Posted by PTravel on 12/25/06 05:13

"Brian Huether" <bhuetherNO@comcastSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:l-udnRD__scGhBLYnZ2dnUVZ_uyknZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> "Richard Crowley" <rcrowley@xpr7t.net> wrote in message
> news:12ou4u2m1iups8e@corp.supernews.com...
>> "Brian Huether" wrote ...
>>>I am looking for a digital video camera that I can use to make
>>>instructional
>>> guitar DVDs. I am wondering if there are any for less than $1000 that
>>> can be
>>> used to achieve very good results for this purpose.
>>>
>>> Also, I am brand new to video production. I am a guitarist with decent
>>> sound
>>> enginering skills, but clueless about video. Basically, I am trying to
>>> create instructional DVDs that are of suitable enough quality to sell
>>> (and
>>> guitarists aren't too picky about video quality - they mainly want good
>>> lessons!), but I don't have thousands to spend.
>>>
>>> If someone can describe the basic process (camera placement and
>>> lighting)
>>> and describe a realistic budget I would be very grateful! Or if you can
>>> point me to a tutorial online that would be great too.
>>
>> I think the first thing to consider is whether you can
>> reaslistically do this with a single camera? Assuming
>> that you want your video to look reasonably professional
>> and not like home movies.
>>
>> Normally, one would do this with 2 or even 3 cameras,
>> where one is a wide shot, including your head/face so
>> you can address the viewer. And then the other camera(s)
>> available to "insert" close-up details of what you are doing
>> with your hands (presumably the prime content of your
>> instructional videos).
>>
>> You COULD shoot this "film-style" with one camera where
>> you shot all the close-up inserts separately and then edited
>> them together. But I would think that it would be somewhat
>> problematic (if not outfight difficult) to match the action
>> between the "master" shot and the close-up inserts. Do you
>> have any friends with decent camcorders? If you shot two
>> cameras concurrently, you could "switch" between them in
>> editing, etc.
>>
>> Of course, lighting and sound (for both the guitar and for
>> your voice) are both crucial for professinonal results. And
>> these are not trivial in cases where you need tight shots
>> of what your hands are doing without mics in the way,
>> and without distracting shadows, etc.
>
> What I was thinking of doing was having one camera that always is
> capturing a somewhat wide angle of me and then I could zoom in digitally
> after the fact to doclose up hand shots. But I don't plan on doing a lot
> of closeups. I was planning on having the camera be showing my waist up
> for the majority of time which would show enough detail in the
> hands/fretboard I think. But that could just be my naiveity...

"Zooming in digitally" is something that is only done on badly-writtenl
television shows -- you'll not be able to get anything usuable if you try to
do this.

I think Richard was being kind in his answer to you. I'm an advanced
amateur, and I've got a fair amount of prosumer and pro- gear. However, my
videos don't look professional (though I've been trying for years). There
is far more than mere equipment to producing pro-quality work. You can give
a pro crappy equipment and he'll turn out a respectable, professional video.
However, even if you give an amateur pro gear, the result will still look
amateurish. As a guitarist, you can appreciate the role that musicianship
plays in a performance -- I'm sure you could pick up a cheapie guitar and
sound impressive. Video is no different -- it requires skill and talent.

If you want to turn out videos that you can sell commercially, you're going
to need to make two investments: one in equipment, so that you can properly
light, stage and capture your performance, but the other is in acquiring the
necessary skillset and techniques to exploit whatever gear you have.

>
> thanks,
>
> brian
>

[Back to original message]