kye Posted May 22, 2018 Share Posted May 22, 2018 Vloggers aren't crazy.... but there sure is lots of debate around the topic! My theory is that they are making films in a different situation and the fact they have different needs is why they appear to be crazy to film-makers from other situations. This is my attempt to explain it. I think film-makers fall across a spectrum of the speed of film-making and the amount of control over the environment that exists. Situation A: low-speed / high control. In situations where things happen very slowly (eg, on a controlled set, or perhaps shooting landscapes and B-roll) you can have everything on full-manual and get the best results because you're in full control of what is happening. This means time to level a tripod, setup whatever lights you want, use a light-meter, adjust all camera settings, setup and rehearse camera moves, etc etc. In this setting having the camera do things for you is counter-productive because you want to have full control over everything. Therefore things like autofocus and IBIS are unwelcome, camera weight and size might not matter, but image quality probably matters a lot, and cinema-primes are a good fit. I think the GH5s / BMPCC4K are aimed more at this type of application. There is always room for a sound-person and various crew here. Situation B: moderate-speed / moderate control. In situations where things happen faster but you have a good degree of control there is value in having some 'helpful features'. This might be something like run-and-gun film-making where you have time to setup an interview station where you have a moderate amount of control. Things like manual focus can still be used, but reliable face-detection would be useful. You might set shutter speed and aperture but have auto-ISO enabled. Camera size and weight potentially matter because you might be filming B-Roll or featuring clips of things that aren't in your control (eg, shooting an event) so having a lighter tripod setup you can carry around and shoot with quickly is useful. Having a sound-person and other crew also works here. Situation C: high-speed / some control. In situations where things are happening in real-time but you have a degree of control over some aspects the priorities shift again. This might be something like ENG film-making where when the action happens you have to capture it with no second chances, but you might also be interviewing people and have some degree of control about how the interviews are done. For example if you were covering a building fire you have no control over when or how the fire will burn, what the responders will do about it, etc, so you need to be able to move very quickly, having a rig that can be hand-held (shoulder rig normally) and also having a tripod that is quite portable. In this situation IBIS, reliable auto-focus, an all-in-one zoom lens, etc become desirable features. However, during the interview situation you can still have input into what is asked, where it is (interviewing the fire chief with something burning in the background makes a nice shot) but if people fumble their replies you can often ask them to repeat something or prompt them in a variety of ways. These can have crew, but often due to the economics of the situation there isn't budget. Situation D: high-speed / no control. I add this mostly for myself and my home videos, where my priority is to capture what happens without directing anything, as I prioritise the experience over the film. This is 'fly-on-the-wall' film-making in a sense. Technically this is within the previous situation, but I choose not to exert most / all of the control I have. I teased that this discussion was about vloggers, so I think they sit across situations A-C, but the controversy comes in when vloggers are in situation C. There is a hierarchy of needs for vloggers in situation C: They REQUIRE that the camera be small and not attracting the wrong attention because situation C is about shooting in public (I've posted elsewhere about being stopped by authorities when shooting in public) and they require that the camera be able to be turned on and recording at a moments notice and they are almost exclusively a self-shooter with no allowance for any dedicated 'crew'. This is basically iPhone / RX100 territory, and creates films where the content better be great because the picture will be shaky and the audio will be noisy and full of ambient sounds. They often WANT to improve the basic quality and so they add a directional microphone of some kind (typically Rode VideoMicro or Rode VMP+) and try to make it more stable by adding a handle (typically a gorillapod). However (and this is where we get the controversy between vloggers and other film-makers in situations A and B) they LUST after having more 'cinematic' videos, which drives them towards higher-bitrate codecs and large aperture lenses (which means they're now looking at the same cameras - 5DIII, 1DXmII, A7SII, BMPCC4K, XH-1, etc), and they want 'buttery smooth footage' which means world-class stabilisation. Film-makers in situations A and B get these by having setups that are have at least one of the following challenges: slow to setup, cumbersome to use, large and attract attention. When a vlogger looks at a high-end DSLR and sees that it doesn't meet one of the basic things they require (small, inconspicuous, no-setup time) they see it as a fundamental flaw in the camera. This perspective makes no sense to a film-maker who places these features of a camera quite far down their priority list, and this is where the controversy occurs. Of course, vloggers often don't know a single thing about how the pros do things, are often self-centred and unwilling to learn about other styles of film-making, which enrages the pros and thus flame wars ensue. (Of course, exactly the same can be said of a minority of film-makers who are uninterested in how vloggers do things, are self-centred and self-important because they view their film-making as somehow better than other types, and are equally as responsible for the flame wars as the vloggers...). Hopefully this helps to explain some of the key differences and why we keep tripping up on these topics. I know that this is a huge simplification of the variety of situations, that this is a spectrum and film-making can exist anywhere between the four situations I listed above, and that many film-makers have projects that are on different parts of the spectrum and require equipment that is flexible. However, each film-maker and each purchase decision will be made by prioritising the features in one category against the others. BTW, the entire DSLR revolution (ie, the vast majority of people on this board) probably look like vloggers in the eyes of those shooting on big-budget sets with the $50-100K setups and equipment that requires a truck to lug it around. Anyone criticising the BMPCC4K is going to look like a spoiled millennial when we criticise a $1300 camera that shoots 4K RAW! Nathan Gabriel 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.