20 replies to this topic

[Jules (Helioxfilm)]

Hi,

just a food-for-thought post:

I checked the recent photo and video competitions. I found one major difference, regarding the prizes. For the stills you can win - beyond the glorie - dive trips to various, remote sites (at least far from Europe), for the videos you can win mainly small housings, lights, some kind of hardware, but no dive trips. Is it a trend? Why are no dive-trips for videomakers? Does anyone any idea? Of course I do not want to blame any hardware-maker sponsors, I am just asking...

Jules

Edited by Jules (Helioxfilm), 15 May 2007 - 08:52 PM.

[Drew]

Jules
I believe it's all about marketability. There's a bigger market for stills than video. Not to mention the exposure of being a prize for a competition. Stills can be accessible on the internet and also print media, so the competition sponsors have far reaching advertising potential. Video right now is pretty much limited to the internet. If it were broadcast or program material, it'd be at filmfests where the win would help gain distribution deals, and that's the real prize.
Otherwise, most of the underwater video fests are mostly artistic exercises for small gains in advertising. Of course there are a few shows who offer trips and such, but by and large, the prizes are dwarved by the stills category.

[Steve Douglas]

I took 1st and Best of Show at the Beneath the Sea competition in 2005 and won a great trip. Haven't used it yet but will next year. Never the less, for some reason, probably because Photo has been around much longer and because magazines can't use video, prizes for Photo are always far more plentiful than for video. They will have a trillion categories for the Photo and only one for video...not very fair but that seems to be the way it is until more people who are involved with various UPS and magazine sponsored competitions make their voices of protest heard loud and clear. Remember the 60s! March, sit in, and burn those bras.
Steve B)

[Jules (Helioxfilm)]

Well,

Drew:
I am full support your idea to offer distribution for the winning films. However, I feel, that the other argument - marketing - can be a very effective one also in the case of the videos. For example if I participated in a good divetrip and I was satisfied with the liveaboard ship and the crew I can put the name of the ship or the dive-base in the credits. For example, if I will plan a trip to Malpelo, I will first begin the negotiations with the Sea Hunter, since I saw them in Shawn's film, distributed via the DiveFilm HD podcast. Or, to visit Guadelope I try to find a place on the Horizont, as I saw it in Mary Lynn's film etc.


Steve
As you wrote, I feel also unfair this difference.
I am not familiar with the rules of procedures in case of the stills, but I think there is no info about the ship or other advertizers/sponsors when a still became a front cover of a big magazine. I guess the gear (taken by Nikon D200 in Subal housing, f8 etc) and the location appear in the title of the picture.

I think, concerning the categoires, the big and mainly film festivals has several video categories - in Antibes, Moscow, Belgrade or in Turkey you can find quite good distinction between the various categories.

My favorite competetion now is the next SanDiskRedSea in Eilat, since they have a video category, and the prize is 7500 US.


Back to magazines: they could attach a DVD to the magazin, containing the best films of a show. I think the only - real - problem is the rights of the soundtrack, since the magazine is sold for some money, and maybe in this case the music rights fell into the commercial category which can be more expensive, if ever paid to the author or publisher...

Jules

Edited by Jules (Helioxfilm), 15 May 2007 - 10:56 PM.

[wagsy]

It's also alot easier for folks to take a pic, fix it up abit and thats it.
Because of that there is a big market for it and the sponsors will follow.

Video runs for some time on a subject, then you need extra skill and time to edit, and put some music with it, hence it takes more time and effort to make a good video.

But for us.....
I wonder how many pics we would off sold in town here
We have sold over 300 of our new Naturally Ningaloo DVD's in just a few months.
Plus we picked up a $20,000 video GIG.
We are very happy we took the video road

[MikeVeitch]

20K!?!?! details man details!

[Jules (Helioxfilm)]

Yes, yes, details!!!!!!

I try to get back the price of my stuff... I have about 1000 EUR back from the 16000 B)

[CamDiver]

Well here's a thought. My next camera has a reputed still resolution equal to a 12MP image. So would that mean that I will be able to enter both photographic and video categories of an event using one source material?? Interesting eh?

Cheers.
Cam(doublewhammy)Diver

[Drew]

For example if I participated in a good divetrip and I was satisfied with the liveaboard ship and the crew I can put the name of the ship or the dive-base in the credits. For example, if I will plan a trip to Malpelo, I will first begin the negotiations with the Sea Hunter, since I saw them in Shawn's film, distributed via the DiveFilm HD podcast. Or, to visit Guadelope I try to find a place on the Horizont, as I saw it in Mary Lynn's film etc.

Jules, it's about how far reaching the image would be. A picture can be in print in publications of hundreds of thousands, even millions round the world anywhere there is a printing facility.
Compare that with video. DVD? Need a player. Online? Need broadband internet. You say podcasts, how many hits? 10-20 k? And poof it's gone. But print is there for a long time. It's just a much broader audience to hit vs video (unless it's broadcast , which is totally different).

[Jules (Helioxfilm)]

Jules, it's about how far reaching the image would be. A picture can be in print in publications of hundreds of thousands, even millions round the world anywhere there is a printing facility.
Compare that with video. DVD? Need a player. Online? Need broadband internet. You say podcasts, how many hits? 10-20 k? And poof it's gone. But print is there for a long time. It's just a much broader audience to hit vs video (unless it's broadcast , which is totally different).

Your explanation is brighter than my HID lamps...

So, if I want to travel for free:

1. by a RED, and use as a still - anyhow, this can be a good way, since you can choose the best momentums from a sequence, and export to tiff...

or

2. by a d200

or

3. make films for BBC, NatGeo etc....


J

[DeanB]

And I thought we were here to promote the wealth of our oceans...

Not our bank balances...

Dive safe

DeanB

[CamDiver]

For love, or money? Sounds like a good topic for a thread?

I'm certainly not doing this solely for the love.

Cheers,
Mark.

[wagsy]

Well wining money, trips or prizes in a video competition is hard and very time consuming.
Once you have a pic you just send it in and thats it.
Wish video was that easy.
Thats the main reason why we don't do it.

Mark thats a great idea with the RED, send in screen grabs
We made a brochure for a local dive company here which we used a screen grab pic from HDV. We even printed out the brochure A3 size and it still looked fine.

Lets see now.
We made our money back on the Phenom and FX1 in the first year by selling footage around the place and not in any competition. Our web site / internet presence was the main reason and maybe because we got in first with the new HDV format. Wonder how many folks paid for their still gear in one year from pic sales? Well maybe Mike..he is a PRO

Jules hang in there and keep plugging away as persistence pays off in the end.

The jobs we are doing now was only possible because we had many shots already in our video archive and there was no one else in town who could do it

It's also funny how a wedding photo guy can charge $2000 while if the video guy asks for the same amount they say it's way too much even though it's 100 times easier to take wedding pics than shoot, edit one. I know as I have done it

Maybe what we could do is have a competition where all the contestants put in $100 each and the winner then takes the lot That way there is a incentive to put something worth while together.

The screen grab flyer...the Whale Shark is a screen grab.

[Steve Douglas]

Wagsy,
Looking forward to the Wetpixel members free trip you promised everyone here. Remember that? It wasn't a dream after all, we all heard you, we remember, we do. Now you have to remember it yourself, don't you. I knew you would.;-)
Steve

If the magazines started putting out discs like so many of the musician and computer mags, there would certainly have to be stricter guidelines. There is such a plethora of copy right free music that, at least on that one issue, it shouldn't be a problem. (Unless someone tried to lie and the mag didn't catch it) There go my hopes of using the Beatles 'Yellow Submarine" for something and hoping no one would notice
Steve

[CamDiver]

Hi Jules,
Made the money back for the Camera and the Base housing unit in the first real month of use, November 2006. (one of my best months in Palau to date), the rest of the gear was paid for by April of this year. Now I don't have a 'Z1 overall cost recuperation' account at the bank. Generated funds in my case go towards new gear whilst collecting interest in a separate account. I put whatever I can afford in that every month and just try forgetting about it. Since moving to HDV there has been a marked increase in both interest from potential stock footage buyers, stock footage agencies asking that I appoint them as an outlet for my archives and then obviously the product sales on the daily side of things.

Steve - Yeah, come to think of it I can remember that free invitation to stay at Wags' place, go snorkeling with the "Floppies" and spin 'donuts' on his back lawn with his new moped!

Wags - I'm wondering what guidelines will be introduced at future digital imaging festivals once RED is launched? Should be interesting eh?

Jules - There's way too many people out there chasing that ideal. Unfortunately these days we all have to pay to an extent to be able to follow our dreams. Gone are the free lunches, unfortunately. I mean, I really wanna get away from editing, not that I hate it but its just not what I want to do. At this level, and financially more of a worry, for the next level it seems that there is no way to advance without my own very basic editing facility. Seeing as I don't have the professional contacts in order to start an acceptable production entity at that level what choices do I have? Maybe in the future but right now? Just not possible. I may be shooting stock for a while with no way of knowing how its turning out until I can get the cash together for the editing system and required screens or monitors etc. Bummer ...........

I remain convinced that this is the way forward for me though.

Cheers,
Mark.

[Drew]

Your explanation is brighter than my HID lamps...
So, if I want to travel for free:
1. by a RED, and use as a still - anyhow, this can be a good way, since you can choose the best momentums from a sequence, and export to tiff...
2. by a d200
3. make films for BBC, NatGeo etc....
J

Hate to burst that bubble too but as Mark will tell you, working for Nat Geo etc is not exactly easy money either
RED? Well if you want to invest $50k into a system, why not?

[CamDiver]

Hate to burst that bubble too but as Mark will tell you, working for Nat Geo etc is not exactly easy money either
RED? Well if you want to invest $50k into a system, why not?

Ain't that the truth.

Jules - What a lot of people don't realize is that National Geographic is science first, film making second. A lot of film makers 'get with' scientists because they both, from different plans of attack, tell the story of a species, phenomena etc. Scientists, normally by way of grants, can regularly justify the expense of having a film crew document his / her work to tell the story. When you see a "and here's Dr. X fearlessly taking on the ferocious lesser spotted Sahara Gerbil armed with just one cotton bud" scenario you should realize that its the scientists grant money paying for that production for the most part.

Working in the field for NG does not bring fame nor fortune as a camera operator. Above all not fortune anyway. I have that on my resume and it sits nicely there to be able to mention that. If I get the chance again to work with those guys I will, I will probably loose money by taking the time away from the regular jobs I have but it all depends on ones desires etc. What one wants to achieve.

If you want to make money in this game you have to go do something like Rob Stewart's Sharkwater project. Again, that is taking a risk. 35mm transfers cost a damn fortune so I guess he had some investors on that. Not sure he even made any good money at the moment on that.

These days there are a lot of people out there vying for the same kind of exposure. Gone are the days of daily monumental accomplishments a la 1960's when the pioneers of this genre of filming were heralded with the same lore as Hollywood stars. Anyone with a bit of cash these days can go out, buy a camera and housing and make a movie. On bog standard laptops its normal that they come with basic editing software. Even Nokia and other cell phone companies are having film festivals open to folks using the camcorder feature of their phones, go figure.

What do you realistically want to achieve? What realistic mark do you want to leave? Answer that question and find a way to get there. Just don't expect there to be a lot of cash and ticker tape parades when you get there, if there is then you've done something right. Good luck mate.

Drew - Budget for basic RED underwater is circa $28k. Scrimping and saving after that for the rest. Modular in design, modular in equipment purchase.

Cheers,
Mark.

[wagsy]

Mark you are so correct.

Steve, give it a few years and we will see what position we are in then

Since my last post, I have had two enquires about stock footage.
Philippines & Mexico

O & the moped, I took out the secondary (restrictive) computer controlled butterflys in the carbs yesterday....now its a 1000cc bike. Dont need to be on grass to spin the back wheel now.

[Drew]

Drew - Budget for basic RED underwater is circa $28k. Scrimping and saving after that for the rest. Modular in design, modular in equipment purchase.

Hmmm the basic RED is already at $22k+ with basic drive options. A real P/L lens like a Zeiss 14 or some thing would be minimum and I can't even remember how much those cost. The housing would be at least in the $10k range, just on the size alone. I dunno how you can get 28k with housing, camera and lens.

[DeanB]

Ha !!! Just realised when talking RED we were in Dollars...That means that flame coloured cam is in my price range even with all the extra's...

Hold on my alarms going off in the distance....Bugger its a dream

Back to the bread and water...

Or wait until I've sold my house ££££££££££ roof over my head or RED...HMMM now lets see.

Dive safe

DeanB