newfoundmass

I mean, the people who drew simple cave drawings probably didn't expect people to view their doodles as art pieces thousands of years later, but here we are. Gatekeeping art is silly because it's not just wrong to do but its such a futile thing to do. Art isn't just what people will remember, it is expression! And it's all around us, from beautiful architecture, to statues, to murals, to kids drawing on the sidewalk with chalk. It's in the biggest music halls, all the way to the local dive bar or coffee shop hosting a singer-songwriter who just likes to sing his songs on a Friday night to a couple dozen listening ears. It's in the giant cineplexes playing the biggest films, to the small theaters that show foreign or low budget films, all the way to the phone someone is holding on the bus plays a random YouTube or TikTok video. Not all of it has the same value or meaning, but it's all still art. Don't try and gatekeep it, or try and tell someone that what they created isn't art just because it doesn't appeal to you.

YouTube revenue is probably down compared to the highs of a couple years ago, but I imagine he's still doing pretty good between it and the deals he has, plus whatever revenue he was generating via luts, merch and stuff. A lot of that content will generate revenue in perpetuity, so he'll still be making ad revenue off it for as long as it's up. A month ago he released a video ranking the color accuracy of every camera brand. It has, to date, gotten almost 100,000 views. He could, realistically, continue creating content like that forever and ever. He has decided not to. So I agree it probably has a lot less to do with financial considerations and more to do with just not enjoying the box he put himself in. And honestly, good for him. Hopefully he'll do something that is more fulfilling. I am happy for anyone who decides "fuck this, I just don't want to do this anymore" and steps away to do something else that makes them happy. With the way the world (and the economy) is going, most of us are going to have to work until the day we die, so we might as well enjoy what we're doing while we can.

Exactly. Not all art is equal, but I think it's the last thing we should be trying to gate keep. Art, and the creativity that fuels it, is the ultimate form of expression and something NO ONE can take away from us. Just not all of us are as creative as others, but that's okay!

I think where we disagree is on the term "art." I think doodling on a piece of paper is technically art. It's not at the same level as the Mona Lisa, but neither are the goofy songs I sing to my dogs equal to "Stairway to Heaven." It's all still art, though, some is just more creative (and better) than the other stuff.

Mosts artists create and never share their work with people outside of their immediate friends and family. Others create and share it on the micro level, simply wishing to share it but not make a big thing of it (example: folks that play at the local bar but have no interest in recording and releasing music.) I think as a whole we are far too judgmental about art and the things people create. It's okay to be critical, but at the end of the day, we should encourage people who create anything at all, especially as AI creeps into the picture. People don't just use AI for the convenience, but because of their own insecurities. I know too many local businesses who have started using AI because of the belief that it looks better than what they were creating themselves. I'm certainly guilty of thinking to myself, when looking at something a local business owner clearly made themselves, "that's awful." What I wouldn't do though to go back to seeing that stuff over the soulless, gross AI slop that they are all switching to. At least it had personality and you knew someone put their time and effort into creating it, even if it wasn't great.

I don't know Gerald outside of what he presented to us, which is to say that I don't know him much at all because we all present what we want people to see online. But with Gerald and other content creators, the algorithms and audience steers you towards what it wants from you. Gerald might naturally just have been someone interested in clinical tests of cameras and not had an interest in being more creative, but I always wondered if part of the reason he (and others in his position) never explored more artistic expression in his videos was the fear that it would be torn to shreds. Sitting in the middle of four walls with a tripod, camera and teleprompter is safe. Creating something MORE and sharing it with folks makes you vulnerable, especially if you've already established yourself in a niche. "The nerdy long form camera review guy that you all put so much faith into fell on his face when trying to actually create something!" Just putting yourself out there at all you open yourself up to so much unkindness, let alone when you actually share something that is deeply personal and vulnerable. As I've gotten older, and experienced how shitty people can make you feel for just engaging in your passion, I've become more empathetic and understanding. I think it's important that while being critical we still remember these folks are human.

Another good example. I'm think we are all guilty of minimizing things because they don't appeal to us. To a certain audience Gerald's reviews were incredibly engaging. It's not what I want out of a review, but I'm sure someone enjoyed it.

Content is art. Not all art is equal, but it's still art. It's like arguing that the people who write instruction manuals or textbooks aren't writers. They are, but that doesn't mean they're Stephen King.

I mean, to the extent he creates videos he's an "artist" even if it's not art that you enjoy. It's not the most creative, but it is what it is. He COULD have explored more creative artistic expression, especially as he had the means to do it given the access to equipment (both owned and loaned) he had, but he chose not to.

It's always strange how these folks always end up hating the box they put themselves into when they never had to put themselves in that box to begin with. The only thing stopping people like Gerald from CREATING fulfilling art is themselves. Having been a viewer of his since the start, he DID start out being passionate about cameras. But his transition from a guy who clearly loved cameras into a soulless content creator who acted as a promotional arm of the camera manufacturers wasn't something that happened overnight, nor was it something that his viewers didn't voice in the comments. It was a choice that he made, and inevitably it was going to end like this. There are so many people who started out around the same time who didn't put themselves into that box. Whether it was young Simon Cade/DSLRGuide or the Film Riot guys, just the first two to come to mind from the OLD days who are still around, they all started out with a similar trajectory but used their YouTube channels as a launch pad into creating art that they wanted. That isn't to say you can't criticize what they ARE creating today, but they are out there creating and, from the looks of things, enjoying it. Their work with cameras didn't just stay within the four walls of an apartment or house, but out in the real world, where they could express and create. I genuinely hope that Gerald finds something that he is passionate about and creates stuff that makes him feel good. Everyone deserves to be happy and fulfilled by what they are doing.

Yeah. I'm not saying that releasing something different might not help raise stock prices, but canning nearly a quarter of their staff probably had a lot to do with it. I don't think your average investor, even one for GoPro, knows all that much about the camera market overall to know the significance.

I mean, the lens mount makes it very adaptable, but not having auto focus seems like a big deal breaker.

Broadcast/live streaming is where the money is right now. There are so many mirrorless camera options that releasing another affordable cine camera probably doesn't make sense right now, especially if they don't significantly improve upon what BMD already has out there. I feel like the lower end cine market in general has retracted a lot. We're a long ways from when ZCam and BMD were regularly releasing different variations of the same camera, and both are more focused it seems on broadcasting than filmmaking right now. It's not just sports broadcasters buying this stuff, but churches, schools, governments, hospitals, non-profits, concert venues, etc. too. One of the biggest concert venues in my state now has a live production set up to encourage bands to film their shows for release there. It has hurt local freelancers who used to film concerts there for bands. Zoom during the pandemic really ushered in the era, but in the years since the needs/wants for these folks has grown and a company like BMD has done a great job in capitalizing.

Maybe not a big film, but Hardcore Henry was filmed on GoPros and received a wide release.

I don't think this makes it a cinema camera...