C***@adobeforums.com
2005-11-21 23:18:24 UTC
After an extended sabbatical, I'm ready to jump back into the pro realm of shooting.
My background: in the late 80's-early 90's was a regional award winning photojournalist and was one of 99 accepted to the Eddie Adam's Workshop in 1992 for the documentary projects I had created. consulted with many big names at the time - National Geo, Newsweek, Time, Black Star Photo, etc. Had a standing position offered at Newsweek by Jimmy Colton - the Director Of Photography at Newsweek who was a team leader at the workshop - didn't take the offer due to family.
Been thru some major life changes over the course of the last 3 years and am now looking to go back to what I enjoyed doing the most - telling stories with images. Having been a still shooter, I am finding the idea of shooting moving images more compelling an idea.
My interests lie in shooting short form documentaries, special interest programming type work (mainly independent cable), etc. In addition, I am also a certified diver (currently awaiting my divemaster) and will want to shoot u/w - natural history type work, etc.
And now a whole new wrench has been thrown into the works - SD or HD.
I understand that HD is the future of the medium, but what about shooting SD? What about SD in 16x9? I really want to shoot video - but the cost of even low end HD gear is already straining my already tight budget to not being able to make it happen.
I have the Adobe Video Collection Professional suite which came with PP 1.0/AE6/Audition 1.0, etc...
I was hoping to get some insight as to whether shooting SD for the time being will suffice. Is it worth looking at as a short term solution until HD becomes more mainstream (1-2 years)? I was looking at either the SONY TRV 950 or the Canon GL1/2 as my first initial camera to work with. I would add on an anamorphic lens to shoot true for 16x9.
Any advice from working pro's would be greatly appreciated...
Cliff Etzel
My background: in the late 80's-early 90's was a regional award winning photojournalist and was one of 99 accepted to the Eddie Adam's Workshop in 1992 for the documentary projects I had created. consulted with many big names at the time - National Geo, Newsweek, Time, Black Star Photo, etc. Had a standing position offered at Newsweek by Jimmy Colton - the Director Of Photography at Newsweek who was a team leader at the workshop - didn't take the offer due to family.
Been thru some major life changes over the course of the last 3 years and am now looking to go back to what I enjoyed doing the most - telling stories with images. Having been a still shooter, I am finding the idea of shooting moving images more compelling an idea.
My interests lie in shooting short form documentaries, special interest programming type work (mainly independent cable), etc. In addition, I am also a certified diver (currently awaiting my divemaster) and will want to shoot u/w - natural history type work, etc.
And now a whole new wrench has been thrown into the works - SD or HD.
I understand that HD is the future of the medium, but what about shooting SD? What about SD in 16x9? I really want to shoot video - but the cost of even low end HD gear is already straining my already tight budget to not being able to make it happen.
I have the Adobe Video Collection Professional suite which came with PP 1.0/AE6/Audition 1.0, etc...
I was hoping to get some insight as to whether shooting SD for the time being will suffice. Is it worth looking at as a short term solution until HD becomes more mainstream (1-2 years)? I was looking at either the SONY TRV 950 or the Canon GL1/2 as my first initial camera to work with. I would add on an anamorphic lens to shoot true for 16x9.
Any advice from working pro's would be greatly appreciated...
Cliff Etzel