While playing about with camera settings and doing some research I stumbled across this video, may be of some use to some of you, I'm sure all the 'pro' photographers on here will find plenty in it to argue with so something for everyone really

LINK

I just find it easier to video everything with a DSLR which takes all the aggro out of it. Make sure everything thing is framed correctly and then I'm good to go. Videos are much better anyway as it's real as apposed to a sterile picture. Each to their own though.

In reply to Post #2
That's great if you're happy with your images.
However it's worth considering that 1080p video is only 2.1 mega pixels.

In reply to Post #3
These days I hardly take any pics (even whenI do fluke one), apart from maybe one for a insta story - usually just for the lake owners catch reports if they want it. Re 2.1 mpxl pics - good enough unless you are trying to blow them up massively, fine for websites, even for print.....

In reply to Post #4
There are bigger downsides to using video for stills than the mega pickle count imo.

Decent vid from what I saw

In reply to Post #1
Actually never thought of light direction so carried on and watched the full video, thanks.
See if it makes any difference on my next takes.

I just use my phone on HD video mode on a tripod, its a s20 ultra and the stills I have taken from the videos are ok for me.
I did consider buying a fancy pants camera at one time but I am never going to blow the pics up where I would notice a difference.

Plus its waterproof and less to carry.

In reply to Post #3
I'm extremely happy with the videos I get from my camera, it takes beautiful images = movie like quality.

My camera will do 4k, not that I've got a Tee Vee to watch 4k, even if I did have one, I prefer 1080 as it's warmer to look at, 4k just seems cold and kinda dead to me.


For certain situations a still rules, I'm thinking of captures of historical moments like the girl running away from a burning village way back in the Vietnam war, for fishing? Nah, I think - only my personal opinion mind - video is so much better as it captures everything. A still of Dave Lane's Black Mirror would have looked good, the video however grainy that was really encapsulated the moment so much better than a still ever would. Like I said in my previous post, to each their own 😉

I don't post up anything in regards to any social media sites....not even got any accounts other than this one. The vids I take are for my own personal reminder or a mate at work who might ask to see what I've had, nothing more.

The link that Chuffy put up is great 👍 very helpful.

In reply to Post #7
There's lots that still apply to your method in that vid tho.
Videos are great, and if you aren't fussed with stills then crack on. Taking video with the intention of getting stills from it is lazy and will give poor results. That video and probably this thread aren't aimed at those who are happy with the quality that method gives imo

I've got a mate who does it with a full frame canon dslr, I just don't get it, not least because it shoots in a crop mode for video and creates loads of weird affects from any motion.
Newer kit is better but most/all cameras can't read out the whole sensor at once, so video or electronic shutter pics leave weird artifacts

In reply to Post #8
Deffo duggs 👍

Any advice on framing etc is always welcome irrespective of video or stills.

I've never taken a still from video for fishing, I have done it for astro work with good results. Artifacts, can't remember. Canon cameras and video isn't that manufactures strongest point. Possibly a mix of sensor/software issues maybe? Sony A7s series, different gravy. Awesome for video.

There was a series of articles in Carpworld about 10 years on how to improve your angling photography. It went into lots of detail and seemed to cover everything (too much for my skills!).

I have thrown all my old magazines away but I am sure that someone on here will have them and could put a few scans in Dropbox if people are interested.

With modern sensors, there is no reason why anyone should be getting artifacts unless shot under fluorescent lighting and shot electronically i.e. not using the mechanical shutter. Yes, some of the cheaper LED lighting setups can also be a problem if out of frequency. Always wise to check first with a couple of test shots.

Always look for a shaded spot and avoid full sun as this tend to give unwanted shadows. Unless you're taking a full studio lighting kit and softbox full sun is just going to ruin a good shot.

I presume most here would be using their images on social media so the output is key more so. Long edge 2048 will improve quality no-end on Facebook. And make sure its output as a PNG to max resolution in SRGB.

Framing, if you have a high megapixel camera you will always be able to crop whilst maintaining details providing focus is on point and your depth of frame has had some thought. But nowadays even with a standard 24mp camera, software such as topaz labs will always help, so shooting wide and cropping in post should be able to produce some great shots. Topaz labs BTW are doing free trials at present.

In reply to Post #11
What's that Topaz Alpha, a Windowz prog?

I'm using Capture One for stills/tethering and DaVinci Resolve for video. Was using Final Cut, seeing as DaVinci is freemans, why not?

Alpha-males post


In reply to Post #12
Topaz is a Windows and Mac programme. They are really very good. You can have the software suite or run it as a Photoshop plugin. Both Enhance software packages for stills and video really are the best I have used for enlarging and enhancing/sharpening. BTW I don't do much video, but I also use DaVinci the free programme and it does a superb job for a freebie.

Topaz Labs

In reply to Post #14
Thanks Cam