Gear Talk > EOS Bodies - For Video

Entry-level video production

(1/10) > >>

Curmudgeon:
To the videographers on the forum:

My young nephew (like every other artistically inclined person under 35) has joined some fellow conspirators with the intention to perpetrate video production. They've gone so far as to hire an attorney and incorporate. They think they'll buy a T3i, a $400 zoom, a few accesories--spend maybe $1600 to $1800--and wow the world on the basis of their creativity. They have some horsepower as far as writing, on-screen talent, even marketing goes, but I don't think one of them knows an f-stop from a drive mode from a liquid head.

I'm the family photographer, and my nephew has approached me about how to best invest their limited budget. My sense is that the kindest thing I could do for these kids is to put a pin to their bubble, but I'm basically a stills photographer and I can't critique their game plan with the kind of authority and specificity that might get their attention before they make some costly mistakes. I shoot a 5D2 and I do know that it doesn't take $25000 worth of equipment to make an adequate corporate video. I also know that digital has made it relatively easy for anyone to take a decent picture and raised the technical standards for taking one that stands out. Since video is the big thing among the younger generation, I'm sure the same reality applies to a higher power.

I presume that serious video production requires at least a half-serious camera, a solid tripod, a decent liquid-damped head, a lamp (and a stand) or two for modeling the talent, maybe a basic shoulder mount , and surely off-camera audio recording capability--as well as a few other things that might not occur to a novice. But maybe not. I'd appreciate if a couple of forum members who do video full-time or part-time (say as an adjunct to a wedding business) would take 20 minutes to address a letter to my nephew--his name is Dave--about what a realistic entry-level video lash-up includes and what it costs. I'll refer him to this thread.

Thanks in advance,

      Curmudgeon 

Mt Spokane Photography:
They might check out some of the many video blogs on the internet where successful video makers share the equipment and how-to with enthusiasts.
 
You have to start somewhere, and for utube videos, you can get by on a basic budget.  The camera body is indeed the smallest part of a video budget, sound is 50%, lenses, of course, and lighting.  Some things can be rented and some can be home made by clever people. 
 
A good way to start might be by working weddings, bar mitzvahs, and cranking any money earned back into equipment.
 
Here is a link to a article about Vinvent Laforet.  He had the good fortune to have a father who was a well known photographer of movie stars and sets, but his father did not want him to be a photographer, rather a doctor or lawyer, so he started with nothing but a camera and worked up from there.
 
http://idesignyoureyes.com/2011/01/21/one-on-one-interview-with-vincent-laforet/
 
 
Rather than burst their bubble, encourage them to learn and be clever in the use of what they have to start with.

bp:
Already incorporated?  They show admirable determination.  Bursting that bubble might be fruitless

All this is just my uber-humble opinion - many may disagree.  But yes - just a camera and a lens is just barely getting started.  Unless they plan to do nothing but static shots, at the very least, they'll need a set of sticks with a fluid head - the Manfrotto 701HDV is a good low cost starter head (701 head and sticks can be had for around $300).  They can get away with not having a shoulder rig. 

Audio is a whole other ball of wax.  Nothing can cheapen a well-shot video like bad audio.  Unless they're planning to do nothing but music videos and shoot without sound, they'll need something.  Zoom H4n or an H1 in a pinch ($100 to $300).  A decent shotgun mic to stick on the end of a home made boom pole might also be a good call.  Omnidirectional / stereo mics on the zooms are great for environmental sound but don't do very well with dialogue

A T3i (even a used T2i) actually punches above it's pay grade, in terms of video quality, but that's also highly dependent on the glass.  Just one "$400 zoom" sounds scary.  Slow glass works OK if you've invested heavily in lighting - or available/home-made lighting works OK if you've invested heavily in fast glass.  Combine slow/cheap glass and bad lighting, and they'll have a very short quick journey into bad video land.  Instead of a cheap sliding aperture zoom (zooming is close to useless in anything but run-n-gun event video where every moment counts and you don't have time to compose your shots as carefully), they might look at picking up a couple cheap but decent primes, like a 35 f/2 ($300'ish) and an 85 f/1.8 ($400'ish).  The 85 is especially good for it's price.  If they go with a used T2i instead of the newer T3i, they might make their money go farther.  Buying used in general could seriously save them some dough

There's also all the peripherals like memory cards, NLE editing software, etc...

If they really do have great writing ability and creativity... that will be the most valuable asset in their bag, and can overcome a slew of gear-related obstacles.

IMHO

scottkinfw:
Disclaimer:  I am a stills  photographer too.

I would look at Sekonic for cinematic light meters.  They have some that measure colors etc.  Lighting is a basic, yet advanced topic, but critical to master.

sek


--- Quote from: bp on April 14, 2012, 02:19:50 PM ---Already incorporated?  They show admirable determination.  Bursting that bubble might be fruitless

All this is just my uber-humble opinion - many may disagree.  But yes - just a camera and a lens is just barely getting started.  Unless they plan to do nothing but static shots, at the very least, they'll need a set of sticks with a fluid head - the Manfrotto 701HDV is a good low cost starter head (701 head and sticks can be had for around $300).  They can get away with not having a shoulder rig. 

Audio is a whole other ball of wax.  Nothing can cheapen a well-shot video like bad audio.  Unless they're planning to do nothing but music videos and shoot without sound, they'll need something.  Zoom H4n or an H1 in a pinch ($100 to $300).  A decent shotgun mic to stick on the end of a home made boom pole might also be a good call.  Omnidirectional / stereo mics on the zooms are great for environmental sound but don't do very well with dialogue

A T3i (even a used T2i) actually punches above it's pay grade, in terms of video quality, but that's also highly dependent on the glass.  Just one "$400 zoom" sounds scary.  Slow glass works OK if you've invested heavily in lighting - or available/home-made lighting works OK if you've invested heavily in fast glass.  Combine slow/cheap glass and bad lighting, and they'll have a very short quick journey into bad video land.  Instead of a cheap sliding aperture zoom (zooming is close to useless in anything but run-n-gun event video where every moment counts and you don't have time to compose your shots as carefully), they might look at picking up a couple cheap but decent primes, like a 35 f/2 ($300'ish) and an 85 f/1.8 ($400'ish).  The 85 is especially good for it's price.  If they go with a used T2i instead of the newer T3i, they might make their money go farther.  Buying used in general could seriously save them some dough

There's also all the peripherals like memory cards, NLE editing software, etc...

If they really do have great writing ability and creativity... that will be the most valuable asset in their bag, and can overcome a slew of gear-related obstacles.

IMHO

--- End quote ---

Policar:
Sounds like they have more business sense than photographic savvy, in which case they'll do fine.  So long as they can deliver a consistent and marginally better product than their clients themselves would produce and seem professional along the way they will do okay and grow and improve.  All the why-you-can't advice in the world will only dissuade, so just encourage and provide the basics.  Paul McCartney never learned to read music and the Beatles did okay.  Most producers and directors don't know their f stops or lenses when they start, either.  With a dSLR you can expose fine by eye (and btw most cinematographers don't trust Sekonic meters, Spectra is the industry standard, but you don't need anything at all for videography) and if you're shrewd you can easily pick up lighting techniques and composition by watching the competition's reels--or hire someone with more experience until you can do it yourself.

They'll do fine.  Their clients don't know what f-stops are either, and don't care.  There are a million film students who know all the technical stuff and will work for nearly free, but artistic pretensions and technical stubbornness just get in the way (and business savvy people can hire these people dirt cheap anyway).  His clients will care about a professional business approach, professional website, and reliability.  That's what I'd reinforce.  Sounds like a fine kit, btw.  National ads are shot on the 7D regularly so it's not a matter of gear, either.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page