video, video, VIDEO!

Started Sep 30, 2010 | Discussions thread
SteB
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,814
Like?
Not quite
In reply to krh_57, Oct 4, 2010

krh_57 wrote:

SteB wrote:

So what's the beef about video in DSLRs? Self-evidently it does not compromise stills ability - please give an example if you dispute this. If you don't want to use video, then don't use it, it's as simple as that. There are countless features on modern cameras that I and others never use. The reasons and the reasoning you give for your arguments don't stand up to scrutiny. Your whole argument is based on the premise that video compromises stills quality/ability, when there is no evidence for this, and no such example to back up this spurious argument.

It should be about the ability of the photographer to capture the moment.

In time, with the inclusion of video capability in every DSLR, the moment captured will be nothing more than a frame extraction of a 1080P DSLR video.

When most action shots are captured by DSLR video, such as the ball at the outreached fingertips of a player leap, or a volleyball in play just at the point of contact with the players arm, or every dramatic lightning shot, that can only be taken by video for some. The skill and excitement of a skilled stills photographer to capture such shots will be diluted with video extractions, most likely to the point of not caring to become skilled at a craft that takes time and patient's.

Slightly OT.

Look at the time and effort you put into developing your lighting diffuser. If the camera was able to figure out all the different lighting scenarios for you in advance, would macro still be an intense photographic genre for you? Imagine if you didn't have to figure all that out for yourself?
--
Ken

Initially I thought that this was maybe how things would go. Then I learned a bit more about the video side and realised that dual video and still footage like this would be difficult to achieve. Videographers want a shutter speed that blurs motion a bit or the footage can look strobe like and flickering if each image is sharp. Whereas the stills photographer would probably want more of a higher shutter speed frozen look. So the same shutter speed would probably not give both good video and stills.

I think it will always take the skill of the photographer to capture that decisive moment as Cartier-Bresson called it. This is because it is not just the timing you have to get right, but the angle and the framing. A good stills photographer is always exploring the subject looking for a particular viewpoint, moment or composition, and I think capturing this by luck is probably quite difficult, no matter how fast the drive rate. One thing that macro photography has taught me is what a difference a slightly different viewpoint gives. My macro flash can keep up with the high speed drive for a short burst, but I have rarely got an image like this that I am really happy with. The careful single shot approach consistently yields better photographs than the spray and pray approach.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow