Consumer vs Professional cameras

[Bill Hunt]

Going back up to Chuck's comment on "prices too good to be true... " two other tactics are to offer the camera at a great price, and THEN point out that everything (normally in the box) is EXTRA, and these "extras" usually push the total price to above what a reputable seller, like B&H has. The other is to do a "hard sell" of accessories. Usually, these are monsterously inflated items, that one could pick up for 1/10 the price elsewhere. If the consumer declines these "kits," then the product is instantly "Out of Stock," and will never be in stock. Also, one has to be aware of "grey-market gear," without a warranty in one's geographic location.

Go with the real resellers, establish a relationship with them, and support them. In the end, you will also likely get a better price, for what you want and need. I've used B&H and Calumet (mostly for my still equipment), and have never had anything but great service at fair prices.

Hunt

PS Jack left off one additional "advantage" to pro/prosumer rigs - you can "trick" 'em up with all sorts of neat-looking stuff, and make the client think that you just arrived from Hollywood! Actually, some clients are really into how the camera "looks," and will pay more for a guy/gal with one that "looks" like the big-boys' rigs.

[John 'twosheds' McDonald]

Jack left off one additional "advantage" to pro/prosumer rigs - you can "trick" 'em up with all sorts of neat-looking stuff, and make the client think that you just arrived from Hollywood! Actually, some clients are really into how the camera "looks," and will pay more for a guy/gal with one that "looks" like the big-boys' rigs.

Spot on! When I used to do wedding photography I always used roll film camera, a Hasselblad, and a tripod. No hand held shots unless they were 'unposed'. Reason? A quality 35mm would have been adequate but pretty well everyone has one of those. With a roll film camera one was obviously 'a professional'. It was all in the image (pun intended ).

[Bill Hunt]

John,

I am with you on that. Going back some years, I was doing a brochure for a commercial water treatment plant. Their pump room was beautifully lit, and all pumps and piped were colorfully painted. I set up the 4x5 and did a time exposure with corrective filters for the lighting. The art director asked what I was doing, as he had told the end client that I had a lot of equipment. I did - about 1400 lbs. in my Landcruiser. He wanted a production. We spent about three hours setting up all of the strobes and test fired them. I changed the sync on the shutter, so that the trigger would come BEFORE the shutter opened for the time exposure. I did another Polaroid (after I hid the first one), and handed it to him. "Oh, this is SO-O-O much better, than what you did the first time," he stated, rushing off to show the Polaroid to the client. "Approved," he yelled, when he returned. Little did he know that the shot was exactly the same, as the first one he'd seen. The only difference was that about 9600 WS of strobe power went off BEFORE that exposure! In another hour, we had the equimpent broken down and moved to the next shot - which did require strobe, BTW. About 4 hours wasted, though billable.

Yeah, give me big fluid head, a large compendium with rails all over the place, some sort of focus-pulling knob and a box of "goodies," and the client will be happy, even if you're shooting a Canon ZR-70 from inside a black cardboard box!

No accounting for client perceptions,

Hunt

[Ken Jarstad]

Sorry Bill, but this could devolve into quite a philosophical discussion. I could never behave that way.

[jackfalbey]

Most clients really only want 2 things: 1) a great product and 2) a good sense of value for their money.

With the state of technology today, a skilled photographer/videographer can give them a decent product with an HDV handycam or 10 megapixel point & shoot. The skill level of the professional isn't visible on the surface, and the client may not be able to recognize the skill level in the finished product (as in Hunt's experience above! ). Their sense of value comes from watching us set up lots of very complicated-looking gear and making a big show of it; "If his camera has that much stuff attached to it, he must know what he's doing."

As long as we are delivering a great product and giving them a good value for their money, the showmanship is often just to reassure them that they made the right choice in hiring us.

[Ken Jarstad]

I anyone else willing to defend this behavior? To me it really exposes the fallen nature of mankind.

[John 'twosheds' McDonald]

I anyone else willing to defend this behavior? To me it really exposes the fallen nature of mankind.

Sadly, Ken, it is based on the real preconceptions of the client and, for me, real world experience. As Jack says, any video/still camera will do the job in competent hands but when the client is paying (say) 1k or more they have an expectation that needs to be met. Turning up with 'consumer gear' gives the client the immediate impression that they have been conned and 'the boy next door' or 'uncle Jack' or whoever could have provided the service for a tenth of the price or even free.

[Ken Jarstad]

OK, thanks for that. I guess I better not press this much further.

Years ago someone told me to sell a steak I had to sell the "sizzle". Problem is, too often I get lots of sizzle and a poor steak.

Now, I wouldn't even dream of any of my enthusiast companions here doing a middling job for someone, but if the game is showmanship, how soon does a successful video shop get to hiring noobs at minimum wage to service all the high roller video events? Lots of impressive equipment and little expertise because the business owner has too much business to shoot by himself.

Just wondering

BTW, n9jcr is likely Ham call letters, right?

[Bob]

It's a reasonable expectation that if you hire a professional and pay a professional rate, you will get a professional. If the professional shows up to do the job and doesn't look or act the part or have appropriate professional level equipment, the presumption is that you didn't get a professional. It's not just showmanship. You already sold the sizzle, you're delivering the steak. The client won't be happy if you show up with hamburger.

Perhaps not a great analogy, but how would you feel if you paid a professional pest control company a substantial fee to come out to treat an insect infestation and the worker showed up with the same consumer grade can of bug spray and insect traps that you buy at your local supermarket. Would you feel cheated? Would you recommend that company to a friend?

As for hiring noobs at minimum wage to service the events, that's been happening for a long time. Some companies get away with it, others end up in litigation.

[jackfalbey]

Maybe "showmanship" was a poor choice of words...

As Bob, Twosheds, and Hunt stated (much better than I) you have to look the part as well as having the skill to deliver a professional-quality product. Image and substance go hand-in-hand in our business; you won't get very far relying on one without the other. The image reassures the client that they hired an expert, and the substance reassures them that their money was well-spent.

All the expensive-looking equipment in the world won't satisfy a bride whose $5000 wedding video looks like it was shot by a 6-year-old with a Flip Mino, but if you don't have the fancy gear in the first place, she'll probably hire the other guy who does.

[Ken Jarstad]

Excellent discussion! For those interested in making a good impression on a meager budget the HV20 forum has several DIY topics with modifications to the Canon HV series to make them look more, ehhh..... professional - looking.

http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?t=21526
http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?t=4431
http://www.hv20.com/showthread.php?t=21670

Does this have the desired effect?

wow1.jpg

[Bill Hunt]

Ken,

That was my point exactly!

In a thread over on the Premiere Pro board, one poster was looking for gadgets that would "pimp" [his word, not mine] his rig up, so that clients would be impressed. What he wanted was what your image showed. He just wanted to find the cheapest matte-box, rails, focus-puller, etc., as he was hesitant to pay US$3000 over the price of his camera for the "glitter." I think that someone suggested that he get a sheet of foamcore and start cutting...

Thanks for that photo,

Hunt

[Ken Jarstad]

OK, that photo is cut down from one on HV20 forum. Don't know if they care for that or not.

In my search on the HV20 forum I found plenty of people who had the same "image" problem but, interestingly enough, I found someone who said feature film makers were buying dozens of the HF versions of our HV cams and planting them in all sorts crazy places for use during explosions, for instance. The cams that survive are used for multi-angle cut-ins of the action!

So, despite the "size matters" mentality - good enough for Hollywood should be good enough for everyone else. These little cams do perform and the bias OUGHT TO BE "Oh, you're still using old, bulky technology."

[jackfalbey]

There's no doubt that these little cams perform exceptionally well. In fact, I often use my HV20 for a third cam at weddings. I place it somewhere inconspicuous and set it to record a wide shot of the crowd. While everyone sees my 2 PD170s right up front getting the good close-ups of the B&G, no one even realizes that the little HV is there recording Mom & Dad's tear-soaked cheeks. With a little extra saturation, it cuts beautifully with the Sony footage. I think using compact HD cams as b-roll or in tight spaces is great on a pro shoot, just as long as you have the big pro cams shooting a-roll.

My point is not that the little HD cams can't do the job, but that if you show up on a paying job with a cam that looks just like the one Aunt Sally carries in her purse, your client is probably going to feel like they got ripped off.

Hey, is the horse dead yet?

By the way, that is one seriously buff HV20 pic you found, Ken!

[Bob]

One other consideration. Cameras used for cinema production are significantly different from the ones used by consumer and prosumer. They don't use the same codecs and the chroma sampling is higher quality. Yes, they'll use the "cheap" cams for explosions and cut-ins which won't have significant on-screen time, but, as a general rule, you won't see the cheap cams used for principle photography or green screen sfx. Corporate, TV, and news is a different story and there the Prosumer HDV is generally good to go.

Got to love the "modders" though...