Everyone asks for Pani dvx100's
 

Im seeing more and more ads requesting videographers using DVX100's or other 24p cameras. Even people who don't know what it really means are requesting it. It seems to be replacing the old simple request for shooters with three chip cameras. I use a PD150. Does anyone have a good reply for these ads? Are there disadvantages to 24p? Applications where it's not preferable?

Thanks,
Myron

at the risk of repeating myself, i'd tell those folks that 24p effect is achievable in post-production and then get yourself some 24p filters.

That's certainly one approach, and it may work fine for you. On the other hand, if they are serious about wanting you to shoot on a DVX100 you may just be wasting your time applying for that job. Or you could rent one.

Totally putting aside the issue of cameras and frame rates, I think there's another principle here which you should consider. I've hired a lot of people in my own business, and as an employer the last thing I want is for a job applicant to tell me that he knows more about what I want than I do. This is sort of "the way of the world" unfortunately.

So for example, if I put a requirement in a job description that you need a car, then I wouldn't want you to apply and try to convince me that you could do the job without one.... that would be wasting both of our times.

The only point I'm making is that life is short, and there are always other jobs out there. You may put your time to more productive use by applying for jobs that don't require a piece of equipment you don't own....

Dear Myron,

I love the Sony PD-170 and alot of my peers who went freelance before me bought one. And I also love the shoulder mount and the interchangeable lens capability of the Canon XL1 but I bought a DVX-100A because there seemed to be more requests for this specific cam.

As far as 24p goes, my slightly educated guess is that most directors want the "look" of film but don't want to have to pay the costs associated with the medium.

See ya,

Steph

This ''24p'' thing seems to be an NTSC want much more than a PAL want. Over here where we shoot 25 fps the specification of the cameraperson is far more important than the specification of his kit.

tom.

boyd may very well be right that you should give the employer what he asks for, but sometimes in this biz, it seems like not all employers are as in the know as boyd obviously is, and sometimes they ask for what they think they need, more than what they actually need or can use (for instance, witness on these boards the number of weddings where the b&g request HD or consider a small form factor "unprofessional.")

i am of the opinion that it never hurts to offer what you can. big whup if they turn you down. you are no better or worse off than if you never requested their business at all. sometimes who you are matters more than what you offer.

You may very well be right, and you will have to make the decision as to which approach to take based on all the specifics of your situation.

Another analogy comes to mind.... at a restaurant you order green beans as a side dish. They don't have any green beans so your waiter tells you that they have broccoli instead, that it's actually better for you and you will be just as happy with it.

Some people may never have tried broccoli and will have an open mind and say, "sure I'll give it a try." But others may get really mad at the waiter. So my point is to just be careful to size up the situation before taking that risk, because the customer may decide not to come back to your restaurant the next time :-)

Meryem, I think the example about the "small form factor" on a wedding shoot reinforces my point. It's all about perception. Even if your camera is great (and broccoli *is* actually better for you), if it isn't what the client wants you can do some real damage by trying to change his mind. Next time he may go down the street to another restaurant...