How to save the consumer camera: DON'T!

[treb999]

HAHAHAHA!  Perfect response.

[Orangenz]

I think I get what you say. Adding little trinkets to a non-smartphone camera will make it more useable to the person wanting a non-smartphone camera but will not result in what the camera industry really would like which is the smartphone people to stop using their phones and buy a camera instead. 

Trinkets that would be handy - wireless charge station that auto initiates gigabit wifi uploading to home computer.

Tacky trinket that would be handy - smaller jpeg creation and upload to media sites, ie. an easier way to use a camera as a phone. Ah stuff it. 

[Eric Calabros]

I'm really happy that people are no longer interested in dedicated camera.. tourists (who have no clue what exposure is) holding DSLRs set to Auto mode.. it was always like an insult to me. No I"m not snob or something, I just say it was wrong since the beginning. 

At the other hand, the company that makes gears I want, is so dangerously addicted to consumer market cash flow, and has no clear plan for healthy less- painful transition. 

[kidzrevil]

Smartphones won and to be honest with you the average consumer doesn't know,doesn't care and doesn't see the difference between our 5D's,NX1'S & GH4's. The "pros" will have to start thinking like artists & not gear heads to survive 

[Arikhan]

@kidzrevil

Quote

The "pros" will have to start thinking like artists & not gear heads to survive

As said in this thread, in my eyes you need much more marketing skills (nowadays social media, YT- / Vimeo marketing, etc.) than filmmaking skills to be successful as filmmaker. It's all about hype and publicity, not all about quality or artistic aspects...Mostly...Though sometimes, there are serious filmmakers expressing emotion,, beauty, joy, sadness or even some interesting information in their films. The age of (low budget) artistic filmmaking is - in my eyes - over. Exceptions prove the rule...

There are many "iPhone Tarantinos" nowadays and some of them spread very successful their "content" - aka films. Millions of clicks and views in Social Media, sometimes some weeks or months of fame...These guys are the new sheriffs in the town...Quick and dirty - and sometimes very successful....

[Laquaglia Punto Ernesto]

Photography and moviemaking are industries destined to disappear and became hobbies mainly. I believe that in 100 years from now, making movies will be a pastime of doctors, lawyers, engineers, bankers etc. (In some ways, it already is) and not a career anymore. Creating good images it's already so stupidly easy, and creating good content is incredibly easy if the majority of the audience has already very low standards. 

Paired with the fact that for most people piracy is legitimate, I believe it is only a matter of time before virtually anyone well off will be able to be a "part-time Spielberg".

[Cinegain]

Lol, whut? No.

[kidzrevil]

1 hour ago, Arikhan said:

@kidzrevil

As said in this thread, in my eyes you need much more marketing skills (nowadays social media, YT- / Vimeo marketing, etc.) than filmmaking skills to be successful as filmmaker. It's all about hype and publicity, not all about quality or artistic aspects...Mostly...Though sometimes, there are serious filmmakers expressing emotion,, beauty, joy, sadness or even some interesting information in their films. The age of (low budget) artistic filmmaking is - in my eyes - over. Exceptions prove the rule...

There are many "iPhone Tarantinos" nowadays and some of them spread very successful their "content" - aka films. Millions of clicks and views in Social Media, sometimes some weeks or months of fame...These guys are the new sheriffs in the town...Quick and dirty - and sometimes very successful....

I know people who personally are trash but because of nepotism and some industry connections they are getting high budget projects.

and I also know people who take better pictures with their iPhones than some of these guys with their Canon 6D's and L glass. I've worked in this industry long enough to understand that gear won't take your career to the places it needs to be. It's all about your aesthetic and who you know and these iPhone photographer are reaching a huge user base cause they can create content in seconds. 

The pro's will learn the hard way and the consumer camera market will continue to plummet until camera manufacturers change their marketing and stop holding back on features they could easily implement in their cameras.

The old era and old way of doing things are finished...it is 2016 after all

8 minutes ago, Laquaglia Punto Ernesto said:

Photography and moviemaking are industries destined to disappear and became hobbies mainly. I believe that in 100 years from now, making movies will be a pastime of doctors, lawyers, engineers, bankers etc. (In some ways, it already is) and not a career anymore. Creating good images it's already so stupidly easy, and creating good content is incredibly easy if the majority of the audience has already very low standards. 

Paired with the fact that for most people piracy is legitimate, I believe it is only a matter of time before virtually anyone well off will be able to be a "part-time Spielberg".

Its about creating CONTENT. Keyword : content. The market for creating content is opening up big time with companies literally paying for content. I was in a meeting the other day with my partner and he told me companies like Tidal & Spotify are now offering to pay cash for content to add to their roster. The market isn't dying as much as it is evolving. We have a choice as to whether we are going to adapt to it so we can eventually innovate it or are we going to complain that things aren't the same as they were in the 80's lol

[Arikhan]

@kidzrevil 

Another interesting question is, if most consumers care about information, artistic aspects or quality of images (4K? Cinematic look? On smartphone displays? :-)) ). I doubt it. For most people, films are content. Taking a look, (probably) sharing and then hunting the next piece of video content. "Speed consuming" at it's best. As filmmaker you have to impress/shock them/beg their attention nowadays your audience for more than 30 minutes - but...I think Andrew is right. Good times for serious/talented filmmakers with good concepts and ideas - and a nice INCOME from another industry than photo&film... ;-)

[norliss]

Excellent article, Andrew and I find myself agreeing with you rather than Tony Northrup. Then again, I'm not sure how much Tony Northrup really agrees with Tony Northrup: his video smacks of being one to pull in an audience with a headline-grabbing title...

Sure, I'm all for improving usability wherever possible but proper photography and "hey, look at my friends having lolz tonite" pictures on social media are two different things. There really is no point trying to make cameras operate exactly like mobile phones because for the vast majority of people, it wouldn't make any difference: they'd always opt for the phone and the phone-alone because it's 'good enough' and the extra performance of the dedicated camera just doesn't warrant the cost/size etc.

Ultimately, if people are genuinely interested in photography they'll move up to a 'proper camera' and learn to use it. I don't subscribe to this dumb-down/ race-to-the-bottom mindset that says we should gear everything toward the people that have grown up in the smartphone/iPad era.

[Timotheus]

I think Tony tries in this video and many others to get manufacturers to start innovating and deliver more value. Not only for the benefit of micro-attention-spanned millenials, but certainly also for dedicated, paying consumers. As Canon's intentional crippling of camera's is often lamented here, I would reckon this notion would gather some support?

Among many, many other things: simpler menu's, touch UI, flawless connectivity through Wifi and GPS, easy firmware updates and an update of those friggin archaic top-lcd's have nothing to do with 'dumbing down'. These would be beneficial to everyone.

[norliss]

21 minutes ago, Timotheus said:

I think Tony tries in this video and many others to get manufacturers to start innovating and deliver more value. Not only for the benefit of micro-attention-spanned millenials, but certainly also for dedicated, paying consumers. As Canon's intentional crippling of camera's is often lamented here, I would reckon this notion would gather some support?

Among many, many other things: simpler menu's, touch UI, flawless connectivity through Wifi and GPS, easy firmware updates and an update of those friggin archaic top-lcd's have nothing to do with 'dumbing down'. These would be beneficial to everyone.

I did say I think usability should be improved wherever possible (many of the things you mention above would definitely fall into that) and I agree about Canon's intentional crippling.

However, I think chasing the 'yoof' market i.e. uploading straight to Snapchat/Zuckerbook/Instagram IS dumbing down as those things are faddish/ ephemeral and besides which, will make zero difference for the very reasons I outlined in my original post.

[kidzrevil]

5 hours ago, Arikhan said:

@kidzrevil 

Another interesting question is, if most consumers care about information, artistic aspects or quality of images (4K? Cinematic look? On smartphone displays? :-)) ). I doubt it. For most people, films are content. Taking a look, (probably) sharing and then hunting the next piece of video content. "Speed consuming" at it's best. As filmmaker you have to impress/shock them/beg their attention nowadays your audience for more than 30 minutes - but...I think Andrew is right. Good times for serious/talented filmmakers with good concepts and ideas - and a nice INCOME from another industry than photo&film... ;-)

they care more about the artistic aspects of the image. You know how much it bothers me when someone tells me they can't tell the difference between a bluray & a dvd ? It bothers me but I know the average consumer does not care about the things we rave about as filmmakers and enthusiasts. That was a tough pill to swallow when I seen people preferred my work with my Canon XC10 over my NX1 which I think is superior in image quality. The consumer gravitates towards contrasty & saturated images etc. and pretty much the opposite of everything we drool over on a spec sheet lol. I definitely agree with Andrew as well its going to be a good time for serious filmmakers 

[Tim McC]

On 11/19/2016 at 11:55 AM, Tiago Rosa-Rosso said:

there will be software that will perfectly emulate all possible combinations between lenses and sensor sizes

Not any time soon.  Light doesn't work that way.

[Tiago Rosa-Rosso]

11 minutes ago, Tim McC said:

Not any time soon.  Light doesn't work that way.

Maybe not so soon. But we are definitely heading that way. Check this out. 

https://light.co/technology

[dkovie]

This article by Forbes contributor Avi Dan (regarding the demise of Kodak) rings true for me. https://goo.gl/pU8MMC

"Companies have to adapt to the requirements of the market, even if that means competing with themselves."

"Marketing is tasked with keeping the company relevant to their customers’ needs."

[dkovie]

On 11/19/2016 at 2:35 PM, Michal Gajdoš said:

I am sorry Andrew, i stoppeed reading when u wrote...

Please explain why it's somehow a point of pride to say "I stopped reading when".

Choosing to hear only what you like to hear is a sign of ignorance! "I stopped reading when" means that you were unwilling to give a writer the benefit of doubt. 

Do you stop reading a novel 75% of the way and then say that it had a terrible ending? Same logic applies here.

[Daedalus0506]

Why would you do that. How about Kids that want to actually learn photography/filming and the techniques behind it. Or just enthusiasts that cant spent thousands of bucks for a camera. Its so awesome that starters can afford cameras with the same tech like pro cams. 

Do you want them to learn it with crappy smartphones? Thats just bullshit....

sorry but such sentiments make me just sad

[Novim]

This big techno change (mass photo & video using cheap cameras on smartphones, which the photo/video elite - „pros“ - despise) looks similar to the big techno change in the XV-XVI Century, when the Gutenberg press machine enabled that "everybody" could publish a book in large quantity, instead of handwriting/copying them. And than the elite said it would ruin culture. But, not "everybody" started to write and publish books, "everybody" start reading (consuming), and the press broadened from books to magazines and newspapers. Etc.

The analogy is this: like in those times, "everybody" now makes photo/video with smartphones, the culture has changed from verbal texts into pictorial texts (photo & video are texts, too), and this has broaden the audience into the new market. Only some will continue to make movies ("write books"). The former do not need 2000-5000$ ILCs, 2000-5000$ set of lenses, cages, rigs, tripods, gimbals. The later care and will continue to care about quality of the movies, and for it they need better equipment.

Here the analogy should stop. The question (both of Northrup and Reid) is weather the divide between the two camps will grow, and what is the sense of it. It is a big question and I can say only this:

With the massification of video culture, we now have young videomakers (some of them will become moviemakers later) who look less like the the movie directors or producers before when they were almost all alpha males (or had to behave like alpha males to find the funds and put the filmaking chaos into some sort od order); the new generations start to learn photo/video on their smartphones, some of them will move onto higher quality level, but their non-ILC beginnings could give them some experience and sensitivity we from the old times did not get. I wish I had a smartphone 40 years ago to start with.

So, "Do you want them to learn it with crappy smartphones? Thats just bullshit" (Deadalus0506) does not stand, imho.

[Arikhan]

The tools of videomakers (Smartphone, Camcorder, DSLR, Arri, Sony, etc.) are not crucial. Essential is content / information / emotionality and acceptance within your targeted audience. For technical and specification reviews, OK, quality of content is decisive. But - as Andrew said - this is all about just a small audience of freaks or enthusiasts. The "big audience" doesn't care at all about technical aspects of the films. As media consumption becomes more and more mobile (between 45 and 75%), videos/films published for internet audience and smartphones/tablets will never care about resolution, color grading or the last detail of color science. As long as viewable screens are quite "mini", as in case of smartphones and tablets, there will be no need for "extraterrestrial" 4K-8K filmmaking (from technical point of view). BUT there is a need for good/funny/informative/narrative/entertaining content. Completely indepent of the degree of technical implementation/excellence.
In RL nobody cares about "smooth/mushy" 1080p out of a Canon-DSLR or the 10%-debade on color display/differences of Canon vs. Sony/Pana. Just my 2 cents...

And even discussing about display on bigger screens than mobile ones: Take a look at surveys and serious statistics on media consumption. Current screen resolution of PC-Screens, laptop screens or consumer TVs (US, Southamerica, Europe, Westaisa) will make you laugh when debating on 4K...For most of display devices, 1080p is more than OK. Why then pixel peep about the "last 5%" difference and 300% percent crop within 4K footage? In my eyes this is absurd and narcisstic - without any significance for audience.

It's only significant if you want to make good sales by telling your future customer, that a RED and 4k/8K production are decisive for the success of the coming film. If this is not a multimillion production, this is not decisive. It's just a marketing lie. A profitable one from the point of view of providers, but still a lie...