Race to the bottom

[webrunner5]

9 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Then you also have no job as a wedding videographer today if you're showing up to shoot with a cellphone (except as a gimmick). 

I would think in this day and age walking around, especially at the Reception, with a cellphone might render better, more natural looking shots. Not many people like to have a C300 shoved in their face and act normal. That is the beauty of cellphones, most people ignore them.

And Nothing is a gimmick if you produce. I don't give a shit if you use a Barbie Cam when I hire you if it comes out like I want it to or better. I have no clue how everyone thinks you have to have a Arri to impress people. Plus how many can even afford one. Your Website is what impresses people. 99.9% of the people in the world don't even know what a Arri even is. But they know if your website is good, no matter what the hell it was shot on. It takes skill to do this stuff, not gear out the butt. Gear in this day and age is becoming pretty irrelevant. Because the kid down the street with a iPhone 10 might just kick your ass on the skill side of it and put you out of business tomorrow. There is Way too much competition to be a half assed shooter now. If you aren't skilled as hell at this stuff, Really skilled, find something you are skilled at, and do it quick. The days of just having good gear and getting work are over.

It's like this new Zoom 6 that is out. If you can't overdrive the output how many people are going to need a Sound Man that have one now. Sure the high end stuff will keep them, but middle to low budget stuff, wow not so sure. You can hire a Monkey to hold a stick over peoples heads. Say all that hair you have, hmm. ?

 

 

1 hour ago, jpfilmz said:

 

That just speaks to your experience level.  Good luck with hawking irobot, eagle eye and cell phone wedding shoots.  I'm good on my side and not worried about it.


 

Yep, you are right. I have Zero experience. Carry on. ☺️

[dbp]

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

I would think in this day and age walking around, especially at the Reception, with a cellphone might render better, more natural looking shots. Not many people like to have a C300 shoved in their face and act normal. That is the beauty of cellphones, most people ignore them.

 

Do any cellphones have zooms at this point? My Galaxy S8 doesn't. That's currently the big achilles heel, I think. You're stuck on a wide shot, which admittedly looks good in bright low. Doubtful it's gonna cut it during most low light receptions. Hell, my old boss used to send me his cell phone clips to use in edits and they looked terrible once the lights went down.

No one likes any camera shoved in their face, for the most part. Unless they're drunk. That's why longer lenses are so handy for stealthily sniping shots at receptions.

[TheRealOG]

On 4/18/2019 at 9:05 AM, jpfilmz said:

People will always pay for someone to focus in on that aspect of a wedding if they want it done right no matter what the picture/video capture taking box is.  My focus is documentary style wedding production and cell phones or fixed ceiling cams cannot make it through 8 - 10 hrs a day of video recording through different environments and locations. Even taking photos would't work.  Imagine someone with a cell gimbal phone invading the alter the space of the bride, groom and pastor just to get a close up of the wedding rings.   I'd slather that type of customer experience competition every time.  By all means have at it....more differentiation for me.  

It's like to see AI and Robots endure following a bridge and groom around for 8/10hrs a day in multiple locations indoor and outdoor on weddings shoots.  

 

 

You are using copyrighted music. I stopped watching right away.

[webrunner5]

Yeah I think there is a camera or two that does have a real optical zoom in it. They have the potential to use Folded Optics to make it happen. The new phones now have at least 3 lenses in them now one of them has 6 lenses now. And rumor has the iPhone 11 will 3 also. So that would cover, other than Really long stuff, most of what people really need. They are getting better quicker than real cameras are that is for sure.

On my way to Florida I had my iPhone and my Nikon D2Xs with a 18-105mm on it on the front seat and I went for for iPhone 90% of the time because I could just do the Drive By Shooting thing one handed with it a Lot more easier than the Nikon. Now when I got out of my truck and went to say the beach I took the Nikon. But I would have only taken say 100 pictures on the way down compared to probably 400 or more I did with the Phone. Sure it is spray and pray but still it was a whole lot better than No shots. My target audience, my Mom, and family, and Facebook, is not going to scrutinize every shot I post. They are excited to see my adventure, and to be envious of me in Florida while they were freezing their ass off on Ohio lol.

I have the iPhone XS and it can do better than most people think. Here is a link to Flicker, and there is some pretty damn good stuff on there. That Smart DR they have in them is pretty amazing I think. It is Way better than my iPhone X I had before it.

https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=iPhone XS

It is like this shot on there. You could not have done that with a phone 2 or 3 years ago. That has some pretty good DR in it.

Or who would have thought you could just go out and do this with a phone. The average person is going to be impressed, and that is what counts. That is who goes to movies, not just perfectionists.

 

[TheRealOG]

30 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Yeah I think there is a camera or two that does have a real optical zoom in it. They have the potential to use Folded Optics to make it happen. The new phones now have at least 3 lenses in them now one of them has 6 lenses now. And rumor has the iPhone 11 will 3 also. So that would cover, other than Really long stuff, most of what people really need. They are getting better quicker than real cameras are that is for sure.

On my way to Florida I had my iPhone and my Nikon D2Xs with a 18-105mm on it on the front seat and I went for for iPhone 90% of the time because I could just do the Drive By Shooting thing one handed with it a Lot more easier than the Nikon. Now when I got out of my truck and went to say the beach I took the Nikon. But I would have only taken say 100 pictures on the way down compared to probably 400 or more I did with the Phone. Sure it is spray and pray but still it was a whole lot better than No shots. My target audience, my Mom, and family, and Facebook, is not going to scrutinize every shot I post. They are excited to see my adventure, and to be envious of me in Florida while they were freezing their ass off on Ohio lol.

I have the iPhone XS and it can do better than most people think. Here is a link to Flicker, and there is some pretty damn good stuff on there. That Smart DR they have in them is pretty amazing I think. It is Way better than my iPhone X I had before it.

https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=iPhone XS

It is like this shot on there. You could not have done that with a phone 2 or 3 years ago. That has some pretty good DR in it.

 

Indeed it is terrifying at how good the camera phone can be when there is enough light. I was using my X-H1 with the mitakon .95 lens to do a portrait and also used the the iphone XS... Oh man, I was blown away at how close they could be. Hell, I was really sad and excited. Cellphone cameras have come a long way!!

[webrunner5]

1 minute ago, TheRealOG said:

Indeed it is terrifying at how good the camera phone can be when there is enough light. I was using my X-H1 with the mitakon .95 lens to do a portrait and also used the the iphone XS... Oh man, I was blown away at how close they could be. Hell, I was really sad and excited. Cellphone cameras have come a long way!!

Yeah the iPhone XS and the XS Max are a Huge jump in quality over the past stuff i have had. In a couple more models they may be scary good.

[dbp]

I used to take my GH2/GH4 pretty religiously on any excursion, but I pretty much exclusively use my phone now. Ever since I found out it could shoot raw and I could use the lightroom app.

In good light, it's really not far off from the GH4. I do miss the lack of zoom at times, but convenience can't be beat. 

[PrometheusDM]

2 hours ago, dbp said:

Do any cellphones have zooms at this point? My Galaxy S8 doesn't. That's currently the big achilles heel, I think. You're stuck on a wide shot, which admittedly looks good in bright low. Doubtful it's gonna cut it during most low light receptions. Hell, my old boss used to send me his cell phone clips to use in edits and they looked terrible once the lights went down.

No one likes any camera shoved in their face, for the most part. Unless they're drunk. That's why longer lenses are so handy for stealthily sniping shots at receptions.

Samsung A9 has 4 camera in it - wide angle f2.4, telephoto f2.4, 24 mpx 1.7 primary sensor, and depth camera. 

I think eventually we would get something like DJI Osmo Pocket Pro/2 with 1" sensor that's affordable and good enough even in low light and most circumstances.

[IronFilm]

11 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

 

It's like this new Zoom 6 that is out. If you can't overdrive the output how many people are going to need a Sound Man that have one now. Sure the high end stuff will keep them, but middle to low budget stuff, wow not so sure. You can hire a Monkey to hold a stick over peoples heads.

There is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more to being a boom op than just "holding a stick above people's heads"!! And no recorder, no matter how magical, will change that. 

9 hours ago, dbp said:

Do any cellphones have zooms at this point? My Galaxy S8 doesn't.

There are quite a few cellphones coming out with triple cameras, a wide, medium, tele camera.  

[webrunner5]

10 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

There is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more to being a boom op than just "holding a stick above people's heads"!! And no recorder, no matter how magical, will change that. 

There are quite a few cellphones coming out with triple cameras, a wide, medium, tele camera.  

boom op. Glorified stick holder. I will give you the benefit of the doubt. You are a pretty good boom holder. Pats on his head. I warned you, your days are numbered. In a few years won't need a focus puller, won't need a second AC, won't need a, well you get the idea.

[thebrothersthre3]

Of the jobs on set I hate being the boom OP the most. Its difficult and tiring tbh. 

[KnightsFan]

58 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

There is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more to being a boom op than just "holding a stick above people's heads"!! And no recorder, no matter how magical, will change that.

Thank you. As someone who has to listen to the audio while I edit it, I have a great appreciation for boom ops. I think it's more likely that we use deep learning to clean bad audio than we invent a robot that can hold a physical boom pole properly.

[Kisaha]

1 hour ago, KnightsFan said:

Thank you. As someone who has to listen to the audio while I edit it, I have a great appreciation for boom ops. I think it's more likely that we use deep learning to clean bad audio than we invent a robot that can hold a physical boom pole properly.

This. It is incredible complicated to be a good boom op.

People do not understand the complexities (physics, experience, good knowledge of lenses, high IQ, memorize lines, physical capabilities, technique, e.t.c). A good boom op can be almost 80% of your sound or more. I was (still am) mixing with the boom at times.

This was a very interesting thread, then became the usual iPhone love letter, now people that do not understand sound say whatever they want, because they have a keyboard and unlimited free time.

This is a forum about video creation, when a young kid comes here to gather information, what is the message? "Screw sound and buy an iPhone"?

All very bad advice..

[Zach Goodwin2]

The time I first started making films(actually videos) was with a webcam and legos. I was actually into brickfilms at the time then I discovered Indy Mogul.

[noone]

I keep getting point and shoot cameras from the Op shop I work at quite cheap.     I pay for them even though in many cases they would just be thrown out for various reasons.    The last few I have got have been quite surprising.    A little 16mp underwater Panasonic (this does use folded optics for its four times zoom- starting at 25mm FF angle of view).   Image quality is not the greatest but is ok but I will certainly keep it for when I need an all weather/rugged option. Only HD video.     My favourite so far is the Canon superzoom I posted about earlier (newest so far with a 24-960 lens and great stabilization but poor battery life and again, only HD video).   This week I got an older one (oldest lately by far) but was quite expensive new, a little Panasonic 24-120 but with full HD and manual control and touchscreen.   Image quality is not as good as the newer canon but still much better than other older P&S cameras I have had.   I am so happy with the three that I threw two other cameras into a bin on the street today (no chargers and each had a minor fault, otherwise I would have given them away).  One actually had half decent image quality (for a P&S from a few years ago- A Canon with HD video), the other was another underwater P&S but older and not as good/more limited.

I am waiting for someone to donate a C300 or A7Riii or the like.

Back more on topic, I keep seeing fewer newspaper photographers out and about and more likely a Journalist with a phone.     The TV stations are not quite using phones or even mirrorless cameras YET.

[IronFilm]

6 hours ago, Kisaha said:

This was a very interesting thread, then became the usual iPhone love letter, now people that do not understand sound say whatever they want, because they have a keyboard and unlimited free time.

It certainly has been a very wide ranging thread, with many twists and turns, I reckon if we just throw in some 9/11 conspiracy talk into the discussions then we'll have all our bases covered and hit bingo. 

[kye]

On 4/19/2019 at 3:05 AM, IronFilm said:

My view is that robotic AI cameras/software won't replace humans filming weddings in the near future, but could it happen in my life time...  ? 

I agree.  Funnily enough, I also have a Computer Science degree

On 4/19/2019 at 12:05 AM, jpfilmz said:

People will always pay for someone to focus in on that aspect of a wedding if they want it done right no matter what the picture/video capture taking box is.  

Robots and AI are gradually making things faster / easier..  eg, NLEs now automatically scan for faces = work you don't have to do = work you don't have to charge for = less total industry value = less people can afford to survive in the industry.  AI won't stop doing this, it'll be gradual but it will be relentless.

The trick is to understanding what can be automated and what can't be.  IIRC it's about repeatability and predictability, lawyers for example are quite automateable because most of what they do is to know the law and basically regurgitate the relevant bits.  Yes, there is judgement and also lateral thinking involved, but lawyers are going to be hit very hard when you can buy a magic box that knows all the law and you can just talk to it and have it quote precedence.

Film-makers will have the total value of the industry eroded by AI doing rough-cuts and things like that, but I think there will always be room at the top for the most creative.  Not necessarily the 'best' but certainly the least predictable or those with a style that is least popular, so the robots will learn it last.

It will take a good long time before the robots are actually operating the camera and sound equipment though, robots aren't very coordinated or agile in the physical world, and teaching them the etiquette of how to be in the face of the couple while being the least disruptive will be quite a challenge.

The short-term strategy is to get good so that you're still going to be able to stay in the industry as people are gradually squeezed out of it.  And pretty much "quality is the answer" is a good strategy regardless of whatever the hell happens, so it's not like you're going to spend all this time getting great at your craft and it turning out to be a bad strategy

1 minute ago, IronFilm said:

It certainly has been a very wide ranging thread, with many twists and turns, I reckon if we just throw in some 9/11 conspiracy talk into the discussions then we'll have all our bases covered and hit bingo. 

 

[IronFilm]

2 minutes ago, kye said:

The trick is to understanding what can be automated and what can't be.  IIRC it's about repeatability and predictability, lawyers for example are quite automateable because most of what they do is to know the law and basically regurgitate the relevant bits.  Yes, there is judgement and also lateral thinking involved, but lawyers are going to be hit very hard when you can buy a magic box that knows all the law and you can just talk to it and have it quote precedence.

Bet there will be lots of parents going "thank goodness my son became a filmmaker instead of studying to be a lawyer!" 
 

[kye]

1 minute ago, IronFilm said:

Bet there will be lots of parents going "thank goodness my son became a filmmaker instead of studying to be a lawyer!" 
 

lol.  I'm not sure about that exact situation, but it sure will be interesting times.

I saw an interesting interview where the guy said that the first stage of robots/AI taking over is automation and that's been happening throughout the industrial revolution and may be one of the critical drivers behind the rise of nationalism around the world as the people that used to have good factory jobs now don't have jobs, or they have shitty unskilled jobs cleaning the machine that paints the cars instead of painting the cars themselves.

There are going to be lots of people saying "I'm glad...." or "I wish.....".

We're going to need some form of universal income because otherwise there won't be enough work to go around.  Independent artists making a living on YT and Patreon and Etsy are certainly coming up in leaps-and-bounds, but it's nowhere near enough to counter the disappearing middle-class we used to have.  In Australia the economy has had decreasing total hours worked for many decades, but it's been partially obscured by taking children out of the labour force and also the 40-hour week, but that trend can't continue indefinitely without resulting in mass unemployment.

 

[IronFilm]

Weddings of the future: