Why so little interest in Video - even here?

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by D7k1, Feb 26, 2016.

  1. D7k1

    D7k1 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    690
    Nov 18, 2013
    I've cut back my internet forums to here and DVXuser (pretty high level stuff). I wonder why the video related forums are very, very slow here. We've got lots of Panasonic and EM1/OMD5 II users here, why the lack of interest and posting about video?

    I know video is very complex to get to the final product, but its the journey that can be interesting. Over the last couple of years I've gotten more and more interested in video, as a means for exploring imaging in a larger sense than just stills. I intend to do a lot more posts in the specific video focused forums, I :)hope some of you closet video shooters will join in. Am I alone in this great void?
     
  2. Exposed

    Exposed Mu-43 Regular

    136
    Apr 13, 2011
    Central Washington State
    Randy dawson
    Just this week I started using my em-1 with 12-40 as a second camera for video. I was doing interviews of hockey players and I wanted a different angle, not just the straight on shot. Worked very well.
     
  3. jo45800

    jo45800 Mu-43 Veteran

    265
    Aug 23, 2013
    Montreal
    I think it's due to the relative complexity to process a video footage, cut it, grad it etc... A picture is a lot more easier in my opinion.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  4. JBoot

    JBoot Mu-43 Regular

    106
    Dec 4, 2012
    Scotch Plains, NJ
    Jerry
    @D7k1@D7k1, I'm with you and scan the video forum reguarly. In fact, it was one of the main reasons I went with Olympus over others in the first place while trying to consolidate down equipment and downsize overall.

    I'm a part-time pro photographer, but video is a bit new to me. Many years thinking 'stills' but like those in front of the camera, I tend to 'freeze' when shooting video... so my learning has to really start with how to envision making short clips more interesting. Recently, I'm very focused on bringing video more into play and have been focusing on improving sound. For sure, the gear is not holding me back.

    I've found the system quite amazing with the 40-150 kit lens for soccer clips. For family video, I tend to run the VMPR direct into the camera and run a prime lens or the 12-40/2.8 pro.

    I also have a Zoom H2N, which I've just started to play with... especially as I consider the Pen-F and want to improve my audio.
     
  5. D7k1

    D7k1 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    690
    Nov 18, 2013
    jo45800 - you are correct about the effort in producing good video, even "B" roll.

    Here a post I made on my meetup group Jerry - the link to the story arc concept might be helpful. I've also found that when recording on the camera as well as on my Tascam D60, Plural eyes gives a great syncing ability. Also remember that every clip can have a story arc - can you see the story you are trying to tell. It's what makes a 30 second commercial hard to do well.

    The subject arc – what is the story you want to tell.
    I am working on a travelogue about Astoria and Ft. Stevens state park. I have been imaging both stills and video for several years. What is the story I want to tell will help me select from the 1200 still images and over 100 videos.

    Here is a good representation of how to configure a Story Arc
    Link to Story Arc Template

    My Story ARC revolves around the character of place and how it changes over times. How what you see from the past determines the experience of the current now. A common theme among my travelogues is that animals have to adapt to live in the present and often take advantage of those things that man creates. So you will often see the juxtaposition of “Wildlife” and those things man creates in the environment. I try and create nostalgia by color and composition so we can see the past while living in the future.

    These are the type of discussions I hope to have in the Video forums - if everyone shares we call all be better.
     
  6. JBoot

    JBoot Mu-43 Regular

    106
    Dec 4, 2012
    Scotch Plains, NJ
    Jerry
    Jeff, thank you! That definitely helps. I've looked at storyboarding stuff, etc. but have yet to really put something together for a project and when I'm with family, I tend to just grab as I can between stills and video, but not lots of thought to it.

    I shoot Bar/Bat Mitzvahs and am now getting into busy season for me and have been thinking of creating a project around this work. Since I've got over a dozen parties between now and the summer, I have not shortage of material and subjects... especially if I don't charge for it.

    One of the guys I love to watch is Casey Neistat on YouTube. His short vlogs are outstanding. I'm going to see how the story arc applies to what he does.. making me think.
     
  7. dancebert

    dancebert Mu-43 Veteran

    259
    Jan 18, 2014
    Hua Hin, Thailand
    Except for the equipment, they're 2 different things. In the era before digicams could do stills and video, people did one or the other with little crossover. With most people now carrying a phone capable of stills and videos, the ones who shoot both are rarely what the still photo industry calls 'enthusiasts'. I've long had an interest in how film makers in that era got started. It was with Super 8 or VHS. None ever mentioned shooting stills, except Robert Rodriguez, who shoots stills for his movie posters.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    I think the biggest reason why people aren't that in to video is because of the work required. It's much easier and faster to take photos rather than take the time to capture the video clips, edit them together, add music, grade the footage, etc., rather than just running the images through LR (especially if you have a preset applied during import that does 90% of the work before you even touch the images).

    While it's more work, I think the results are worth it. Video is able to capture things that photos simply can't, and when done properly, it can tell a very good story. Owning two GH4's, I've started getting in to doing more video lately. It's a fun hobby to have along with photography that enables me to capture and document some great memories, and it's wonderful having a camera (two actually) that are so capable for both photography and videography.

    I'm really perplexed by all of the people claiming they don't want 4K on the E-M1 II, there's no way to view it, etc. etc. Sure, it's because they obviously don't do ANYTHING with video, but why would you want to willingly exclude a feature that could open the camera up to a larger market, bringing in more money for the company you support, which they can then turn around and do more R&D with? It simply boggles my mind.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  9. QualityBuiltIn

    QualityBuiltIn Mu-43 Veteran

    351
    Jan 1, 2011
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    It would suit me fine to buy a camera with NO video feature whatsoever. I wonder if that would either improve the IQ of stills or reduce the price of the camera.

    You've got me thinking - is there a market for a 'purist' camera with no scene modes, no art filters, no video? I would struggle without auto focus and exposure but I don't tend to use the other bells and whistles.

    There is of course Leica Ms - but that's a different beast. However think about Porsche; they charge more for a stripped down car with webbing door handles, no air-con, no music, no carpets even...

    The only time I've been thankful for video was a couple of years back when my spaniel died and I had experimented with video a few times with her chasing sticks in the river. It was lovely to look back on her fully animated.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. DaveEP

    DaveEP Mu-43 Top Veteran

    684
    Sep 20, 2014
    York, UK
    I very much doubt it since the camera would have less appeal, sell in smaller numbers and so need a higher price to justify the development.

    Look at what Nikon did with the DF - the price was more for less.

    I rest my case :)

    The idea of a stripped down camera is pure nostalgia. I shot with Leica M again for a couple of years and once I got over the nostalgia they were a major disappointment.

    I'll never use half the stuff on the EM1 (art filters are a prime example) but I'm not going to complain because other people do apparently use them.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  11. ijm5012

    ijm5012 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 2, 2013
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Ian
    I think your story about your Spaniel is a perfect example of why video is important @QualityBuiltIn@QualityBuiltIn. Video is able to capture things that a photo simply can't. Sure, for little clips like that you don't need something as good as the GH4, but would you really prefer to save a couple hundred bucks on a depreciating asset and not have the video of your pet? The whole reason we got in to this hobby is to capture and document memories, and I know looking back saving $1000 over the course of a few cameras would be insignificant compared to the memories captured that I could rewatch with video.

    Video of family members or pets who have passed, once in a lifetime vacations, those are areas where I think videos are more important than photos. Sure, photos are great to hang on the walls (and I have plenty of my images from vacations and travel framed and on my walls, and I enjoy viewing them), but the ability to watch a video and hear someone's voice or the ambient surroundings allows one to re-immerse themselves in the situation in a way that a still photo simply can't.

    Here's an example of my own. This is a video I shot at this past year's ROLEX 24hr race at Daytona. It was all shot on a little Canon S120 point & shoot (since I was helping as part of the crew, I couldn't have my m43 gear with me but it's easy to have a camera in your pants pocket). While there are imperfections with it, I feel that it does a greater job of "taking me back" than viewing the photos I took that same weekend.

     
    • Like Like x 4
  12. dornblaser

    dornblaser Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 13, 2012
    Chicago-area
    David Dornblaser
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. DaveEP

    DaveEP Mu-43 Top Veteran

    684
    Sep 20, 2014
    York, UK
  14. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    Fred
    I have no interest in videography so I've never noticed the lack. It's not because video is hard as some have suggested, I'm just not interested.

    I'm interested in photography and use u43 cameras so I'm here. If there were lots of threads about video I'd probably move on. If I were interested in video I'd be at a video oriented forum.

    I hadn't even noticed that we have video oriented forums here.

    Fred
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    To be honest, I find my video needs are better served by my iPhone. At least, texting a quick video is how I primary use video.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. rbelyell

    rbelyell Mu-43 Veteran

    356
    Sep 15, 2013
    Mountains of NY
    i say this with absolutely no offense intended, but perhaps because this is first and foremost a photography site, and photography has nothing to do with video. in a way, like employers paying for health care, lumping video ability into a still camera seems an accident of history to many. i bought my first digital camera fifteen years ago, a 2mp canon elph. ive had scores and scores since, and ive never touched the video button.

    i'm not saying you and many many others shouldnt have the video option available on your digicam, shouldnt discuss it on these sites or shouldnt enjoy video to the hilt. but perhaps video fans should not be surprised that a great many of us visit photography sites to discuss still-photography issues. its just a venue primarily geared to a different audience.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. DaveEP

    DaveEP Mu-43 Top Veteran

    684
    Sep 20, 2014
    York, UK
    I have to admit that while I use video (even professionally), I come here for the photo stuff. I'd probably still be going to the lies of DVXUser if I wanted to chat about video more. I've visited other sites too, like Cinema5D etc (when they had more forums) but I tend not to bother nowadays :)
     
    Last edited: Mar 1, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. kingston

    kingston New to Mu-43

    3
    Mar 1, 2016
    i'm interested in how i can make the most use of my ep5 video-wise
     
  19. PacNWMike

    PacNWMike Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Dec 5, 2014
    Salish Sea
    guess?
     
  20. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    The irony is that niche/specialist camera cost more. When they put a wide variety of features into a product, they can sell them to a wider variety of customers. Higher volume means higher sales which translates into economies of scale. If they made a specialist model that only applied to the relative few "purists" then they would not sell nearly as many, which means R+D and marketing and all that junk can't get spread around. Each unit costs more and results in higher cost.

    The other factor is that scene modes, art filters and video are all software features. Meaning you program that code once, spread it across a bunch of camera models and incremental costs per unit are near zero. So the cost they add to the camera is much much smaller than many think. Video is already just there because they need a feed from the sensor just to show you the LCD/EVF. All you need is a little code to pipe it into a video file when you hit go. That's why video appeared in SLRs right after live view became popular. The hardware was all in the camera already!

    Nikon DF is the closest thing to a "purist" camera and it was expensive and sold poorly. I don't think it's something many companies will try outside of Leica.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1