Photography vs. Videography

[Charlie99]

IMHO, it's because of the ease to post/view/send a photo vs. a video and how quickly you can scan through a set of pictures vs. a video.

You can look through 50 crappy pictures fast and it's not too painful. Can't say the same thing about crappy video.

Agreed. Photos and video, whether topside or underwater are used differently. A photo album laying on the coffeetable is something that you or visitors can leaf through casually as they desire. Watching a video requires more committment and involvement.

More crudely put ---- my wife rarely looks at my dive photos and there's no way I could convince her to sit down and watch a bunch of my underwater movies.

 

[robint]

cost and knowledge... the 2 biggest reasons, in my opinion.

I can't tell you how many people here, through our LDS, say they love my videos and then ask me "can't I shoot a video just like that with my little $200 P&S camera? It says it can do video..."
Once I start explaining that a $200 camera isn't the same thing as a video camera, they get that glazed over look in their eyes... then I tell them about cost, and that video is about 10% underwater, 90% editing at home --- then they change the subject!

If you look at underwater videos posted on YouTube, you will see that most of them are crappy videos taken with a little $200 camera, no editing, and mostly out of focus and shades of blue. For those people, that's great video because it was cheap and effortless...

Just my 2 cents... a former still photographer who does only video now and LOVES it.

robin

 

[ronscuba]

Agreed. Photos and video, whether topside or underwater are used differently. A photo album laying on the coffeetable is something that you or visitors can leaf through casually as they desire. Watching a video requires more committment and involvement.

More crudely put ---- my wife rarely looks at my dive photos and there's no way I could convince her to sit down and watch a bunch of my underwater movies.

Similarly, a photo slideshow with music vs. a photo album where the viewer can flip through at their own pace.

Although editing style and music selection let you be creative, it also opens the door for more criticism. People have different tastes and you can't please everyone.

 

[Papa_Bear]

You have to please yourself above all! I fight with this all the time weather to go video or Still? It always depends on my assignment and what kind of end project it will be! I really enjoy both and can't ween myself of either.

Digital has made presentation an art in its self! Your music and style selection should reflect you and the story your trying to tell! If you are pleased others will be as well and if not, not everyone like Picasso! And that does not diminish his work at all!

 

[peterbj7]

I've done a lot of both, on land and underwater, and own two u/w video rigs and three u/w stills. But increasingly I find myself preferring to take stills over video. Although I have an HD video camera I haven't used it in months. I've just paid over $8k for a high-end stills camera and I use that every day. I feel more in control of my creative side with stills than with video. I don't really know why but I do know it's true.

 

[vladimir]

Agreed. Photos and video, whether topside or underwater are used differently. A photo album laying on the coffeetable is something that you or visitors can leaf through casually as they desire. Watching a video requires more committment and involvement.

More crudely put ---- my wife rarely looks at my dive photos and there's no way I could convince her to sit down and watch a bunch of my underwater movies.

This has been my experience as well. I felt like I was imposing on the good nature of my friends and family to ask them to sit through my videos, whereas my stills can be displayed in a take-it-or-leave-it fashion, and friends actually ask to see them after a dive trip. Maybe the videos just sucked. I do think some destinations--Cocos comes to mind immediately--lend themselves to video better than others.

 

[ronscuba]

This has been my experience as well. I felt like I was imposing on the good nature of my friends and family to ask them to sit through my videos, ......

I know exactly how you feel. Other than divers on the net, usually the only people I ask to watch my videos are my parents and dive trip buddies. One positive thing is it has forced me to make more interesting videos. If I can keep my non diving parents interested, I moving in the right direction.

 

[Annie Crawley]

I still hold the position...it is all about the story...

And I have seen a couple funny ones about diving with dry suits...

Video is changing the way we communicate and view the world...and once our government allows the bandwith that asia has, video is even going to become a bigger influence...

 

[Charlie99]

Video is changing the way we communicate and view the world...and once our government allows the bandwith that asia has, video is even going to become a bigger influence...

The different types of media still have their uses. Movies haven't eliminated the market for books.

Movies and videos are non-interactive in the sense that you only get to see it as envisioned by the author. Slideshows of photos are similar in that the content and speed have been chosen solely by the author.

Books, photo albums, and webpages are interactive and the user has more choice on what he sees and for how long.

 

[Christian]

Problem with video is that it's a much more complicated, expensive and time consuming process – considering you want to produce a top quality product. With top quality, I mean a professional technical as well as artistic level – something that the average person can enjoy, or at least stand, to watch without getting bored (which disqualifies 99% of amateur productions and DM-videos made on liveaboard trips).

With stills it is 'much' easier. A semi-pro (funny word) UW DSLR-rig is 'cheap' compared to a high end semipro/pro UW video-system. But it's able to produce world class still images considering you get everything else right (this is where it usually fails). And the image is readily available to enjoy pretty much directly after the dive it was captured, whereas the work on a film has just begun. You can put an image on a wall in your home or in your office, easy for people to see (and admire). To show a film, you need to sit people down, preferably in front of a larger screen for the best impact. If you have average talent and don't give up too easily, it's not impossible to get your best still shots published dive and travel magazines. Try to get an amateur film aired on a TV-station...

I guess the route to praise and back patting is shorter with stills. And that's what we all want in the end, isn't it

If you just want to 'do it for yourself'... I have no clue.

cheers

Christian