Quote:
Originally Posted by candyflip
Paul also said somewhere above that "no one has ever bought content because it's 4K" or something to that effect. While I know that most who shoot in these higher resolutions aren't delivering at the same resolution, customers absolutely have and do buy content that's specifically 4K. While they really won't see huge differences, the public has been conditioned, already own the displays and are starving for 4K content.
It really is only a matter of time before this is the standard for online delivery.
Paul, if you're at all interested in learning about some of the cameras available for content creators of all types....here's a good look:
And the results...based on the votes and eyes of viewers who likely know what they're looking at 
Keep in mind, the Pocket 6K is $2500 and the Arri Alexa Mini is about $30000. The only thing cheap about that camera is the cost. |
If you're going to spend that much on a camera you must know what you're doing.
Do you know what you're doing with a camera? Then there's a good excuse for elevating to 4K. But never assume 4K is going to make a bad shooter good or a bad movie good. Never assume that only good shooters can buy a 4K camera.
What's the hardest and more vital thing to acquire? The skills to shoot videos good enough for Pfizer or the buying of a 4K camera?after all you said $1300 is all it takes to get a 4K camera. Even $3,000 won't be a problem. It takes years to acquire the skills to shoot properly, therefore it's primary and the camera is secondary. Which is where I started.
So keep arguing the camera is the more important and the only reason Pfizer come to you for the $250k is you have a good camera. Because if you disagree with that you have to agree with me.