Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Video
Page <<first <prev 7 of 7
Feb 16, 2019 09:29:09   #
Denise Jones Loc: Lewes DE
 
I shoot event and sports most of the time. My chief assignment is shots of the fans but I do shoot college football. I use video on my Joby tripod to capture pre-game activity on the field. I then shoot shots with my 2nd camera. Having the video opens my options for designing my slideshows and for catching images of the team entering the field running through"fog" and pyrotechnics from a very low productive.
Give the video a try.

Reply
Feb 16, 2019 09:45:56   #
Arubalou
 
I guess im not alone....i have no interest in video. Nikon d7200

Reply
Feb 16, 2019 11:00:52   #
Anhanga Brasil Loc: Cabo Frio - Brazil
 
JohnSwanda wrote:
I read your post again, and don't see any reference to those using video frequently, only that you never use it. Of course, using a camera frequently for either stills or video will shorten its life. But for people who do shoot video and stills, the alternative is to buy and carry around dedicated video equipment along with their still equipment. It's much more convenient to have one camera which can do both.


OK. If the subject is "Video", as the OP wanted, for a good reader half a word is eno.

Reply
 
 
Feb 16, 2019 18:47:22   #
dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia
 
Bobspez wrote:
That may be because it is many times harder to create an interesting video than an interesting picture. Very few people on UHH have been willing to share their videos.


Have to disagree. I frequently see "interesting" video that contains nothing that would make an "interesting" still. In fact I occasionally will hit pause when watching a show and look at the composition. Usually it is not all that interesting. The interest happens in the quality of the story and its telling. Video has a lot more tools to tell a story. A still photographer needs to boil it down to its essence in one shot. I think a truly interesting still is much more difficult than an interesting video.

Reply
Feb 16, 2019 20:35:23   #
BebuLamar
 
dsmeltz wrote:
Have to disagree. I frequently see "interesting" video that contains nothing that would make an "interesting" still. In fact I occasionally will hit pause when watching a show and look at the composition. Usually it is not all that interesting. The interest happens in the quality of the story and its telling. Video has a lot more tools to tell a story. A still photographer needs to boil it down to its essence in one shot. I think a truly interesting still is much more difficult than an interesting video.
Have to disagree. I frequently see "interest... (show quote)


In my case I don't want video because I can't make decent video. Video requires team work for most types of video and I prefer to do thing alone.

Reply
Feb 17, 2019 02:59:44   #
Billy Britt
 
brucebil wrote:
How many people really use the video feature of your DSLR and appreciate having it. I have a Canon 5D Mk 4 and never use the video and never will. I would so appreciate it being removed and either the price lowered or other features added. Also it is just something else to go wrong. Just interested, not looking for a debate.


I use mine all the time for video. I've used it while doing weddings and Quiniceras, (Mexican Sweet 15 parties) and find it very useful. Why buy an expensive Camcorder when the DSLR will do just as good a job if not better. The most important thing is to be sure to use an external mic. I carry two cameras at such events, a 5D IV for the photography and a Canon 80D for the video work. The 80D is attached to a gimbal to ensure smooth videos. I use Lightroom and Photoshop for the photographs and Adobe Premiere for the video work.

Reply
Feb 17, 2019 14:20:21   #
Bobspez Loc: Southern NJ, USA
 
You wouldn't know unless you personally did both, and judged your own results. Then you would know if it was easier for you to create an interesting still pic or an interesting video. What others can do is besides the point.

I can get lucky with my camera and get a nice pic of a flower or a bird or the moon or landscape or my dog or a grandchild or a building or a room, etc. It might take 10 minutes or so to tweak it in Photoshop and upload it to Flickr or UHH. But when I do a music video or an instructional video for youtube, I need to be a performer and a cameraman and an audio engineer and an editor and a colorist. It can easily take a day or two to create a 3 to 4 minute video.

Whether people like the still pic or the video doesn't tell you the amount of work that went into it.

dsmeltz wrote:
Have to disagree. I frequently see "interesting" video that contains nothing that would make an "interesting" still. In fact I occasionally will hit pause when watching a show and look at the composition. Usually it is not all that interesting. The interest happens in the quality of the story and its telling. Video has a lot more tools to tell a story. A still photographer needs to boil it down to its essence in one shot. I think a truly interesting still is much more difficult than an interesting video.
Have to disagree. I frequently see "interest... (show quote)

Reply
 
 
Feb 17, 2019 15:17:00   #
dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia
 
Bobspez wrote:
You wouldn't know unless you personally did both, and judged your own results. Then you would know if it was easier for you to create an interesting still pic or an interesting video. What others can do is besides the point.

I can get lucky with my camera and get a nice pic of a flower or a bird or the moon or landscape or my dog or a grandchild or a building or a room, etc. It might take 10 minutes or so to tweak it in Photoshop and upload it to Flickr or UHH. But when I do a music video or an instructional video for youtube, I need to be a performer and a cameraman and an audio engineer and an editor and a colorist. It can easily take a day or two to create a 3 to 4 minute video.

Whether people like the still pic or the video doesn't tell you the amount of work that went into it.
You wouldn't know unless you personally did both, ... (show quote)


My first profession (full time from 20 to 35) was as an actor. Still do it from exploration and on shoots. We have discussed this a good bit. I have also had this discussion with entertainment colleagues. As an actor I already knew that film acting and stage acting are very different. My conversations with pros in both areas as well as my experience convince that they are very different skill sets and sensibilities. And that the concentration of effort on a single frame of a still is higher than on a video shoot. In video you are relying on movement to help the story a still is a very different animal. I am not saying one is more difficult than the other. They are just so different that comparing them my be pointless.

Reply
Feb 17, 2019 19:50:12   #
burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC
 
Bobspez wrote:
You wouldn't know unless you personally did both, and judged your own results. Then you would know if it was easier for you to create an interesting still pic or an interesting video. What others can do is besides the point.

I can get lucky with my camera and get a nice pic of a flower or a bird or the moon or landscape or my dog or a grandchild or a building or a room, etc. It might take 10 minutes or so to tweak it in Photoshop and upload it to Flickr or UHH. But when I do a music video or an instructional video for youtube, I need to be a performer and a cameraman and an audio engineer and an editor and a colorist. It can easily take a day or two to create a 3 to 4 minute video.

Whether people like the still pic or the video doesn't tell you the amount of work that went into it.
You wouldn't know unless you personally did both, ... (show quote)




My family and friends and I have participated in the 48 Hour Film Project for the last two years.

https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLi6rj1DeValG9L_1slta3N4MrkL_6aqLU

It’s amazing that a team can form — can be given a theme, a character, a prop, and a line of dialogue — and create a seven minute cinematic story FROM SCRATCH in 48 hours.

We do it again this June.

Reply
Feb 19, 2019 07:27:57   #
dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia
 
burkphoto wrote:


My family and friends and I have participated in the 48 Hour Film Project for the last two years.

https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLi6rj1DeValG9L_1slta3N4MrkL_6aqLU

It’s amazing that a team can form — can be given a theme, a character, a prop, and a line of dialogue — and create a seven minute cinematic story FROM SCRATCH in 48 hours.

We do it again this June.
img src="https://static.uglyhedgehog.com/images/s... (show quote)


The 48 hour project is great. They have had one here in Philadelphia for around 15-20 years. I can't remember exactly when it started here. It often runs in August at the same time as our Fringe Festival.

It is a great way to get artists together who might not otherwise work together.

We also had a 24 hours theater project for many years until the Brick Theater went out of business. It occasionally pops up but I do not think it is a regular thing.

Reply
Feb 19, 2019 09:40:49   #
burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC
 
dsmeltz wrote:
The 48 hour project is great. They have had one here in Philadelphia for around 15-20 years. I can't remember exactly when it started here. It often runs in August at the same time as our Fringe Festival.

It is a great way to get artists together who might not otherwise work together.

We also had a 24 hours theater project for many years until the Brick Theater went out of business. It occasionally pops up but I do not think it is a regular thing.


Greensboro 48HFP had around 36 teams participate last summer. Screenings took three nights, then there was an awards presentation... They also host a horror film project in the Fall, with screenings on or around Halloween. Even those who don't participate enjoy watching. Some films are much better than others, of course, but the anticipation of what will surprise you is half the fun of watching.

The national and international winners are always amazing.

Reply
 
 
Feb 19, 2019 19:51:01   #
NikonRocks Loc: Sydney
 
brucebil wrote:
How many people really use the video feature of your DSLR and appreciate having it. I have a Canon 5D Mk 4 and never use the video and never will. I would so appreciate it being removed and either the price lowered or other features added. Also it is just something else to go wrong. Just interested, not looking for a debate.


Three years ago I bought a D7200 and use it at least once a week for videography. It was never my intention to buy that camera for its video capabilities. In fact I was not even aware of its capabilities in that area. My purchase decision at the time was based solely on its photographic capabilities and as a replacement for my D70, which sensor died all of a sudden, and the glass I was already invested in.

In the process of getting to know all the new features of my camera I bought a good third party book that explained all. I experimented with this other "side" of the D7200 and found myself in a new photographic dimension. It certainly was a challenge to learn how to shoot and produce good quality video but perseverance has paid off. That is not to say I am now a professional at it but as a 70 something year old I'm not adverse at having a go and putting in the necessary effort if the subject interests me.

One of the nice features I use the video side of the camera for is time-lapse video. Sure, you can use external software to produce the same results from hundreds of stills but it is nice that the camera will to do all that work for you internally.

I bet there are features on all DSLRs out there that their owners know nothing about or have never used or will never use. For example my camera allows me to shoot photos with monochromatic output. I have never found the need to use that setting to date - but you never know. And there are many others that come along for the ride and all for free.

Thanks Nikon for a great camera!

Reply
Page <<first <prev 7 of 7
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.