Will the evolution of the video camera kill photography?

[dug777]

How long would it take you to go through those 5000 shots?

I'd rather take the time & get the good single shot (in fact that's the pleasure of photography, actually being out & about learning/exercising those skills, rather than taking 11ty billion pics in 5 mins, and spending six months in front of yor computer sorting through them) 😛

 

[dug777]

How long would it take you to go through those 5000 shots?

I'd rather take the time & get the good single shot (in fact that's the pleasure of photography, actually being out & about learning/exercising those skills, rather than taking 11ty billion pics in 5 mins, and spending six months in front of yor computer sorting through them) 😛

 

[everman]

Originally posted by: dug777

There would be no skill it, there would still be no way you could control what you were producing, and you would spend hundreds of hours looking through the frames for the one shot you wanted. It sounds neither desirable nor practical to me.

It would be possible, but maybe not practical. Indeed the technology will and does exist to do many impractical things. It will still be a while before a computerized system can do better than an expert photographer, but even that will happen. Of course it's more likely to involve a combination of biological and non-biological intelligence, but that's for a different thread 😉

 

[FP]

Originally posted by: virtualgames0
Well if you were good at metering in the first place, you wouldn't really need to bracket your exposures 5 stops for every 5 pictures.

I know, I was just saying it to make the point that given the ability to take a large number of shots in a small amount of time gives you the ability to virtually take every combination of settings and pick your favorite.

With regards to the "skill" of it all... I completely agree, there is an art to it and I love it. However, "skilled" people used to make handmade furniture/jewelry/etc that is now made by machines. Do the machined pieces look beautiful? Yes... Do I still respect and admire the guy who spends 2 years making a desk? Absolutely.

My arguement is that given a sufficient increase in technology, the skill needed to create stunning pictures will decrease.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: binister

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: everman

Originally posted by: dug777
that's silly.

You will NEVER get a video camera that could achieve what a good SLR/DSLR can do in a single frame, besides which, composure is 9/10 of a brilliant photo 😉

Never say never 😛

It will happen, it is inevitable.

Sooner or later still cameras will reach the same frame rate as video cameras.

😕

I can set my Nikon to 1/30s now...

Umm... that's not what I meant. That's shutter speed. Your camera can't take 30 (or 24) pictures in one second, a video camera can. But what I'm saying is the number of pictures per second that a digital SLR is capable of is rising. I don't know if it'll hit 24 pictures per second, there probably isn't a desire for that. Canon 1D Mark II can do 8.5 fps, not sure if any are higher than that. That's 1/3 of the frame rate of a video camera. Of course you can't do that continuously, only 40 straight pics like that. And the flash memory requirements would be enormous to do that frequently - and therein lies another problem with your suggestion - the resolution of video cameras is very low compared to digital still cameras.