We all want to make videos. Precisely we all want to make videos since the explosion of clips on the internet. Few years ago, with my personal experience as photographer, I decided to work not only with my Reflex (which was used just to make pictures...) but also with a video camera. When I took this decision I knew clearly how I was going to use my first semi-professional camera; I was leaving for a Polar expedition in Antarctica (since then I have taken part in five expeditions at the North Pole and South Pole ). Seeing the exceptional natural beauty of the Antarctica I decided to take photos of both the nature and animals and to offer myself as a documentary maker to the Italian television.
When I said "I want to make videos", it was already clear that I intended to produce images technically and expressively, adequate to have success in the Italian television market. I had a specific goal , and this was a great advantage.
Nowadays, with the presence of different quality cameras already included in every electronic device, everybody has a tool in hand for producing videos that , often, is used unknowingly. We are all filmmakers , but only few of us have the real skills to do it. What I'm trying to say in this first opening article that represents a manifesto that will inspire all future work, is that you can not talk about VIDEO intended as a monolithic entity, always equal to itself.
There are many types of videos connected not only to the various purposes that every filmmaker tries to achieve before pressing the REC button, but also to the many results we expect to achieve from our shooting.
I'm not talking about differences of genres: we all know that a science fiction movie is something different from a romantic comedy and, more generally, that the cinema ones s are completely different from television dramas and inquiry reports.
What I want to highlight is that the personal perspectives of each filmmaker lead to technique, content , expressive and logistic assessments that will be different from time to time and can never rise to the role of dogmatic paradigm. Nothing is absolute! Everything is (or at least it should be) functional to the final result!
For example, if I'm working for a big production company that deals with weddings or events filming (for instance music or television star weddings, sport celebrities or heirs to the throne of Royal Houses) I will face problems and situations that don't belong to the photographer/filmmaker who deals weekly with weddings of ordinary people.
If I'm the uncle of the bride and I would like to capture memories of the most beautiful day of my beloved niece , I will act differently and with completely different tools. Can you imagine your uncle assembling the rails of a cart in the aisle of the small church where you have chosen to get married? Or the BBC cameraman that shot William and Kate with his smartphone...? They are both indeed dealing with weddings.
There are many reasons why one person decides to use filming equipment (both photographic and video): from the ones of the amateur who wishes to show his friends his last journey, to the real passionate who searches for his aesthetic canon throughout every detail; the small local production house to the video–production company that works for important and national networks and from the people who publish curious movies on the web, to those who are looking for a web professional display and an income for his activities as a filmmaker.
This is why, as far as possible, in this blog I will try to respect the differences that characterize the digital image world as well as the different expectations of those who are really passionate about videos and photos shooting.
Of course, all this "video-diversity" has nothing to do with the fundamentals of photography and videography: if an image is not clear or if it wobbles, it will probably be a wrong one.
For this reason the basic principles of photos / video will be always at the center of our conversations.
One final note: the difference between "professional" and "amateur" lies only in the fact that the first earns money from his business and it does not imply any assessment on technical/expressive skills of anyone. There are always good amateurs able to impress professional photographers.