroup.com/video/source/hair.htm)
Everybody's different, everybody has different dreams, but I also know that everything changes.
When I saw the first still image on a computer, manipulated in photoshop I said If I have to spend my days staring into a teevee screen then I'll quit, cause that's not my role. Well I was wrong and now I spend a lot of time working with a lot of different teevee screens.
We adapt, or we disappear.
Personally I hope no still photographer moves to motion, I hope all motion guys stay out of shooting stills, but I also want world peace, lower taxes and my own Gulfstream.
JRR
Most 80's and 90's BIG name photographers have just about all gone to video and it was the wise and obviuos upgrade to being a photographer.
When I was doing the Calvin Klein ads with Bruce Weber in the late 80's he was also doing short films. HE was working on a Chet Baker film during the CK and Ralph Lauren shoots we were doing at the time.
He also was doing a shrot film called Broken Noses about boxers that was interesting and was lit like his photographic work at the time.
Herb Ritts and Mathew Ralston to name a couple. Unfortunately Herb is no longer with us. Mike Meyers who shoots just about every top music video was also a photography at one time or another. Music Videos are the easiest to get into b/c they are like moving Fashion shoots. Movies and Commercial TV ads are quite abit different.
Nick Knight is all a GENIUS who started out as a photographer and is doing some amazing stuff both in Photography and Video.
That guy just oooozes creativity!!!
I guess it is where you want to go, but having the Video under the Belt could make you get into another whole world of work.
I am starting to do some Music videos recently for local artist. But it is just recently getting my hands wet. I like music videos becasue I can still have a fashion point of view which is where I come from...:+}
Snook
Turned 41 today...:+}
-
Iill tell ya, anyone that makes equipment needs to start looking at lights instead of cameras, especially hmi's that are small and light, like those Broncolors.
I've got one of them, will buy more, though getting information from Sinar Bron is like finding out where Putin has dinner.
In fact if any of these dealers are still talking to the Mac group, tell profoto to ramp up production on thier HMI's. They had them, they dropped them.
JRR
funny you should mention this...
the only light purchases I've had this last year or so has been kino flo's
can't shoot video with strobes, but I can shoot photo's with Tungsten/HMI/Kino
plus makes your set video friendly should you want to roll 10 seconds on it or something like that.
Happy Birthday snook
make sure you get some cake, it's good luck
am
-
funny you should mention this...
the only light purchases I've had this last year or so has been kino flo's
can't shoot video with strobes, but I can shoot photo's with Tungsten/HMI/Kino
plus makes your set video friendly should you want to roll 10 seconds on it or something like that.
Happy Birthday snook
make sure you get some cake, it's good luck
am
AM Thanks for the Birthday wish and thanks for sending me those movies, Very cool. Now I can see how that would help/be done in same session and lighting...:+}
I guess that means Hot lights are going to be the "Hot" item, no pun intended...:+]
Snook
-
I see the value in discussing all forms of professional photography, especially on the high end.
Quite honeslty the RED is not much different than the meidum format business model. It's expensive compared to Canon and the japanese makes, it has a superior image quality and raw format, but is also requires a lot of proprietary software to view and process the files, and in ways is slower and less mobile than the newer high def video cameras.
I have been told by a few users that it also has an over heating problem of the sensor when you capture for longer than 5 minutes.
Is that correct?
-
I have been told by a few users that it also has an over heating problem of the sensor when you capture for longer than 5 minutes.
Is that correct?
as a RED user (renter) I can tell you that, that is not the case at all, we've had full ( and I mean 14 hour full) days of shooting with it.
the only problem I've encountered with them was one faulty battery charger where we had to wedge a piece of paper between the battery and charger so it could charge.
but this sort of thing is unfortunately a possibility with rental gear.
The only other challenge with RED is media (hard drive) consumption.
am
-
Ziocan, you should go back to the newstand and have another look.
I have that Esquire sitting right here, and the IQ on the cover looks as good as the rest of the Esqurie covers. That is to say, it looks quite good. Nothing to complain about. Plus, look how much BUZZ it generated for Esquire. In this day of sagging news stand sales, that BUZZ is a Very Big Deal. Men's mags are dropping like files. Even Playboy is cutting back their number of issues per year. No more 12 monthly issues...
On the other hand, I think some of the images inside the Esquire spread are a bit soft looking. But then again, some photos in many spreads printed in magazines end up looking soft regardless of camera or format. But again, I think this issue is a BUZZ generator, and not supposed to be the pinncale of printed IQ. And it leads the readers of the magazine to their web site to check out the videos too...not bad marketing, IMO. If I knew that Esquire was going to have some cool moving image stuff on their site every month, shot by a good photographer, I'd be there every month to check it out. the video has got a cool look, and I'm glad they did it in greyscale instead of color.
I agree some guys in this thread seem to have head in the sand syndrome about video being viable for print guys now, and about it being a good tool for still guys to learn, and it's a little silly. You're too sensitive ;-)
[And on a side note, I was recently in touch with someone who was shooting MF stills for peanuts and competing with 5 billion other guys in NY all doing the same thing, and he recently bought the Red and now shoots video. Oh, and he just bought a house with all the money he's generating by shooting the video now. Would not have happened if he'd stayed shooting girls on a seamless for the web in ny. There's too much competition, and the rates are not where they should be.]
I was at the news stand today and I gave a second look. And you are right, the cover is fine. Though the story inside still looks powershot like.
My point was that, i do not understand all this fuss about red cameras that is going o change photographers life and I think still images should be still taken with a proper camera. Beside that Esquire cover may not be shot with the RED. Anyway it does not really matter what your friend did or the esquire photographer did. Shooting motion and getting hired for doing it, does not have anything to do with having this or that camera in the closet. It is simply a matter of doing what you like and a state of mind that tells you I would like to shot video and you just take the necessary steps to do it, which does not mean having the video camera.
I'm about 43 now, I shot and edited my first short movie in super 8 when I was 12 and few others followed. I directed my first commercial for TV in Europe when I was 22 and few others followed. Shot short movies for festivals, been director of photography in 35mm film for other directors quite a few times and directed a couple of music videos myself, without the need of owning any motion camera a part for the one I take on holidays.
Beside that, I have been taking photos (also on seamless in NY LOL) and despite that I own houses in 3 continents include an apartment few blocks from central park. Without the need of owning a RED camera.
-
I was at the news stand today and I gave a second look. And you are right, the cover is fine. Though the story inside still looks powershot like.
My point was that, i do not understand all this fuss about red cameras that is going o change photographers life and I think still images should be still taken with a proper camera. Beside that Esquire cover may not be shot with the RED. Anyway it does not really matter what your friend did or the esquire photographer did. Shooting motion and getting hired for doing it, does not have anything to do with having this or that camera in the closet. It is simply a matter of doing what you like and a state of mind that tells you I would like to shot video and you just take the necessary steps to do it, which does not mean having the video camera.
I'm about 43 now, I shot and edited my first short movie in super 8 when I was 12 and few others followed. I directed my first commercial for TV in Europe when I was 22 and few others followed. Shot short movies for festivals, been director of photography in 35mm film for other directors quite a few times and directed a couple of music videos myself, without the need of owning any motion camera a part for the one I take on holidays.
Beside that, I have been taking photos (also on seamless in NY LOL) and despite that I own houses in 3 continents include an apartment few blocks from central park. Without the need of owning a RED camera.
I see it like this if you do not understand the "Big" Deal.
Where I live they spend a lot of money shooting TV commercials then they shoot a whole day , with me, to get the print campaign. The print Campaign is usually with the SAME idea as the Commercial. So it is logical if they can save $$$$$$ grabbing a still from the Commerical and use it for the print ad. That way they save $$$$$$ on the extra day.
Ziocan, is that clear now?
The James Bond is perfect example. No it is not going to happen tomorrow but they are already tetsting the waters and it will be done sooner than earlier. Am I scared... No? Not every ad campaign comes with a a TV commercial or Vice a versa. But it is a beginning of the end of 2X day for "Some" campaigns.
Not sure what you are shooting but that is the potential scenario I see and that WILL start to happen. I get paid quite nicely to shoot in my studio and would lose a lot of work if this happened. So would A LOT of guys doing the same.
The only ones benefiting would be clients, just like the change from film to digital and now they don't have ANY expenses for film or polaroid. The same will happen with this for sure.
Snook
-
Idirected a couple of music videos myself, without the need of owning any motion camera a part for the one I take on holidays.
Beside that, I have been taking photos (also on seamless in NY LOL) and despite that I own houses in 3 continents include an apartment few blocks from central park. Without the need of owning a RED camera.
ziocan, maybe you missed my point. My point is not about OWNING anything. It is about seeing opportunities down other avenues, and taking advantage of them. A guy was tired of doing one thing, and the market was saturated with competition, then he changes direction (and cameras) and is having a great time now, and making more money. That's all. I guess you don't need to be told this, but I'm pointing out to some in this thread that there is no reason to be scared of the new tool/camera just because it shoots video. It could actually help you grow your business in unexpected ways.
Anyway, again I think the thing about the Esquire stuff is that it generated good buzz marketing. I'm sure this is not the only nerdy thread on the web discussing that issue.
-
Ziocan
I actually agree with you on the fact that one will not get booked for owning a RED or a P95++,
one gets and should get hired for what they can bring to the table, I don't own a MFDB even though I'm a frequent user, and I don't own a RED, again rent it when I or my client needs it.
how you write treatments, handle clients both in prepro meetings and on set and how you handle the post goes way way more than any one piece of gear.
and my note to other people is that these 2 worlds have collided, like it or not.
I for one have decided to take advantage of it, and really do enjoy it.
am
-
ziocan, maybe you missed my point. My point is not about OWNING anything. It is about seeing opportunities down other avenues, and taking advantage of them. A guy was tired of doing one thing, and the market was saturated with competition, then he changes direction (and cameras) and is having a great time now, and making more money. That's all. I guess you don't need to be told this, but I'm pointing out to some in this thread that there is no reason to be scared of the new tool/camera just because it shoots video. It could actually help you grow your business in unexpected ways.
Anyway, again I think the thing about the Esquire stuff is that it generated good buzz marketing. I'm sure this is not the only nerdy thread on the web discussing that issue.
we may have missed all each others point. LOL what ever that means.
What really surprise me of the majority of the folks on this thread, it is that they seems of discovering motion picture as an alternative or way to evolve just recently. maybe I always took it for granted, but my real life fellows photographers, with which I grown up since the late '80ies between, paris, amsterdam, milan, tokyo and NY had always considered motion picture as something to do or that we should do and at the end most of us did.
that red can grab stills from a video has nothing to do with opportunities. those existed already 20 years ago.
I had forgot about this. I published my first cover with 8 pages fashion story, grabbing frames from a video camera for 20 ANS magazine in 1999, the editor in chief she did not like it, yet she published it because she felt it was the right thing to do. Tom Munroe did it for L'Uomo Vogue two years earlier. Pretty amazing story by the way. Both my story and Munroe's were pixelate like hell, but did not look half baked as the esquire's one.
if someone think video may be an opportunity, do it, but do it only if we think we are going to love doing it. otherwise is going to be like shooting MF back on seamless in NY for peanuts all over again.
as for snook, if you think that someone is going to steal your job grabbing frames from his/her footage, does not sound like kids begining of shooting web catalogues on seamless with a 1500$ canon 10d for 500 bucks a day, all over again?
the castle is always under siege.
but I'm sure you know it.
BTW, we can rent a good video camera for 300$ a day.
And NYU kids have been shooting 16mm with their friends on washington square NY, or european kids on the streets of Paris since when I can remember.
-
as a RED user (renter) I can tell you that, that is not the case at all, we've had full ( and I mean 14 hour full) days of shooting with it.
the only problem I've encountered with them was one faulty battery charger where we had to wedge a piece of paper between the battery and charger so it could charge.
but this sort of thing is unfortunately a possibility with rental gear.
The only other challenge with RED is media (hard drive) consumption.
am
I've never run the Red over 5 minutes. 5 minutes is 5 - 6 pages of a script, which is really too long for one take. Even Gus Van Zant long takes aren't 5 minutes. We do long over the shoulder steadycam stuff, walking down a whole block while some clown sings some crappy song to playback, but it sure is not 5 minutes. That being said, we shoot long days (non-union) with no problem. The only problem we've had with the Red is that one of our Red drives drops frames when being jostled violently. We switch to the cards and its fine.
-
if someone think video may be an opportunity, do it, but do it only if we think we are going to love doing it. otherwise is going to be like shooting MF back on seamless in NY for peanuts all over again.
Yes. To do video well is very hard work. I am sure there will one day be a flood of fresh Brooks/SVA/SCAD grads lining up to shoot uninspired crap for clients that just want "content." I'm hoping the recession will shake out some of these clients that need "content" to keep ads from touching each other.
Yeah, you have to love video like you love photography. Its too much work to not love it, and if its bad, its really bad.
-
I have one client who wanted to do some still and moving images. Look at this http://www.yanickdery.com/projects/adverti...-4/index-01.htm (http://www.yanickdery.com/projects/advertising/sCohen-4/index-01.htm)
And I just send my latest .mov to a regular magazine I am working for in Montreal.
-
the only light purchases I've had this last year or so has been kino flo's
can't shoot video with strobes, but I can shoot photo's with Tungsten/HMI/Kino
plus makes your set video friendly should you want to roll 10 seconds on it or something like that.
The first thing every still photographer says to the talent on their first motion project is, "you've moved out of the key light, out of the key light, no . . . get back in the key light".
There is a reason that a small Hollywood insert stage will hold a Peterbuilt, because the difference between a wide horizontal to working a tight vertical are substantial.
Then once you get the hang of it, going to vertical seems limited, because horizontal offers an expanded visual story, if that makes sense.
In the last few years more and more of our still work is shot horizontal, maybe because the AD's are working on cinema displays, maybe because web is much more a part of the media play than print, but where the ratio use to be 5 to one vertical to horizontal, it's now the opposite.
But, the biggest leap from still to motion, isn't in the framing, or the lighting, it's just how the story is told, or the fact that you really can tell a story, instead of just shooting something pretty.
The other leap is to make sure you do have a story to tell and something that binds it, whether it's visual, voice, or music, hopefully all three. Something has to bind it.
A few years ago I had one client request that we shoot a video with a still project and I asked for a script, with the response, "well just use talking points". So after storyboarding, shooting, to the first edit I made the call the to the client that went like this;
"Well, you have 25 great 10 second spots but not a cohesive 3 minute movie". So we had to do it the backwards way and write a script to what we had, then shoot some more to fill in the blanks."
The big difference (at least to me) in the mediums of still vs. motion is the amount of footage it takes to tell the story. When we sit down to do the first cut, to get a a finished 60 second piece, I'm always amazed that I have a 3 or 4 minute cut and I think I'll never get this down to 60 seconds.
By the time you get to the final cut, I'm stretching to get to 40 seconds, much less a minute. You really can't ever have too much footage.
You can stretch it by repeating the same visual story, or through titles, transitions or just slowing things up, but it always looks stretched.
Now all of this will change as web spots become even more common, in the same way that the pace of television and movies have changed through the years. The viewer is much more sophisticated than most people give credit and anything predicable, anything that is slow or flat footed, looses
it's appeal quickly.
But regarding technique, there is something to be said for a still camera that shoots motion, or a motion camera that can shoot usable stills. Having one lighting setup that works for both can save hours, even days and I'd rather switch cameras than switch lights. Trying to match flash to continuous is very difficult. It can be done, but it's hard.
Yes, you can rent it all, but renting equipment usually gives you a reason not to explore or test for yourself, owning forces you to get to work, to make use of your investment.
JR
-
funny you should mention this...
the only light purchases I've had this last year or so has been kino flo's
can't shoot video with strobes, but I can shoot photo's with Tungsten/HMI/Kino
plus makes your set video friendly should you want to roll 10 seconds on it or something like that.
Has anyone here used and can offer a review on the Kelvin TILE??? are these usable for stills as well as film? http://elementlabs.com/KelvinTILE.html (http://elementlabs.com/KelvinTILE.html)