Why not copy the StillMotion look?

Bill Grant · December 2nd, 2008, 10:53 AM

Konrad,
No anger... I'm not really involved... I'm just observing...
Bill

Richard Wakefield · December 2nd, 2008, 02:25 PM

John: "Ego, pride, self importance come to mind" Why do you enter awards ceremonies again??!! Proud of your work perhaps? Bit of an ego trip perhaps?

Joel: in response to what you've said:

SHARING is fine, always has been, always will be. I love sharing my work, Patrick loves sharing his work, so-and-so might not like to share their work.

But COPYING exact shots is lame. e.g. Macro shot moving a light source over 2 rings, to produce moving shadows is an EXACT COPIED shot. I'd prefer to see a variation of that if the viewer had enjoyed seeing it so much, but not the exact same thing. And that's just one example, but I hope it illustrates the difference between sharing/influencing, and people copying exact shots.

Patrick's been doing some cool fast panning transitions which i've seen people instantly try to imitate exactly. But me, it just made me aware that I 'might' look into developing a cool transition myself, not trying to work out the exact way he did his.

ok, another example is, millions globally are copying Videocopilot's stuff in AE, but that's the nature of his site really, infact it's encouraged....but it seems the people everyone has the MOST respect for on his forum (and other forum-goers will agree), are the ones that produce showreels utilising the skills they've just watched, to develop their OWN style, not copying the tutorials exactly to get the exact same results.

** i'm not having a go at anyone here, just trying to clear things up. oh, and i'm sorry for the patronising captialisations. i'm leaving this thread alone now :) :)

Tim Harjo · December 2nd, 2008, 03:54 PM

I don't think copying a particular ring shot is what this is about... I think it more has to do with seeing a video and making your video just like it... as in not a couple of seconds worth of a shot, but rather 3 minutes worth.

And by the way, those pan transitions are not new to the wedding industry. I first saw Mayad using them, but I honestly have no idea who started them. As an industry, do we really want to stake claim to every original shot and transition we come up with?

Blake Cavett · December 2nd, 2008, 04:03 PM

From what I gathered, the 'beef' (if you want to call it that) is that it's okay to be INSPIRED by watching someone else's work, but copying shot-for-shot isn't hurting the one being copied. It's hurting the one DOING the copying because they aren't putting those creative juices to work.

I get that and I think we can all appreciate it. We can easily fall into a pattern and habit of copying what we see and then all we're doing is just going through the motions rather than trying to be original or creative.

But where exactly did it all start? Who was the first to get a tight shot of the wedding rings and make it their own? Who was the first to use a steadicam for weddings?

In TV land, we're quick to say that 'there are no new ideas.' Everything has already been done. Watch a newscast from 1975, 85 or 95... and the reality sets in!

I like to watch other newscasts that have great photojournalists and see what they come up with and see if I can incorporate their ideas or styles into something that works for me. Heck, if Spielberg does something I think is awesome I'm going to try it as well.

But I'm going to do my best to MAKE IT MY OWN.

97% of the time... ;)

Ethan Cooper · December 2nd, 2008, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Wakefield

But COPYING exact shots is lame. e.g. Macro shot moving a light source over 2 rings, to produce moving shadows is an EXACT COPIED shot. I'd prefer to see a variation of that if the viewer had enjoyed seeing it so much, but not the exact same thing. And that's just one example, but I hope it illustrates the difference between sharing/influencing, and people copying exact shots.

But in this lies the condundrum; at what point does it go from copying what you've seen to being your own artistic vision? If I use a different background for that shot, or maybe gel the light, or I don't know,use a wide angle instead of macro does it change the fact that what I'm trying to do is recreate the feel of Patrick's ring shot?

Where someone is crossing the line is when they copy my videos, put them on their website and claim they did them to sell more or higher priced packages. But if you like what I do, and can re-create it and make money then what's the harm? If you adopt my techniques, move into my market and seriously put a dent into my business then that's on me for showing you what I did and for not being strong enough on the business side to fend off the competition.

I too am done with this discussion.

Peter Szilveszter · December 2nd, 2008, 05:41 PM

My final statements:

Be your self not somebody else.

Let the story and what's happening in front of the camera dictate the outcome of how you shoot and edit.

Josh Green · December 2nd, 2008, 09:55 PM

Wow, I just logged in and started reading through this thread. It really is amazing to me that some of you really care that much if someone emulates your shots. I know for a fact people have copied me and I can say without feeling the least bit bad that I've tried to emulate shots I've seen. Of course I have always tried to push the envelope with my personal style and I'm really happy where I'm at now, but when I was starting out, I would watch Still-Motion, Jason Magbanua, Maya Studios religiously and try to completely emulate their style, it's how I got to where I am. I watched those guys all steal (if that's what you want to call it) each others shots as well. I personally think this whole thread is ridiculous, you'd never see professional photographers having this conversation.

Ethan Cooper · December 2nd, 2008, 10:42 PM

Josh - it seems that Patrick's original intent was to encourage people to do more than emulate his style & search for their own and grow as artists, but something in his comments definitely struck a nerve around here.

Didn't I say I was done? Ok, now I'm really done.

Josh Green · December 2nd, 2008, 11:25 PM

And I think that's exactly what he and his company did for me, helped me develop my own style. I guess I used him and his videos as my mentor. What's hard about these forums is that you can't truly know the tone behind the posts, I'm sure he meant nothing by his post but I could see how people could get riled up over it, I guess I kind of did when I read it.

Noa Put · December 3rd, 2008, 03:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Josh Green

I watched those guys all steal (if that's what you want to call it) each others shots as well.

That's what I first thought as well when I looked at one of Jason Magbanua clips because it looked a lot like what patrick is doing, only Jasons editing style is different. I think as well that in one way or the other everybody is copying, not only from other wedding videographers but from movies. The fast pan transtitions for instance is something I have seen more then once in movies. The only thing is that you need to make it your own after that by adding your own touch to it and not just carbon copy.

Yang Wen · December 3rd, 2008, 02:55 PM

Tru dat. ALL of wedding videography as an industry is inspired by what we've first seen in movies, television, where they have mega $$ art directors coming up with unique ideas etc..

Anyone who is trying to say wedding videography is a reliable source of unique and new ideas in motion imagery is kidding themselves.

End of discussion.

Joe Allen Rosenberger · December 3rd, 2008, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yang Wen

Tru dat. ALL of wedding videography as an industry is inspired by what we've first seen in movies, television, where they have mega $$ art directors coming up with unique ideas etc..

Anyone who is trying to say wedding videography is a reliable source of unique and new ideas in motion imagery is kidding themselves.

End of discussion.

Yang is right on with his comment. Jason, Patrick and many others around here do some nice work BUT in no way shape or form are they nor anyone else in the wedding industry "original".

Creative...yes, talented...yes, BUT innovators and originators....Nope! In addition to weddings, I've worked in the television land for a while....and have shot for a lot of networks in addition to my wedding stuff. I have yet to see one frame of wedding footage from anyone that I am like...."wow, I've NEVER seen that before!" I doubt I ever will.

There's a lot of talent "out there" who could care less about being "known" by other wedding videographers.

Chris Hurd · December 3rd, 2008, 10:07 PM

There's lots of excellent feedback in this thread, but it has definitely run its course.

Concluded.

December 2nd, 2008, 10:53 AM	#46
Bill Grant Major Player Join Date: May 2005 Location: Columbia,SC Posts: 806	Konrad, No anger... I'm not really involved... I'm just observing... Bill __________________ Cinema Couture www.cinemacouture.com

December 2nd, 2008, 05:41 PM	#51
Peter Szilveszter Major Player Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Yeppoon, Queensland Posts: 332	My final statements: Be your self not somebody else. Let the story and what's happening in front of the camera dictate the outcome of how you shoot and edit. __________________ www.livinglens.com.au \| www.livinglens.com.au/blog

December 2nd, 2008, 09:55 PM	#52
Josh Green Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 77	wow Wow, I just logged in and started reading through this thread. It really is amazing to me that some of you really care that much if someone emulates your shots. I know for a fact people have copied me and I can say without feeling the least bit bad that I've tried to emulate shots I've seen. Of course I have always tried to push the envelope with my personal style and I'm really happy where I'm at now, but when I was starting out, I would watch Still-Motion, Jason Magbanua, Maya Studios religiously and try to completely emulate their style, it's how I got to where I am. I watched those guys all steal (if that's what you want to call it) each others shots as well. I personally think this whole thread is ridiculous, you'd never see professional photographers having this conversation.

December 2nd, 2008, 10:42 PM	#53
Ethan Cooper Trustee Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Houma, La. Posts: 1,400 Images: 5	Josh - it seems that Patrick's original intent was to encourage people to do more than emulate his style & search for their own and grow as artists, but something in his comments definitely struck a nerve around here. Didn't I say I was done? Ok, now I'm really done. __________________ ∅ -Ethan Cooper

December 3rd, 2008, 10:07 PM	#58
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	There's lots of excellent feedback in this thread, but it has definitely run its course. Concluded. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

December 2nd, 2008, 02:25 PM	#47
Richard Wakefield Major Player Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Surrey, UK Posts: 680	John: "Ego, pride, self importance come to mind" Why do you enter awards ceremonies again??!! Proud of your work perhaps? Bit of an ego trip perhaps? Joel: in response to what you've said: SHARING is fine, always has been, always will be. I love sharing my work, Patrick loves sharing his work, so-and-so might not like to share their work. But COPYING exact shots is lame. e.g. Macro shot moving a light source over 2 rings, to produce moving shadows is an EXACT COPIED shot. I'd prefer to see a variation of that if the viewer had enjoyed seeing it so much, but not the exact same thing. And that's just one example, but I hope it illustrates the difference between sharing/influencing, and people copying exact shots. Patrick's been doing some cool fast panning transitions which i've seen people instantly try to imitate exactly. But me, it just made me aware that I 'might' look into developing a cool transition myself, not trying to work out the exact way he did his. ok, another example is, millions globally are copying Videocopilot's stuff in AE, but that's the nature of his site really, infact it's encouraged....but it seems the people everyone has the MOST respect for on his forum (and other forum-goers will agree), are the ones that produce showreels utilising the skills they've just watched, to develop their OWN style, not copying the tutorials exactly to get the exact same results. ** i'm not having a go at anyone here, just trying to clear things up. oh, and i'm sorry for the patronising captialisations. i'm leaving this thread alone now :) :)

December 2nd, 2008, 03:54 PM	#48
Tim Harjo Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Sacramento, California Posts: 195	I don't think copying a particular ring shot is what this is about... I think it more has to do with seeing a video and making your video just like it... as in not a couple of seconds worth of a shot, but rather 3 minutes worth. And by the way, those pan transitions are not new to the wedding industry. I first saw Mayad using them, but I honestly have no idea who started them. As an industry, do we really want to stake claim to every original shot and transition we come up with?

December 2nd, 2008, 04:03 PM	#49
Blake Cavett Major Player Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Madison Posts: 330	From what I gathered, the 'beef' (if you want to call it that) is that it's okay to be INSPIRED by watching someone else's work, but copying shot-for-shot isn't hurting the one being copied. It's hurting the one DOING the copying because they aren't putting those creative juices to work. I get that and I think we can all appreciate it. We can easily fall into a pattern and habit of copying what we see and then all we're doing is just going through the motions rather than trying to be original or creative. But where exactly did it all start? Who was the first to get a tight shot of the wedding rings and make it their own? Who was the first to use a steadicam for weddings? In TV land, we're quick to say that 'there are no new ideas.' Everything has already been done. Watch a newscast from 1975, 85 or 95... and the reality sets in! I like to watch other newscasts that have great photojournalists and see what they come up with and see if I can incorporate their ideas or styles into something that works for me. Heck, if Spielberg does something I think is awesome I'm going to try it as well. But I'm going to do my best to MAKE IT MY OWN. 97% of the time... ;)

December 2nd, 2008, 11:25 PM	#54
Josh Green Regular Crew Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 77	And I think that's exactly what he and his company did for me, helped me develop my own style. I guess I used him and his videos as my mentor. What's hard about these forums is that you can't truly know the tone behind the posts, I'm sure he meant nothing by his post but I could see how people could get riled up over it, I guess I kind of did when I read it.

December 3rd, 2008, 02:55 PM	#56
Yang Wen Major Player Join Date: May 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 991	Tru dat. ALL of wedding videography as an industry is inspired by what we've first seen in movies, television, where they have mega $$ art directors coming up with unique ideas etc.. Anyone who is trying to say wedding videography is a reliable source of unique and new ideas in motion imagery is kidding themselves. End of discussion.