What you shoot for?

[DMKAlex]

I've been shooting photography for many years. In the past 6-7 years, I went out every week with my buddy. The Zoo, Botanical garden, Chinatown, Central park, Grand Central or Battery Park. You name it, we've been there 15 times, if not more.

I got a bit tired of shooting the same thing over and over again, although I never get tired of the beautiful roses, or tulips or lotus. That's why I got into video, which represents a new challenge, at minimal incremental cost.

Initially, I was a bit dumbfounded what is the purpose of the video. I am not shooting my kid's birthday party or graduation.

But with 3 months or so into my learning curve, I come to convinced that video is a far better way to tell a story, just like my pictures were telling a story of my day.

Last month, my kid (scattered around the continent and the world) asked me what we did for the weekend. My wife and I went to Jones Beach to enjoy a couple of hours basking in the sun, taking in the breeze. I saw these hobbyists kiters (short of a better term) displaying their passion. I took a short clip and compiled it. I sent it to my kid in Belgium. I don't think my photos would accomplish half of what the video tell.

Or another weekend, we went to Rockport in Massachusetts to reminisce the old time (we were from Boston before settling in New York). And I shot some clips of the streets we used to walked down, or the stores that we used to frequent 30 years ago. I think my children were so touched that they wanted to go there with us again.

Well, I think I've found a purpose of my new passion. No, I am not trying to be Steven Spielbery. But I can tell touching stories, at least to those who would matter, more effectively with video, my new found passion.

 

[Sean Nelson]

Nicely put!

I'm very similar to you, when I'm out and about I now shoot a lot of video in addition to stills. I still like stills for things like landscapes because in the absence of anything more than 8-bit/channel video I can push and pull the images a lot more. But video really does have a much more immersive feel.

For the past few years I've been putting together little mini-productions to document my sojourns that incorporate both video and stills, using the "Ken Burns effect" to add some interest to the stills and integrate them better with the moving images. With a nice music track and/or narration to describe what's on the screen my friends and relatives seem to find them way more interesting than a simple slide show.

 

[Richard Frederick]

I am primarily a still photographer, but I do have video equipment that is way better than my ability.

I recall while at a family reunion, perhaps 30 years ago, I viewed a brief film clip of my grandparents (black & white, no sound). Those few seconds of viewing brought back memories that could never have been generated by still pictures.

I need to get out and create some videos of those of us who are still vertical and the ones who are very small to create similar memories for others.

 

[FLruckas]

"I am primarily a still photographer, but I do have video equipment that is way better than my ability."

Absolutely the same here. (Even the still cameras I have are way beyond my still set).

"I still like stills for things like landscapes because in the absence of anything more than 8-bit/channel video I can push and pull the images a lot more. "

I opted for a video camera that shoots RAW and I shoot RAW video.

I don't know if anyone else in this form shoots RAW video.

Maybe some are using Magic Lantern.

With respect to the OP I feel like video is a paradox.

Stills to video is like being able to see in black and white then being able to see in color in 15 stops of DR.

There is so much involved sometimes to get good video.

Yet video can be so much better at telling a story and being interesting.

You can have ordinary image quality with an interesting story and subject and video is more interesting.

So I feel that stills have to be better to be special. Video although it may be more complicated to execute doesn't have to be as good. (Although it can be).

The biggest things I miss from stills are autofocus and more megapixels.

I'm wondering of those in this forum who are stills people how much stills vs video we're shooting these days.

I find myself taking only my video camera when I go shooting with stills people and bumming their still camera for a still shot or two now and then.

 

[DMKAlex]

I am glad that most of the responses are in line with my thinking. Video makes telling a story more effective. I tried here to avoid using the word "better". But it is definitely able to come across and touch the audience easier.

Three months ago, when I first started to dabble on video, I was quite obsessed with about the script of a story, which turned out to be a non-starter. I guess I was trying to mimic movies that I saw and I couldn't come up with anything remotely close. But now, I feel quite at ease to take footages of what I see and then put together a presentable short story. A movie is like a speech. But not every conversation is a memorable speech. A video can be just a casual dialogue.

But, of course, I would give some thinking in what I am trying to say, and the different way to say it. Again, it is very much like a conversation, which somehow represents our brought up, our education level, and our concern.

So, my advise (I'm probably not in a position to give) to those who want to get into video (most of the camera we use today has that wonderful capability) is to shoot and edit. The more you do, the better you become. You'll develop your skill and learn more technique. That, along with your philosophy of life, would become your style. You may not be Steven Spielbery, but you definitely will touch someone.

 

[Sean Nelson]

Three months ago, when I first started to dabble on video, I was quite obsessed with about the script of a story, which turned out to be a non-starter. I guess I was trying to mimic movies that I saw and I couldn't come up with anything remotely close. But now, I feel quite at ease to take footages of what I see and then put together a presentable short story. A movie is like a speech. But not every conversation is a memorable speech. A video can be just a casual dialogue.

Very nicely put.

 

[DMKAlex]

Nicely put!

I'm very similar to you, when I'm out and about I now shoot a lot of video in addition to stills. I still like stills for things like landscapes because in the absence of anything more than 8-bit/channel video I can push and pull the images a lot more. But video really does have a much more immersive feel.

For the past few years I've been putting together little mini-productions to document my sojourns that incorporate both video and stills, using the "Ken Burns effect" to add some interest to the stills and integrate them better with the moving images. With a nice music track and/or narration to describe what's on the screen my friends and relatives seem to find them way more interesting than a simple slide show.

I did something like that for the 3 week European cruise/land vacation we took in June. We went with another couple and enjoyed every single moment of it.

I was taking video and still photos of the trip. I spliced in the still photos using a fading effect with the video. When I was on the ship, I left the iphone recording on at the stage where the band was playing. My wife and her girlfriend danced all night every nights there. I used that music tape as background music. So between the still photos of the different cities/countries, the video of the ship and the grander landscape, plus the musics, it is an extremely memorable record of the three weeks.

I think still photo alone would not have 10% of the impact.

 

[DMKAlex]

Nicely put!

I'm very similar to you, when I'm out and about I now shoot a lot of video in addition to stills. I still like stills for things like landscapes because in the absence of anything more than 8-bit/channel video I can push and pull the images a lot more. But video really does have a much more immersive feel.

For the past few years I've been putting together little mini-productions to document my sojourns that incorporate both video and stills, using the "Ken Burns effect" to add some interest to the stills and integrate them better with the moving images. With a nice music track and/or narration to describe what's on the screen my friends and relatives seem to find them way more interesting than a simple slide show.

I did something like that for the 3 week European cruise/land vacation we took in June. We went with another couple and enjoyed every single moment of it.

I was taking video and still photos of the trip. I spliced in the still photos using a fading effect with the video. When I was on the ship, I left the iphone recording on at the stage where the band was playing. My wife and her girlfriend danced all night every nights there. I used that music tape as background music. So between the still photos of the different cities/countries, the video of the ship and the grander landscape, plus the musics, it is an extremely memorable record of the three weeks.

I think still photo alone would not have 10% of the impact.

 

[Sean Nelson]

When I was on the ship, I left the iphone recording on at the stage where the band was playing. My wife and her girlfriend danced all night every nights there. I used that music tape as background music.

I love it when I can find an opportunity to use music that appears in the video as a background. I shot a video of the CP Rail Holiday Train that uses a selection played by the train's band as the background music which also syncs into the portion of the video that shows them playing it. I was very happy with the way it turned out.

 

[Richard Frederick]

Outstanding! Great job, Sean.