The Portland Metro Photographic News

a commentary by Tom Hubbard

Over the course of a month, I have attended two very similar manufacturer-sponsored seminars.  They both concerned "the next big thing" for still photographers -- DSLR Video Photography.  The corporate speakers painted a rosy picture of the opportunity for still photographers to enter video production cheaply and exploit their photography skills.  They even had some nifty customer-produced videos to stir up attendee emotions and punctuate their point.

I asked the same question at each seminar.  "Where's all this business coming from to support the existing work force of cinema and video photographers (that are being pumped out of colleges by the gross) plus this new influx of still photographers with their comparatively cheap, video-capable DSLRs?  Do you think the well-established community of videographers is going to spread their arms and welcome their still photographer cousins into the video photography fold?"  My question and obvious skepticism were not well received.  

The answer is always, "This is the way the market is moving.  Everybody will want video for the web and other commercial uses.  There will be plenty of business for everyone."  Well, that may be true over the course of a decade or so.  But, in my opinion, the trend isn't moving fast enough to financially support all these aspiring video photographers from the still photography world today.

Being an industry "old timer" I've heard this story before, and it never comes out the way camera manufacturers' marketing departments proclaim.  

Digital still cameras are the most recent example. The introduction of digital photography was supposed to improve quality, make it easier for photographers to do their work, be more productive and attract crowds of customers to their doors.  The truth is that the original digital cameras were prohibitively expensive and  could not hold a quality candle to traditional film.  That milestone came several years later.

What it did commercially was to make it easier for the non-professional/amateur photographer to take pictures of minimal professional quality, nearly eliminate photo processing labs and begin a movement of replacing professional photographers with existing company employees who expressed an interest in photography and happened to own a DSLR.  Because this is almost "free" photography for small corporations and businesses, the top brass were willing to lower their quality expectations to reap the apparent cost savings.  

It was the very definition of image quality that took the greatest hit when the digital camera first arrived.  And the rationale was and is:  "I'm only selling hammers for Pete's sake.  I don't need a $200 an hour professional photographer and his Hasselblad to take pictures for my web store.  My friend Bob, up in the accounting department, has a DSLR.  I'll just have him take some quick pictures for us.  Besides, he gets a kick out of taking pictures."  (Today, the corporate expression is "do more with less".  Which, when honestly interpreted, means "It's cost -- not quality or creativity -- that counts.")

The result has been less available work for the pro, a proliferation of part-time, semi-skilled photographers and the average professional photographer's yearly income reduced to $29,000 (according to Indeed.com) -- with many barely holding on and others seeking the protection of bankruptcy court.  Much of the blame can be traced to the "blue sky" marketing promises generated by manufacturers of digital hardware.  As consumers, still photographers are normally a skeptical bunch - and, rightly so.  We should approach this new camera capability with similar caution. Remember, manufacturers are trying to sell cameras.

What about the established video production competition?  Consider that the cost of even the most expensive video-capable DSLR is nearly infinitesimal when compared to the cost of the professional equipment being used by existing video production houses.  To them, DSLRs could be considered disposable cameras.  They, too, recognize the cost savings DSLRs offer and will surely begin their own aggressive exploration of these new cameras.  But, unlike still photographers, they will already have the video training, experience and industry credibility to profitably exploit the technology.  More importantly, they will already have the clients and a long list of potential customers who are seeking a lower cost video production alternative.

I'll admit I’m a digital guy at heart. I'm excited about the prospect of getting my hands on a high-end DSLR camera with HD video capability and experimenting.  I believe every professional still photographer with the means should experience and evaluate this impressive DSLR achievement.  But I have zero expectations of becoming wealthy making commercial videos. That's an entirely different career with its own very steep learning curve.  It's another world my friend -- with its own established jargon, compositional techniques, technical requirements and professional cliques.  (By the way, add a comprehensive understanding of audio production to the list of “must knows” for videographers.)

So, my message is "caveat emptor" -- let the buyer beware.  If you are fascinated by the addition of video to DSLR cameras and believe producing videos will be your path to financial security, you might be right.  But, DO YOUR HOMEWORK FIRST. 

• Study your market and competition.
• Talk to other photographers who are willing to share their experiences.
• Read everything you can on the subject.
• Go to seminars.
• Ask the tough cost and pricing questions (include your accountant).
• Understand the TRUE cost of the primary AND ancillary equipment required in professional video/audio production.
• Interview your existing and potential still photography customers to gauge their future video production needs.
• Have a plan for your own training (the camera’s manual is only the tip of a massive educational iceberg).

Find out exactly what's real and the hurdles you should expect to encounter before placing all your photographic eggs in this digital basket. This is the same list of suggestions I would ask camera manufacturers to include in their presentations as a reality check and service to their still photography customers.

By the way, expect history to repeat itself. Camera manufacturers are beginning to announce less expensive DSLRs with full video capability.  This, once again, opens the doors to non-professional photographers to become your competitors for corporate, wedding and small business jobs.

A few years from now, there will inevitably be stories of the next Steven Spielberg who began his illustrious, Oscar-studded movie making career when he discovered that the DSLR he used to shoot weddings could also take HD videos.  But the majority of tomorrow's commercially successful video photographers will be those who did it the old-fashion way.  They were formally educated as video or cinematic photographers, became photographers’ assistants (at minimal wage), joined the Union and put in years of hard work enduring all the drudgeries associated with apprenticeship in the video/cinematic production world.

By all means, I endorse adding a hands-on understanding of DSLR video photography to your professional vocabulary.  Try it out.  Explore the possibilities.  Have fun.  But, don't give up your day job just yet.  All the while, spend even more time mastering the craft and business that fuels your creativity and feeds your family -- still photography.

Sometimes the grass is greener on the other side of the fence only because we haven’t adequately fertilized our own turf.