You've probably heard the statement "nice and simple." Sometimes it's true, indeed, but most of the time the results and consequences from following that philosophy are not so nice, especially for those who are in the business of photography and filmmaking.
When I walk in the nature I look around me and I see lots of things that are nice, but they are not simple at all. Have you tried to draw a "simple" cloud? Have you seen the detail in bark of the tree? It's not just a flat brown surface. What about ants which are insects of such a sophisticated behavior, and yet people stomp them with their feet when these tiny workers are trying to grab bits of food. Everywhere I look in nature, there's nothing "simple," but it's still beautiful and glorious.
When a master painter draws a scenery, we are amazed by the similarity of the painting with the real-world view. Those who haven't tried to draw such a thing may think it's "nice and simple," and maybe the painter have learned their craft after watching a 10-minute video on YouTube. No, their masterpieces are based on hours upon hours of hard work.
What if a painter made a picture of a nice cube? It is nice and simple, but there's nothing extraordinary in it. Everyone can copy it and reproduce the same result with an ease. The painter will soon sink into the deep sea of copycats and will be forgotten. But if one draws a complex masterpiece, they can stay on the top of the lader for quite a long time.
It's the same with photography and video. Recently there was an article by a fellow writer about people who duplicate the work of other artists, and thus dilute the uniqueness of the primary idea, just because it was simple, albeit nice. As with the example with the painter who paints simple pictures, a photographer or a filmmaker won't go a long way if all of their work is "nice and simple." A photograph of a beautiful girl is really nice and could be a technically simple portrait, but if the whole portfolio is just nice girls on a simple blurred background, is quite easy to duplicate the same result with the same model. There has to be a unique element in the final result. If the work you do is nice and simple to be reproduced by others, and you rely on that for a business, soon there will be a multitude of other businesses that are doing the same thing. How will you compete against them? This is why most "nice and simple" photography businesses are struggling.
In order to be successful, one has to work on projects that are not only good looking, but well thought, complex, full of detail, and unique. Most copycats are sifted out just because a project is too complex. How many good painters do you know, despite the affordable paintbrushes and dyes? How many good photographers do you know, although good cameras are easily accessible today?
On every project I work on, I think of ways to make it in a different way, so that it's not easily reproducible. Of course, the idea can be copied, but the means to execute the idea can be of a very high level of complexity that would turn away the lazy folks. Sometimes just using lots of gear in a difficult-to-be-reached place could be the reason the majority won't copy it.
Turn around. Everything natural is sophisticated, complex, and it has stood the test of time. If you want to leave a memorable body of work, copy nature; make sophisticated and beautiful work.