Forums: Climbing Disciplines: Climbing Photography:
New Canon Compact Cameras.
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Climbing Photography

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All


pico23


Aug 21, 2009, 11:54 AM
Post #26 of 37 (1285 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378

Re: [gmggg] New Canon Compact Cameras. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Yeah, I wasn't really slagging video, I personally don't prefer it, and I personally feel photos CAN provide more of an emotional connection but as I think we all generally can agree both are effective and useful mediums.

The bottom line to me is if you like still photography, concentrate on that as you will have a better chance of creating an emotional connection with a good photo, than a bad video.

Likewise, if you are a clueless photographer but amazing at creating emotionally compelling, and interesting videos go with that.

I'd rather watch a good 5 minute video than be forced to sit through a bad slide show, or bad gallery exhibit.


JasonsDrivingForce


Aug 21, 2009, 1:11 PM
Post #27 of 37 (1283 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 3, 2009
Posts: 687

Re: [pico23] New Canon Compact Cameras. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

While I don’t agree with everything you said. That was a freaking awesome post! Good job, and well written.

pico23 wrote:
chanceboarder wrote:
I must be the only photographer in the world who doesn't care, need, or want video of any kind on a still camera. I just want my cameras to one thing and do it good, and that's take photographs.

Jason

You and me both.

I don't really care about video, I'm reviewing a K7 right now and it's killing me that I HAVE to review and talk about the video feature.

That said, if it comes without reduction of still quality and features, I think it would and could be useful for even someone like myself (and you) who doesn't really care about it.

What has been missed (and I have not read every post) is the fact that Canon has joined the Nikon, Panasonic, Pentax, club of not forcing MPs down our throats. I keep seeing on twitter "is the megapixel race done" with reference to the G11, and the reality is Nikon ended it with the D3, and Panason with the LX3, and to a lesser extent Pentax when it didn't increase pixel desnity of the K7 from the K20D (not the same sensor, totally redesigned, just same pixel count). And we can't leave out Fuji which while they claim to have 2X the pixels in the sensors actually don't, and are still producing lower MP cameras with higher DR.

Canon is a bit late to the party in that a few people on here know that I was complaining that the G10 was useless above base ISO, and that while it did match the 50D in resolution at base ISO and optimal lens setting it fell apart fast.

The bottom line is I think we were all waiting to see when Canon would join the party, and hopefully give credibility to the industry shifting focus (yes Wes, while I don't love Canon I do give them credit for their market share, and influence in the industry).

So what am I saying, well I always have felt the G series was pretty much the best compact camera dollar for dollar.Yeah I like the ricohs build, and the LX3 wide lens, but the G series has always been king till the G10 where it dropped a few pegs, NOW i might actually upgrade my G3 which I still (rarely) occassionally use when I want SLR features (hot shoe, manual control, IR port, etc) without SLR bulk.

Kudos to Canon and screw video (although if you are going to put it in a camera, make it HD for gods sake).


JasonsDrivingForce


Aug 21, 2009, 1:24 PM
Post #28 of 37 (1281 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 3, 2009
Posts: 687

Re: [wes_allen] New Canon Compact Cameras. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

On the topic of video versus pictures:

Check out this video. I know it is not professionally done. That is not the point. The point is that both stills and video are necessary to tell the complete story. For example the picture of my son with the bowl on his head evokes one emotion while the video it transitions to evokes a different feeling in my opinion.

Also the picture at the beginning of my son flicking off the camera in the silly outfit really doesn't need video. It is actually more interesting that he did it the second that I snapped the picture.

Right Click on the video, select zoom, and then Full Screen

http://twills.fatcow.com/...r=/Kids/2009_07_July

If you can’t get that one to play then you can play the version on youtube. However, youtube would not allow the music to be inserted. And for this video I think the music is as essential as the video clips.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQ9SWnql754

If none of my cameras had ever had video then that compilation video just would not have been the same. Sure the pictures show experiences where my kids were happy, sad, excited, or determined. But only a video can show how stubborn my daughter is or how infectious my sons laugh is.

This video is why I will never buy another camera without “GOOD” video and still capabilities ever again.

wes_allen wrote:
I see. So pretty much, almost all stills and video are worthless because they don't meet your standards for story telling? Sucky video is sucky video, just like sucky stills are sucky stills. In the hands of someone that knows what they are doing, video can tell a story in a way the stills can't. You can't slag on video just because some people don't use it well. All are nothing but tools, but it is funny with the still people and their fear of video...

gmggg wrote:
wes_allen wrote:
Video can tell a story in a way still can never do.

Wrong, That is up to the person taking the picture.

Conversely the same is true for video, most of the videos taken today do not tell a story so much as they regurgitate a moment in time that is somewhere in between not-quite-important-enough-to-remember and too-uninteresting-to-be-worth-the-bytes. This is not telling a story, but playing with a toy. Unfortunately it is also true of most still photos...


(This post was edited by JasonsDrivingForce on Aug 24, 2009, 6:17 AM)


pico23


Aug 22, 2009, 8:15 PM
Post #29 of 37 (1260 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378

Re: [JasonsDrivingForce] New Canon Compact Cameras. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Jason,

you get a few bonus points. Loved the finger, but the Saranac is awesome.

Probably my favorite non micro brewed beer (Saranac/FX Matt is small for a big brewery but not Magic Hat or Otter Creek small...)

Where that tasty Saranac starts out:





JasonsDrivingForce


Aug 24, 2009, 6:13 AM
Post #30 of 37 (1234 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 3, 2009
Posts: 687

Re: [pico23] New Canon Compact Cameras. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

pico23 wrote:
Jason,

you get a few bonus points. Loved the finger, but the Saranac is awesome.

Probably my favorite non micro brewed beer (Saranac/FX Matt is small for a big brewery but not Magic Hat or Otter Creek small...)

Yea that is a tasty beverage for sure! I like those pictures as well. Nothing like a beer straight from the brewery! Speaking of that, I need a beer.


gmggg


Aug 24, 2009, 6:55 AM
Post #31 of 37 (1229 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099

Re: [JasonsDrivingForce] New Canon Compact Cameras. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

JasonsDrivingForce wrote:
On the topic of video versus pictures:

Check out this video. I know it is not professionally done. That is not the point. The point is that both stills and video are necessary to tell the complete story. For example the picture of my son with the bowl on his head evokes one emotion while the video it transitions to evokes a different feeling in my opinion.

Cool videos!

But I think you miss my point and maybe some of the other poster's points as well...

Home movies aren't "telling a story" so much as they are "capturing great memories" (from your youtube description). In short you're not trying to express anything with these videos. With that said, I don't believe there is anything wrong with that at all.

If someone, however, wants to create some expressive or aesthetically driven work it will help them immensely to have the best tool for whatever media they desire to work with.

Still/video camera mash-ups are about as useful as a double neck mandolin/guitar combo. It's nice to have both at hand, but a mastery of one requires a dearth of the other.


JasonsDrivingForce


Aug 24, 2009, 7:52 AM
Post #32 of 37 (1220 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 3, 2009
Posts: 687

Re: [gmggg] New Canon Compact Cameras. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

gmggg wrote:

Cool videos!

But I think you miss my point and maybe some of the other poster's points as well...

Home movies aren't "telling a story" so much as they are "capturing great memories" (from your youtube description). [image] In short you're not trying to express anything with these videos. With that said, I don't believe there is anything wrong with that at all.

If someone, however, wants to create some expressive or aesthetically driven work it will help them immensely to have the best tool for whatever media they desire to work with.

Still/video camera mash-ups are about as useful as a double neck mandolin/guitar combo. It's nice to have both at hand, but a mastery of one requires a dearth of the other.

I get what you are trying to say but I don’t necessarily think that a mash up of clips is not “expressive or aesthetically driven”.

For instance, go back and watch the video with the songs again at the link below. This time listen to the words of the songs and pay attention to what pictures are being displayed. The songs match with what is being displayed.

During “Bold as love”, look for the colors that Hendrix says in the pictures. Also notice the emotions that Hendrix describes like “Anger”, “Jealousy”, and “Envy”, and then look at the pictures. The story behind my video is that my son was a super happy go lucky kid until my daughter came along and stole the show.

At first my son was angry and jealous of the attention but he soon realized how much his little sister loves him and looks up to him. Now I can say without a doubt that he is the best big brother I have ever seen and I think those pictures portray that.

I guess my video’s theme was just too subtle.

I do wish that my cameras back then would have been able to shoot widescreen HD videos though. The poor quality of some of the videos does detract from its appeal. That is one reason that I think HD video with high quality sound is essential in today’s cameras.

http://twills.fatcow.com/...r=/Kids/2009_07_July


gmggg


Aug 24, 2009, 9:13 AM
Post #33 of 37 (1214 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099

Re: [JasonsDrivingForce] New Canon Compact Cameras. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

JasonsDrivingForce wrote:

For instance, go back and watch the video with the songs again at the link below. This time listen to the words of the songs and pay attention to what pictures are being displayed. The songs match with what is being displayed.

You are right. I re watched the video and you are the American Sergei Eisenstein, in color!

In climbing terms, you are at the 4th class approach to art's 5.15 potential.

If you think what is holding back your video is the technological abilities of your equipment then you have some grave misunderstandings. If technology had anything to do with art or even story telling then Michael Bay would be giving lectures. If you think your video had a subtle theme with nuanced interplay of sight and sound then you have spent way too much time being cued by the prime time laugh track.

There is nothing wrong with what you are doing, in fact, you have some superb home movies. But you can't claim anything more than that, and you shouldn't need to...

Again to put it in climbing terms, the 4th class peak bagger is not climbing as hard as the 5.14 sport gal, or the 5.7 trad man, but they are all climbing and having fun, they all have different motivations, and they all need different equipment.


edited too add: Just in case there are any film geeks in here. I know that Eisenstein would make occasional use of color...


(This post was edited by gmggg on Aug 24, 2009, 9:17 AM)


JasonsDrivingForce


Aug 24, 2009, 10:58 AM
Post #34 of 37 (1209 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 3, 2009
Posts: 687

Re: [gmggg] New Canon Compact Cameras. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

gmggg wrote:
You are right. I re watched the video and you are the American Sergei Eisenstein, in color!

In climbing terms, you are at the 4th class approach to art's 5.15 potential.

If you think what is holding back your video is the technological abilities of your equipment then you have some grave misunderstandings. If technology had anything to do with art or even story telling then Michael Bay would be giving lectures. If you think your video had a subtle theme with nuanced interplay of sight and sound then you have spent way too much time being cued by the prime time laugh track.

There is nothing wrong with what you are doing, in fact, you have some superb home movies. But you can't claim anything more than that, and you shouldn't need to...

Again to put it in climbing terms, the 4th class peak bagger is not climbing as hard as the 5.14 sport gal, or the 5.7 trad man, but they are all climbing and having fun, they all have different motivations, and they all need different equipment.


edited too add: Just in case there are any film geeks in here. I know that Eisenstein would make occasional use of color...

No I think you took my comments all wrong. I wasn’t trying to say that my “Home Movies” were the next Reverie. I just took exception to your comment “In short you're not trying to express anything with these videos”. I actually was trying to portray a theme. I just didn’t do a very good job doing it.

And I don’t think that all my movies need is the right camera to be the next Reverie. The video was cute and it had some underlying themes but nothing more. However, a nice HD camera with some fast glass would definitely have made it more appealing visually.

I know that good resolution isn’t the only thing that makes a film or movie good. If that was the case then Vincent Laforet could have just shot Reverie with my ZS3 and everyone would have heralded it as the second coming.

However, I wonder at what point do you get diminishing returns? If Laforet had shot Reverie with a Panasonic GH1 would that camera have been respected just as much as the 5DMKII for video?

I guess the only thing that is certain is that if Laforet shot Reverie with the G11 no one would pay any attention to it because 640x480 just doesn’t impress anyone anymore.

Reverie: A real piece of artwork.

http://www.usa.canon.com/...t&articleID=2326


gmggg


Aug 24, 2009, 11:36 AM
Post #35 of 37 (1206 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099

Re: [JasonsDrivingForce] New Canon Compact Cameras. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

JasonsDrivingForce wrote:
No I think you took my comments all wrong. I wasn’t trying to say that my “Home Movies” were the next Reverie. I just took exception to your comment “In short you're not trying to express anything with these videos”. I actually was trying to portray a theme. I just didn’t do a very good job doing it.

And I don’t think that all my movies need is the right camera to be the next Reverie. The video was cute and it had some underlying themes but nothing more. However, a nice HD camera with some fast glass would definitely have made it more appealing visually.

I know that good resolution isn’t the only thing that makes a film or movie good. If that was the case then Vincent Laforet could have just shot Reverie with my ZS3 and everyone would have heralded it as the second coming.

However, I wonder at what point do you get diminishing returns? If Laforet had shot Reverie with a Panasonic GH1 would that camera have been respected just as much as the 5DMKII for video?

I guess the only thing that is certain is that if Laforet shot Reverie with the G11 no one would pay any attention to it because 640x480 just doesn’t impress anyone anymore.

Reverie: A real piece of artwork.

http://www.usa.canon.com/...t&articleID=2326

First, I didn't take your comments incorrectly. Further, you are misreading my statement about being "expressive and aesthetically driven" those are specific statements. They do not speak to what you are taking offense at.

Second, there is no reason to put home movies in quotes. This is not meant as an insult to your time or work, but rather just a descriptor of what they are.

Lastly, There is a reason that Canon gave Laforet a preproduction camera and not the average Best Buy customer. That video shows very little of what the camera is capable of. Instead it shows what years of dedicated practice and in depth knowledge of a field can accomplish.

This last point is the most important and the one that you are hoping to ignore and shortchange by purchasing the next great tool. There is nothing wrong with 640x480. There is nothing wrong with a 320x200 down sampled gif. If you don't know how to use something, if you don't take time to learn, and don't take time to practice then no tools can help.


JasonsDrivingForce


Aug 24, 2009, 12:23 PM
Post #36 of 37 (1200 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 3, 2009
Posts: 687

Re: [gmggg] New Canon Compact Cameras. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Naw it wasn’t offense that I was taking it was exception that I was taking. You said I wasn’t trying to express anything and that was incorrect because I was. No offense there just a difference of opinion.

What did you mean by “expressive and aesthetically driven” then? I still don’t get what you are saying about that.

I put home movies in quotes because you had lumped them all together as not “telling a story so much as they are capturing great memories”. A home movie most certainly can tell a story it is just that most don’t or don’t do it well.

Even Laforet said he had zero experience with video. I believe even he was amazed at how well the movie turned out. Sure his photography skills are what made that movie possible. However, there is no way Reverie would have had any impact with a $100 Walmart special.

Actually I don’t think it would have had the same impact if he was only allowed to use 1 lens with the 5DMKII. If you took away all of the tools that he has spent so many years learning how to use then it would still have a good story but the video would not be as impressive.

I just don’t agree with your last statement. I don’t think 640x480 and certainly not 320x200 are adequate for videos or movies. Go watch all of the videos on youtube that are more than a few years old. Some of them have excellent content but they are unbearable to watch because of the compression and resolution that was used back then.


gmggg


Aug 24, 2009, 12:51 PM
Post #37 of 37 (1194 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099

Re: [JasonsDrivingForce] New Canon Compact Cameras. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

JasonsDrivingForce wrote:
Naw it wasn’t offense that I was taking it was exception that I was taking. You said I wasn’t trying to express anything and that was incorrect because I was. No offense there just a difference of opinion.

What did you mean by “expressive and aesthetically driven” then? I still don’t get what you are saying about that.

I put home movies in quotes because you had lumped them all together as not “telling a story so much as they are capturing great memories”. A home movie most certainly can tell a story it is just that most don’t or don’t do it well.

Even Laforet said he had zero experience with video. I believe even he was amazed at how well the movie turned out. Sure his photography skills are what made that movie possible. However, there is no way Reverie would have had any impact with a $100 Walmart special.

Actually I don’t think it would have had the same impact if he was only allowed to use 1 lens with the 5DMKII. If you took away all of the tools that he has spent so many years learning how to use then it would still have a good story but the video would not be as impressive.

I just don’t agree with your last statement. I don’t think 640x480 and certainly not 320x200 are adequate for videos or movies. Go watch all of the videos on youtube that are more than a few years old. Some of them have excellent content but they are unbearable to watch because of the compression and resolution that was used back then.

I'm done with this. There are many things needed to make art. Artifice is one of them. This is what you are hung up on. You obviously don't know much about this stuff (and that's cool, perhaps it's boring to you, nothing wrong with that). But I doubt that any introspection or motivation will come from this conversation.

Your theme was not an artistic theme, your expression was not artistic expression, both already existed in the moment and on your memory card. You created a montage that showed these moments. (again there is nothing wrong with that, and I am not criticizing you) There was no "story" just a series of events. There are many examples of "expressive and aesthetically driven" montages out there, both with fictional and non-fictional film. Watch a few of those and study what is going on. Start with Eisenstein, he pretty much solidified the montage's place in cinema. For still photography check out what people do with old Polaroid and Lomo cameras...

I know I sound like a crank about this, but I would hate for some future climbing video artist to blame his failings on technology and not his own lack of expertise. And it does really irk me when a bunch of people start wanking off about some new piece of technology before they have any understanding of what they already own. Rampant consumerism does no favors for experience, art, or the individual.

In climbing terms, if your foot slips, it is usually not the case that you need a new pair of shoes.

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Climbing Disciplines : Climbing Photography

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?
$49.46 (10% off)
$125.96 (10% off)
$62.96 (10% off)
$53.96 (10% off)



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook