Wouldn't you be tempted to do still shots after going to all the trouble of model/styling/make-up etc for a video shoot?

I do video shoots, I don't do photo shoots.  That is... I don't have strobes or most of the other equipment that dedicated "photographers" have for photography.  I bought my Canon T2i specifically to shoot video.  However, I still shoot a lot of stills.

One feature I like about the T2i is that while in Video mode I can still shoot stills.  So "between takes" I'll pop off a few stills when doing my video shoots.  Occasionally, something will actually be useful for stock photography, but I don't worry about it.  I'm sure if I actually cared more about the still side of the business, I'd invest in the proper equipment and probably a second camera that I could keep set up for stills and use both on my shoots.

I agree completely that they are too totally different animals and if you want to be successful at BOTH on the same shoot, you have to work a LOT harder to make sure both are up to quality.

Quote from: hqimages on May 06, 2010, 17:57

Wouldn't you be tempted to do still shots after going to all the trouble of model/styling/make-up etc for a video shoot?

I'm still not sure why you think it is so simple.

I'll elaborate, once again.  You said "a usual shoot".  A usual shoot involves strobe lights, and, for most, shooting handheld, going solo.  A video shoot involves hot lights, numerous pieces of hardware, like a tripod and a glider or a boom, plus, possibly people to do follow focus and audio.  As well as talent who can not only smile and look good for 1/125, but can successfully act to convey a message.  And other things.  

So, you said "since you have the studio/model set up anyway, what's the biggie to shoot some video as part of a usual shoot".  There, I told you "the biggie".  I'm sharing information.  That should make you happy, right?

 I'd rather you didn't speak to me, permanently.

Sigh... People are still bringing this old article up...

The owners of the H.264 patent have already put out a press release after this article came out that they have no intention of going after camera owners for selling their footage.  Canon, Nikon, etc.. have ALREADY PAID the licensing fee for use of the H.264 codec and they are fully aware that if they were to go after individuals, they'd cause the whole industry to switch to a new standard which would cost them millions of dollars.

I'm not sure, did you refer to this communicate?
http://videomaker.com/community/videonews/2010/02/6721-mpeg-la-extends-h-264-codec-royalty-free-licensing/

They are saying in that one:
" MPEG LA announced its AVC Patent Portfolio License, which the H.264 codec belongs to �will continue not to charge royalties for Internet Video that is free to end users (known as Internet Broadcast AVC Video) during the next License term from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2015.�"
It's sound to me that they are talking about youtube and other sites where it is free of charge for viewing encoded footage.

I'd rather you didn't speak to me, permanently.

You can permanently choose to not read what I post, but I'll feel free to take part in any forum conversation I like.  Thx.

Quote from: hqimages on May 07, 2010, 01:22

That's cool! And yes, no-body ever said photography is easy, and video is even harder.. however as a photographer I feel like moving to video, although a massive learning curve, I at least have an understanding of how to set up studios, how lighting works, I have some experience with final cut pro etc.. so I'm looking forward to doing some video I personally while I'm learning video, will shoot stills too on the same day.. changing a lighting set-up etc isn't a big deal to me, and I feel at least if I've made a mess of the video, I'll have something to show for the day at least, so that's what I want to do at the beginning and see how it works out..

I can't wait to try it anyway!!

Looking forward to hearing your results.  Hope it goes well for you.

Personally, I will still have to stick to one at a time for now.  As I mentioned - my average shoot lasts 5 hours or more and involves 3-4 different concepts (each of which requires its own setup and tear down). 

If I were to change setups to shoot still and video in one session that would eat up all my time and I would probably only be able to fit in one concept.  For now I think my time is better spent fitting multiple concepts into a shooting day than multiple media.

If it works out for others then that's great.  We all have to budget our time how we feel it will yield the best results.

Yeah understandably for you Lisa, I'm much more cavalier really  I'll see how it goes, may well decide it was a terrible idea and just keep them separate!

if you're shooting in the 'wild' it's much harder to find places where you can do both - you really need to do either one format or the other in most cases.

If your primary focus is still photography, shooting video at the same time is very difficult.  If you're recording video then you'll often miss shots that would be great stills.  So if you're a still photographer, I would recommend that you ignore video on most off-site shoots, unless you have a second person with you to handle the video.  However, if you are a video shooter, there's "no harm/no foul" in popping off some still shots "between takes".  Especially if you're shooting with a vDSLR.  I do it all the time, and I've had many of those still shots accepted as stock.  But I don't lose site of my primary purpose, which is shooting video.

Let me also say that in my little make-shift studio at home I have discovered that lighting for video and lighting for "good" still shots are two totally different animals.  Although it could have more to do with my camera than my lighting setup, but I doubt it.  From what I've read here and from talking with some really good studio photographers, the goals are often different.  Especially since most of my in-studio stuff at home is chroma-key.

As I mentioned previously, I do shoot stills between takes while doing video shoots.  But most of what I shoot is not good enough for stock.  Occasionally I get lucky and something does work.  And since I pay my models pretty well, I'm not gonna waste my time on relighting for stills.  I have much better luck when shooting outdoor and have had most of my accepted stills from my outdoor video shooting sessions.

Sean is right. 

If you are really professional, if you are really serious about what you do, it's not just a matter of pushing a different button.  It's not that simple.

Photography and video are completely different.  Different equipment, different skills and talents.

I agree completely about them being different and such, but I disagree about your 'definition' of professional.  I don't think you can define 'professional photographer' or 'professional videographer' in just one way.  Many people approach the 'profession' differently.

I think the fad is actually the video features being built into DSLRs and not stock video itself. Cinematography is a completely different ballgame. People interested in getting into it don't just run to the mall and buy a video camera. One popular and cheap video setup for beginners is a Canon XL2 (about $3,000 body only) .. the cheapest lens they make for that model is like $1000 ... that's a lot of money for a cheap starter setup with only 1 lens. It's also worth pointing out that this $4,000 setup is a dirt cheap video setup .. in photography economics it would be kinda like running to walmart and buying a kodak easyshare off the shelf and thinking you now had the gear to compete on a professional level.

Actually if anyone is interested in seriously shooting video for income you need to be looking at either adding it to your wedding services or teaming up with another wedding photographer. "Save the Date" video is extremely popular and highly profitable (not including craigslist photographers) .. at least it is in the US.

I don't buy that - one can excellent results with a consumer level camcorder & iMovie, or one can rent equipment. The real problem with video is the time required to edit - an old rule of thumb is 8 hours editing per finished 3 minutes

Sean is right.  

If you are really professional, if you are really serious about what you do, it's not just a matter of pushing a different button.  It's not that simple.

Photography and video are completely different.  Different equipment, different skills and talents.

Uh-oh.  Don't agree with me, even if we're right.  You'll get on her bad side  .  Just for giggles, go back to page to and read my totally sensible answer to her question:
"But yeah, why not shoot video? Technology now allows it on ur dslr, and since you have the studio/model set up anyway, what's the biggie to shoot some video as part of a usual shoot, it's just diversifying ur portfolio, and getting another customer in there that needs video, or offering video to your existing clients that dabble in some web work.."
and immediately, she's on the offensive.

Quote from: Digital66 on May 09, 2010, 01:50

Sean is right.  

If you are really professional, if you are really serious about what you do, it's not just a matter of pushing a different button.  It's not that simple.

Photography and video are completely different.  Different equipment, different skills and talents.

Uh-oh.  Don't agree with me, even if we're right.  You'll get on her bad side  .  Just for giggles, go back to page to and read my totally sensible answer to her question:
"But yeah, why not shoot video? Technology now allows it on ur dslr, and since you have the studio/model set up anyway, what's the biggie to shoot some video as part of a usual shoot, it's just diversifying ur portfolio, and getting another customer in there that needs video, or offering video to your existing clients that dabble in some web work.."
and immediately, she's on the offensive.

With anything you say directed to me, keep in mind I know exactly what you are, so don't be surprised if it's not received well, ever. This is why I said I'd prefer you to not even direct any post directly to me.. post away to other people, just not to me directly.. I find you the most negative person on this forum, the most offensive, and the person most likely to put other people off making any kind of effort as a beginner by letting them know how 'hard' everything is, and how all of their ideas are terrible, even if you twist their words completely. I think it's a shame you're here to be honest, being such a downer on almost everything that's posted, I think your presence on the forum makes it less friendly, and less useful than it could be. There are many people that agree with me, that won't even post their agreement because they lurk rather than even bother posting anything and get the typical negative backlash, and it's not just you responsible for this, there are others in this forum that are just nasty. Someone who says 'sure, let other people give away their images for free as long as it benefits ME' is not someone who's opinion I want on my words, which you constantly misconstrue.

So let's just try not even posting on each others comments and that will suit me and everyone else I'm sure just fine.

With anything you say directed to me, keep in mind I know exactly what you are, so don't be surprised if it's not received well, ever. This is why I said I'd prefer you to not even direct any post directly to me.. post away to other people, just not to me directly.. I find you the most negative person on this forum, the most offensive, and the person most likely to put other people off making any kind of effort as a beginner by letting them know how 'hard' everything is, and how all of their ideas are terrible, even if you twist their words completely. I think it's a shame you're here to be honest, being such a downer on almost everything that's posted, I think your presence on the forum makes it less friendly, and less useful than it could be. There are many people that agree with me, that won't even post their agreement because they lurk rather than even bother posting anything and get the typical negative backlash, and it's not just you responsible for this, there are others in this forum that are just nasty. Someone who says 'sure, let other people give away their images for free as long as it benefits ME' is not someone who's opinion I want on my words, which you constantly misconstrue.

So let's just try not even posting on each others comments and that will suit me and everyone else I'm sure just fine.

May I suggest you put Sean on Ignore?  That way you won't have to read his comments.  It's pointless to tell someone not to post, especially when Leaf has provided us with such a useful feature as the Ignore button.

FWIW, not that he needs or wants my opinion, but I find that if you look past his acerbic style, Sean has a lot of useful input.

Umm...who really cares what your personal taste or interest is?  You are not a buyer/consumer of clips are you?  The OP seemed to be asking business and market for video clips on microstock sites.  I didn't see where he was asking for your taste or approval.

I am curious about what professional buyers of clips think about microstock sites for flash splash pages, banner ads and the emerging e-magazine market.

A: I was responding to Elena's post.
B: I'm one of the 5 billion consumers on the planet who advertising and magazines are aimed at.  You know, the stuff done by people who buy stock clips?  BTW, here's Leaf's clip from the OP:
"Like PowerDroid said in the other thread, I think we are going to see more and more video in digital magazines and websites with the onslaught of tablet style computing.  This will increase the need for digital stock."

My post directly addresses that as well.  I greatly avoid video, especially anything in a digital magazine, or on websites as they waste my time.  Sorry, you weren't able to apply what I said to the topic.

I guarantee you no-one is saying that about you Lisa, i have found you a pleasure, and also I have learned from your opinions on things..

Thanks a lot for the kind words Hilary  
I am on several people's ignore lists though, so I've managed to tick some people off.  I guess most of us who express opinions manage to get on somebody's bad side...

Back on topic, if you do a shoot incorporating both I hope you will post how it goes so that others of us who haven't tried video yet can get an idea what we're in for.