dbp Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 Just curious, how many EOSHD regulars dabble in photography as well? Andrew, how about you? Been shooting video for years and years, but have recently become more and more into the photography side of things. The GH4 seems pretty decent as a photo cam too. I make my money doing video but I'm starting to see the appeal of branching out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raafi Rivero Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 When I bought my 5D mkii six years ago, it was for video. But at some point I realized, "you know, this is a pretty good still camera, too." [doh]. So I started shooting a lot more stills. I had always shot stills as a hobby, or "to train my eye" for film shoots, or on location scouts. Suddenly stills became much more present. I've now been hired many times as a still photographer in addition to continuing work in film. The bulk of my work, effort, and marketing goes into the film side of things, but I really enjoy shooting still now, too. Here are some shots from a recent trip to Morocco. Shooting stills has also made me a more confident cinematographer, too. Flynn and Michael Coffee 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronFilm Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 I started out years ago as a casual hobbyist photographer (still am that), think it made the transition to filmmaking even easier as I understood a bunch of general terms already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Ma Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 I think both skills are essential and learning one can only help the other. The 2 biggest takeaways so far for me has been: Being forced to learn how to grade 8-bit (a jpg file is pretty much like grading 8-bit video) because I can't shoot in raw has only helped me understand color grading better and what's happening from a data perspective. Editing clips together to form a story when there is none has helped me put together better collection of photos together rather than only putting galleries together just based on individual merits of each photo. I don't own a GH4, but I'd never take my GH3 for photos (anymore). I think the GH4 is far better, but what you get with something like a Canon is better skin color, and more shallow DOF, maybe better noise performance (depending on camera), and it gives you so many more photo shooting opportunities where there was none. Flynn 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graphicnatured Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 I started in photography prior to video. I too wouldn't take my GH4 on a shoot for stills. I'd take a Nikon or Canon. Geoff CB and Michael Coffee 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timotheus Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 For me it's been the other way around. My photography got more serious after buying a 70D and some quality lenses in 2013...then the cool video options on the thing (DPAF!) got me reading on DSLR video... Before I knew I got a collection of vintage glass (Takumars, some Russians and a set of anamorphics...so much for DPAF haha) and a G7, but way too little time...just have to take it slow, I guess. But coming here is easy, reading and learning. I like my niche...and this forum! :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Bacle Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 I started with photography for 6-7 years before jumping in the video world. I learned photography with film cameras, which taught me to think a bit before pressing the shutter, and I find it very valuable now kaylee 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inazuma Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 I think it's very healthy to always be taking stills. Video can get you bogged down with all the technical aspects whereas the simplicity of stills allows you to focus more on composition, lighting etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowfun Posted September 9, 2016 Share Posted September 9, 2016 In many ways I think that what I do with my video cameras is essentially to take "moving stills". By that I mean that I like to take landscapes, scenary and atmospheric pictures. I used to throw photographs into FCP with a 5s delay and show them as a sequence of stills. But they lacked something. They lacked any sense of movement - ripples on the distant lake, a leaf blowing on a branch, the sway of the grass or a person walking across the scene. Taking video "stills" addresses those deficiencies. The best example is with aurora photography - any 30s exposure still can give a decent image. But it's not the aurora - it lacks the dancing and drama of movement. The same 30s "photo" with the A7s and a shogun... totally different. It's not really "film-making" but it does bring "photographs" to life. As I learn more about camera movement I see new opportunities but I do think there is a grey area between video and photography - the moving still. Cinegain 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.