Considering that I look like a teenager battling my way through puberty on an average day, dodgy facial hair has been an area I've avoided for years. There's a lot of things people don't tell you about growing a tash.

The obvious things didn't bother me. Did it itch? Not really. Did I hate the way it looked? Kind of. Did I get food stuck in it? Nope.

My top 10 memories (good and bad) from this month will be:

1. The amount of times I was told I look like a WW2 pilot.
2. Looking down and being grossed out that I could see this thing attached to me.
3. People I know genuinely laughing when they look at me.
4. Me genuinely laughing at people I've never met.
5. Having a drink, licking my top lip and then pulling a face like a baby eating a lemon because I forgot about it.
6. The mutually accepted nod between complete strangers.
7. Having an excuse to buy a cravat.
8. My girlfriend refusing to kiss me for a month.
9. Seeing how much money people are willing to pay for you to look like creepy pervert.
10. Shaving it off.

During the hairy-top-lipped-season I received an article about the evils of Movember. The article was outraged at the fact that the CEO took a £50k salary. For starters, if you run a global not for profit organisation that raised $80.7 Million (USD) in 2010 then I'm all for a little pat on the back. But Movember is so much more than that. Anyone in our industry will understand that what Adam Garone has achieved is nothing short of genius. He has turned us into walking billboards. I for one, cannot wait to join the emotional roller-coaster once again next year.

The premiere room was packed to bursting full of fellow camera geeks, ooogling over the new Canon model; running their hands over it's buttons, changing lenses and peaking through it's viewfinder. 3 cameras between 50 people - you do the math. If I were a Canon C300 I'd feel pretty heavy-handled but the C300 doesn't care. It is after-all a superstar that clearly doesn't mind being idolised; and why shouldn't it? If I were that perfect I'd enjoy all those people checking me out. (I'll never be that perfect) :(

So let's get down to the details. My first impression of the Canon C300 was its compact size and weight. It wasn't a heavy beast but in the same way felt extremely sturdy in your hands. It also looks quite sexy, (to a camera geek that is.)

Here comes the science... The C300 shoots in 444 but records in 422 full HD. It shoots in 23.98p, 24p, 25p and 30p in full HD. It also shoots interlaced if you're into that and unfortunately 60p drops the size down to 720p. It has inbuilt ND filters, which can silently change while shooting - a nice feature.

A brilliant trait of the C300 is it's ISO capabilities, once you'd navigated through the menus to find the settings. Even at 20,000 ISO the picture quality was breathtaking. Shooting in the dark you can crank that iris down to a low F stop and still get a beautifully large depth of field. And the noise that was apparent on higher ISO settings strangely seemed more like film-grain than the ugly static effect apparent on most HDSLR footage in low light. It seems even when this camera displays undesirable features it does so still beautifully.

The Canon C300's large 4k sensor size means shooting steady footage, even without an image stablisation lens is a breeze. You have the option to use additional mounts and rigs to improve image quality, but unlike shooting handheld on a HDSLR the C300's raw handheld footage is most definitely useable. Equally, the C300's stunning dynamic range provides a smooth roll-off with panning or moving shots and keeps those highlights and shadows as crisp as real life. Plus the C300's Canon Log setting/picture style allows super-flat shooting that will streamline the colouring and grading workflow.

I was also pleased to learn that a strong highlight of the C300 is its ability to shoot without any moir. Meaning that dodgy interference on suits, fabrics and eyebrows, which really shouldn't be there in the first place on HDSLR footage, doesn't pose a problem with the C300.

The one problem however with the C300 is that it only shoots 8-bit footage. There is a growing argument both online and also at the preview event today that within a year or so Canon will be producing a product that shoots 10-bit; thus making the current model obsolete. The decision to buy the C300 regardless however I would say is completely individual. A 10-bit model would cost even more than the already slightly expensive, but then again quite responsible considering it's features, estimated UK cost of around £14,000 for the C300. Can you recoup the costs before the next model is released? Is it worth waiting until the C300 drops in price? It's completely down to the individual.

You can probably see that I am a big fan of this new model from Canon, a model that moves them very nicely from the realms of low-budget but beautiful filmmaking to the mainstream television market. And who knows... it may convert one or two 5DMkii owners. Maybe even more if they're making money from their work.

It has the power, if produced well, to inspire, emote and if you're lucky, even entertain; which makes it the perfect addition to a PR story. It has never been more appropriate to use video within PR campaigns, with the launch of computer tablets and smart phones who breed a generation of consumers that crave more and more content. And with the introduction of Google Page Ranks, PR's can now give an estimated traffic and readership value to all online coverage. So why do most PR agencies get the equivalent of a slap in the face from their clients the minute film is mentioned in a brief?

Well... other than putting that extra strain on the ever-shrinking budgets, many clients don't see it as necessary. Why use video when a photographer is cheaper and easier? But we'd argue that video has 100 times the impact of an image, and to win it as part of your campaign it should be approached with PR clients in exactly the same way as photography. After all, a photo can either illustrate the story or form the core of the campaign itself and the trick is using this two-step process to your advantage and not moving too quickly.

So start with something small like an event film or filmed piece to camera - something that will illustrate the story. This won't cost a fortune, will gain your clients trust and has very little risk. Once the results start piling in, (more exposure from online seeding, estimated audience values with Google Page Ranks,) the clients will be far more likely to then take video to stage two, the core of the campaign.

For example, Reko.TV produced an online viral film for LastMinute.com which saw Louie Spence prancing around the capital trying to get someone to give him the perfect 'dirty dancing lift'. Filmed guerrilla style, the video was used as the central hook for a LastMinute.com story about discounted summer theatre tickets. There was a massive amount of risk associated with such a project, as video provided the key ingredient to ensure the campaigns success. However the results spoke for themselves. The video gathered 120,000 unique hits and attracted more online and even national print coverage than would have ever been possible with just images and a press release. Using video as the central core of the story not only attracted journalists, it gave what would have been a rather standard, tedious news story a lease of life and a news angle that the press couldn't resist.

So the moral of the story - don't just tell your client "video would be good for you", prove it! Start small with a video that simply illustrates and then move on to something bigger; something at the centre of their campaign that will inspire, emote and entertain, which really brings in the results.

To keep up with all sorts of amazing multi-media campaigns, or if you want to know more about our good selves, take a peak at our Twitter page.