Anybody catch the June Esquire featuring a cover shot of Megan Fox? I don’t read Esquire and I don’t know who Megan Fox is, but I did see that the cover was shot using a 4K RedOne video camera (whatever that is), with the final still pulled from the video.
It’s actually a concept that I’ve always wondered about, much to the annoyance of my photographer friends. Why couldn’t you just video tape the entire shoot and pull out the best frames instead of trying to get the shot with a standard camera.
I was always told that the quality was nowhere close to the same, which I guess is no longer true. Esquire’s camera probably costs more than a few bucks, but it looks like it’s only a matter of time until this sort of thing is commonplace.
But…what about the romantic side of the whole thing? Can you really just sit there with a video camera without having to worry about timing? Could you go through a shoot without ever hearing the shutter click?
Couldn’t imagine it. Would never happen.
But that’s probably how people used to feel about kissing the dark room goodbye, too…
Your thoughts?
SLR Obsolete?
February 20, 2010 - 12:20 pm
Even though I’m NOT a gambler, I still get a rush, knowing I got THE shot. I think shooting video and just pulling frames, removes that thrill. It become very mechanical and I think the intimacy of creating will be lost. Just my of the cuff two cents.
March 8, 2010 - 12:52 pm
I’m with Willow. Takes the personal touch (for both subject & artist) out of it.
March 21, 2010 - 3:08 pm
That seems to take all of the creativity out of the shot. I surely wouldn’t want to take the chance that I would stumble upon some shot looking through the video. But then again – I swore that I would never give up film. LOL – but I did.
3 comments