Not sure if UHD is going to be like 720p was.

[Michael Silverman]

Originally Posted by Kyle Root

It looks like a CES today a new 4K consortium has been formed by major industry players to actively promote 4K development for broadcast.

In other news, I did a bridal show yesterday and of all the ~100 brides I talked to, not one asked if I delivered in 4K. LOL .... for that matter, no one asked if I deliver in HD either.

Kyle, did anyone ask if you shot in 4K?

[Kyle Root]

No. No one asked anything at all about 4K, either shooting or delivery.

Same for HD... not a single person asked anything about the technical side.

They were more concerned about whether we did "long" or "short" form, what we would wear on the day, and if we would travel. Those were the 3 biggest common questions all day.

Fortunately, we do "long" and the other videographer did "short" so we had completely different styles. And, 80% of those I talked with wanted "long". So yay! lol

[James Palanza]

Originally Posted by Kyle Root

No. No one asked anything at all about 4K, either shooting or delivery.

Same for HD... not a single person asked anything about the technical side.

They were more concerned about whether we did "long" or "short" form, what we would wear on the day, and if we would travel. Those were the 3 biggest common questions all day.

Fortunately, we do "long" and the other videographer did "short" so we had completely different styles. And, 80% of those I talked with wanted "long". So yay! lol

Haha that worked out eh? Curious, any reason you don't offer the option for either or? I mean you are shooting for long anyway so you'll have enough footage to do short. I typically let brides choose though I find the short form to be MORE editing than the long form, oddly.

[Kyle Root]

I've just never done a short form. I'll do highlights, but in this area, the parents seem to want as much as possible so I think they believe they get more if you say you're giving them 30-60 minutes when done vs. 15 minutes.

Most of the time its the mom and dad who are paying, so when they walk up with the Bride, I make sure and find out what they want.

I'm sure I could do a short form, as the only real thing would be to pare down the ceremony from like 30 minutes to 6 or 7 minutes max.

My bridal prep section is usually only 5 minutes and I could edit down reception stuff to about the same if I didn't show full first dances.

[Michael Silverman]

Originally Posted by Kyle Root

No. No one asked anything at all about 4K, either shooting or delivery.

Same for HD... not a single person asked anything about the technical side.

In one of my posts earlier on in this thread I mentioned that if a company shoots in 4K then it could certainly help them to mention "We shoot in 4K" and then explain the benefits to the bride and groom. While at the same time, if a company does not shoot in 4K (like my company) I don't think that much business will be lost by not having 4K capable cameras. I can see this changing in 3-4 years, but by then you may not be able to buy a camera that doesn't shoot 4K.

[Kyle Root]

Yeah. I'm sure 4K cams will be the norm very soon. With Panasonic leading the charge of 4K consumer cams and smartphones already going on.

This was our booth setup. Most people were floored by the cinema posters. Great point to starting conversations.

[Roger Gunkel]

I enjoyed reading these last couple of posts of yours Kyle as I do quite a lot of wedding shows and it is very rare indeed that I get asked anything at all technically. I get nearly all my non recommendation work from shows and I learnt years ago that talking technical is a no no. When the bride is surrounded by stands displaying cakes, shoes, dresses, jewelry and flowers, she will glaze over in seconds if you talk technical to her. You have to capture her interest with the emotional aspect of video or she will drift away instantly. Grooms are only there to reluctantly follow the bride round a few feet behind and feign interest, as they are never going to make a decision over the head of the bride.

I enjoy wedding shows as they are a challenge to make that first eye contact and sell yourself as much as your product. 4k is totally irrelevant to the conversation!

Roger

[Kyle Root]

Roger, you are correct. That is something I've really become more conscious of lately even in my regular dealings with potential clients. I don't go into any real technical detail about gear or anything, unless they specifically want to dig into it from their side, and that's only happened one time that I can recall. In general they don't care and just want their video to turn out like the ones they've seen... which it does.

This was the first bridal show that I have actually done in about .... 8 years. I had a friend of mine come down from Nashville, who is my main second shooter to help me out because he is much more of a "talker" than I am. I'm more introverted and quiet, so the whole atmosphere of the trade show is somewhat daunting to me to do alone.

My idea was to simply try to tie into the emotions and explain why we think having a video is important. Certainly no high pressure or anything like that, but just honest conversations. My goal going in was to get at least 1 booking and preferably 2 or 3. I think with a solid 12 leads we'll be able to do that.

It was interesting to interact with everyone and it was a good time overall. It was a 4.5 hour show and by then end I was pretty exhausted. This is the first year where I have felt like I have had material that was worth actually showing and was proud of it.

The cinema posters were absolutely huge in getting people to stop by and say, "We have never seen anything like that." We got more compliments on those than the actual videos. But it opened the door for conversations which is what is most important.

I've also studied a lot and came to realize that "not every bride is my bride." Previously I felt like I had to do whatever to book the job. But now I realize the value of my work and figure I must be doing something right since my clients and all the family and friends go bonkers when they post the reels on Facebook. LOL So, I realize not every bride is going to choose me, and I'm ok with losing them. I know that there are brides out there who value quality work and who want a video and are willing to pay for it. Those are who I want.

Wow, this took a detour, but fun discussion.

[Chris Harding]

Hi Roger

I think I have just one groom who asked a few technical questions once but, yes, brides themselves have never asked me "What cameras are you using" .. I used to team up with a photog who lead his interview with the bride by hauling out his Canon 50D and explained how it worked and how good it was! He didn't survive long!! It's all about visual impact and end result. Brides are not tech heads like us!

That's an eye catching display Kyle ...that would work well to attract brides to your stand for sure. It's said that you have a mere 30 seconds to get someone interested in your product or service so a stunning display would do the trick! I wonder if anyone actually takes cameras and sets them up in a stand display? Doubt whether that would attract a bride though it may treak some interest in grooms who are only at a show cos that have to be there!!

[Dave Blackhurst]

From a purely technical standpoint (to return to the original post), the difference in the two formats is much less consequential to image quality than 720p vs. 1080p. Since the number of vertical pixels is the same, the horizontal difference is not too likely to jump out at you...

IMO, 720 was a way to sell sub par panels at cheap prices while ramping up to "full" HD in the consumer display space. The "average consumer" couldn't see the difference if it wasn't pointed out (but I'd argue they can't "unsee" it once shown how to spot the difference).

Of course when the quality of the source material is lower resolution anyway, arguably the increased display resolution is immaterial... and in my mind this is the one reason to shoot at higher resolution, so by the time you crop and edit and all, it looks good whatever you display the final product on.

In the end, you still need spiffy "marketing" like those posters and a sharp looking booth to catch their attention!

[Jon Robertson]

I'm currently debating whether to go for a Sony AX100 or CX900 to go alongside the X70 I'm interested in to cover a 4k upgrade. The only real advantage I see to 4k at the moment for me is the ability to crop in on shots and still maintain an HD picture. I think a little over 10% of my customers opted for a blu ray disc last year.

I have a lot of friends who enjoy a good film that are still happy watching on DVD and there are others who don't see enough of a difference in HD to upgrade. I see the prices of 4k TVs has dropped but mainly in certain screen size ranges. Personally I don't see the point in going 4k unless you are watching on a properly big screen or a projector. If someone buys a 4k 50" TV to replace an HD 50" TV and sits the same distance away from it, then the benefits are going to be minimal.....unless you move your seat closer to the TV :)

[Roger Gunkel]

I'm in total agreement with you Jon, the average UK tv size not being big enough to see a great difference at domestic viewing distances.

I think that there is a difference in the US though as tv sizes tend to be much larger, as do houses and viewing distance. I think that is why there are often big differences in the perception of the impact of 4k viewing on opposite sides of the pond.

Roger

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Jon Robertson

The only real advantage I see to 4k at the moment for me is the ability to crop in on shots and still maintain an HD picture.

That is by far the biggest advantage 4K gives me, especially as a unmanned camera it gives you so many options that where impossible before. I would definitely invest in a ax100 instead of a ax900, the 4K of my ax100 has given me much more versatility in post plus I can get very nice looking prints for my dvd's and for my website.

[Kyle Root]

With the introduction of the new Sony AX33 4K camcorder for $999, that is really nice.

Also, Panasonic is in there with the WX970 for about the same.

I'm kind of surprised that Canon has no consumer model 4K camera.

I think going forward, for me, I'm not going to buy anything that doesn't shoot 4K simply because there are certainly advantages to having more resolution, the main on being cropping in on 1080p timelines.

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Kyle Root

I'm kind of surprised that Canon has no consumer model 4K camera.

Canon really need to get their fingers out. I understand they place less value on dslr video, even though other companies are doing well in this area, but the C100 Mark II lack of 4k is annoying. I'd love to add that to my camera gear but it's hard to justify the cost when you're taking a step back in resolution. I'm looking for some 4k handycams this year, so I'm glad there's going to be a choice soon in that area.