Videographer vs Filmmaker: What’s the Creative Difference?
July 29, 2025
This week, I began a new project with Northumberland Wildlife Trust, filming on a beautiful beach near Amble.
As we set up, I overheard one of the project coordinators telling a participant that they had brought in a “professional videographer.” A few months earlier, at the Berlin premiere of the Napola documentary I’ve been making, someone approached me and said, “I understand that you are the filmmaker.”
There is a subtle hierarchy attached to those labels. For many, “filmmaker” carries connotations of artistry and creative control, while “videographer” implies someone who simply records. But the reality of the videographer vs filmmaker debate is far more nuanced. Over the years, I’ve learned that the difference between a videographer and a filmmaker isn’t about equipment or even the scale of the project—it’s about intent, context, and how a story is told.
From Film to Video to Digital
Historically, the difference between “film” and “video” wasn’t just about titles but the medium itself. Filmmakers literally shot on film stock, using motion picture cameras that captured light onto celluloid. These cameras, whether 16mm or 35mm, demanded an involved workflow of processing and editing, which in turn shaped a certain level of craft, crew size, and budget.
By contrast, “video” emerged with analogue video cameras in the 1960s and 70s, bringing lighter, more affordable equipment to television newsrooms and eventually to home users. Video lacked the visual depth and dynamic range of film, and for decades the two worlds remained distinct: one seen as cinematic and artistic, the other as functional and fast.
But in the digital era, those boundaries have dissolved. Today, both filmmakers and videographers typically record on the same digital cinema cameras or mirrorless systems, often shooting in formats that rival or exceed what was once only possible on film. I saw this transformation first-hand. I started out using a Sony Z5 video camera, which produced solid, functional footage suited for events and documentation.
In 2011, I moved to the Panasonic AF101 and GH2, and suddenly there was a clear visual shift: shallow depth of field, richer colour, and a cinematic quality that felt worlds apart from traditional “video.” That change fundamentally altered how I approached my work and blurred the old technical distinction in the videographer vs filmmaker debate.
I frequently move between projects using my Panasonic GH6, Osmo Pocket 3, and my iPhone 15 Pro. And because I am a hoarder of excellent cameras I always have my faithful 4 GH4’s for C-roll and timelapse. They are all tools that deliver professional-quality footage in the right hands. The portability of my kit allows me to work intuitively and responsively knowing the footage can sit comfortably alongside that from larger, more traditional cameras that many filmmaker men stroke beards over. As technology continues to miniaturise and improve, the practical difference between what a “videographer” or “filmmaker” uses is almost nonexistent. I have been experimenting with a Beastgrip DOFAdapter MK3 and with the rumours about the camera capabilities of the iPhone 17 I hope to have a more minimal cinema camera setup by 2026.
What truly matters now is how the story is told, not the price of the camera.
Videographer vs Filmmaker: What’s the Debate?
Across the web, definitions vary, but certain themes keep surfacing. Videographer vs filmmaker discussions often describe videographers as those who record live events such as workshops, conferences, community projects, or most commonly weddings. They tend to work as one-person crews or in small teams, handling camera, basic lighting, and sound. Post-production is usually fast and functional, aimed at delivering clear documentation rather than building a layered narrative.
Filmmakers, meanwhile, are associated with storytelling. Their work often involves a creative vision shaped through storyboarding or scripting, carefully planned lighting, and deliberate direction. For me, filmmaking is not defined by scale or geography; it’s defined by the intent to tell a story with care, whether it’s a global feature or a small community project.
Every project I do involves a high level of strategic planning, and this is one of my favourite parts of pre-production. I work closely with the commissioners of each project, ensuring they are actively involved in how the story is told. This collaboration allows me to bring my knowledge and experience to the table, offering guidance on the best ways to shape the narrative while making sure their vision is fully realised.
In short: one creates; the other records. But for most of us working in the industry, the truth is that we do both and shift seamlessly between documenting and shaping, depending on the story in front of us. This is why I think the videographer vs filmmaker conversation is less about dividing lines and more about the range of skills that a single professional can bring to a project.
How I Move Between Videographer vs Filmmaker
On many projects, I’ve been called a videographer: documenting academic research, community events, or wildlife fieldwork where the goal was to capture what was happening with minimal intrusion. But on other films like the Napola documentary or my artist films for Northern Print’s Glossary I was firmly in filmmaker territory, storyboarding sequences, shaping interviews, and crafting a strong narrative arc in the edit.
The truth is, I bring a filmmaker’s approach to every project, even those that might be labelled “videography.” Storytelling should lie at the heart of all artistic practice, whether you’re recording a school workshop or shooting a cinematic documentary. And while I often work alone, I collaborate with second camera operators, sound recordists, and assistants whenever a project calls for it.
When Might You Use Each Title in The Videographer vs Filmmaker Debate?
If you’re commissioning a project, you might hear both terms used. Neither is wrong. It’s simply about context.
You might use “videographer” when the job involves documenting something as it happens, like a community event, a wildlife project, or a research workshop. In these cases, speed of delivery is often more important than complex story construction, and a small, agile crew can be the best fit.
By contrast, “filmmaker” is often used when there’s a narrative arc or creative vision, like a short documentary, a branded story, or a larger cultural project. Here, pre-production planning might include storyboarding, lighting, direction, and a more deliberate emphasis on shaping mood and meaning.
But in reality, these worlds are not separate. Most commissioned films require elements of both. The important thing is finding someone who can move between these modes and understand that whether they call themselves a videographer or filmmaker, the story comes first.
If you’d like to watch more of my work exploring community stories, creative resilience, and diverse subjects across arts, heritage, and the environment, you can explore all my films here: