Different between Cinematography and videographer
- Thread starter tianzhong
- Start date
xwenlovesfilms
New Member
Hello!
Cinematography and Videography is as different as apples and oranges.
Cinematography is an art form in which camera angles, lighting, types of camera, lenses and etc are taken into consideration. There is a storytelling element in Cinematography and requires a thorough creative process. Just think about it as the Cinematographer is the person who tells a beautiful visual story. Cinematographer develops their skills over time and experience.
Videography is capturing footages with the camera without any creativity. Think wedding videos and home videos. Just capturing moments as they are. Anyone can be a videographer - all you need is a video camera or even your iPhone to shoot videos.
Hope this helps!
Cinematography and Videography is as different as apples and oranges.
Cinematography is an art form in which camera angles, lighting, types of camera, lenses and etc are taken into consideration. There is a storytelling element in Cinematography and requires a thorough creative process. Just think about it as the Cinematographer is the person who tells a beautiful visual story. Cinematographer develops their skills over time and experience.
Videography is capturing footages with the camera without any creativity. Think wedding videos and home videos. Just capturing moments as they are. Anyone can be a videographer - all you need is a video camera or even your iPhone to shoot videos.
Hope this helps!
Bamboopictures
Senior Member
This thread sounds familiar... If you have a piece of work screened in a cinema, you're cinematographer!
The terms/jargons are likely to change over the years. In my opinion, videography is a newly introduced term, it's not like the word photography, which has existed way before. (correct me if my facts are wrong).
However, to say that videography does not require any form of creativity is kinda harsh. Reknowned videographers like Jason Magbanua (i know his name has been mentioned to death already) is changing this, and still referring himself as a wedding videographer but at the same time producing lip smacking works.
And then there's Director of Photography, Cameraman.....
However, to say that videography does not require any form of creativity is kinda harsh. Reknowned videographers like Jason Magbanua (i know his name has been mentioned to death already) is changing this, and still referring himself as a wedding videographer but at the same time producing lip smacking works.
And then there's Director of Photography, Cameraman.....
If you consider 1970s a starting year for the term 'Videography' to come about, then it's probably pretty new compared to the film days. 
Since the Betamax and VHS cameras, the term for 'videographers' have been used quite extensively, but back then, such video works are restricted to television stations. Only from the 1980s onwards that it's kinda reached the hands of end consumers.
Ampex VR-3000 video recording camera.
Picture source from:
http://tofuttibreak.tumblr.com/post/94223371/waxandmilk-vr-3000-portable-quadruplex-vtr-by
Since the Betamax and VHS cameras, the term for 'videographers' have been used quite extensively, but back then, such video works are restricted to television stations. Only from the 1980s onwards that it's kinda reached the hands of end consumers.
Ampex VR-3000 video recording camera.
Picture source from:
http://tofuttibreak.tumblr.com/post/94223371/waxandmilk-vr-3000-portable-quadruplex-vtr-by
Last edited:
it's a profession where there are no regulating bodies to recognise that you're a pro practicing in the particular field, unlike doctors, architects, lawyers, accountants, etc...
These mentioned professions like doctors need to go to a medical school, get certified & licensed to practice...whereas anyone can go into the field of film & video.
Unless of course you're going into the field beyond the art of film & video acquisition like light/optics, acoustics/sound, imaging, compression technology, and broadcast engineering.
These mentioned professions like doctors need to go to a medical school, get certified & licensed to practice...whereas anyone can go into the field of film & video.
Unless of course you're going into the field beyond the art of film & video acquisition like light/optics, acoustics/sound, imaging, compression technology, and broadcast engineering.
Last edited:
jasonjoseph
New Member
Its all marketing...but dun call Roger Deakins a videographer heh
giantcanopy
Senior Member
He is a member of the British Society of Cinematographers, so he is already tagged
jasonjoseph
New Member
Locally film roles are all mixed up anyway
We dun subscribe to the hollywood norms of production, i don't think its a bad thing its just different. But one key difference is in hollywood alot of "Cinematographers" do not operate the camera. I know some local DPs do this too, but very rare, budget constraints are to blame i think
I would like to think a cinematographer would work more closely with the director hand in hand to tell the story of the film in images, not just a technical specialist.
We dun subscribe to the hollywood norms of production, i don't think its a bad thing its just different. But one key difference is in hollywood alot of "Cinematographers" do not operate the camera. I know some local DPs do this too, but very rare, budget constraints are to blame i think
I would like to think a cinematographer would work more closely with the director hand in hand to tell the story of the film in images, not just a technical specialist.
Last edited:
Let me add my own take on this, so it's just my personal opinion:
Cinematographer, if there's such a term, is typically the director of photography who has shot a movie screened in the cinema. To me, that's the "real" cinematography. Such a person is typically a member of ASC or BSC, HKSC, etc. Of cos, we have some people trying to market themselves as cinematographers such as those doing wedding "cinema". I don't blame them. It's part of the marketing game.
Videographer comes about as a short form to address people who shoot mainly events and weddings.
Otherwise, in TV or corporate work, the one operating the camera is typically known just as the cameraman and if you are the really experienced guy who can do good lighting, lead a team of camera crew, operate very good camera work, I will call you a director of photography. Philip Bloom is one.
My 2 cts.
Cinematographer, if there's such a term, is typically the director of photography who has shot a movie screened in the cinema. To me, that's the "real" cinematography. Such a person is typically a member of ASC or BSC, HKSC, etc. Of cos, we have some people trying to market themselves as cinematographers such as those doing wedding "cinema". I don't blame them. It's part of the marketing game.
Videographer comes about as a short form to address people who shoot mainly events and weddings.
Otherwise, in TV or corporate work, the one operating the camera is typically known just as the cameraman and if you are the really experienced guy who can do good lighting, lead a team of camera crew, operate very good camera work, I will call you a director of photography. Philip Bloom is one.
My 2 cts.
hiderocketdive
New Member
To be exact, cinematographer is a person who work in a particular profession; Director of Photography is a position in a film production. Cinematographers can and do work in a variety of genres and visual forms besides doing narrative films meant for theatrical presentation. As long as you have the ability to create and capture moving images for the purpose of realizing a specific goal, either creatively and/or technically, you are a cinematographer. And strictly speaking, one doesn't have to belong to any cinematographer associations to be considered a cinematographer. Janus Kaminski, having quit ASC in 2006 and don't belong to any other associations now, is still considered a cinematographer, and a very very talented one!
IMHO, videographer is a rather odd term. It's too sweeping to say that a videographer has less creativity or that they work only in some specific markets. To draw a clear distinction between videographer and cinematographer is tough. Simply because the skill-set of the former overlaps that of the latter. I feel there should be no qualifications associated to these terms: ie. a cinematographer does not necessarily mean he is better or has more prestige than a videographer.
And for the record, Roger A. Deakins does his own camera operating, despite being a Hollywood DP!
IMHO, videographer is a rather odd term. It's too sweeping to say that a videographer has less creativity or that they work only in some specific markets. To draw a clear distinction between videographer and cinematographer is tough. Simply because the skill-set of the former overlaps that of the latter. I feel there should be no qualifications associated to these terms: ie. a cinematographer does not necessarily mean he is better or has more prestige than a videographer.
And for the record, Roger A. Deakins does his own camera operating, despite being a Hollywood DP!
jasonjoseph
New Member
it was a joke duh...
someone should form a Singapore Cinematographers Society, but not me hehe...
anyway what's in a name, proof is in the pudding...
someone should form a Singapore Cinematographers Society, but not me hehe...
anyway what's in a name, proof is in the pudding...
Last edited:
