Digital still cameras on the verge of obsolescence..

[Sean]

I had predicted that in 5-10yrs time that digital cameras (DSLR's etc) would become obsolete and digital video technology would allow for high resolution frame grabs. There would then be no such thing as photographers, just videographers. I was surprised to see it's practically arrived today with Sony announcing a new cmos chip. This chip will allow 6MP frame grabs from video. This will only improve of course. I am curious how this will change the future of still photography when it gets to this point of obtaining all still images from edited video frame grabs.

Note the article even touts this as a good thing:

Professionals will no longer have to concern themselves with one art form over the other; instead, the distinction between still images and video capture are set to blend into one seamless continuum.

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/sony-cmo...ionize-videography-and-photography-297824.php

P.S. Not looking for D vs. A posts

 

[Lopaka]

Sounds like just the thing for photojournalists. Some of these guys modified movie cameras back in the 1940's slowing down the fps so they could get still frame grabs without using mountains of film. Also seems like it could take the idea of 'if you shoot enough images, some are bound to be good' to the extreme.:rolleyes:

Bob

 

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Well, that just remind me that today I went to see a couple of exhibits at the Mois de la Photo in Montréal. The theme is "narrative" this year, and for better or for worse, there were quite a good number of video installations.

 

[Pinholemaster]

The sky is falling.

I let the future stay the future.

 

[removed account4]

sean:

i spoke with a ad rep in california a few months ago,
she said that companies have been into this sort of thing for a while now.
at trade shows the first questions asked are if the people represented
shoot video or just images ...
seems that they just shoot dv for the website video and take screen shots for the adverts.
its almost as bad as having to burn a cd before the "set" is torn down
with no time to edit bad images, or at least retouch ...
i would hate to be the "tech" that sits infront of the screen all day sifting
through endless video to find the screen shot that works. looking at contact sheets
and/or 35mm chromes is bad enough.

 

[Kino]

This really doesn't change a thing. Those who hose-down the scenery and try to glean great images from the deluge have been around a long time. All it does is waste time and resources.

Problem is, there are only so many Garry Winograd types (one to my counting) and, as a famous motion picture producer once exclaimed, "From sh*t you get sh*t".

If you need further proof that people are not fooled by quantity over quality, just look the resurgence of popularity in LF in this day and age! People still value skill and craftsmanship.

I think pop culture will continue to shove crap on our plates, the only think is we don't have to eat it.

 

[bill schwab]

Sounds like just the thing for photojournalists.

The trend in newspapers now that printed versions are on the endangered species list is to use more video in online versions. I know of several "photo"-journalists that have already gone this route. With more demand from publishers for video, it makes life much easier for them. Even my wife, who is a print journalist, is being trained in video production!

 

[erikg]

Bill has it exactly right from what I can see, it won't be a still image of Barry Bonds hitting a home run that we will see, but a video clip, more YouTube than Times. The economics of printing a paper are not in its favor. Still it won't stop me from shooting stills.

 

[Michael W]

I think the big problem with video grabs is the shutter speed. I know with Super 8 cameras running at 18 fps & normal shutter angle, the exposure time is approx 1/40 second. I'd guess video will be close to that. So it seems people going down this path will end up with a lot of blurry still shots once they do the frame grab.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

Sean, might I suggest you get right to work on OD-PUG; the Original Digital Photographers Users Group website. Imagine how fast that puppy would grow! Then again...most of them would probably be falling over each other to buy the newest gadget.

Murray

 

[Baxter Bradford]

I agree with 'goldie' that shutter speed will potentially be the achilles heel. Not just for fast motion, but also long exposure in low light which can produce such wonderful atmospheric images.

Adds another big chunk to the digital workflow. Not just all the post-processing, but deciding which image is the definitive one.... also going to require a whole array of mass storage devices.

That said, I can see there being a number of applications where this offers real benefits. But no, I don't anticiapate joining the checkout queue.

 

[scootermm]

Im sorry but I cant even begin to imagine dealing with even 24fps of 6MP images. thats 1440 frames in a min... thats 21,600mb.... IE 22Gbs roughly for a min of footage.... unless my math is real off... which is possible, but whatever the storage itll need to be LARGE

 

[Sean]

Im sorry but I cant even begin to imagine dealing with even 24fps of 6MP images. thats 1440 frames in a min... thats 21,600mb.... IE 22Gbs roughly for a min of footage.... unless my math is real off... which is possible, but whatever the storage itll need to be LARGE

No doubt. Storage may be an issue for a while, however IBM's latest breakthrough in molecular computing has them claiming 30,000 HD Movies can be stored on the head of a pin. We're likely heading to a future where entire lives are recorded in high definition..

 

[Dave Miller]

No doubt. Storage may be an issue for a while, however IBM's latest breakthrough in molecular computing has them claiming 30,000 HD Movies can be stored on the head of a pin. We're likely heading to a future where entire lives are recorded in high definition..

Does that mean we will have one fixed to the top of our heads; like a cyclops? With a wi-fi connection the the Ministry of Images perhaps.

 

[SuzanneR]

Yes... sounds like an editing nightmare, and I think media outlets, especially the older print publications are struggling with how information will be presented in the future. I'm not sure they recognize the type of skills journalists and photojournalists need.

Frankly, with the tools changing for photojournalists and editors, I'm not sure the process has to change all that much. Yes, a lot of photographers are becoming videographers, but many are employing effective slideshows with audio to present stories. Check out the multimedia section on Ed Kashi's site. He's combining still, video and audio very effectively in story telling.

It'll be interesting to see the skill set needed for photojournalism, and if media outlets will be able to identify how to most efficiently gather, edit, and distribute stories with the tools our there, now.

http://www.edkashi.com/

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I think the editing of stills from motion pictures is just a different process from editing from contact sheets or transparencies. I suppose one first edits the footage for presentation as a movie, and in the process, you become sufficiently familiar with what's there and where the climaxes are, and then you just scrub through those moments to find the best frame.

The topic of photojournalists becoming video journalists is one of the central topics on Dirck Halstead's website, digitaljournalist.org. For cranky still film shooters, I recommend Bill Pierce's column-- http://digitaljournalist.org/archives/columns.html#pierce

 

[eddym]

IBM's latest breakthrough in molecular computing has them claiming 30,000 HD Movies can be stored on the head of a pin.

Hmmm... and if the movies are all "Angels in America" then we will at last have the answer to one of the oldest theological questions:
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

 

[eddym]

For cranky still film shooters, I recommend Bill Pierce's column.

Yes, I always read his column first... then ignore all the crap about video.
As for the subject at hand, I have only one problem: I truly HATE video! Long live the still photograph!!

 

[nicolai]

The Sony is already dwarfed by the 12MP (@12-bit RAW), 60fps RED video cameras. Hose away.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Sean;

JVC makes an HDTV camcorder with 3 chips to eliminate aliasing. It allows frame grabs very simply. I have seen some startlingly good prints taken this way by Paul Gilman. He showed prints at one of our lunches made using the new Kodak printer.

PE

 

[rhphoto]

The still image, hell, the two-dimensional graphic representation, has been around for a little while. I guess around 20,000 years give or take. To me there is something so fundamentally different about pictures, photographs, paintings, drawings -- and moving images, that I don't ever see the line being blurred outside the realm of "art". Certainly in the case of sports reportage or the you-tube phenom, video is now the state of the art. But I suspect (I hope!) there will always be a distinction among serious artists between visual entertainment and visual art. Apples of a different orange, if you will.

 

[Kobin]

The trend in newspapers now that printed versions are on the endangered species list is to use more video in online versions. I know of several "photo"-journalists that have already gone this route. With more demand from publishers for video, it makes life much easier for them. Even my wife, who is a print journalist, is being trained in video production!

So if we can invent the technology to display video images on newsprint media, we'll have newspapers to rivals the ones in Harry Potter.

K.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Moving pictures in still frames has been done. Kodak has shown a method of reproducing up to 3 or 4 frames of motion picture in a flat poster like image. It was used for Jurassic park and Star Trek Generations ads. In the first, it showed a tyrannosaurus rex leaping out at you and in the second it showed the Enterprise flying away from you.

Oh, it was also possible in 3D.

This technology, along with incorporated sound bytes never caught on.

PE

 

[nicolai]

e-Ink make paper-thick, flexible video displays. They don't seem to be ready for prime time yet, but they work.

 

[Photo Engineer]

E-ink is under intensive R&D at Xerox. Our youngest daughter is apparently working on something related to it, but cannot talk about it.

PE