Will Video kill still photography?

[fimgirl]

Interesting article here with some good examples.

http://petapixel.com/2014/10/16/will-video-kill-photographys-stars/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PetaPixel+%28PetaPixel%29

Not for me though. I have enough trouble selecting from 2/3 shots never mind 200- 300 frames.

Edited October 23, 2014 by fimgirl

[A1Str8]

No.

[sunshine51]

Will video kill still photogrtaphy?

The article offered up some interesting situations and a brief on two particular

MP cameras...Arri's Alexa and the RED. Both cameras are very good and both

are very expensive which may put either one well outta the reach of all but the

most seasoned & highly respected (read....rich) stills photographers of today

There is that benefit to motion pictures which is derived from the fact that the

camera is always "rolling" while recording instead of being actuated intermittently

by the pressing of a shutter release button (or switch on UHS cameras). This simple

fact; that the camera is rolling enables any photographer to get shots that otherwise

would be nearly impossible having to release a shutter each time to make an exposure,

when viewed in single frame. I mean...if you have 35mm film stock rolling through a

film gate at 30fps, and the camera is stable...there's all sorts of possibilities there.

But jitter or jerk that camera around and everything will go to crap.

One also must understand how a motion picture camera works compared to how

a stills camera works and yes, there are similar basics and there are worlds of

difference too. Google is your friend. An example...back in the mid 70's using

my Nik F2AS & a special hispeed motor drive, with the mirror locked up and a

shutterspeed of 1/2000th a second fed by a 250 exposure nagazine back....my

fastest fram rate was only 12 fps....limited by the drive. Nowadays that frame rate

is easily achieved in cheap handphones that shoot video in 3gp format.

Back in the days when BetacamSP was the defacto industry standard for us news

cameramen some of the stills guys would pester us for a frame grab if they didn't

get their shot or were in a different location and our stuff looked better. Mind you

even with the steam powered frame grabbers of those days, expensive stuff it was

too...the still frames grabbed were pretty good but they still looked like a video frame

grab when printed in the media.

That is changing though as the years pass by. There was a time when Format Wars

meant an argument between who had the best TV standards system and usually

involved those who used NTSC or PAL...the SDECAM users never amounted to

much agro and kept to themselves mostly. Nowadays Format Wars has taken on a

completely new meaning...Gone are the avi, wmv & mpg fanatics...hello to the H264,

4K & 6K stromtroopers. And all the other formats on the sidelines trying to grab some

spotlight time.

However...it will always "get better" when pulling stills from video as the article stated,

especially in the fashion photography industry. But will video & stills from it ever beat

out the still photograph?

I will not say a resounding NO...more like a begrudging "nope"...although things are

always going to change aren't they?

[astral]

Cinematography did not kill the still

Why should video??

[Goshawk]

The article offered up some interesting situations and a brief on two particular

MP cameras...Arri's Alexa and the RED. Both cameras are very good and both

are very expensive which may put either one well outta the reach of all but the

most seasoned & highly respected (read....rich) stills photographers of today

I've been toying on & off with the thought of buying a Panasonic GH4 for a few weeks now (purely for video work, not as my main stills cam) and one of the very features lots are talking about on tog forums & youtube is its pretty darn good single frame grabs taken from it's 4K footage. I've seen a few & they do look quite amazing, and this powerhouse video machine can be bought for a fraction of a RED.

[sunshine51]

Cinematography did not kill the still

Why should video??

Astral...Welcome Back! Hope all is well.

I agree with you....however...in this digital age...things are advancing at such

a blazing rate that I forsee a definite blurring of the once distinct line between

stills & motion. This is beginning to be seen in 4K video and the cameras such

as the one Goshawk mentioned are very small and reasonably priced. With

the correct video editing software and or hardware, grabbing a frame or dozen

for publication on a glossy magazine will/soon is, gonna be a piece of cake. It's

alrerady being done today as stated in the article. Sure it's nice to own an Arri

Alexa or a RED...but having the dosh in the bank for other purposes is also

nice too...like buying a GH4 and having a serious play with 4K.

[Whale]

Yes, its just a matter of time. It may take a few years yet but it is inevitable.

[phuketrichard]

Never

there diferent and will always remain

for some things video is far preferred ( look as some of the action videos shot with go pro cameras

than look at a single shot ...

But for street photography no reason to see 2 minutes

1 125th of a sec tells the story