A collaborative online community that brings together photographers and creative professionals of every kind to find ways to keep photography relevant, respected, and profitable.
Want us to find an answer to your question? Interested in becoming a contributor?Email us
1. How much do you shoot video compared with stills?
I have been working on a film in the Niger Delta, and although I’ve been shooting video for the past nine years, this is the first time I’ve shot a complete film without any stills.
2. What tools do you use to shoot video?
When I contemplated shooting this film in the Niger Delta, one of the toughest places I’ve worked, where most people don’t want to have any kind of camera pointed at them unless you explain yourself or you pay them, I was initially considering using the Canon 5D Mark II in video mode, thinking it would make me less conspicuous. That was a silly thought. In the end, I decided to work with a great standard definition video camera for excellent sound and none of the unresolved issues in video with the 5D.
3. What is the biggest difference for you between shooting video and stills?
Whereas still photography resides in the fractional moments, video lives in whole moments and complete segments. Keeping the editor’s needs in mind, you must provide sustained coverage with video, instead of pecking away at the fractional moments with your still camera. This can be a killer on your back, neck and/or wrist. The physical strain shooting video is definitely increased, at least for me since I work quite light, with one camera and one lens, when I shoot stills. With stills I am also slavishly dealing with the light, beholden to it’s patterns, moods and dictates. Light is important with video too, but I can still make a compelling video in almost any light. Then of course there is audio. I often ponder situations in terms of the audio it will render, what it will say and how it helps shape the narrative.
4. How do your still and video work influence each other?
Shooting stills is more torturous mentally but ultimately more deeply satisfying. I am a photographer at heart. Video is interesting, vital, challenging, relevant and captivating, but photographs are sacred to me in a way that video is not. It has something to do with my long relationship to photography, but more metaphysically, it relates to the stillness, the quiet and meditative quality of still images. No matter how enveloping and captivating video can be, there is an essential truth in still images for me. And I am finding that I miss working with my images — looking, editing, thinking about them, sending them to friends and family. They are much easier to move around, share and work with.
1. How much do you shoot video compared with stills?
It totally depends on what I’m working on. I’m just finishing a short documentary now that is entirely video. I’ve directed music videos and television spots for years. Usually I let the subject matter make the decision for me about the amount of video vs. stills that I’ll shoot.
2. What tools do you use to shoot video?
I shoot primarily with the Nikon D90, which allows me to switch between video and stills very easily. I have several professional-level video cameras, but the optics I can use with the D90 makes it a superior choice. I gather audio separately and I have had the D90s modified so they can accept outboard microphones.
3. What is the biggest difference for you between shooting video and stills?
From a physical standpoint, shooting video requires a tripod — otherwise it’s just not going to look good. From a photographic standpoint, composition still rules, but what works for each is totally different.
4. How do your still and video work influence each other?
My video and still work is totally in sync. Each is meant to enhance the other.
1. How much do you shoot video compared with stills?
The majority of my work over the past five years has been video-related, much of it in the independent film market. I shoot stills in my downtime to supplement my income and to keep my creative eye fresh. Over the past month, I’ve been out on three independent short film shoots, two as the director of photography and one as a Steadicam operator. I also had a handful of still shoots. Shooting video and stills at the same time is not generally required by my clients. Most hire me for one or the other, as they understand that trying to do video and stills at the same time often results in both suffering to some degree. The two mediums require different thought processes, and it’s very challenging to go between the two and do it well, especially in a deadline situation.
2. What tools do you use to shoot video?
I shoot on a Panasonic SDX900 for much of my independent film work. I’ve also shot several indie films on the Panasonic DVX100, which records in 24p, but on the more affordable MiniDV format. The short film I ran Steadicam on last month shot with Canon’s new 5D Mark II cameras. It was pretty exciting shooting HD video on a full-frame SLR, being able to use very wide aperture lenses to emulate the shallow depth of field of the 35mm motion picture format. For the rare instances that 24p is not required, I shoot on my Sony VX2000 MiniDV.
3. What is the biggest difference for you between shooting video and stills?
One large difference between shooting video and stills for me is lighting. Still images are pretty easy to manipulate after the fact, but you really can’t dodge and burn video. That’s why I try to nail my video lighting setups so I can hand the client a DVD of my camera raw video without color correction and not be embarrassed by it. I studied lighting in college so it’s not uncommon for me to spend an hour or two lighting a scene for film shoot, with only the last five minutes of that time devoted to setting up the camera and framing the shot. I think a lot of new video shooters and photographers get so wrapped up in the camera technology that they forget how important lighting really is.
4. How do your still and video work influence each other?
My video and still disciplines keep each other in check. I find that after shooting stills for a few weeks, the next time I pick up a video camera, the shots come easier. Sometimes I’ll try things with the video camera that I tried earlier with a still image, such as radically underexposing for a dramatic highlight or colorful costume. I have an equal love-hate relationship with each medium. Video editing is more tedious than editing a still photo shoot, but I do like the camaraderie of video shoots. First and foremost, though, I consider myself a lighting designer. Even when I’m shooting video all day, the majority of my time is spent lighting the scenes. The same goes for setting up a portrait shoot. When shooting on location with available light, lighting is still at the forefront of my mind.
1. How much do you shoot video compared with stills?
I shoot about 80% stills. Often I’ll capture video on interesting assignments, but more for memory’s sake. I’ve started working on video projects with my family and friends, but I have yet to capitalize on actually making a living with video. The transition is underway, but I don’t expect to ever give up still photography.
2. What tools do you use to shoot video?
I’ve exclusively used the Canon 5D Mark II for capturing video. For general audio I have a hot-shoe-mount mic made by Sennheiser (MKE 400). For music videos we record the music in a studio and lay it as the main audio track. For my latest project I used a separate sound crew who used professional booms, shotguns, and LAV mics.
3. What is the biggest difference for you between shooting video and stills?
The biggest difference during the shooting process is motion. Moving the camera while recording makes all the difference whether it’s a pan, dolly, crane, or steady-cam shot. I’ve found that keeping the camera motionless makes video more stagnant and less appealing. On the editing end, it’s a much more laborious process due to the file-sizes of the videos. It’s also more difficult to tone and edit 30 pictures per second.
4. How do your still and video work influence each other?
I feel that I’m a photographer at heart. Since I’ve started toying with video, I consider myself more and more a filmmaker as well. I think I have a lot to learn, but the ease of the 5D II makes it enjoyable to teach myself.
1. How much do you shoot video compared with stills?
I’m still shooting nearly 100% stills for my professional and personal work, but nearly all of my clients are no inquiring if I can also produce video in addition to stills. On my last large shoot I started out thinking I would shoot a little video to show my clients how the activities might translate when we began our video productions. Yet, over 10 shoots at 10 locations, I only shot stills. Right now my mind set is, one or the other — video OR still. I think there have to be two different shoots or I have to have a video camera operator on set who I could direct while I shoot the stills.
2. What tools do you use to shoot video?
I am exclusively using the Canon 5D Mark II. We are capturing audio separately using a Marantz digital recorder.
3. What is the biggest difference for you between shooting video and stills?
When shooting photos I am really focused on perfecting the single moment. One perfect image. Video is about the flow through the frame and linking moments. Not all the moments in a sequence are perfect, but you only spend a fleeting moment looking at any one frame.
4. How do your still and video work influence each other?
I’m a photographer who is exploring video. I definitely think like a photographer… but I LOVE applying that to my new work in video!
MJ: You mentioned that you found yourself making the same “Martin Sundberg” images with the video camera that you would have with a still camera. What do those look like and how do you recognize them as your signature look?
MS: This first foray into video felt like a seamless transition from shooting photography, and a lot of that can be attributed to the Canon 5D Mark II. It was amazing to use the tools I’ve always used, in terms of the feel and function of a still camera, and do this entirely different thing with it. For me, this really facilitated a consistency in my vision. In my still photography, I try to use the elements of the moment, exploiting light and weather whenever possible, to add to the photograph. I also am often trying to capture motion and distill that feeling into a photograph.
When it came time to post some teaser videos on my blog, I went to pull some frame grabs to situate next to the videos, and that was when I realized I had shot the video footage in the same way. This is an intriguing revelation, and I’m excited by the idea of moving between the two mediums for a client, creating both stills and video for a campaign. This also reminded me that the creative process is really a series of choices. Planning sometimes precedes these choices, but very often it’s a matter of simply reacting to what’s in front of the camera at that moment.
I now understand photography and video as having a more synergistic relationship. When I bring elements together that I’m passionate about — light, water, inspiring people, and evocative environments — I tend to act in a way that defines and supports the style that I’ve developed through many, many experiences with the camera at my eye. Being facile with both mediums is just another way to keep exercising, challenging, and honing the process of seeing and creating images.
MJ: What did you learn from this shoot and what advice would you give to photographers going out on their first video shoot?
MS: When the project concluded and we all went back to our respective parts of the country, I realized how much I love the still image. I continue to be excited about the outcome of this project, but I was honestly shocked to discover that I didn’t have a body of still images after all of that effort. Of course, I knew I logically hadn’t been making still pictures, but I did feel a pang of regret for not having a second body of still work. No prints, no stock, no licensing usage for my clients.
A week after the shoot, I was fielding calls from magazines specifically interested in the triathlete project and I have almost nothing to offer them. Typically, after a personal shoot like this, I would be able to field those requests. With that in mind, I’ll definitely try and schedule a couple of days for still photography on my next personal video assignment. And in the meantime, I’ll begin exploring the portals that exist for distributing video pieces in similar ways.
I would advise anyone moving into video to assemble a good team. For me, I like to have the flexibility to be quick and nimble with my team, so for this type of project, I’d make sure to include an assistant, a stylist, a sound person, an editor, and the models. That would be a bare-bones assembly. You don’t need an army, just a few enthusiastic and interested people. I love the collaborative process because when you get a few good people together, each with his or her own expertise, it can be like igniting a haystack of ideas.
Miki Johnson: What was your idea for this shoot and what did you want to achieve creatively?
Martin Sundberg: This was a personal shoot that I put together to begin cultivating my video skills. The idea of the shoot was to explore some of the new technologies and tools that are being presented to photographers, such as the video capabilities now being packaged into our still cameras. Video is a hot topic among photographers these days, and it seems that individuals on all fronts are testing the waters, exploring what this physical merging of media means for the creative process as well as the business. Having never shot much video, I was really interested to see how my mind, one that has been conditioned to create still images, might instinctually apply that vision to motion.
I chose the triathlete as a subject for this project primarily because my style of shooting is very active, which lends itself well to shooting active people. The triathlon also required that I shoot footage in three outdoor locations, which I could weave into one continuous standalone piece that would be about a sense of place as much as an activity or person. From the beginning, I conceived of this project as a collaboration between the athletes, Matt and Chris Lieto, their coach, Matt Dixon of Purplepatch Fitness, and Derek Weiss of Piton Productions.
We set out to tell the story of what it feels like to participate in the three activities — swimming, biking and running — at such an elite level. To make pictures like this, I often find that it’s absolutely necessary to get physically into the shoot yourself; otherwise, it’s too easy to capture what it feels like to be a spectator. We shot from strategic angles and a mixture of vantage points, including from the air and the water. We were constantly on the move, trying to keep up with Matt and Chris. And let me tell you, that wasn’t easy. But all of these efforts are felt, if not directly seen, in the footage, which was our goal.
MJ: How did you plan for this video shoot? How was it different from planning a still photo shoot?
MS: Planning for this shoot was very similar to producing a photo shoot. One aspect that is different is the fact that video is experienced on a continuum, thereby forcing you plan for how the subject enters and exits the frame, what will come before and after that scene, and how the transition between scenes will occur. It’s no longer one moment but a series of moments within each frame, and ultimately, within the entire piece. And not only does the entire piece have a beginning and an end, but each scene also has its own beginning and end. Everything needs to be considered on this larger continuum.
With video, it’s also necessary to plan for sound. For this project, we chose to utilize a soundtrack, which allowed us to really focus on the visual aspect of video while shooting. Otherwise, I scouted locations, coordinated with the models, discussed shots and scenes, researched access issues — basically the same planning as a still shoot.
We shot over the course of four days and took advantage of the visually powerful locations available right here in the Bay Area. The biggest differences between video and still photography is evident in the post-production work. With video, more time is spent sequencing shots; whether it’s a narrative piece or not, you’re still communicating something to an audience and the right sequencing will determine whether that ‘something’ is clearly delivered. In addition, you’re simultaneously working with the many other variables that harmonize to complete a video piece, like transitions, sound, intro and closing.
Video always reminds me of the tremendous team effort that goes into producing a finished piece. With stills, I have a very refined workflow and can navigate my editing tools, like Lightroom and Photoshop, with ease. For this project, however, I culled footage and selected the clips that worked well individually and that told the story, but my editor Derek took over from there. I knew what I wanted to see, and he edited the many variables together to communicate the story we intended to tell. I have a huge respect for this part of the process.
Editing is absolutely vital to any final product. With most of my still photography work, I’m looking for one iconic image, which doesn’t necessarily rely on what comes before or after it. With video, sequencing is everything. Again, this is a notable departure from the process of editing still images. Unless I’m working on a portfolio, an essay, or a particular series of images, sequencing doesn’t figure into my still photography edits.
Learn how to engage your audience and
build brand recognition across social
channels. Learn more...
Pick your package. Pick your design.
No credit card required.