Panasonic GH1 video article on LL

[bakubo]

Here is a long and very interesting article about Panasonic GH1 video:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/revie ... /gh1.shtml

I am still reading, but already have learned several things. Several people here have expressed interest in video on recent Canon and Nikon DSLRs, so this may prove interesting to you too.

[bfitzgerald]

The article is interesting (even though I am not "that" into video)

However I was kind of shocked to read this statement

"Yes, there will always be amateurs and fine art practitioners for whom the "print" is the ultimate objet d'art. But for those who make their living behind the camera, simply shooting stills for use on the printed page is a dwindling market, and soon to become almost totally marginalized. Photographers who can shoot stills and motion are the ones that are going to win the bids, and of these, those that understand how to communicate in each media properly will be the winners. The camera makers are simply providing us with the tools to make this happen"


I am in contact with a number of people who do earn their living in photography, and video as well. Bottom line, they are all under a load of pressure at the moment, some have shut down their studios (in order to reduce overheads, aka work from home etc), all report business is slow, and prices are under great pressure (no doubt from weekend warriors etc) Even the well established players are saying times are tough. But, out of all of this, my impression for the wedding market is, if something gets the chop, it's the video guy..ist, photographer not as much. Though some obviously do DIY jobs relatives etc.

Back on track, I cannot for the life of me see how the stills photography market is going to be forced into video as well, maybe some crossover for weddings, but 2 problems. Is it realistic to shoot video and stills at the same time? And video shooters might not make great photographers, and vice versa. 2nd, are people going to hire a video guy to do a confirmation or a portrait session? I think not..odd comments from the LL to say the least.

They said photography would kill art, oils and canvas. But it didn't. No doubt about the crossover aspect..but some articles go to far..this is one of them. The print is far from dead, and it never likely will be. Photography is a different medium to video, in the same way paintings are.

[David Kilpatrick]

Reichmann views this from a stock photography viewpoint, and also, commissioned advertising shots. It is true that if you want to get commissions now for major web marketing campaigns, you must be able to provide not only packshots of a product, but turntable rotatable views (multi-shot) and video clips. Walkthroughs, Virtual Reality, 3D, HD video, animations and other types of image compete with standard still shots.

He's not in the wedding market. I agree with your view Barry. My wedding photographer 'parish' is having a hard time, but wedding bookings are up, spends are remaining good, bookings are rolling in for 2010. The problem is the damage done to the UK wedding market by the SWPP, it's almost impossible to repair. It is rather like the damage done to the stock photo market by iStockphoto and Alamy. Increase the pool of photographers tenfold, and naturally everyone finds it harder to get their slice of the cake - increase it by tenfold and include people who don't care whether they only make £100 pocket money for their Saturday free time, and the lower end of the market goes into free fall.

Fortunately the top end - the £5k wedding spend on photography - remains unaffected by this dilution.

David

[bfitzgerald]

David you are right about the number of photographers, which has gone up significantly. I suspect you are also right about the high end of the market, not being hurt as much, less competition. Mid point and lower are under a lot of pressure, and sadly some folks are digging about asking for jobs done for daft rates.

Not that I have done much wedding wise, but some of the calls I get are just hilarious..can I drive 20 miles spend 4 hours doing shots for a few hundred euro...erm nope! ta ta! lol. Even some studios are charging well below rates for a single sitting, not sure how much lower they can go. Latest trend for studios seems to be "kids fairytale shots" , really not my kind of thing at all

I have seen the SWPP, but am unsure what you mean by "damage done" I don't know much abou them, I simply thought they were another organisation much like the other well known ones.

I was just surprised to read the article from just one viewpoint, I am sure there are lots of stock photographers about, but not every photographer is into that side of photography.

[Birma]

There does seem to be a growth market in photography "tutoring" including photo tourism type enterprises. Is this something that pro's are doing more as other business opp's dry up? Just to keep things on topic, I haven't yet seen any of these photo tours / tutoring groups offer to teach you how to use you v-dslr yet. Anybody who decides to take up this fabulous ideas can just take my commission off the price of my first trip .

[bfitzgerald]

There is a market for tutoring, no question. And I bet everyone here could do a decent job on that, with a novice user. One to one..not sure about groups or classes, might be more a challenge..then you have to organise things and possibly a place to teach etc.

Have to say I have done a fair bit of restoration, old photos..and making slideshows on dvd etc. Why not? Times are tough..I won't say no to anything that pulls a bit of cash in. Not a big money earner, but it helps

[David Kilpatrick]

I have seen the SWPP, but am unsure what you mean by "damage done" I don't know much abou them, I simply thought they were another organisation much like the other well known ones.

No, they are a fake - not an association, actually a privately owned subscription pretending to be an association. The service offered is actually pretty good - as many commercial groups can be - but they have absolutely no membership criteria, they pretend to be a 'Society' (and have invented a dozen more 'Society' titles to try haul in more subscriptions), and worst of all they confer meaningless 'qualifications' which to the public look no different from the real thing. Actually, SWPP is just Phil and Juliet Jones. They have as much right to award Fellowships in Wedding Photography as your local photo shop.

Recently though they have come a real cropper by sending bailiffs in to members who have failed to pay up and did not give three months' notice to leave (etc).

In your backyard the Irish Professional Photographers Association is the recognised and genuine pro organisation. I get to see a lot of very good work from their members.

David

[bfitzgerald]

Well that was very revealing! Seems all is not as it at ist appears with the SWPP
I have seen a number of members in my area, but I don't see any requirements for joining as you mention. They also seem to have a lot of members, I suspect it's something along the lines of shove the SWPP logo on you website, and clients might feel more confident about you.

I cannot join the IPPA, simply because, even if I were being optimistic..I am barely part time, and they require members are full time.
Someone I know suggested the RPS, but I am of mixed feelings on this. Not convinced it's really going to help a lot (as a photographer), bar possibly a few letters after my name (if I got a distinction that is!)

[David Kilpatrick]

MPA also requires all members to be full-time (and to complete a diploma paper and pass, and then to be assessed at L grade within one year of joining - or leave...). BIPP does not require full time status, and is more flexible - also more general in focus. Totally bona-fide of course, like RPS/IPPA/MPA. For those reading this who don't know it, that is the British Institute of Professional Photography.

I was responsible back in 1990 for getting them to change their constitution to admit part-time (aka freelance) members. I did it by accident - started a new association which was friendly to part-timers, grew it to 500 members. The committee of PPofGB decided it wasn't going to go much further without starting to charge some real membership fees (it was effectively voluntary), so had talks with BIPP and amalgamated - the same way the Audio-Visual Association had done. But most of them could not join under the full time rule so BIPP decided it was time to change and they have never looked back!

David