Over on the UK forum, we're contemplating coming up with new language for what we, as people that film weddings, are.

Most of us hate the label 'wedding videographer', but accept that we really have to stick with it coz it's what all brides mags and forums (and the general population) are used to.

But as an idea, why don't we just all agree on a new modern name? 'Videographer' sounds so 80's IMO!

- Is 'cinematographer' a bit OTT for some of us, and not general enough for everyone?
- 'filmographer'? ('film' seems more up-to-date than 'video')
- or something completely new and fresh?

Let's face it, we all argue about the right, or most appropriate term - so can't we just come up with one new term? Or would that cause more arguments?

Obviously i'm not suggesting we must do this, but just wondered 'why not' if it's a case of the majority agreeing!

'Videographer' sounds so 80's IMO!

Interesting. I "wear" the term Videographer VERY proudly (usually with "Broadcast" in front of it) on this side of the pond, but I'm also NOT a "Wedding Videographer". Done two weddings in my life and it didn't work for me. Kudos to those of you who do weddings and MASSIVE kudos to those who do it well.

yeah, sorry, i should point out that i'm talking about wedding videography only... certainly don't want to offend 'broadcast videographers' :)

I just get called the "Camera Dude" or "Video Dude ". I guess we could start the "Society of Professional Camera Dudes".

But yes, I'm not overly fussed on the term "Videographer" either.

LOL, at 'camera dude' :D


i mean my personal preference is 'filmographer'.

No matter what you shoot with, be it a camcorder, a videocamera, a 5dmk2, an iPhone...or 'how' you shoot (documentary, cinematic...)...then you're still 'filming' - so 'filmographer' seems as general and correct as anything else?

the exciting thing is that we could get all the Bride Mags etc to write an article on this official name change - summing up how oldschool wedding videographers are now modern filmographers. i think it would create some buzz and eliminate some stigma and opinions (well, we get it in the UK anyway!)

I generally refer to myself as a video producer. But the general public still uses the term videographer so I use the term sometimes myself.

I don't think filmographer sounds very good or is even appropriate. You're not filming, you're videotaping. Accept it.

You can call yourself a grilled cheese sandwich. But that doesn't make you one.

Who cares what name or label they give you? As long as the check clears.

Jeff

sorry Jeff, i don't mean to rub you/anyone up the wrong way. i was only asking for opinions, and naively expecting the majority to agree.


Just for consideration, the online Dictionary definitions:
FILM:
Verb
a. to photograph with a movie or video camera
b. to make a film of (a screenplay or event)

VIDEO:
Verb
- to record (a television programme or an event) on video
Adjective
- relating to or used in producing televised images


we're not all technically recording on to video...but 'filming' could refer to recording on to any media?!

as i say, i'm only wondering general opinions....yours is totally valid. if you think it's pointless to even question, then that's fine. it's just that in the UK, there is a definite stigma about 'videographers', and it is only when people actually see us work at weddings, or our demos, do they admit they had no idea how far we'd come.


ur fellow grilled cheese sandwich :)

certainly don't want to offend 'broadcast videographers' :)

ZERO offense taken! It's just that when I get introduced to new people as a "videographer" they ALL ask "oh, so you do weddings?!?!? My <insert relative/friend/enemy here> is getting married and..." so I pre-empt by adding "broadcast". That way I START OUT sounding like a snob instead of having to EXPLAIN that I'm a snob... <tongue planted firmly in cheek>

What's wrong with "filmmaker"?

There are some inherent issues with Cinematographer (ignores all of the editing work we do) and Filmography, which is already a defined term (a filmmaker's portfolio of work).

I vote for "Emotive Visual Motion Artist".

I agree 100% Richard - "Videographer" sounds so dated to me and probably to others as well. It seems that the term Cinematographer is growing in popularity among studios over here in the US and may be the best fit at this point. The biggest issue I see is for those studios who rely on clients finding them via web search. I't going to take some time before any new term takes hold. Until then, our customers are going to continue to google "wedding videographer"

Art

Art:
yeah, and 'IF' a name change occurred, it would definitely cause a lot of grief, and would prob take 1year+ to get fully implemented, and for people to get used to. There are companies out there with 'videography' in their company name title, so they of course wouldn't be very happy at all!

so we can either all take this really seriously and have a proper debate with an intended conclusion, or just admit there's no point even discussing it as it will cause too much agro to implement

What's wrong with "filmmaker"?

There are some inherent issues with Cinematographer (ignores all of the editing work we do) and Filmography, which is already a defined term (a filmmaker's portfolio of work).

Good suggestion Kevin! I would add Event or Wedding in front of it if your studio's primary work is that!

Event Filmmaker is the title being printed on my new business card!

A few random thoughts...

I'm with Steve and "camera dude", he beat me to posting, but it was my first thought... duuuuude!

Language is fluid and often somewhat complex in its evolution. A decade ago if you said you "googled" someone or something, I suspect you might have had a visit from the authorities, now it's common parlance.

We don't go to the "movie store", we go to the "video store" (oddly, to pick up a "movie"/moving picture) on disk, not videotape... (shouldn't that mean we go to the "disk store"?!?!) so I suspect the current expectation of the client is to seek out someone to do a "wedding VIDEO" which is actually a feature shot/edited/delivered digitally in some form or another.

The term "video" is virtually synonomous with "movie" to Joe Q. Public in some respects but in others it carries a stigma of scratchy, jumpy old home videos.

I believe that technology has progressed and continues to do so (particularly the Photo video convergence) and there simply isn't the same stigma when "the public" is used to a wide range and quality of "video" content via YouTube (Shutterfly just added video - it's becoming mainstream and commoditized).

What "Camera dudes" offer as a service varies quite widely, from a cinematic to a documentary "style", much as photographers have fiddled with the definitions of "photojournalist", candid, and "traditional/formal"... I'm not sure how you take radically different styles from "multimedia artists" (hey, how about THAT for a new name!?) and create a catch-all that has enough sex appeal that it "fits" for everyone.

This explains the adverse reaction that "filmographer" (anyone here using "film" as a primary media??). "Film" is that strip of celluloid that gets run through a camera and processed in a lab... no offense intended, but it's "old school". And that may well hold attractions for some markets, but I haven't touched film in a long time, and for my kids it will be part of a history lesson. I'd rather look forward.

Cinematographer is actually nice, yet sounds pretentious - and realistically I ain't no Spielberg... and does he run camera anyway?


Just to toss out some food (and words) for thought, what we do is "personal", we work in "digital multimedia", we produce a "documentary" of an event (or perhaps a "stylized cinematic visual interpretation"). We capture "memories"... and so on.

I think the challenge is to come up with a short word, acronym, or phrase that is inclusive, descriptive, and instantly connotes what us "camera dudes" (editor/producer/director dudes) do. Too bad "dreamweaver" is taken, has a nice ring to it...

I like filmmaker, but if kevin is a filmmaker then if I put myself in the pecking order below I would say I am wedding pondscum ;)

Point well taken Danny! Kevin's stuff is just scary good...

I will now declare I am a "WP".... has a sort of ring to it, if no one asks what it stands for! or maybe it can mean "Wedding media Producer"... yeah, that's the ticket...

I generally refer to myself as a video producer. But the general public still uses the term videographer so I use the term sometimes myself.

I don't think filmographer sounds very good or is even appropriate. You're not filming, you're videotaping. Accept it.

You can call yourself a grilled cheese sandwich. But that doesn't make you one.

Who cares what name or label they give you? As long as the check clears.

Jeff


I'm with you on Video Producer. It's generic without stereotyping to a particular genre, style or mode of recording. Our local association uses Video Producer as part of their name - it encompasses both the corporate and special event arenas and in some ways, allows an individual to interchange b/w markets.

I'm with you on Video Producer. It's generic without stereotyping to a particular genre, style or mode of recording. Our local association uses Video Producer as part of their name - it encompasses both the corporate and special event arenas and in some ways, allows an individual to interchange b/w markets.

Video producer - I like it!...

A few more suggestions:

Event video producer;
Event videographer;
Event Video operator;
Digital moviemaker...

you know here (in Cyprus) we are called " the camera man"...although latetly they started using the term "opticographer" from the two greek words "optikos" = visual and "grapho"=write in other words you are "writing"=taping, visual things.

Stelios

wedding film-maker for me!

Santo

I personally like the term Wedding Filmmaker as well however I'm whatever the client thinks I am. To some I make movies to others I shoot video, idiots refer to me as the dvd guy, the rich will refer to me as a cinematographer and even though I market myself as a cinematographer I'm nowhere near able to shoot Hollywood movies, I don't consider myself a true cinematographer worthy of the title. I think 'camera dude' sums it up.

ZERO offense taken! It's just that when I get introduced to new people as a "videographer" they ALL ask "oh, so you do weddings?!?!? My <insert relative/friend/enemy here> is getting married and..." so I pre-empt by adding "broadcast". That way I START OUT sounding like a snob instead of having to EXPLAIN that I'm a snob... <tongue planted firmly in cheek>

Thanks, Shaun. My favourite post of the week (note correct spelling of "favourite").

Hehehe...

Pretty happy with wedding videographer really. It's tough to battle entrenched linguistic assignments.

Just a thought - instead of changing that term which defines us, why not change the definition/connotations instead?

Isn't it better to be a videographer who does awesome work than a filmmaker who makes crap.

Isn't it better to be a videographer who does awesome work than a filmmaker who makes crap.

I agree with Jason. Videographer is a more modern term than filmmaker. The only reason we might cringe when using it, is its association with bad work. Filmmakers and Cinematographers are perfectely happy with these old labels because we associate them with great works.

The more good work we do as a group, the better viewed we are, whether we call ourselves videographers, filmmakers, producers, dudes, whatever..

You can change the name, but if the work still sucks, who cares?. A good friend of mine introduced me to the phrase, "no matter how much you polish a turd, it's still a turd." I try to remember that when I'm feeling lazy.

Just a thought - instead of changing that term which defines us, why not change the definition/connotations instead?


I think you're spot on. it's like the banks spending huge sums in advertising telling us how good their service is are instead of spending the money on actually improving that service.

Changing what we call ourselves is easy if we can pick a term but that isn't going to change peoples perception of us, we need to establish an new image in the purchasers mind.

right now it's..
VHS tape, black & white, poor quality, dated, something old married farts have on their bookshelf and never watch, unnecessary

while we want them to think..
essential, modern, made for the future, a must have.

The biggest change we can make is to constantly strive to improve our work and a forum like this is a great tool to help us. I do wonder however, just who sees this 'good work' if it's just the couple and family/friends then there are still a lot of prospective customers out there with the old image and no reason to change it.

We need a way for more people to see the best that we can offer and make it something they want for themselves - but maybe thats a different subject alltogether

ermm.... I still think that changing the name will help... if the word videographer already got bad image.. why still use it..?? rebranding is a method that might work.

Not that I'm seriously suggesting about it though.. just open for discussion. I don't think anyone here really care what other people call themselves really :P

I guess the only thing that keeps me from putting some "videographer" words on my website and blog is because of SEO.. thats it.

at the end, use the one that will get you clients.. and then make them call you "awesome videographer/film-maker/cameraman/dudes..."

because if you dont have the client, then no one can call you anything.

A wedding documentary filmmaker describes what personally I strive for in our line of work.
Is it a bit of exagerration of a term? Probably so.

Still what most of us in the industry do, can be called a wedding clip maker, presenting aproduct in a short form, a clip of some kind, which heavily dependent on a musical score, a soundtrack, which regretfully we do not write, produce.

Secondly, seldom we see a complete film approach, a 3 act structured story with distinctive beginning, middle, end, in other words a story structure. And essentially we all want to tell a story of a wedding day.

The degree of creating a convincing emotional experience of any kind determines if can we call ourselves filmmakers.

videographer is not bad, it's has implied limitations.

The English suffix -graphy means "writing" or a "field of study"

Video is the technology of electronically capturing, recording, processing, storing, transmitting, and reconstructing a sequence of still images representing scenes in motion.

Paradoxically nowhere we see an implication on a story telling. Story recording at most.
Which are totally different things!

Interesting isn't it?

Pretty happy with wedding videographer really. It's tough to battle entrenched linguistic assignments.

Just a thought - instead of changing that term which defines us, why not change the definition/connotations instead?

Isn't it better to be a videographer who does awesome work than a filmmaker who makes crap.

i would say it has been a rather easy and short battle for us within our market and with our couples. being we should worldwide, the language we use in relation to our films has been very well received and very effective in communicating something different.

why not change the connotations? i would wonder how effective it would be when the majority are still producing old school videos. the idea behind a different term is that it denotes something different.

as for filmmaker vs videographer - why not go for awesome filmmaker vs one that produces crap. is not one of the biggest issues that has plagued our industry been that we collectively aim too low and are okay with mediocrity....

P.

i would say it has been a rather easy and short battle for us within our market and with our couples. being we should worldwide, the language we use in relation to our films has been very well received and very effective in communicating something different.

why not change the connotations? i would wonder how effective it would be when the majority are still producing old school videos. the idea behind a different term is that it denotes something different.

as for filmmaker vs videographer - why not go for awesome filmmaker vs one that produces crap. is not one of the biggest issues that has plagued our industry been that we collectively aim too low and are okay with mediocrity....

P.

Patrick, even if you retained the term videographer, but output the same work that SM does, you would still sell.

The evolution of your work came ahead rather than your change in nomenclature.

If everybody's work improves, across the board, a name change is the least needed for one to market effectively.

Totally agree with quality issue.
Original post and part of discussion was semantics related, finding the essence of meaning of what we do is very important I think.

Too bad "dreamweaver" is taken, has a nice ring to it...

Yeah, but it comes with its own theme song!! :P

I am comfortable with any of these terms. I'm proud to be a videographer. When arranging businessy things however, I tend to use "Filmmaker" as it has a more professional ring to it in my market.

When I think of the film vs. video debates (at my level of this tricky visual media), I tend to see people trying to get the "Film Look" by emulating crappy, poorly shot, aged super 8mm film... at that point, I'd rather be associated with video, so changing the perception on our end is probably the best bet as it will ripple out from us.

Well shot film is beautiful; well shot video is beautiful; both shot poorly looks like crap. It's not the tool, it's how you use it. Titles have always confounded me as well, I use what is most appropriate at any give point in time and try not to fixate on defining myself as something that will limit my future. Leave room for anything by being whatever your client is asking for.

I'm whatever the client thinks I am. To some I make movies to others I shoot video, idiots refer to me as the dvd guy, the rich will refer to me as a cinematographer and even though I market myself as a cinematographer I'm nowhere near able to shoot Hollywood movies, I don't consider myself a true cinematographer worthy of the title. I think 'camera dude' sums it up.


at the end, use the one that will get you clients.. and then make them call you "awesome videographer/film-maker/cameraman/dudes..."



If everybody's work improves, across the board, a name change is the least needed for one to market effectively.

I think I missed one quote, but these are the ones that say it best. If you are ONLY a "wedding videographer," then there may be another term you can create. But when you talk about using terms like "filmmaker" it makes your skill more general (to the public, which is who we create for). If you call yourself a filmmaker and a Director asks you to DP a feature for him, what will you say? Film is film and tape is tape but I'll leave that alone.
But a note on Cinematography. Cinematographers usually oversee the overall lighting of a "set." I'm still learning how to light so I would be hesitant to call myself a Cinematographer.
I love creating all types of videos no matter the event, movie, etc...The fact is that "video" is a generic term in itself. Think about it, when someone is filming (yes, actually using film) to shoot a music video...well, it's still called a music video. Only when someone is shooting a movie do they say they're creating a film. I say just keep it simple. Let the professionals chat about proper terminology and practice, let the public be happy. And remember the quote above from Jason!
Blah Blah Blah I think this is my longest post yet. Hopefully I said something useful. Great topic btw.

JS
PPEG, LLC
Videographer