Hello everyone first post here.

After this wedding I removed 1-camera package from my site, and am never doing that again, because I think it may have led to the problem on a video.

It was a small indoor space, with a stairwell on groom's side, so I stayed on the stair platform the whole time.. well the client in "not pleased" because I did not capture much of the groomsmen, and also because I was to the side (which I read is a pretty std. place), I got a frontal of bride but not of groom very much.

The groomsmen did not enter as a processional. I had my camera pointed up the stairs as the brideswoman entered. Now at the bottom of staircase the groomsmen MIGHT have escorted them down, and yes, I missed that, but with a one camera setup my options were limited.

I've read that 90% of unhappy clients don't report it, but for someone to be unhappy because the groomsmen aren't emphasized as much seems like a bad client, and I'm not sure if I should even respond back or not.

thx for input.

The minimum coverage for a wedding should be one manned and one well positioned fixed camera. There are just too many variables and surprises to risk only one camera. Why would anyone want to risk having only one camera rolling!? If they need to prove they are a he-man or something they should join a gym, not fleece couples at their weddings.

After reviewing the footage, the wedding was unorganized, and the groomsmen did not enter as a processional, they were already down by the alter before the wedding or music began.

It looks like all that I'm missing would be the overview shot. I probably would have shown this shot during the first words and then switched to the closeup side shot during most of the ceremony.

I'm not here to fleece anybody, and I've seen many other videographers in town advertise a 1-camera package, and I'd also like to preserve the integrity of the industry, so what is the standard reaction to this, and what would you normally do with a client who is "not pleased": full refund, partial refund, explain situation, defend situation, etc.?

thx again.

Jeff,

I'm surprised that these sorts of things weren't discovered during the practice run.

The other thing is that brides etc most probably don't "get it" regarding needing more than one camera for adequate coverage.

Andrew

I'm not sure I get what you were referring to about the stairs, pointing up the stairs, missing the bridesmaids etc.. I could understand if you missed the first few seconds, or the first girl, but the entire thing? Also you seem to say the groomsmen did not enter as a processional, then say the did or might have. Myb I'm misinterpreting.

It's tough I know, as we've learned weddings don't always start 'On the hour' (ie 1pm, 2pm etc) so sometimes they seem to immediately start after a long lull of nothing going on & waiting.


Anyway, it sounds like it was a venue that wasn't condusive for a very good video capture. How did everything else turn out (lighting, audio, reception?). If they're just upset over the cameras POV then it sounds like they're being a little picky. Did it seem a bit of a low-budget location? If so, (without telling them this) it seems they cut corners or couldn't afford very much, but are expecting you to overcompensate & overcome the obstacles that such a location offers.

Jim makes a good point, what are your options? Can you just put another camera on a tripod in the back for b-rolll footage. I'm sure some clients may not want to pay for a second shooter, but you might not want to lose their business.

As for responding back, well, what did they do, call you or email you? Demand money back?? If they did I would either email or write a letter stating that the venue made it challenging to shoot. Explain why you couldn't or chose not to shoot from other areas (back), and anything else. I certainly think it's best to respond in some form, even if it's not what they want to hear. Maybe they just had this vision in their head that the place would look beautiful on TV, then they watched it & it just looked small & cramped. Better than you caught the bridesmaids than the guys. I would work that into your response to, that you "opted" to get more footage of the girls. Just curious, would you have been able to shoot from the back??

Remember "the customer is always right"... even when they're not. Maybe they are unreasonable, but that isn't going to help your business, and that's your responsibility to prevent or "fix".

I'm confused as to where exactly you were - if I read your post right, you DIDN'T MOVE throughout the ceremony?? I'm gathering you were at the base of a stairwell on the groom side the entire time... (on a tripod?... bridesmaids came down the stairs, groomsmen didn't, so they were behind you?)...

NO way that will work with a 1 camera shoot (you HAVE to move as needed to find the best shot, just like a photog), and if you realized your motion would be limited, your backup camera should have come out, gone on a tripod for cutaways, and a little more mixdown time been thrown in.

I consider that if it's a "1 camera" shoot, they STILL get a fixed position backup angle cam since it's a live shoot, and if your main camera goes out for any reason (or you have a crappy angle), you're hosed and have a "zero camera shoot" - unacceptable.

The cost for rolling an extra camera (or two or three) is minimal compared to having no cutaways and an unhappy customer... Part of being a professional is being ready to shift gears on the fly and adapt to difficult locations, people, weather, etc.

I am sympathetic, but really this doesn't sound like an "unavoidable" situtation, and heck, nobody died... or lost puppies or anything even... WV requires thinking on your feet and making the impossible "work".

I was on the mid-way platform of the stairwell on the right side (groom side) elevated.

After reviewing the footage it looks like I didn't miss the bridal party, It's just that the groomsmen and groom were already at the alter before the wedding began or music started (which I think is due to un-organization).

Even if I had used another camera the only difference that would have made would have been a overview shot, which I would have used in the beginning, and then switched to the side shot for most of the event.

The first year when I start doing this business, I only use one camera. Then I realize having a second camera unmanned on tripod, it saves a lot of time during editing. When times I need to change tape, I don't have to worry about missing any important moment.

Then few years later, I now have an assistant to help me operate the second camera. Basically just to make sure it has battery and still in good angle.

I agree that running a 2nd unmanned camera from somewhere to get a safety shot is the thing to do even on a 1 camera shoot. However I don't quite understand the layout of the venue and exactly where you were positioned.
In my time I have shot in lots of venues that really weren't "wedding" oriented but I found the safest place to shoot from is upfront for the processional and then move slowly and confidently to the center aisle exact position to depend on the setup. (meaning how far back i go) This way you can get a shot of the girls coming down the aisle and when the guys go to meet them part way down you're in position to get that. When the bride comes down the aisle and is handed off to the groom you can get that and then move back down the center aisle to get the ceremony. While you might only get the back of their heads for most of it you will get their profiles during the vows and rings and then you're in position to get them during the recessional.
Anyway, as far as this particular wedding goes, you can't edit what you don't have, so IMO there is nothing you can do to make it better of fix it. If it were me, I would certainly NOT ignore the brides inquiry and explain to her that using 1 camera limited what you could do. I would try to help her make the decision to leave it as it is BUT it soulnds like she might be looking for a partial refund of her money. If she insists on persuing the matter then you need to ask her what she would like you to do and go from there.
Many many years ago 1 camera jobs were very common but since the early/mid 90s with the advent of DV/miniDV cameras running 1 camera at a wedding can be considered a prelude to suicide.
As for unhappy brides not reporting it, well they may not say anything to you but trust me, they ALWAYS tell their friends and guess who else is getting married. Their friends. You need to respond quickly, the long it takes, the more they fester and the worse the video looks. Human nature.

Skip 1 cams altogether. I only shoot 3 cams now. It is too nervewracking or confining to shoot only 1 cam. That would be among the most boring of videos. Constantly stuck on medium wide angle, no closeups, etc.

I wish you the best in dealing with the client though. Even though you spend time educating, many clients are just not well versed enough to understand. Heck, I don't think a client NEEDS to know all that video techno-babble. What they need to know is the final look they want, do they like my previous works, and where to write the check. What I NEED to know is what can I give them for the amount they are willing to pay, can I achieve the look they want, and do I know all the video-techno-babble to pull it off. :-)

Hi Jeff

Plenty of videographers and photographers are too lazy/busy to go to wedding rehearsals and it may seem like a waste of time but I go to every one. That way there are no surprises even if you shoot with one cam!!! Don't get caught out with the phrase "If only I had known........."
I only had one bride ("we don't need a rehearsal") who complained about me missing footage of her father handing her over to the groom. It was done totally unconventionally way out of the camera view and over in seconds. If the bride says they are not having a rehearsal I always ask her to take me thru the ceremony so if something unusual is likely to happen I can spot it and take action!! If they do something totally strange that happens fast even with 2 cams you might not even get to it in time !!!

Chris

Hi, Jeff,

I did not understand the layout and your positioning there but now it does not matter...

In this situation you need to reply to the bride, as was mentioned here before, as soon as you can. I would recommend to do it in writing, in the most polite form - letter or E-Mail (will be documented this way...) You can remind the bride that you had offered her (I hope...) 2 or more camera options with explanation of all the benefits, but it was her decision to choose 1 camera coverage, i.e., limited coverage option... I would also mention that you did the best you could do at this particular location, worked hard for the rest of the day etc...

As for myself, I mostly freelance for different studios, and it is not my decision, how many cameras to use on the job - they always send me solo, often in-camera edit package (no studio edit later...) I had to learn hard way, how to use 1 camera, how to position myself, when to change tapes etc... I only use monopod and move when needed. Also, very important is good audio: I use wireless lav on groom and have separate audio recorder on a stand into a loudspeaker for the whole ceremony.

I hope, you will learn from your mistakes... Good Luck!

Hi Jeff

Plenty of videographers and photographers are too lazy/busy to go to wedding rehearsals and it may seem like a waste of time but I go to every one. That way there are no surprises even if you shoot with one cam!!! Don't get caught out with the phrase "If only I had known........."
I only had one bride ("we don't need a rehearsal") who complained about me missing footage of her father handing her over to the groom. It was done totally unconventionally way out of the camera view and over in seconds. If the bride says they are not having a rehearsal I always ask her to take me thru the ceremony so if something unusual is likely to happen I can spot it and take action!! If they do something totally strange that happens fast even with 2 cams you might not even get to it in time !!!

Chris

We also never miss a rehearsal and make SURE we ask the the person conduct the ceremony " IN FRONT OF THE BRIDE" Where we can be positioned. We also have our little handy cam running to capture the audio, just in case.

It doesn't matter how good you are and how much work you put into it, you will never please everyone.

Stop and think about it.

They have a show on television called "BrideZilla". It's named that for a reason.

Have you ever heard of a show called VideographerZilla?

Jeff you are 100 % right, but we always give it our best shot.

Hi Walt

I'm glad that it isn't only me who goes to rehearsals!! I often get the "I don't bother story" and more often than not the photographer is never there. Yes, I also make sure I stay for the complete rehearsal. That way you know what to expect and when to expect it!! I had a wedding a couple of weeks ago where the couple were doing "dummy vows" .. I suggested to the priest that if they turned just a fraction outwards not only would the guests see their faces but the camera would too!! He was more than willing to help and we got some great shots!!! It's also imperitive to get a copy of the ceremony so you know when Aunt Jane will get up and do a 60 second reading on the other side of the Church!!

I also take just one cam with me, just to look at possible lighting hazards and best angles!!

The rehearsal is also a dummy run for the videographer and it would be very foolish not to take advantage of it!!! I always remind myself that there are no second takes at weddings!!!

Chris

You do not need to remove a single camera from your packages! You simply explain explain explain that your single camera package is meant for people who CANNOT afford more. You have a disclaimer in your paperwork that warns that there are risks in missing coverage and there are further risks in video/audio continuity.

You find out about the venue and the layout, and you warn that you will get only the back of the bride as she walks down the aisle. (I long ago stopped shooting single cams from front. I do not and will not take my camera and move up the aisle after the hand off. That footage is going to look handheld at best and I do not want my ass showing as I walk backward up the aisle.)

You shoot from the back, and you never move except after the bride goes down the aisle, you move to the center of the aisle and stay there until the ceremony is over. If people stand during the service, you are blocked, but your customer KNOWS about this in advance, because you have EXPLAINED this to them.

I very rarely do not sell a second camera as an add on a single camera package. Almost every time I take a second camera anyway, and when I edit the wedding I easily sell them the second camera then. By the time the honeymoon is over they REALLY want to see the video, and are happy then to spend whatever to make it the best.

Jeff lays out the risks involved in shooting a single camera ceremony, it's those risks that keep me from ever wanting to shoot single camera. To each his own.

I always shoot with 2 cameras. Single cam is really risky as you can't ask for second take. 2 cameras save lifes dealing with, bad audio, tape dropouts, scene missing during changing tape, cut-aways-> less boring for long scene... it's just overall good wedding videographer should do.

There're some customers can't afford my package (young couples, just out of college...), I offer two types of editing style packages. I have this package called Director-Cut packge which is cheaper. I did everything the same on the wedding day but a lot less editing effort (backgorund music, fancy title, single menu...) in post. It's a good move in general.

Not to get off topic... but I've seen plenty of videos that were done with only one camera and the video was stunning.

The issue isn't having just one camera rolling. Often times families will opt for the '1 camera' deal because they can't afford 2 or 3 cameras... or aren't willing to pay more for it.

As long as the families/couples know what they're getting with a one camera deal, that's on them. They can't come back and say they wished they had seen more of x, y or z because they knew the limitations beforehand.

Well, they could... but they opted for one camera.

It's like buying a new car and going back to the dealership a week later and saying you wanted that sunroof. Sorry, no dice.

I always tell couples that if something is truly important to them, DON'T SKIMP!

Blake, you are correct. I can't think of any of their names right now, but there are more than a few NYC video guys who shoot single came and get relatively big bucks. I remember one who charges around $3k.

I offer single camera packages as a sales tool; its a way to get them in the door. I then upsell the additional cameras. In the past year I sold around 10 single cam packages, and I took a second camera to every event but one, a day when I was heavily booked. Each of the other 9 clients paid for the second camera by editing time, and they all thanked me for it.

It's called salesmannship based on a sincere desire to help the client, even when they do not know what is in their own best interest. You sell a single cam, you take two cams, and then you tell them you had a backup camera and ask if they'd like the footage included in their video. They have never told me no. In advance of the wedding they will often resist and say no, but afterwards they are much more agreeable and they can think more clearly.

I'm not a full time wedding videographer and only use one camera, recorded on tape and cf card at the same time for insurance. Get a lot of cutaways before the ceremony starts. I do offer 2 cameras but most if not all of my customers are on a budget so one camera is ok for them.

Jun

Jun, your post is a good example of how different markets will bear different prices and packages. Smaller markets are often more price conscious. I know my sales techniques (as I discussed above) wouldn't work as reliably in a some markets as they do here.

I have to admit after reading all the posts it's been quite entertaining. I can understand if you prefer to shoot with more than 1 camera but to say shooting with only 1 camera is suicide or not smart is ludacris. I shoot 1 camcorder jobs 95% of the time. Are there jobs where I wish I had another camcorder absolutely, but when the client doesn't choose the 2 camcorder package what are you going to do? This is still a business. I'll say this for those very uncomfortable shooting 1 camcorders, moving from 2 to 1 is very difficult to get use to. Once your use to it, it is quite easy and still fun shooting 1 camcorder. Just got to know what you need and when to get it.

I have to admit after reading all the posts it's been quite entertaining. I can understand if you prefer to shoot with more than 1 camera but to say shooting with only 1 camera is suicide or not smart is ludacris. I shoot 1 camcorder jobs 95% of the time. Are there jobs where I wish I had another camcorder absolutely, but when the client doesn't choose the 2 camcorder package what are you going to do? This is still a business. I'll say this for those very uncomfortable shooting 1 camcorders, moving from 2 to 1 is very difficult to get use to. Once your use to it, it is quite easy and still fun shooting 1 camcorder. Just got to know what you need and when to get it.

Ok, I started out for the first 2 weddings shooting 1 cam (plus still photos). It is possible, but just isn't fun. I prefer to start my packages at 2 cams to provide for a more satisfied customer, than a cheaper product.

Ok, I started out for the first 2 weddings shooting 1 cam (plus still photos). It is possible, but just isn't fun. I prefer to start my packages at 2 cams to provide for a more satisfied customer, than a cheaper product.
Okay, shooting video with 1 camcorder and stills is suicide ^_^ .

I shoot weddings with one camera all the time and shoot stills. Have two other cameras running just in case of a disaster. When your in a Catholic church you can't get the angles because of the restriction. Here is a one camera shoot mini video with stills. Officials sent us to the balcony. Some times you take what you can get. The Bride Loved it, as a matter of fact she cried when she saw it. iPlayer (http://www.iplayerhd.com/player/c05fd1d8-a9db-4748-ac52-dc2414aa6420aspx.aspx)

The other cameras have bad angles and are blocked by people heads no matter where I set them up. I put them in place and hope for the best that I will get even the littlest peek of video.

We were sent to the balcony, with stern warnings for no flash and no disruption to the ceremony permitted of any kind. Bride knew and was very happy with the outcome.
You can shoot with one camera and the stills make up for what you can't get on tape.

Hey Walt I still stand by my statement but need to clarify it. It is suicide to shoot stills and 1 camcorder at a wedding/event and be the main person for both. In your case you may have found a good system to where you can take stills at a good time.

1 Camcorder gigs aren't that tough to pull off. Just need to develop a system to where it's a viable package. Doesn't mean your stuck in 1 position the whole time. You just need to know when you can move. I must say if you miss a beat you can screw yourself pretty badly though, had it happen 8/8. Here in MD the average 2 camcorder job comes in under $1500. That's the average, I won't use 2 till they hit $2000.

Jeff if the product is done there is no need for a refund. When you met with the client did you show them what a 1 camcorder gig looks like? You may have shown a 2 camcorder and they were expecting that.

Hey Monday

Another person shoots the stills, can't do both. Just have a camera for the the kiss. You are 100% right.

You know Rick from Video Memories, very good friend of mine. Lives in your area.

OK since I made the one camera is suicide comment, let me clarify.
FIRST, shooting a wedding with 1 camera is in my opinion one of the BEST things one can do because you have nothing to fall back on-none of the "it's OK to mess this move up because I have 1 or 2 or 3 other cameras running", it's a great learning tool and if one can keep a cool head and a steady hand you CAN produce a beautiful product. Robert Allen in NJ uses 1 camera, charges about a grand an hour with a 5 hour minimun and produces a beautiful product.
WHAT I meant to say and should have said more clearly is this; FIRST if you are doing a one camera shoot you'd best be on you toes and keep a cool, calm and collected head and have a shooting plan layed out. SECOND, have another camera in the bag with you in case your primary camera craps out on you. Remember there are only 2 kinds of videographers. Those that it HAS happened to and those that it WILL happen to.
When I first started in the business, NO ONE shoot 2 cameras. Couldn't afford them. You HAD to learn to shot with what you had. Of course churches then were much more restrictive than today but you still only had 1 camera.
Today with cameras being so inexpensive (relativly speaking of course) and small, it's easy to have 2 or 3 or 4 or more and place them around the venue to get (hopefully) a good or great shot but IMO the best shot is the one you see thru the viewfinder regardless of what shot it is. Everything else is a crapshoot.
So to reiterate. Single camera shoots are a great way to learn and produce great stuff IF you know what you're doing and how to do it AND have a backup in the bag and while I am not necessarily a fan of one cam shoots anymore I always SHOOT as if there is no other camera running. Things happen. Batteries die, tapes screw up (I know - go tapeless) shoots get blocked, cameras forget to get turned on. Stuff happens.
The best shot is the one in your viewfinder.
Gotta go, got a 3 camera wedding shoot to do! :-)

The client is understanding now that I explained the wedding was unorganized and the groomsen weren't missed, they just were already at the alter and didn't have a procession in.

I believe that I did not communicate adequately the limitations of a 1 camera, so I will do what the client wants, which is a photo-slideshow with vows video to cover up that and some other mistakes made by the preacher. For free.

Also, I will rent additional camcorder for my next wedding, because I think the client just looked at the price and went with the lower one, without fully understanding.

I disagree with some previous poster about 1 camera being technically great, because there's way too much panning involved in that (unless you just want shots of everybody's backs). I could not shoot all the way in the back, knowing the bride and party all would have back shots! And if you can get front shots there's too much panning= headache.

Plenty of videographers and photographers are too lazy/busy to go to wedding rehearsals

In Belgium they don't do rehearsals, it always happens in real-time :)
I always shoot alone, I also always ask if they want a second cam at the wedding (at an extra cost) but they always say no to save costs, even if I explain the benefits to them. Most videographers here work alone, the wedding industry is definitely not as advanced here as on your side.

Edit: just read Don's comment about his "one camera is suicide" and that's exactly the way I work, I do have a back-up camera in a backpack, ready to shoot but I don't use it unless I need to. Since I bought my xh-a1 end last year I also only film weddings in 25f, working alone and using the 25f format has changed my way of filming considerably. For weddings at the church f.i. I do a one hour continuous shot as if every second is important, if something important occurs on my left side I don't swing my camera to there but very slowly pan. I also use 2 irivers and a zoom h4 so I always get good sound. Some months ago I bought a hvr-dr60 drive so that I have a double back-up of my footage if something goes wrong.
Working alone is not easy but as I see it it makes you a better cameraman.

I'm not sure I agree with the panning comment. There's only too much panning if you don't edit it out. If you are a solo operator you can only handle 1 camera at a time. So if you're on the front camera (if you can place one-a lot of churchs won't let you and if you can they may not let you man it) you can't get anyone at the podium on the altar. If you're on the back camera, yes you get the backs of their heads but if that's how the ceremony is done... As for panning you have to pan to get the readers at the podium and then if the couple go to the Holy Family (Catholic Mass) and that's really about it. Go slow and ahead of the readers, cut the pan, and follow the B&G keeping them centered and it's done.
Multiple cameras can make it easier but as I said, the best shot is the one in your viewfinder. You just never know what could be going on with the unmanned cameras.
Anyway glad you got it worked out with your client.

I'm not sure I agree with the panning comment.

Weddings here are a quite bit different then on your side, I'm beside the altar all the time so I can get a good view on the couple and the priest, if someone has to read I take my camera of the tripod and move up real close, that's also no problem and when they put on the rings I stand beside the priest (a bit behind him but still quite close) With the panning I meant that during this motion that nothing can be cut out, I prefer to slowly pan then doing a very fast pan, if there is somebody talking before I'm panning I would have to fill the fast pan up with another image as I can't cut the audio, therefore a slow pan is better in such a case.

Weddings here are a quite bit different then on your side, I'm beside the altar all the time so I can get a good view on the couple and the priest, if someone has to read I take my camera of the tripod and move up real close, that's also no problem and when they put on the rings I stand beside the priest (a bit behind him but still quite close) With the panning I meant that during this motion that nothing can be cut out, I prefer to slowly pan then doing a very fast pan, if there is somebody talking before I'm panning I would have to fill the fast pan up with another image as I can't cut the audio, therefore a slow pan is better in such a case.

My wife is from Italy so naturally thats where we were married. I envied the photographer and videographer for being allowed such freedom. The danger of shooting one cam was so much less. They had the ability to move around and get the shots they needed. They weren't overly obtrusive either.
No wedding rehearsal either.... It's silly how we do it here in the states if you ask me. Everyone knows how to walk. The church's here only care about perception so they can get more people to marry there and bring in more money. My opinion of course.
I find in funny that the 600 year old catholic church with a full mass was less strict on having the vendors capture the moments then the churches I work in today.
Wish I was working in your neck of the woods Noa!

yeah, it's been my experience that in most cases here in my area you can not be on the altar. At BEST an unmanned camera but generally even IT has to be off the altar.

From church to church it varies. Catholic churchs are actually less strict on placement an movement than some others. Of coruse it varies from one to another. I've been in some Catholic churches where the priest is open to pretty much anything and others where, if you move at all, a bolt of lightning will strike you dead.

At the churches where I shoot a lot they know me well and most give me a bit more latitude than someone they don't know but again, each church and officiant is different.
I try to stay within the rules and bounds because I KNOW I'll be back there and don't want anymore restiction than I already have.

Other countries ARE different.

Wish I was working in your neck of the woods Noa!
Considering how much they are willing to pay for video here I don't think so ;)

Usually when the priest is talking they all expect that you don't move but standing on the side between the altar and couple is no problem and that's just 4-5 meter distance. i also get a real good view on all the guests from that location and use my zoom very often (when the camera is on a tripod) to get a close image from them.
Also with the rings if I would stretch my arm I could push away the priest :) It's that close I can get, that's why I can get all the important shots with one camera. Same with the readers, sometimes I'm standing about 1 to 2 meters from them.
The only stressing part in the church is getting all my audio in place before the ceremony starts, when everybody arrives at the church I mic the groom and then walk for the first time in the church and have 2 to 3 minutes to place my zoom h4 and if possible I attach a second iriver at the place were they read or were the priest is standing. After that it's quite easy as I can follow all action from very close.

The church's here only care about perception so they can get more people to marry there and bring in more money. My opinion of course.I've been on the board of stewards for three different churches in my life and the subject of bringing in more money from weddings was never brought up. Churches don't get money from weddings anyway. Perhaps there's a stipend so the janitor gets paid for the extra work but that's it. Weddings are so convoluted over here because eveyone wants to "out do" the previous wedding. We're in the middle of planning my daughter's wedding and women LOVE to plan - the more details the better...!

Anyway I shot my first wedding with one camera. I made sure I bought another camera before the next one.

I find in funny that the 600 year old catholic church with a full mass was less strict on having the vendors capture the moments then the churches I work in today.


I think the problem is that some churches and clergy have reacted to some incredibly audacious photographers and videographers who they had problems with in the past. As a result, they set down some rules to minimize it in the future. There is a small minority that ruins it for everyone. This minority has no sensibility or sensitivity and would literally stand between the bride and groom if they thought they could get a better shot. An earlier poster in this or another thread mentioned that he stood so close to the couple that he could touch the officiant if he turned his camera. If I was that officiant, I would find that extremely irritating and would do whatever it takes to make sure that didn't happen to me again. You have to remember that it's a real wedding with people participating and watching, not a studio set.

I've been in churches where I shoot perhaps 6 times a year or more and they know me well. I've had officiants and "church ladies" smile when they see me because the last person that was there was a real PITA to them. They have rules for a reason. It is still a wedding and since it's in a church it IS a religious service and IMHO there are cetain things that one doesn't do, like disturb the service, no matter what.
Now having said that, many times these same churches DO give me a bit more latitude becaue they know I won't do anything to disturb the service.
Anyway IMHO there is little reason to be that close to the wedding party or the officiant or to make ones-self a part of the day like that BUT every area of the world has different rules and acceptablities. Generally here in my area it is a 110% absolute NO-NO to be on the altar but occassionaly some do allow it.
This is not to say one can't get good footage and produce a quality product by staying within the bounds of the venue but remember, there next guy/gal has to work there next week and they only remember the "bad guy". Human nature.
Shooting a wedding is like shoot a breaking news event. Things happen fast and sometimes not in the order you might be familiar with. Stay cool, on your toes and be ready for anything.

I think the problem is that some churches and clergy have reacted to some incredibly audacious photographers and videographers who they had problems with in the past. As a result, they set down some rules to minimize it in the future. There is a small minority that ruins it for everyone. This minority has no sensibility or sensitivity and would literally stand between the bride and groom if they thought they could get a better shot. An earlier poster in this or another thread mentioned that he stood so close to the couple that he could touch the officiant if he turned his camera. If I was that officiant, I would find that extremely irritating and would do whatever it takes to make sure that didn't happen to me again. You have to remember that it's a real wedding with people participating and watching, not a studio set.

That's exactly what happened to me. I did a video inside a beautiful marble church, and the vicar said, no moving around, stay out of site and no flash. He then went onto tell me that they had a photographer a few months back, who constantly moved around, flashing away with his camera and walking around the couple during the vows to get close up shots, clicking and flashing. The vicar stopped the ceremony and ordered the photographer outside.
He said; You will not do that will you?
I said no. First, I don't use flash and second I use a tripod, so I normally stay put. He then told me where to position myself and it was a great view of the couple.

yep, all it takes is one and the rest of us get thrown into the same barrel. It's a real shame.

Since this thread is already off-track, and i'm a newbie. What do you do about sound? I mean when you say "cut away all the panning" if you're on 1 camera you have to screw with the footage without ruining the natural sound.

I think any event videographer should strive for natural sound, overlaying a track is cheesy.

I always talk to B&G before wedding day about the church layout and possible camera placements. I also point out to ask the priest about any possible limitations for me. Unfortunately I wish I could do it myself at the rehearsal but my time schedule doesn't allow me for it (I have regular full-time job aside from my business). But having Bride talk to the priest about video work serves also other purpose - let her argue with the priest if she has some unrealistic ideas about video coverage of the ceremony. I had a Bride like that and the priest sat them on the altar and closed the access for any photo and video. That was the end for us.

Since this thread is already off-track, and i'm a newbie. What do you do about sound? I mean when you say "cut away all the panning" if you're on 1 camera you have to screw with the footage without ruining the natural sound.

I think any event videographer should strive for natural sound, overlaying a track is cheesy.

you may not have to mess with audio (too much) if you plan you pan. Hmmm, didn't mean to be poetic.Anyway, most weddings especially church wedding have a lot of air during the ceremony. For example, the priest says "and now MAry will do the first reading". While she walks up to the lectern it could take 30 seconds. You need to pan to get the lectern in frame, but it doesn't take 30 seconds. CUT! Perhaps dissolve to it whatever, but now the air and pan movement is gone. Audio goes with the footage.
If you are panning during music say following the couple to place flowers you probably aren't going to cut that anyway. So no harm no foul.

If you do need to cut a pan move and it's over important audio you can do any number of things to cover that. Be it slowing the footage down SLIGHTLY or using a cutaway shot that you got earlier or later (parents, g-parents even perhaps a beautiful stained glass window, if appropriate). Honestly that's really the last thing I worry about when I shoot and even though I use 2 and sometimes 3 camera I ALWAYS shoot as if I'm shooting 1 camera. That way I don't do anything I shouldn't do, like wild swish pans or crash zooms.

Since this thread is already off-track, and i'm a newbie. What do you do about sound? I mean when you say "cut away all the panning" if you're on 1 camera you have to screw with the footage without ruining the natural sound.

I think any event videographer should strive for natural sound, overlaying a track is cheesy.

Jeff:

I think for most short/normal ceremonys, the ceremony is generally in real time on the final product.

If someone shoots 1 camera and something is cut (panning), obviously the ceremony (& audio) is no longer real time, it can't be. However, the room tone & noise is usually so uniform, no one would ever notice any change in the audio. I don't see a problem.

On two or more camera shoots, one of the cameras (and/or audio recorders) is usually a static "safety" camera and the audio in those cases can be continuous and uninterrupted, although in post you would tranisition the audio to the appropriate source for what is happening, recorder covering music, wireless channel covering vows, line in covering readers on house sound, etc.

If someone shoots 1 camera and something is cut (panning), obviously the ceremony (& audio) is no longer real time, it can't be.

I use a zoom H4 and 2 irivers meaning I have 4 audio sources, audio is never a problem for me in the church while filming with one camera.

When shooting multicam and with multiple backup audio tracks, you can just sync everything up on the timeline, then cut "dead spots" if desired or just mix/cut and render to a continuous "feature", or remix as desired. This is where even one extra camera angle comes in handy... and if your "backup" camera (which you should have anyway) is sitting in a bag/case anyway, why not fire it up at a "safe" angle, locked down on a tripod?

The extra sound sources aren't to REPLACE ambient audio, but to ENHANCE the audio tracks for the best final result. Think how a Hollywood feature is shot - boom mic's to get audio from the actors (we use lavs), plus a sound track, ADR and Foley to enhance the experience. No reason not to use the "tricks of the trade" as needed to achieve a "better than being there" experience for the client, right?

Let's say that the priest forgets to turn on his mic, and there's NO "house audio" - so nothing to get from ambient mic'ing! BUT, if I've got a lav on an iRiver right on the Groom (and obviously you can mic the priest, etc.), and maybe a couple small wireless bluetooth mics strategically placed and recording to center channel on B/C angle cams... I've got a CHOICE of "real time audio" including good to excellent audio from the "hot zone" for the vows, and that "missing audio" because the priest "forgot" to turn on his mic...

This is from the "Video Scout" handbook:
Rule #1... BE PREPARED!

For "live fire", one shot events, you can never know what will happen, so being prepared for ANYTHING is "better safe than sorry". Such is the lot of the wedding vidoegrapher.

I don't want to sound consdescending but aren't people being unrealistic trying to cover a live event with one or even two cameras? And not even attending the rehearsal? Shooting a feature film with one camera may be OK but weddings aren't feature films. They're unrehearsed amateurs doing a one-off performance. They're nervous and often self-aware and embarrassed.

We consider ourselves professionals; we use three Z1s and wouldn't consider fewer. Two operators, third camera on a radio controlled hothead mounted on a tall tripod (15ft). Sorry if readers consider this excessive but when did you last see even the local news made with fewer than three cameras?

This may also reflect the fact that most UK churches and civil venues either disapprove of or don't allow cameras to move during the ceremony. I've seen still photographers asked to leave the church because they were standing on the church wall (modern church chancel rail) "to get their shot".

Sorry but my 2c.

Philip