It's easy to see why many view cinematography and photography as the same art. They both use cameras and balance light, geometry and colour to create a meaninful image. It then seems logical to say that cinematography is simply "Photography but moving" and this is in essence, true. My point here though is not to say cinematography is more complex, but that it's fulfilling an almost fundamentally different purpose.
A photo has to convey everything in one fell swoop, a film has time to work with. When filming a scene for a film, individual shots do not have to look good or be meaninful. So long as the feeling drawn from a sequence of shots matches that which the writer or director intended.
I'm not a photographer, but I do occasionally like to try and make pretty things. Here's a few photos from a recent trip to the USA that I thought were varying degrees of interesting, if not always good looking. Shot on a Canon 7D and iPhone 6S.
Perhaps soon I'll dedicate some more time to taking good photos, as I don't thing it will take much time to extrapolate skills learned from cinematography and graphic design and apply them to a still image.