Video Forum on PN?

I've made three contributions recently in threads pertaining to the "new use" of video and the convergence of the

still camera to video. I find this significant as for a few years now, we've been seeing video cameras next to

still cameras in media scums.

Now the video camera itself is evolving by leaps and bounds with a couple mainstream video cameras this year now

capturing in RAW. Like the Casio EXF1

http://www.casio.com/products/Cameras/Exilim_Pro/EX-F1/

and the Samsung SC-HMX20C.

http://www.samsungcamerausa.com/PMA2008/productdetails.asp?No=8

Most point and shoot cameras already come with video mode and are utilized. Purchasing decisions are made on the

video capabilities of point & shoots.I strongly believe the more mainstream market will be using cameras like the

Casio and Samsung very soon to "kill two birds with one stone" and take their jpg stills from their video.

The pro's? Well they might be forced to evolve if they wish to work. Just like how clients asked years ago, "Do

you shoot digital?". I can hear it now, "Do you shoot video?" And perhaps within a few years, more pros will be

using cameras like this very soon.

http://www.red.com/nab/scarlet

Luminous Landscape, a traditionally still camera forum similar to PN has a few articles on this topic.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/convergence.shtml

Bridal Fairs now have videographers offering albums from their still captures. And the quality gets better every

year. Formal set ups at weddings will soon have the video person intruding dead center and sharing the stills

person place

for the video needs yet to be used in an album once only capably offered by the stills person. Soon after that,

there wont be

a need for a stills camera offering less services. Except maybe by those that can't afford a videographer. The

writing is on the wall.

All pro photographers should be aware that it's coming down the pipeline if they don't wish to be redundant, imo.

If you think about it, why not hit the shutter for a couple seconds to make sure you have caught the decisive

moment within 48 frames? Surely there will be a frame in there with everyone's eyes open, smiling, and looking

forward.

Your child is running across the playground with the golden retriever in tow, and there's that one excellent

frame with perfect strides and a smile that a still camera missed.

It's easy peasy marketing for the

manufactures. And because of gaming, we have incredible computers today. Video will be dead easy for the next

generation of 64-bit software while everyone has octa-cores and 32 gigs of ram. Video and Adobe Premier Pro will

outsell Photoshop one day. Everything is falling into place for video acceptance.

It's only a matter of time

before questions start appearing in the Digital Darkroom with the likes of "I have a raw file from my video

camera and how do I make it into a B&W and what resolution for printing at Walmart?" Don't laugh, it's coming.

So, kind of long winded, Josh, but would it perhaps be a good

idea

for PN to be prepared for this convergence and the soon to be created and curious market and have a video forum?

Being established, PN

would be the first place photographers curious or forced into video would go for posting questions and searching

for answers. I'd prefer a forum (this one)

with other

photographers perhaps going through the transition to video than otherwise being forced over to a dv dedicated forum

because what I need isn't available here.

I tend to agree on the video in PJ. I'd like to see a video forum resurrected here. I dabble in video, but see what I do as a

complement to my still work.

I'm with you on this, you don't have to convince me that video is on it's way up to the masses.

Two things:

1. We used to have a video forum. It is currently de-activated. I suppose we could re-activate it. But PN isn't

really set up for video in any useful way.

2. I have tossed around the idea with Jin and a few others about a "video" version of photo.net. Loosely connected and similar in design and function, but it's own site. Sort of addressing the need for a video site that is more serious than youtube. But not so serious that it gets into the realm of high end betacam-broadcast/35mm-film/etc pro stuff.

I'm not really excited about the first choice and we haven't really thought the second through very well. Though I suppose resurrecting the video forum might be a way to gauge the interest of PN type users for a video based site.

Josh: I am finding that I am approaching my new interest in video in the same way I approach still photography: light,

composition, etc. And I am having a ball in post production making 5 minute movies from 30 minutes of video. Yes, one

option is to create a new site, but this will be a big job. I think recreating the forum would be a good move and see where it

goes. I love the look of all your other sites. I would guess a video site would be a big hit.

"All pro photographers should be aware that it's coming down the pipeline if they don't wish to be redundant, imo"

LOL, how many times this has been said in the past. You're a funny guy

Strictly from a commerical viewpoint, it would make sense for photo.net to simply resurect the video forum. It costs nothing in terms of time and effort and it may attract some users.

Personally I have no interest in video and I don't think that pro photographers will have to adopt video in order to stay competitive. Photography and videography are totally different art forms.

I do not think we would add in any sort of video just because of the concept that "pro photographers are going to have to shoot video to survive". Even if it were true, that wouldn't change photo.net's mission as a photographic education and sharing community.

But the fact is that video, and high quality video at that, & editing is getting more and more accessible to the average person. At some point, "video production" as a hobby will become as common as photography as a hobby.

Dirk Halstead of the Digital journalist has been preaching this for 10 years, I myself over the last 6 years when Im on a video shoot also shoot stills of the same subject,plus do audio.. the web has brought the 2 mediums together and the number crunchers has cut the amount of $$$$$$$$$ to do shoots. Check out the platypus resources from Dirk. Halsteads site...BTW a point and shoot or even a DSLR with video aint gonna cut it for quality for video, most folks I know are using something in the range of a Panasonic DVX 100A and a high end DSLR, next though is video in HD/16:9

http://www.digitaljournalist.org/

As I said, I'll put some thought into it. As a video/film "buff" I am interested in a video site with the vibe of

photo.net. But as someone who has put in a decade as a user/moderator/admin here, I'm not interested in diluting

photo.net or changing it's purpose.

So if it were possible to have a small video.photo.net or some sort of area that was separated from the photo

site, but loosely connected, I would be intrigued. I am not going to make photo.net into "photo&video.net". We

are a photography website first and foremost.