Can I ask videography related questions on Photography Stack Exchange?
I think the important thing here isn't the equipment but the intention.
For example, a question about 24fps vs. 30fps strikes me as off-topic. A similar example would be audio. Both of these are irrelevant to still photography, regardless of what's behind the lens.
On the other hand, lighting questions have a broad overlap, as do filtering, or questions about exposure and composition generally.
I think if the only relation to still photography is that it's using a DSLR body more typically used for stills, that's probably _not quite enough to make it on topic. I think the best rule of thumb will always be:
Can I use this information in still photography?
Lighting, yes; composition, usually; audio, no; lenses, yes... It seems to work quite well to me.
I would suggest not.
There is another SE site for Audio-Video production (currently in beta) that I would suggest is better suited for videography questions.
Edit: I Also agree with Edd's answer, in that some level of video related questions is acceptable. Particularly those about shooting video with cameras aimed primarily at stills shots.
I think the focus should remain as a stills photography Q&A site, but inevitably there will be people who want to purchase a camera for both, or who consider themselves primarily a stills photographer but who wants to record some video whilst on holiday, for example.
I think what I'm suggesting is that we discourage too many serious, detailed questions specifically about video, but that if a question mentions video we don't automatically close it, and have a
[videography] tag for such occasions. Example questions I'm thinking of are things like
I'm primarily a stills photographer, shooting Subject X and Subject Y, but I'm starting to get intrigued by video. I currently only have long-ish lenses (100+mm), but was thinking about getting the 17-40mm f/4L for taking landscapes on my holiday to the Lake District in the autumn. Would this also be suitable for video, or would I be better saving for the 24-70 f/2.8L or 24-105 f/4L IS as a compromise?
I don't think we should shun video outright, as, although it doesn't interest me at the moment, there clearly is interest with things such as TWiP featuring it increasingly heavily.
"Photography is the process, activity and art of creating still or moving pictures by recording radiation on a radiation-sensitive medium, such as a photographic film, or an electronic sensor."
Wikipedia seems to think that it doesn't matter if the image is moving or still, it's photography. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photography)
The word photography is based on the Greek φῶς (photos) "light" and γραφή (graphé) "representation by means of lines" or "drawing", together meaning "drawing with light".
Ultimately a "photograph" is a story. As the old adage, "a picture is worth a thousand words," describes, the potential to relate a message to a viewer through imagery is profound. A camera IS a portable dark room. "Photography," by definition, is the recording of light. Video is only a series of sequential photographs displayed at a rate that the human brain can perceive fluid change; a collection of photographs.
The still undefined realm of multimedia is an amalgamation of video, audio and still photography. Its story telling potential is immense, and truly allows the photographer (especially editorial photogs) to present MORE of the story than the photograph alone beckons us to understand.
By essence of technology, multimedia, though its roots lie in the world of still, is a video process. I don't think video related questions should be bared from discussion. There is much to be gained in this realm. Unless a third site JUST for multimedia is to be created, it seems to me a robbery of knowledge to partition a separate site. There is SO MUCH growth for the still image in video.
Check out Brian Storm's project "1976" here. In the digital age, all is fair game! It is limited thinking to hold out against videography...in regards to photography anyway.
Photography and Video are similar in many ways but also critically different in many others. I liken the difference to mixing live audio versus doing recording. While video is focused on getting a good enough shot all the time so that the action can tell the story, a photograph has only a moment and the photographer has to seek out that moment and capture it perfectly.
Since in concept they are different things, questions directly related to videography wouldn't be on topic, however topics that have crossover interest would be. I would still probably edit out any direct reference to video to keep it on topic though. For example, I think that we don't want a question like "How do I set up lighting for a video shoot?" since this would lead to confusion about if video is on topic or not. I would suggest that "How do I set up lighting for a scene that I'll be shooting from multiple angles?" is a better phrasing as it can be applicable to both without confusing people about the intent of the site.
It is also worth noting that Video Production routinely answers video related questions and could handle any video specific questions.
I would say that the answer has to be yes, for anything which could be photography-related and which does not already have another, better, more natural home.
Otherwise you end up with the ridiculous situation that questions like How to put my images onto my Samsung 3D TV (a question to which I would actually like an answer myself) cannot be asked on either Photo or Video.
As to the splitting analogies, I'd say it's much more like splitting programming to the CLI as opposed to programming to a GUI.
I would suggest yes, as there is such a strong overlap, especially with regards lighting, lens choice etc. Lets not fragment Stack Exchange into many overlapping sites - just like there's no point having Stack Exchanges for different programming languages, when Stack Overflow does such a great job.
One place to go to.