they also colorcorrect in a way the video gets a distinct but to my eyes weird and unnatural look

I think that's an interesting comment, because I've sort of noticed the same... The particular photographer I'm thinking of corrects his videos like he would his photos, but, for whatever reason, it doesn't work. Maybe because there's so much more information to play with with a RAW still vs an h.264 video. Or maybe something about a moving frame doesn't lend itself to the same effects as photos.

The whole concept of cinematic, photographic style short form is really a new product that couples are able to consider. I don't see any reason why it should be seen as a threat to doc style or old style whatever you want to call it. The danger lies when a couple are totally unaware of the options open to them and assume that short form is what wedding videos are all about.

I had yet another video view this week where all of the other companies that they had contacted were showing short form. I was the only one offering a whole day documentary, and they didn't know until I visited them that anything else was available. Within 10 minutes of them starting to view one of my videos, they stopped it and said 'This is exactly what we wanted'. Their signed contract arrived yesterday, so that means that four other companies offering short form only and competing for the same job have missed out.

I will include a short highlights video set to one song for quick showing to their friends, but that wasn't mentioned when I visited. So it reinforces my view that whole day footage is what most couples want given the choice and that the short form cinematic is more of a luxury item or perhaps sometimes chosen when they aren't aware of the alternatives. In other words, a different product entirely.

Roger

What brides want is as varied as the people on this board.

Some will come here and say "No, they dont want it". Some will tell you they want long form and short form is wrong. Some will say short form is the only way to go.

The fact is, what your brides want is different to what our brides want. Our brides go with us because they want a shorter edit, they want the DSLR look, they want Steadicam and all the rest. We have people who want a longer edit and we will put them in touch with people who offer that.

Its very hard to say if brides want shallow dof. Our brides do, those who dont offer it, their brides dont want it hence the reason they go with that person.

When we do our edu events people always ask how can people possibly want a shorter edit as all their clients want a longer edit. And we explain that if you offer a shorter edit then yes, the clients you currently have wouldnt book you but you find different clients who do want it.

Same as if you stopped filming weddings and only filmed funerals. Your current clients wouldnt book, but you would find new clients who will :)

Dont get too caught up on what other people offer. You find your own thing, whatever makes you happy and the clients will come.

The whole concept of cinematic, photographic style short form is really a new product that couples are able to consider. I don't see any reason why it should be seen as a threat to doc style or old style whatever you want to call it. The danger lies when a couple are totally unaware of the options open to them and assume that short form is what wedding videos are all about.

I had yet another video view this week where all of the other companies that they had contacted were showing short form. I was the only one offering a whole day documentary, and they didn't know until I visited them that anything else was available. Within 10 minutes of them starting to view one of my videos, they stopped it and said 'This is exactly what we wanted'. Their signed contract arrived yesterday, so that means that four other companies offering short form only and competing for the same job have missed out.

I will include a short highlights video set to one song for quick showing to their friends, but that wasn't mentioned when I visited. So it reinforces my view that whole day footage is what most couples want given the choice and that the short form cinematic is more of a luxury item or perhaps sometimes chosen when they aren't aware of the alternatives. In other words, a different product entirely.

Roger

I dunno. I've said this in another thread and I'll say it again. People talk about
'most brides' or 'most couples' wanting long form or short form or shallow depth
or shallow depth of field or deep depth of field or whatever. Brides do NOT fit
in some neat category in my opinion. They are individuals and as such, are all
over the place. I have been asked for just a highlights video, to every moment
of everything that happened in the day. You either choose what you want to
offer, and then get mostly that type of bride coming to you (as watching your
demos will weed out many that don't look for your style), or you offer everything
and anything (and post demos of all styles). That is much harder to do, but
certainly possible. However, this is why you have a sit down meeting with a
potential customer. You get to find out what kind of video she is expecting,
and she gets to view demos of your work and you can both decide if its a good
match.

I However, this is why you have a sit down meeting with a
potential customer. You get to find out what kind of video she is expecting,
and she gets to view demos of your work and you can both decide if its a good
match.

I absolutely agree with this! I also agree with Danny's point that you decide what style you want to do and if they want something different send them elsewhere there is room for everyone. I couldn't care less whether people produce long form or short form, only that I can sell my own services.

I will add though, that I advertise that we produce wedding video with the option of photographic package, but I do not advertise how long the finished product is. So potential clients do not contact me because they want any particular style unless they are recommendations, but rather because they want a wedding video. In my experience, over 2000 weddings, the vast majority have little idea what to expect although some may have seen a friends video, which could be long or short, cinematic or doc. I always visit potential clients to discuss requirements and show our work, and over the last 24 months of visits am still maintaining a 100% booking rate from visits, all long form doc style! I've no idea what that means except that I can't see any possible way to improve on that!

Roger

Hi Roger

During interviews brides will usually ask me "How long is the video" and I tell them "It's on two DVD's with the first covering prep, ceremony and photoshoot and the second covering the reception" "between 60 and 80 minutes depending on speeches"

What weird is that they have never said to me "Oh, that's very long" .. I have never asked them "Is that what you were expecting?" I wonder what they expect the DVD to run for? Danny's are short form so I'm now curious as to what my brides would say if I told them it's a short and sweet 20 minutes. Maybe the next time I will ask... what length did you expect? 20/40/60 or 100 minutes?

Have brides ever said to anyone ..Why so long? or Why so short?

Chris

I've never got the question, "Why so short?" or "Why so long?", but I pretty much always get asked, "What is the total length?"

I think, from the bride's perspective, duration of video is one of the few solid things that can cling to try to distinguish one vendor from another, and I've got a feeling they adopt the attitude that more is better.

Glad it's not only me then! Yep mine always want to know how long the DVD is but never ever comment. If you told them 60 or 120 minutes I don't think they would comment either way ... I guess it's much the same as asking your camera dealer ..how long will this battery last ...you want a reasonable time but don't expect a miracle.

I wonder if short form guys get asked the same question and do brides have a pre-set tolerance for both?

I think if I said 35 minutes their little brain would work hard and then think .."Wait a minute, the ceremony is 25 minutes so how will he fit in everything?"

Chris

Basically I offer a 'highlights' video, and a long form, multicamera video.
I usually sell the highlights video along with a photographers package.
I'd say about 60% buy just the highlights video and about 40% buy both but
almost no one buys only the long form video, but that's just my market.

I have been asked about how long my short form 'highlights' video is, but
almost everyone who contacts me has already seen my demos online...that's
how many of them find me. The first thing I do when fielding an inquiry over the
phone or via email, is to direct them to my demos and they pretty much always
have already viewed them, so most know a little about what to expect. People
are becoming 'Internet savvy shoppers' and many do some legwork (mousework?)
at least more now than they used too.

Hi Gabe

A while back I offered a short form video and I think only one bride ever took it so I dropped it. I also called it a highlights so maybe brides figured that it would omit too much of the important stuff?

With my highlights I think I offered a short bridal prep (about 3 mins) and then just the entry and vows/rings part of the ceremony (about 10 minutes), a 3 minute stedicam shoot and then bridal entry, cake cut and first dance which would have been 5 mins. That (without speeches at all) was around the 20 minute run length ... problem is if you include speeches (even the tradition 4 ) that can easily be another 30 minutes which makes it almost a long form again as it's nearly an hour!!

Are your short forms around 20 minutes or shorter/longer?

What do people think a highlights should and should not contain?

Chris

I think the above question could be a separate thread.

I know a few people who provide products that are only 40minutes in full - but I can't imagine any clients NOT wanting the full speeches. So I don't know how they find clients who want what they offer.

I've recently proposed to condense my ceremony footage down to 20minutes and nearly all my clients opted for it...

But as somebody once told me, selectively removing parts can be almost as time consuming as leaving it all in an checking through it - boring as it is!

Hey Clive

So how is 40 minutes called shortform when the only thing you are NOT filming would be stuff like congrats after the ceremony, going around the tables and dancing which might add maybe 30 minutes tops to your short form video? To watch 40 mins or 70 minutes to me is long form surely??

I think Danny does a 20 minute short form video only so maybe he can give a rough idea of what he fits into 20 minutes?

I think 20 minutes and under could genuinely be called highlights/ short form but to me anything over that is getting close to long form. I did a wedding 3 weeks ago with 10 speeches .. if one had to include speeches in the short form that alone would chew up 40 minutes!! (allowing a tiny 4 minute average speaker time)

I'm confused where the line is drawn ...is it 20 minutes or less??

Chris

Hi Chris. I'm dipping in again now that we're a bit more settled and connected on our own broadband.

Surely the terms of short form/long form/ documentary are self defined. There is no industry or consumer standard that clients refer to when choosing a video. This industry as you know is comprised of a myriad of individuals who have self-appointed ourselves as video professionals. There is no trade body or guild that we have to belong to and sign-up to a set of standards. We have all established our terms, definitions and ways of working based on our own preferences and experience.

Here's my product - I don't call it either long form or documentary but its certainly longer than 40minutes.

Bridal prep and Church gathering - 10mins
Ceremony - 40/50mins
After church - 5mins
Afternoon - 10/15mins
Speeches - 30/40/50mins
Dancing - 15/20mins

Total Anywhere from 1hr 45 to 2hrs 30mins generally


I then do a highlights trailer of 4/5minutes.

Hi Clive

Thanks for that..that's basically what my DVD's come out to and I figured that was long form. I'm just curious to figure out what Danny uses in his videos which are normally on 20 minutes?

George!!! Great to hear from you again and nice that you are settled ..I can see a few French wedding videos in the making once you get a full grasp of the language!! I assume your trusty JVC 700 is there with you??

Chris

Hi Chris, les français est à venir sur, but I have no intention of getting back into weddings either here or back in UK. In fact I turned down one for last weekend and turned away two enquiries this week for future dates. I'm more interested in weeding now than weddings. I am getting as much if not more pleasure repairing our leaky 200 year old french barn as I did slaving over a warm computer. That said I am still keeping my hand and eye in, I've left most of my shooting kit back in UK as I am traveling back every few weeks to do the training & induction videos that are now the mainstay of my video work. Seems to be working out at the moment so long as cheap airlines keep flying from my local airport.
I've had to pass my theater and schools work to a former local competitor who I'm friendly with as quick turn-around and bulk duplication and distribution is just not feasible. C'est la vie as we say here in La Belle France.

Clive and Chris - your end product timings also sound the same as mine, which I describe as long form documentary.

Roger

I helped out some friends of mine at a Bridal fair in Tennessee over the weekend, and I as I was talking to the brides to be, several of them specifically mentioned that they really liked the short form videos and not full length ones.

I just thought that was interesting.

There really is no right or wrong in all this, it's just a matter of knowing what your client wants from you, and then working to deliver that, if you can.

There definitely seems to be more interest in cinematic short form in the US generally. Perhaps it is more of an instant gloss product that fits in with what appears to be a more showy wedding industry than certainly the UK has.

Roger

But back to the question - the people who deliver short form (I mean 30/40minutes) are they editing and removing some of the speeches?

I can't get my head around any bride being OK with us taking editorial decisions over what parts of speeches to cut.

But some people surely must.

Does anyone on here cut some of the speeches for their end product???

But back to the question - the people who deliver short form (I mean 30/40minutes) are they editing and removing some of the speeches?

I can't get my head around any bride being OK with us taking editorial decisions over what parts of speeches to cut.

But some people surely must.

Does anyone on here cut some of the speeches for their end product???

Clive, usually our speeches aren't as long as yours seem to be. It varies by region, of course, but for example, in my area, speeches are 5-15 minutes total, depending on number of people. Usually Best Man, Maid of Honor; often a parent and/or bride/groom will speak, too. So 2-4 people usually speak, and 10 minutes or less TOTAL.

When I do highlight style videos, I just use quotes, the best parts, of speeches. Rarely all of it. If the speech is REALLY short (as some often are) then it's rarely got anything worth showing, so I show it for the sake of the person rather than them having said anything of value. If it's longer, then it's harder to trim, but choices often have to be made.

I can do this precisely because I provide BOTH a highlight style (15-20 minute) video AND long form (60-90 minutes) so they can go see the full speeches if they want.

I currently deliver long-form but my aim is to eventually deliver short-form. If/when that happens, I would also include a separate disc/usb stick with uncut speeches and uncut(ish) ceremony. From watching Stillmotion stuff over the years I believe that's what they do also.

But back to the question - the people who deliver short form (I mean 30/40minutes) are they editing and removing some of the speeches?

I can't get my head around any bride being OK with us taking editorial decisions over what parts of speeches to cut.

But some people surely must.

Does anyone on here cut some of the speeches for their end product???

Those who claim they deliver short form only generally will also deliver the speeches & service in full on a separate disk. I'm betting that even those who come up with pretentious twaddle like they won't include the ceremony if it doesn't fit with their artistic vision still deliver the traditional documentary style speeches & ceremony

I currently deliver long-form but my aim is to eventually deliver short-form. If/when that happens, I would also include a separate disc/usb stick with uncut speeches and uncut(ish) ceremony. From watching Stillmotion stuff over the years I believe that's what they do also.

When i deliver short form which is now rare in Liverpool as they seem to want everything possible for their money, we deliver about 25/30 minutes, then straight after the short form film i include their bespoke trailer, then include the full speeches and full ceremony all on the same disc, that way they can see the artistic short form which i love editing and then they can view their trailer and then at their leisure they can view their speeches and ceremony. Simples. steve

Wedding Videography & Photography Cheshire Liverpool | Capture Your Moments Weddings | Home (http://www.captureyourmomentsweddingvideo.com)

There seems to be a subconscious dread afflicting both videographers and clients that the yet to be shot wedding video may be hours and hours of unwatchable junk. Rather like they fear that when it comes to stills that the posed photo session will be 2 hours of forced cheesy smiling at the camera.

The reality is anything but. In the UK at any rate.

The great majority of weddings are civil ceremonies and these will seldom be more than 20 minutes. 30 minutes tops even if you leave the cams running throughout the register signing. And within those 20 minutes are lots of golden moments which cannot be done justice by just including a few seconds - or even worse time-shifting the audio.

Some speeches may be marathons but typically they also will seldom be over 20 minutes in total. And again lots of golden moments including guest reactions.

What else? 2 minutes of pre-wedding tops - unless you bring your slider along in which case you'll really bore the socks off the audience :- ) 2 minutes photoshoot highlights. 2 minutes reception scene setting. 2 minutes cocktail hour highlights. 3 minutes 1st dance. What else? Oh yes 200 minutes torturing unwilling guests into making meaningless messages :- ) 200 minutes getting in everyones way with your steadycam on the dance floor whilst you dazzle them with a light late in the evening :- )

So what is so ..... well ..... long about longform? And which bits do the clients really not want to have for their family history? Newsflash to shortform clients: your friends do NOT want to watch your wedding video whether its 5 minutes or 5 hours. They may tolerate a bit if they think they might see themselves. But thats about it. So don't worry about them; just focus on what you'll want for the future.

Unfortunately for us the vendors all these things like shortform and shallow depth of field are highly seductive for clients at the research stage. Even though we know in our heart of hearts that longform is where its at in the longrun. Editing shortform etc can be fun but thats for our benefit not really for theirs.

Discuss :- )

Pete

p.s. I'll just put my tin helmet on!

Some speeches may be marathons but typically they also will seldom be over 20 minutes in total. And again lots of golden moments including guest reactions.

Discuss :- )

Pete


I need to start filming nearer you then!

Speeches seem like they are rarely less than 30-40 minutes and often more like 40-60 minutes.

Hey Pete

I can hear the shrapnel hitting your helmet already!! I can honestly see the use of a trailer or maybe a 5 minute clip with just the vows and bits and pieces of the wedding to tempt a viewer's senses but I honestly cannot see how one can supply a "wedding video/film" which is 20 minutes long that covers all the events (as Clive says..especially the speeches)

I notice an absence from Danny from Minty Slippers who only delivers shortform (I think he was talking 22 minutes) so maybe when he is not busy he can explain how you get a wedding into that time?

A straight forward doc wedding from bridal prep to end of first dance is easily compressed into an hour IF the speeches are short! but I, for one, don't see how one could compress everything into 20 minutes.
I'm sure Danny has said (forgive me if I'm wrong) that he only does shortform so maybe he can clear the mystery?? Based on civil weddings I can see Bridal Prep in 3 mins, Arrival, skip the opening chatter and just do the vows and rings and kiss (maybe 10 minutes) then a 3 min photoshoot full of eye candy, bridal entry. the groom's speech only and cake and first dance, MIGHT be able to be squeezed into the remaining 6 to 8 minutes if the groom just does a 1 minute speech?

I did a REALLY compact wedding this afternoon (just got back) and CamA has 48 minutes on it and Cam B has 55 minutes ..and there was only one speech from the groom! (no bridal prep either!!)

Ok people that do short form ..tell us what you leave in and what you leave out but be nice to Peter

Chris

Hey Pete

I can hear the shrapnel hitting your helmet already!! I can honestly see the use of a trailer or maybe a 5 minute clip with just the vows and bits and pieces of the wedding to tempt a viewer's senses but I honestly cannot see how one can supply a "wedding video/film" which is 20 minutes long that covers all the events (as Clive says..especially the speeches)

I see people refer to and talk about friends' wedding trailers (5 minutes) often, so I know people watch their friends' wedding videos if presented well.

Pete, we're not as good as some folks, but I'm really happy with how our 15-20 minute edits work out. The DVD version full length video for this wedding was just over an hour, but here is an 18 minute wedding video with 5 more minutes of out takes at the end that I couldn't leave in since I felt it ruined the rest. I don't time shift much, but still like to punctuate the beginning or ending with something.

Olivia and Lewis' wedding film on Vimeo

I need to start filming nearer you then! Speeches seem like they are rarely less than 30-40 minutes and often more like 40-60 minutes.

Those are my averages based on hundreds of weddings. I've no idea why it would be so much longer in your part of the world. I did used to live in your part of the world but I was never aware of folks being longwinded :- )

Part of my routine for every wedding is to ask each speaker roughly how long their own speech will be. I explain that this is to help me be in the right place at the right time. Particularly for photography. If I know that someone will be on their feet for just 2 minutes thats a whole lot different to 10 or even 5 minutes in terms of opportunities to capture photogenic moments - where the speaker is looking up rather than looking down at his notes, and smiling or laughing rather than frowning or grimacing.

Robert, do your stats show specifically how many different people watch the trailer right through rather than just clicking on it for a few seconds whilst they suss out whether to watch it. And how many watch it because they fear being interrogated by the bride afterwards (OK probably not the latter!).

Pete

Robert, do your stats show specifically how many different people watch the trailer right through rather than just clicking on it for a few seconds whilst they suss out whether to watch it. And how many watch it because they fear being interrogated by the bride afterwards (OK probably not the latter!).

:)

I didn't mean our videos that they watch. I've had people who hire us reference their friends' videos. So, the gal who hired us for her wedding in January, sent us the link to her friend's wedding from Colorado.

Or, seeing the WeddingWire bride message board everytime someone asks about a videographer in (name the city). Sometimes they'll show a friend's video and say 'like this' kind of thing.

From our own website I can see how long they stay on a certain page, but not through vimeo. So what I'll be doing in the future is sending the online link to a page on our own website rather than vimeo. Then I'll get a better idea if they watched the whole thing or not.

This really is not rocket science. From reading some of the posts it seems we are trying to over complicate the whole process.

Long form is exactly that. A documentary edit that runs in chronological order and includes the ceremony and speeches intact give or take a few segments. This edit is traditional and many couples still want this style.

Short form edit (20-30 mins) is exactly that. You cannot fit the whole kitchen sink into a short form and that is where the creative element comes in. You are creating a story of the couple and their special day.
The approach may be completely different to a long form edit. The focus is on vocals to carry the story, be it from the vicar/speeches, couple themselves etc.

You as the artist putting the pieces together like a jigsaw to create a whole. It is inevitable speeches and ceremony will be cut, why the conundrum? Just give the couple the speeches and ceremony in there entirety on the same disc!

You have to be confident to create a short form edit. Like a painting you hold the brush as the artist.

Couples love short form edits if done correctly, subtle timeshifting and vocals carry the sequence along with the visuals.

So for those who create long form, that's great, for those who create short form, great, but don't over complicate what really is not rocket science....

Why not offer both?......

With the other post regarding long form being preferred over a short form, I also thought about do Brides necessary want shallow depth of field?

I'm actually going to attempt to ask brides etc which they actually prefer, to see what majority want. Obviously, there will be a lot of variables but I'm interested to find out.

they don't know and don't have to know, because that's our job to decide. There is no doubt in my mind that this bokeh mania is taking over most of the footage nowadays because it looks cool and it's easy but should be limited to a couple of shots, three tops. When overdue is boring. The technique changed dramatically during last year and it will keep going for another year. Then it will be back to the way it was before. Guys a nice portrait or close-up breaking the screen for 7 seconds two-three times is enough. It gives the perception of a good work and that image will stay in the eyes of the viewer. But if we shoot the entire thing with a 20mm lens with no background then it will definitely be boring. Let's don't lose the right perspective about this : a video should contain the background by default, then we reserve some breathtaking shot from the distance (adding compression is crucial for a good close-up: there will be no compression with a standard focal or (horror) distortion if done with the small focal wide open: that's not producing bokeh, that's producing amateurish work for gear obsessed video-amateurs).
Just because we have better cameras now it doesn't mean that we have to get all that excited about it: let's use the better gear to produce better definition, also for the background, mainly.)

I showed some video at a wedding fair today and one of the bride's comments brought a wry smile to my face as I thought about this thread. She said, "wow, I can clearly see mum and dad and the bridesmaids in the front rows, that's amazing". Turning to her mother she continued, "remember that other one we looked at last week? We could see the bride but everyone else was blurred. I like this better, it's much higher quality" !!!!!!

So I showed her one shot with DSLR in the same location and she hated it! She really preferred the camcorder DOF because she could see everyone, and 'that' is what she wanted.

Another bride came along a few minutes later and preferred the DSLR version. Hmmm... go figure.

So, discuss to your heart's contents because there is simply no one right answer here folks.

We either need to show them what we want to deliver (if they like it they'll buy) OR we need to deliver what they want to see, once you've figured out what that is of course.

So, discuss to your heart's contents because there is simply no one right answer here folks.

I disagree, which seems petty, I know, but I do. DOF is a tool, like anything else (like choosing a low angled wide shot to make the groom seem larger than life...) I don't know what that sample shot you were showing was (a shot of the B&G with family in the background?), but I'm guessing the gal who liked the shallow DOF was wrong. (And I use shallow DOF)

There might be moments to use it as a style choice, for the bokeh, but broadly, during a ceremony?

Used properly, for our purposes, it's a tool to focus someone's attention on a specific subject - for instance, we use it during the vows, with a tight shot of the bride or groom's face. You can also use it in a two shot to move from a foreground to background subject, like having a groom in the foreground, standing still, waiting, then shifting focus to behind him and now you see that the bride is sneaking up on him.

Of course, it's not necessary, and in that regard, sure, there is no right answer. When it comes to whether someone should/would ever use it all the time? No, that's wrong. I would never use it all day. What purpose would it serve having my rear camera in the aisle shooting at f/2? That wouldn't make any sense.

If someone's really using it as a style choice, an artistic choice, and shooting the whole day like that.(at a wedding)..I really have a hard time believing they know what they're doing at all. I'd love to see an example of someone who does know, though.

If I were to shoot something with all Shallow DOF, it'd have to be a dream-state type of thing (though I would probably lens whack to achieve the dream/fantasy look instead), and I'd never risk an entire wedding on that. A glamour session, sure, but not a wedding day.

I disagree, which seems petty, I know, but I do. DOF is a tool, like anything else (like choosing a low angled wide shot to make the groom seem larger than life...) I don't know what that sample shot you were showing was (a shot of the B&G with family in the background?), but I'm guessing the gal who liked the shallow DOF was wrong. (And I use shallow DOF)

This was a shot of the B+G during the ceremony (from the front). In one shot (camcorder) you could clearly see the parents and bridesmaids behind. In the DSLR shot they are not sot clear because of the larger sensor (at f4 IIRC). Stopping down any more would have mean increasing the ISO to unacceptable levels (shot with a 5D2 at the time).

Which one they prefer is up to them and to tell one bride she is wrong for liking the DSLR and the other one is wrong for preferring the camcorder style is not going to make it any better.

Shallow DOF doesn't have to mean f1.4, f2 etc, it can simply be that at even f4 or f5.6 on a DSLR the background is going to be more blurred than 'some' brides would like, and whether it's your artistic choice or not, if they don't like it there's not much you can do.

That shallow depth of field thing caused many problems for me, as when I started doing that all the complaints were because the background was blurry/unclear/soft/unprofessional/amateur etc.etc...
I licked my wounds and swore never to do that style again without their consent. You cannot make a blurred background sharp again, unlike photography that you can shoot with a wide depth of field all sharp and later blurr out at your heart's content with photoshop filters. It seemed that when I was doing photography there was never a complaint about that type of artistic "look".In video you're stuck with it. Sure, there are brides that appreciate and UNDERSTAND that artistic flavor of the shallow but trying to explain after the job is done to the untrained eye what beauty is in that effect is a tough convincing act.
I would ONLY do that sort of thing if the bride specifically asks for it AFTER seeing demos of it and agrees that it is to her preference, in writing. Introducing a new effect or style always brings in uncertainty and doubt. Things that I am not about to gamble on. I shoot sharp. very sharp with wide primes. Also makes focusing less critical that way.

This was a shot of the B+G during the ceremony (from the front). In one shot (camcorder) you could clearly see the parents and bridesmaids behind. In the DSLR shot they are not sot clear because of the larger sensor (at f4 IIRC). Stopping down any more would have mean increasing the ISO to unacceptable levels (shot with a 5D2 at the time).

Which one they prefer is up to them and to tell one bride she is wrong for liking the DSLR and the other one is wrong for preferring the camcorder style is not going to make it any better.

Shallow DOF doesn't have to mean f1.4, f2 etc, it can simply be that at even f4 or f5.6 on a DSLR the background is going to be more blurred than 'some' brides would like, and whether it's your artistic choice or not, if they don't like it there's not much you can do.

On a 5D I believe that the lens to use is the 17-40 , at f/4 will give sharp footage and a sufficient DOF.

On a 5D I believe that the lens to use is the 17-40 , at f/4 will give sharp footage and a sufficient DOF.

While true, it doesn't help if you really need to be in the 50mm-135mm range due to the location / positioning of the camera (sometimes unattended). Churches in the UK can be quite small and cramped in the choir stalls and have pillars in the way or ornate carvings on the end of the pews if you're really wide, so being wider could easily have meant the frame filled with lots of close objects and the B+G way off in the distance. No matter how much DOF you want (or don't want) if the framing is bad it's all lost.

I'm not arguing for or against DSLR / shallow DOF etc, in fact when used appropriately I love the DSLR look and the shallow DOF it can provide in the right circumstances. I just shot some interviews today and used the C100 and 5D3 instead of the camcorders specifically to control the DOF. Other times I feel the camcorders are the better tool for the job.

It seems that many people get rather tribal about these things based on having only one type (DSLR or Camcorder), so that's all they can see, whereas if you have access to both you can choose the right tool as needed.

My post was merely saying that one bride thought the sharp all-in-focus (camcorder) video of the couple during the ceremony with family and friends behind was higher quality than the DSLR version (due to them being able to see more in focus) while the other thought the shallower DOF of the DSLR was better because it made them look at the B+G, which is more what she wanted because she didn't care about seeing the people behind as much.

With that in mind, I say there isn't just one way of doing it right because different people like different things, and that means there is clearly a market for BOTH. We just need to decide which market we want to be in and only sell to that market, or if we can service both, make sure we know which one the bride actually prefers before the day comes.

This is a great discussion! For over a decade I've been doing "long form" edits, but this summer in June, I'm doing my first ever wedding cinema style shoot - I'm busting out all the stops bringing in a crane/jib, steadicam, slider, and shallow DOF shots!

The couple has hired me for all day coverage and I'm bringing 2 other shooters and 1 high school intern for this one. The bride hired me based on her cousins wedding that I did about 7 years ago.

My intent on this one is to do the regular long form (with Canon XF300s etc) which she is expecting, but then also try my hand at this new fangled short form - time shifting style and see if I can get a story told in 15 minutes mixing shots with one of the guys FS100 (and maybe C100 or D800 if I get one by then).

To me, long form editing is a whole lot easier than trying to do the 15 minute thing.