newfoundmass

Why should we limit what we consider art, though? Is that not gatekeeping, saying one thing is art but something else isn't? Going back to cave drawings, do you think the folks who made those thought they were creating something that would stand the test of time, or do you think they were just expressing themselves using the medium available to them, with zero regard for people who would later find them to be soul-moving and spiritual? Art is art, regardless of the impact or scale. Just some art holds more value than other art. Also, if we are judging content and it's merits on the profound impact it has had on people, for better or worse, there are a lot of 30 second reels that have had an enormous impact on society. My old snow plow guy, who never even graduated high school, thinks he knows more about vaccinations than medical professionals because he watched a couple 30 second TikTok reels that told him they are bad. He also thought Donald Trump was going to free thousands of children from sex trafficking, that Joe Biden and the deep state stole the 2020 election, and that COVID was a man made disease meant to depopulate the earth and enslave the rest of us.

I mean, the people who drew simple cave drawings probably didn't expect people to view their doodles as art pieces thousands of years later, but here we are. Gatekeeping art is silly because it's not just wrong to do but its such a futile thing to do. Art isn't just what people will remember, it is expression! And it's all around us, from beautiful architecture, to statues, to murals, to kids drawing on the sidewalk with chalk. It's in the biggest music halls, all the way to the local dive bar or coffee shop hosting a singer-songwriter who just likes to sing his songs on a Friday night to a couple dozen listening ears. It's in the giant cineplexes playing the biggest films, to the small theaters that show foreign or low budget films, all the way to the phone someone is holding on the bus plays a random YouTube or TikTok video. Not all of it has the same value or meaning, but it's all still art. Don't try and gatekeep it, or try and tell someone that what they created isn't art just because it doesn't appeal to you.

YouTube revenue is probably down compared to the highs of a couple years ago, but I imagine he's still doing pretty good between it and the deals he has, plus whatever revenue he was generating via luts, merch and stuff. A lot of that content will generate revenue in perpetuity, so he'll still be making ad revenue off it for as long as it's up. A month ago he released a video ranking the color accuracy of every camera brand. It has, to date, gotten almost 100,000 views. He could, realistically, continue creating content like that forever and ever. He has decided not to. So I agree it probably has a lot less to do with financial considerations and more to do with just not enjoying the box he put himself in. And honestly, good for him. Hopefully he'll do something that is more fulfilling. I am happy for anyone who decides "fuck this, I just don't want to do this anymore" and steps away to do something else that makes them happy. With the way the world (and the economy) is going, most of us are going to have to work until the day we die, so we might as well enjoy what we're doing while we can.

Exactly. Not all art is equal, but I think it's the last thing we should be trying to gate keep. Art, and the creativity that fuels it, is the ultimate form of expression and something NO ONE can take away from us. Just not all of us are as creative as others, but that's okay!

I think where we disagree is on the term "art." I think doodling on a piece of paper is technically art. It's not at the same level as the Mona Lisa, but neither are the goofy songs I sing to my dogs equal to "Stairway to Heaven." It's all still art, though, some is just more creative (and better) than the other stuff.

Mosts artists create and never share their work with people outside of their immediate friends and family. Others create and share it on the micro level, simply wishing to share it but not make a big thing of it (example: folks that play at the local bar but have no interest in recording and releasing music.) I think as a whole we are far too judgmental about art and the things people create. It's okay to be critical, but at the end of the day, we should encourage people who create anything at all, especially as AI creeps into the picture. People don't just use AI for the convenience, but because of their own insecurities. I know too many local businesses who have started using AI because of the belief that it looks better than what they were creating themselves. I'm certainly guilty of thinking to myself, when looking at something a local business owner clearly made themselves, "that's awful." What I wouldn't do though to go back to seeing that stuff over the soulless, gross AI slop that they are all switching to. At least it had personality and you knew someone put their time and effort into creating it, even if it wasn't great.

I don't know Gerald outside of what he presented to us, which is to say that I don't know him much at all because we all present what we want people to see online. But with Gerald and other content creators, the algorithms and audience steers you towards what it wants from you. Gerald might naturally just have been someone interested in clinical tests of cameras and not had an interest in being more creative, but I always wondered if part of the reason he (and others in his position) never explored more artistic expression in his videos was the fear that it would be torn to shreds. Sitting in the middle of four walls with a tripod, camera and teleprompter is safe. Creating something MORE and sharing it with folks makes you vulnerable, especially if you've already established yourself in a niche. "The nerdy long form camera review guy that you all put so much faith into fell on his face when trying to actually create something!" Just putting yourself out there at all you open yourself up to so much unkindness, let alone when you actually share something that is deeply personal and vulnerable. As I've gotten older, and experienced how shitty people can make you feel for just engaging in your passion, I've become more empathetic and understanding. I think it's important that while being critical we still remember these folks are human.

Another good example. I'm think we are all guilty of minimizing things because they don't appeal to us. To a certain audience Gerald's reviews were incredibly engaging. It's not what I want out of a review, but I'm sure someone enjoyed it.

Content is art. Not all art is equal, but it's still art. It's like arguing that the people who write instruction manuals or textbooks aren't writers. They are, but that doesn't mean they're Stephen King.

I mean, to the extent he creates videos he's an "artist" even if it's not art that you enjoy. It's not the most creative, but it is what it is. He COULD have explored more creative artistic expression, especially as he had the means to do it given the access to equipment (both owned and loaned) he had, but he chose not to.

It's always strange how these folks always end up hating the box they put themselves into when they never had to put themselves in that box to begin with. The only thing stopping people like Gerald from CREATING fulfilling art is themselves. Having been a viewer of his since the start, he DID start out being passionate about cameras. But his transition from a guy who clearly loved cameras into a soulless content creator who acted as a promotional arm of the camera manufacturers wasn't something that happened overnight, nor was it something that his viewers didn't voice in the comments. It was a choice that he made, and inevitably it was going to end like this. There are so many people who started out around the same time who didn't put themselves into that box. Whether it was young Simon Cade/DSLRGuide or the Film Riot guys, just the first two to come to mind from the OLD days who are still around, they all started out with a similar trajectory but used their YouTube channels as a launch pad into creating art that they wanted. That isn't to say you can't criticize what they ARE creating today, but they are out there creating and, from the looks of things, enjoying it. Their work with cameras didn't just stay within the four walls of an apartment or house, but out in the real world, where they could express and create. I genuinely hope that Gerald finds something that he is passionate about and creates stuff that makes him feel good. Everyone deserves to be happy and fulfilled by what they are doing.

Yeah. I'm not saying that releasing something different might not help raise stock prices, but canning nearly a quarter of their staff probably had a lot to do with it. I don't think your average investor, even one for GoPro, knows all that much about the camera market overall to know the significance.

I mean, the lens mount makes it very adaptable, but not having auto focus seems like a big deal breaker.

Broadcast/live streaming is where the money is right now. There are so many mirrorless camera options that releasing another affordable cine camera probably doesn't make sense right now, especially if they don't significantly improve upon what BMD already has out there. I feel like the lower end cine market in general has retracted a lot. We're a long ways from when ZCam and BMD were regularly releasing different variations of the same camera, and both are more focused it seems on broadcasting than filmmaking right now. It's not just sports broadcasters buying this stuff, but churches, schools, governments, hospitals, non-profits, concert venues, etc. too. One of the biggest concert venues in my state now has a live production set up to encourage bands to film their shows for release there. It has hurt local freelancers who used to film concerts there for bands. Zoom during the pandemic really ushered in the era, but in the years since the needs/wants for these folks has grown and a company like BMD has done a great job in capitalizing.

Maybe not a big film, but Hardcore Henry was filmed on GoPros and received a wide release.

I don't think this makes it a cinema camera...

Thank you for letting us know! I'm glad you're well! I do wish the content stayed up, as it was still useful, but I understand your reasoning. At the end of the day, it was YOUR content and you could do what you wanted with it! I hope that you check in from time to time and thank you for all your input over the years! And congrats on the family!

It's never going to happen, but the ideal scenario would be every developed country investing in the tech space to create more competition overall. As countries pull away from the United States (and rightfully so) they might look towards China, but that's just replacing one bad actor with another. It's just hard to think of playing catch up.

Yes, it's very difficult right now not to feel dirty. I've always been pretty far left politically, and as such pretty critical of the style of greedy capitalism that has won out, but today there is virtually no ethical way to do much of anything because EVERYTHING is wrapped up in some pretty deplorable shit. The way the tech companies especially kneeled to this administration, it just feels dirty to even use their services but it's virtually impossible not to. Everything uses at least something from Google or Amazon to operate and run. Look at how many sites and services become unusable when Amazon Web Services goes down, for example. The internet itself grinds almost to a complete halt. It's such a bleak time.

I hope someone is able to reach out and check on him, and let him know that he's missed. He was a rare gem on these forums and YouTube; he was just someone that enjoyed sharing his passion for video and photography. He wasn't trying to sell anything, or get free stuff, he just loved sharing. There was a purity to that, and it's severely lacking these days.

That's really unfortunate. His Vimeo is still up, and his Instagram too, though they haven't been updated recently. His content output decreased a lot once Gunpowder passed, but he had already been less active as I think he became more and more disillusioned with the entire YouTube/Filmmaking/Photography scene. I hope he is well and creating the art that he loves.

This is how they act knowing cameras are on them, filming every thing they do, and with witnesses. Imagine what they are doing when there aren't any cameras fixed on them or people watching. What horrors are they inflicting on the people they've locked up? There are still people here in the US who support this. Those are people we'll never be able to get through. I wan't to think it will get better, but I fear it will need to get a lot worse before that happens.

I don't regret jumping to full frame. The S5 and S5II X have treated me well and both are really good values. It was the right choice at the time, for a multitude of reasons. BUT if I'd known that the G9 II and GH7 were in the pipeline I probably would've stayed with M43. The main benefit for me has been the better low light, but these newer M43 cameras are pretty darn good at that. FF still has an edge, but it's not a huge one. I also don't typically do a lot of work where I need really shallow depth of field. Often times I'm closing the lense down to get similar results to what I got when filming on M43, except these lenses are much heavier and more expensive than the ones I used on my GH5, G85, and GX85 bodies. I could fit all my lenses in a bag and it didn't weigh much at all. The same definitely cannot be said for my FF lenses! The stabilization, to my eye, also looks a lot better on the G9II and GH7 than my S5 and S5II X. I hope Lumix keeps M43 alive and even gets back to innovating with the system. A return to smaller bodies, and possibly even smaller lenses, would definitely pique my interest. I don't know that I'd ever jump back into the system completely, but I could see myself buying a couple lenses and a body if it was compelling enough.

A GH7 (or G9 II if it has unlimited recording and doesn't overheat) really would be my ideal camera. Even though I use the excellent kit lenses a lot on my two S5 bodies and my S5II X, it's still not as light weight as I wish it were. I don't really care about shallow dof and low light isn't nearly as big of an issue when it comes to the GH7 and G9 II based on what I've seen or for what it was on my GH5 cams. But it's hard to justify going back to M43 because I just don't have faith that Lumix is invested in it for the long haul. Everyone i know loves these two cameras, but they don't get the firmware updates that the full frame cameras get. For Lumix that's a red flag because they've always released firmware that gave new features and improved their cameras. I mean, look how long they supported the GH5!

Go to Times Square or Tokyo and you'll see endless 9:16 screens playing (presumably 4K or higher) video. They're massive screens. We're kinda derailing this thread, but it's silly to argue that open gate isn't a benefit for a lot of people. It's cool if you don't need it, but others do.