Caterpillar
User
May 23, 2005, 10:34 PM
Post #4 of 7
(994 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Re: [Tim J] Interesting thread...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Sorry for the earlier reply. My response seems to have been lost. Anyway...
Yes, there are parallels, but No, not in the same conclusion or direction as the article want to lead us. Many have even said, that the need for photographers and videographers will be moot in the future.
The flaw in this analysis and extrapolation based on facts is that the analysis is based on technology alone. The psychological and sociological dimensions were ignored. Consider a scenario in the future, a videophoto camera with 8-10mp moving digital video with a 2048P resolution with 1 lux or better low light capability for only U$1,500 or less, with superb AF, and 3rd gen image stabalization dispensing the need for gimbals or steady cams. Would this now obsolete photographers/videographers?
My answer is an emphatic NO. Why? Because, a guest even with the latest gadget is still a guest. He/she will not be able to cover all the angles. He/she will not be shooting ALL day, ALL the time. Well, unless his sole happiness is doing the pros job, but I don't think he will do this all the time. Doing a Pro's job is a lot of work. It requires the time to do it. The best a guest can do shoot for the highlights. But will he/she be able to cover the dress up or other shots? I doubt it. Even if he is a relative or a brother/sister, he/she will miss something.
I also haven't covered the skill level of the shooter. Even if that guest has the utmost in gear, the question is still, -- is he/she good? Does he/she know what he is doing? But even if we assume the best and that the guest is very knowledgeable, there are more obstacles.
I am a semi-pro and I once covered the entire wedding as a guest for a friend last year. Really covered it wall-to-wall and still was a guest and enjoyed it. I even did better than the hired pro (but that's another story). But I tell you, it is tiring, and unless it is important or a close friend I wouldn't do it again. So, on this aspect alone you are still going to need a pro.
Then the articles fail to mention one important thing -- EDITING. You can even cover the entire thing, but are you good enough to edit it to make your audience watch it? To me, with video, editing is 80-90% of the whole thing. I can hire a decent shooter and make it look good with good editing, but good footage will turn to waste with a bad editor.
These reasons will preclude any takeover by guests to remove the pros from the equation. There will be jobs to do in the future for videographers. My take though is that editing will take more prominent role than the shoot, except in certain cases where the coordination of multiple cameras are required.
What I see is a clash between the business of the videographers and photographers. It is conceivable that in the future, a high rez videocam capable of 8mp in stills resolution with large sensors will be in the offing with good low light capabilities. When you now have this, the merging of video and stills will begin. Whether it will supplant photography is still hanging, but I believe the photographers will adjust accordingly and will use a videocam to get stills as well. But this is about 7-12 years ahead, so I would not be overly worried for now.
In all these, what technology has done is empower the regular consumer to do what the pros used to do, and made is easier and accessible. The barriers to entry has been lowerd. The priesthood is exposed. It is the same empowerment that the PC gave to the accountants, lawyers, students to be creative as the hierarchy in the computer dept.
The mistake however, in the analyses, is the failure to take stock of the photographer's multiple skill level and commitment to the event. The pro will work the entire duration. The guest will likely not. Also, even if the barrier of entry and lower learning curve has been lowered, the entrant must still learn. The avg Joe still needs to practice, to learn, not only his tools, but the craft. Having a defangled new gear without knowing it and knowing how to use it is a recepie for disaster. I have a friend who shoots very well with landscape but is a total failure in weddings. He takes a long time to compose, and even with 2 weeks with a camera, he still can't expose it properly in a wedding situation. Events photoraphy is itself a multiple discipline thing. One must be good at portraiture, action/sports, macro (for the rings, arras, etc), semi-glamour, etc. One must also posses good people skills. The latest and the greatest equipment do not have these things in them and it won't imbue the buyer of that gear these qualities or skills by simply buying the gear.
The barrier to entry and to learning is lower, but the effort required to learn the tools, learn the event, and learn other things is still there. They are lower, but they are many. Technology has just made it easier to do a lot of things. AF, matrix/evaluative metering, image stabilization/VR, good glass, etc has made a lot of problems in the past manageable. But it will never eliminate the problems. They will still have to be overcome.
Finally, the if technology has lowered the barriers to entry to the regular joe, what the article has failed to point out, is that that same lowering, applies also to me. What it means is that I too can take advantage of what the new technologies have to have to offer. In fact, since I am in the business, I may even have an edge as if I can get the same tools, then I too can improve and maybe improve more than those who fail to explore the possiblities of these new technologies.
If ever any adjustment the photographer, and eventually the videographer has to do, it will be the business model. There may be a need to shift the emphasis from prints to service as a profit generator. For video, a shift from the shoot to the editing. This is not to say that prints are not important, or a good video shoot not essential. But the basis for competitiveness and profit generation will not be in the traditional areas normally used. If ever the business of photography or videography will die, it will be in the inflexibility of some to adjust their business models.
No, the guests don't bother me. New technolgies will come and go, and they can be disconcerting. But I believe the future of photography and videography is good. What we all need to do to survive the future is to adapt to it, to change ourselves. And the biggest change will not be in the gear. It will be in our mindset, our attitude, and our business model.
-Caterpillar
Caterpillar
|
. 
- is what some people charge for todays real wedding ceremonies. 