Stop voting to close questions with the forbidden word

Question

I have been active on this site for a few years now, so I think I have noticed a trend.

Whenever someone asks, let's say about lighting but mention a forbidden word "Video" the question is voted for closing, because it is recommended to be asked on video SE.

So I opened an account on https://video.stackexchange.com/ that has been active for all year now, and I have a tiny reputation there (more than 850) meaning that I actually read questions and answer some of them.

The point is that on video SE, the questions are mostly technical, about software to edit, video compression algorithms, resampling... stuff like that.

There is only 1 tag with 91 answers all time.

Compare this to photo se tags. "Studio light, lighting, light modifiers..."

Even in film industry, a photography director is the person in charge of lighting and camera decisions. It is about what the image will look.

---

I obviously understand that video has other variables, mainly time.

For example this question has already some votes to be closed

Outdoor lighting setup for shooting interviews, with changing and mostly low light (sunset through evening)

And the changing conditions about light is the sunset... But it is the same as a wedding photography session, or a photo shoot for the staff of a company during the day.

A problem to be solved about how the image looks.

The right place to ask is here. even if it has the forbidden word.

I totally prefer a question about composition, about light than a question about X model of a camera.

Answer 1

I (guardedly) agree with your point here. On the question on main that inspired this meta question, I'd say it's somewhat close to the borderline between on- and off-topic for video. But as I explained in my comments to the question, I think the clear lighting diagram and good example shots help the question be a good photography example.

Even for that question, there still remains a fundamental problem (perhaps minor), that one of the good photographic solutions is to overpower the sun. In photography, that's easy with strobes. In videography, strobes aren't an option, and continuous lighting overpowering the sun isn't an option for a 1-person videography team with even lots of "prosumer" gear. Even the only answer to that question (at the time I'm writing this) states,

Eliminate the sun as a light source or over power it. I.E. remove the sun from the equation. (Your set up would work beautifully if you were shooting still photos but you are shooting video and your light source is changing "throughout it's timeline".)

The answer is entirely correct regarding duplicating the lighting directionality that the sun is throwing, and while it mentions "or overpower [the sun]", there's not really a recognition that overpowering the sun is not possible with low power LED panels. Thus, "in the context of photography" (i.e., from the vote-to-close because video wording), one of the best possible answers/solutions (strobes to overpower the sun) isn't a good answer to the question's problem (because it's about video).

So the example question isn't entirely and completely 100% topical here — it is still problematic because of its video nature. I just think that on the whole, it's a much better question than the average question that comes along ("Which camera/lens/widget should I buy", "what's this Insta/TikTok filter", etc.), and I think that in this specific case, we allow ourselves to come down on the side of keeping the question open because it's still enough about photography, with good supporting goals, diagram, and examples, to make it a well-asked and therefore worthwhile and acceptable question here.

---

In the larger picture, I support your general point. For instance, awhile back there were several questions closed because they were asking how to use primarily video-oriented cameras for photographic purposes (i.e., Gopros, drone cams, etc.). E.g.: Questions on photography using not-quite-a-camera...cameras

I think the community was getting a bit out of hand in the examples cited in that meta question, and certainly apply to your point.

Answer 2

The point is that on video SE, the questions are mostly technical, about software to edit, video compression algorithms, resampling... stuff like that.

There is only 1 tag with 91 answers all time.

Compare this to photo se tags. "Studio light, lighting, light modifiers..."

Even in film industry, a photography director is the person in charge of lighting and camera decisions. It is about what the image will look.

Regarding the point of Video-SE not having many lighting questions, tags, etc., I don't think that should enter into the calculus at all. Put another way: are video lighting setups off-topic at Video-SE? No. Those questions might get rarely asked there, but they're not off-topic there. But even if they were, our topicality and acceptance of questions is not dependent upon another Stack's topicality rules.

There have been a few cases where the response from the asker to closing a question was, "well, where (which Stack) should I ask my question?" And sometimes the answer is, maybe there's not a Stack. But regardless, it's not topical here. So similarly, if there were conceivably a question vaguely similar to Outdoor lighting setup for shooting interviews, with changing and mostly low light (sunset through evening), but not really having any applicability to photography (perhaps it explicitly excluded all photographic contexts for some reason), then even if there vanishingly few lighting questions at Video-SE, if it's not on-topic here, then it shouldn't stay. (Try as I might, I can't come up with a hypothetical question that would be an example for the reasoning. But hopefully the reasoning is clear).