I'm excited to see which new cameras come out this year but I'm starting to feel like these new cameras are all so good that my clients (especially brides) really won't be able to tell the difference between something shot on a GH4, FS7, or C300 Mk II. I think now more than ever, it's really not about the camera.

I really don't believe that it ever has been about the camera, only the content. I do think there is a big danger in getting into a technical mindset where the camera is the important part, it isn't, it's the content that matters. Given a £45k camera and poor content or a £200 handycam and good content, the good content will always be the winner. I've shot weddings in the past where the lighting and situation have been next to impossible and the end footage has been grainy and lacking in colour, but the couple have been ecstatic.

Your comment about the stills from the C100 being 2mp was interesting, as I have a couple of Panasonc SD750s which take 14mp stills and will take 13mp stills while taking video, just at the press of a button. Granted the sensors are small although they are 3mos cameras, but the stills are amazingly good for the size of the camera given reasonable lighting levels. I have even been asked to make an album from them before now, when the photographer's shots were a disaster.

Roger

Greetings Roger

Sadly being a video forum we tend to get into the tech-head mindset when we are on here! Yes Roger you are so correct! I have seen disaster footage from people with cameras that cost more than I probably earn in a year! However most have no idea at all about basic movie making.

The big issue still seems to be the DSLR owner who becomes reasonably competent shooting stills when they discover that their camera can shoot video too. The immediate reaction is "Wow, I'm now a wedding videographer" ... Shooting motion pictures (if I may call it that) is completely different to shooting stills. Our era and passion for video has allowed us to learn the art of making moving pictures complete with the techniques and rules that apply only to movie making so our content is always appreciated by the bride!

The modern still photographer makes the transition simply because DSLR's can shoot video now, without any basic knowledge about film making. I can pick out the "transitioned" people easily ..Just watch the bridal prep video and you will see lots of shots of the rings, the shoes, the makeup bottles and perfumes .. all they are doing is shooting video of things they used to take stills of!! They have little to no idea of what camera movement is (besides pushing it across a slider) so all you get is a result that could quite easily be emulated using stills and panning across the image. Sadly even the most up to date camera shooting 4K footage cannot make this type of content any better and even simple rules like framing for video and eyeline position that we adjust for by habit are foreign to most people and ignored.

Chris

Roger / Chris, this is a Videographers forum and we can't be too surprised to see an emphasis on tech. As I said before, I go to my Brides to discuss content with them and I come here to discuss tech. Now tech isn't something to be dismissed lightly. We all use it to one degree or another and getting it done well is less impressing the Bride and more delivering a product that looks Professional. After all, for me it's not just the Bride who sees my video, the Groom too obviously, their family and in the case of a Trailer, their friends too. I see no reason to deliver work of a lesser production value on the theory the Bride cares only about content. No, she also expects a Professional looking video, otherwise she'd ask Uncle Bob to film it.

I do use DSLR's for filming. My main camera is a GH4 and I would not have it any other way. I am looking for something larger like a C100, but more for Corporate. I film using a monopod and the small form factor of the GH4 is less an obstacle and more supportive to my way of filming. I tried something larger a year or so ago and hated it. I don't expect some Videographers to feel the same way as our backgrounds and style of work will be different. However I can say that with my videos frequently topping 2 hours in length, I'm not exactly failing on the content.
Yes I love the tech, yes I can occasionally get arty farty as some put it, but I also work very hard to deliver a documentary style video that looks as good as well as covers all the elements of a Wedding.

Hi Steve, I certainly wouldn't disagree that the tech is important, my point is that it is easy for some to get obsessed with the technical side and forget about the importance of the content. I want the technology to give my work a professional and high quality finish, but if the camerawork, flow and content is poor, the the technical quality ain't gonna save me! It's not a matter of offering work to a lesser production standard, we should achieve the highest technical standard that we can as I am sure most here do. But production standards include the content, and wedding clients won't notice if you filmed it on £50k cameras or £1k cameras, but they will notice if the content is wobbly, out of focus or missing parts they really wanted to see.

I do sympathise with you that you come on the forum to discuss the technical side, but let's not forget that this wedding and events section is equally open to discussing content, contracts, experiences etc aswell as the technical aspects.

Chris, your description of what many crossover photographers offer with video is absolutely what I feel. Applying some of the photographic techniques can be great used in conjunction with the story telling and movement necessary for video production, but too often it can look like a video slide show, when there is no knowledge of other requirements. There is a tendency to use the framing, focus and pose to add emotion in the way that a photograph does plus music dubbing, without understanding that it is the emotion and sound already present on the day that is there to be captured and crafted. That is where the strength of video lies when you are filming a wedding. Anything else becomes a different product in my opinion, with it's own place and style.

Roger

I do sympathise with you that you come on the forum to discuss the technical side, but let's not forget that this wedding and events section is equally open to discussing content, contracts, experiences etc aswell as the technical aspects.
Roger

I appreciate discussions on content, contracts and experiences too. Such threads are very valuable and I read many of them and comment also when I have something to offer. However it's only the subject of tech that gets shot down and sometimes cut short with that oh so familiar line - 'aren't we forgetting it's all about content', 'we must remember it's what the Bride wants', 'the Bride wants good content, not a flashy video' etc etc. The other types of threads are never interrupted for covering what they cover. It's hardly big deal, just becoming a bit of a cliche now. I find myself groaning whenever I read a version of the above line.

But that works both ways Steve because I get hacked off with the endless discussions over 'whether this or that camera gets the better bouquet', 'how can I get round the crap audio recording in my dslr', should I upgrade my GH3 to a GH4', 'how much better is the C300 than the C100' .

It's as tedious an any other subject that you have heard over and over again, but it's a forum and people can talk about what they want. It's also new to many new members, so really you should just do what I do, don't go on the thread and whinge about the content, either ignore it or put up with it. Have a cup of tea and chill out like me :-)

Roger

Thinking a bit more about this Steve and I think that your comments about people going on about content and interrupting technical discussion, is biased on your personal preference. This particular thread is about the dual video and photo package, so most of the discussion has been about whether it is possible to achieve that.

Most of the thrust of the discussion is going to be about whether the quality of the content will suffer by trying to offer both, so the technical aspect is secondary to the content side. What equipment is used and how that equipment is utilized is of course important, but not more important that what client expectations are and whether those expectations can be met with a dual package, either solo or with more than one shooter. So I think that if we are discussing fairly, then client expectations are a very big part of that discussion.

Roger

I'm not referring to entire threads. Some of those you mention I ignore, others are relevant to me and not you, so I'll dip into. Yes the umpteenth 'which camera shall I choose' can seem repetitive, but as you say we get new people and the discussions can sometimes reveal new things. After all camera gear is always changing. If I feel a thread annoys me, I'll avoid, though rarely any do. In fact the cliche, 'are we forgetting it's about content' doesn't annoy me as such as amuse me or at worse cause me to utter a mild groan. I can discuss camera gear & tech at length here and still deliver good content to my client. It's not one or the other with me.

Dragging back to this thread though, the Photographer I worked with yesterday does video. However as I suspected would be a problem, she finds the editing not to her liking, so her latest venture as a single operator is to offer a shoot it yourself service. She lends the camera to Weddings she's shoots photos for, and delivers the footage, minimum editing. Sounds like a different approach to the combi service. Which begs the questions, if she's getting lots of takes on this, with other Photographers offering video add ons, solo Shoot it Yourself companies out there too, plus Shortform, Highlights only companies, Marryoke only companies and documentary companies like myself; is it really still only 10% of Weddings that have some company shooting some form of video for them.

Thinking a bit more about this Steve and I think that your comments about people going on about content and interrupting technical discussion, is biased on your personal preference. This particular thread is about the dual video and photo package, so most of the discussion has been about whether it is possible to achieve that.

Roger

Roger, I don't mind talking about content. Honestly this thread has been fascinating for the content side as well as the tech. Let's not blow a minor comment out of proportion, I just find the single comments like 'we tend to forget what the bride wants' and other such similar lines a bit repetitive. I listen to my clients a lot, emails, phone calls. They have my ear 24/7 it seems. So when I'm talking some techy issue and someone says, 'we're forgetting what the bride wants', I either laugh or groan depending on my mood that day.

Roger, I don't mind talking about content. Honestly this thread has been fascinating for the content side as well as the tech. Let's not blow a minor comment out of proportion, I just find the single comments like 'we tend to forget what the bride wants' and other such similar lines a bit repetitive. I listen to my clients a lot, emails, phone calls. They have my ear 24/7 it seems. So when I'm talking some techy issue and someone says, 'we're forgetting what the bride wants', I either laugh or groan depending on my mood that day.

That's fair enough Steve and I'll admit that the content thing with me is a bone of contention as I see so many threads dedicated to improving the technical aspects in the wedding section, where the content seems to be of little interest to many, so I'll move on as well.

Your reflections on type of wedding video offerings is also an interesting one as I can only judge percentages by my own experiences over the years and surveys carried out. The joint survey last year between the Daily Mail and the National Wedding Magazine apparently covered 5000 brides before and after the wedding. Only 10% of UK brides had a video but apparently 92% who didn't, wished they had afterwards. That suggests that videographers are not getting the message across or are not selling what the brides want.

Photography has reached the status of traditional, but video hasn't, so it seems logical to me to combine the two. For me and Chris, that seems to have increased the level of interest and also given me bookings and enquiries for much further ahead than I have experienced before. I am also finding some interesting information from clients on their views on photographers and what they offer, plus the opportunity to talk to potential clients who may not have talked to us without the photography.

Roger

I think that my original point stands Roger that this is a Videographers forum and many come here to discuss tech. If they're like me, this becomes their main resource to do so and learn from how others approach things. Recent discussion on attaching a recorder to a roving handheld wireless mic was quite inspirational and I welcome such threads. If you feel that content needs more discussion though, start a thread.

Going to your 2nd point; I agree there is an untapped resource here. It's widely acknowledged that video is the most under valued service in the Wedding Industry. Even clients who have booked me don't really recognise it's full value until after the Wedding. Problem is, how to change that.
A Bride's priority is always going to be what's happening on the day; the Photographer too is a part of that process as the Photo Session is usually a key event. What part of the day do Videographers dominate; none. They record the day as unobtrusively as possible. There's no Video Session listed in any timetable; well not in my Weddings. Perhaps those that offer Shortform benefit from this, as they make recording the video part of the day, or at least in some examples I've seen with endless shots of the Bride and Groom together.

The closest I get to this is the Marryoke, but even this is left up to me to work behind the scenes. Of course after the Wedding, the focus is on the memory and in this the Video excels. I just wish I could market Videos to couples after their Wedding, then nip back in time and film it for them. I'd be flooded with bookings.

There's no Video Session listed in any timetable; well not in my Weddings.

I think the main reason for this is, is that most of us, including me, don't ask for that time. I"m comfortable with just letting the photog to do all the work during the photoshoot and to include them in my shot as well for the videopart and I do take pictures also for my dvd covers while they are taking their photos.

I"m pretty sure if I would demand videotime as well they would plan it in but probably still call it photoshoot :)

If I'm doing a video only wedding where my photog isn't there I DO ask for the time. Normally pre-arranged with the photog and I do it directly after the group photos are all done but before the bridal party photoshoot. This allows me to do a stedicam shoot with just the bride and groom and also is ideal to zap off some quick poses for the DVD cover if the bride has her own photog. (Despite sincere promises I have yet to have any photog actually send me any images so I take them myself or my own photog will take them)

I guess I have a "video photoshoot" as an essential part of my packages so I need to allocate time for it.

Hi Chris,

Your time with the couple is something that I don't do at all as I like to capture what unfolds at a wedding as a fly on the wall documentary. That would mean that I would see what you are doing in your own time with the couple as constructing something just for the video, which is not a criticism, just an observation on a slight variation of how we both work.

The only thing that I do that I would see as just for the video, is when I sometimes go round a table to ask for messages to the couple. I also see all posed shots, romantic and groups, as set up shots which have become traditional and expected over the years. I think that is what I enjoy about documentary video, it is a live vibrant medium which captures the essence of what the day is all about without intruding on it, whereas posed photography is an artificial set up moment to go on the wall or in an album to be occasionally dusted off.

Roger

Hi Roger

At photoshoot venues it amuses me when I see the photog setting up the posed shots and two eager video guys on either side shooting the whole thing ..I always tell brides that I never shoot the photographer taking pictures of the bridal party and they are happy with that. My little shoot (about 10 minutes tops) is my contribution to the more creative side and the brides love it as it's set to their favourite romantic song. All I do is take them on a little walk away from the remainder of the bridal party and do some soppy stuff including what Don calls roundie-rounds and that's about it ... Along with our "video guestbook" which brides also love the two are sort of signature features of our packages to make us just a little different from the rest of the pack of competitors. I've always done those two in my doc packages and to take them out would more than likely be a mistake so they stay!!

It's sometimes tricky to get an arrogant photog that I don't know to let me have the couple for 10 minutes but that issue is becoming less and less now as we book dual packages

If we all did exactly the same thing at a wedding it would be somewhat boring!!


Chris

Your reflections on type of wedding video offerings is also an interesting one as I can only judge percentages by my own experiences over the years and surveys carried out. The joint survey last year between the Daily Mail and the National Wedding Magazine apparently covered 5000 brides before and after the wedding. Only 10% of UK brides had a video but apparently 92% who didn't, wished they had afterwards. That suggests that videographers are not getting the message across or are not selling what the brides want.


Roger I'd like to quote that statistic to prospective couples - do you have a link to the survey? I've googled but can't find it

Hi Peter,

That's interesting as I googled the survey last November and there were a lot of interesting statistics, but when I googled again yesterday to post a link I couldn't find it at all. It was a Daily Mail/National Wedding Magazine survey. A couple of other threads linked to it last year, so you may be able to track them down. I'll try another search today as I would like to be able to give it to brides.

Roger

At photoshoot venues it amuses me when I see the photog setting up the posed shots and two eager video guys on either side shooting the whole thing ..
Chris

There are times when I do capture part of the photo shoot. For one thing it's a good opportunity to ensure coverage of key guests, other times it's nice to show the behind the scenes of a photo shoot. Some can be quite lively, with a lot of laughter and mockery, such as when a particular guest is late or doesn't stand in the right position. Kids can be great here too. I agree it can be pretty dull for the most part and I avoid just repeating what the Photographer is capturing albeit with video, but if filmed well, it can make for a nice little piece in the video.

Hi Steve

Again as Roger says we all work in different ways! Photoshoots here involve just the bridal party going off to a few different venues ..never the guests ...family groups are done at the ceremony venue and normally dispensed with quickly so the bridal party can have maximum time getting their "special photos"

When we do our dual shoots we are doing photos anyway so I will team up with the wife and do groups then do my video shoot at the first location. After that the video stuff and stedicam is back in the car and I'm onto stills until reception time ... while I have the B&G for video the rest of the bridal party are doing stills with wifey so it works well.

Chris

In the UK, once the ceremony is over, the main wedding party and guests tend to remain together at most weddings, with groups being called by the photographer. He will probably take the B&G away from the guests for a while to do some romantic shots.

Like Steve, we always include part of the photographer's groups in the video as it is quite a big part of the day. The setting up of the poses, funny comments etc are what we film, with the actual posed shot being of little importance. We do exactly the same if we are doing the dual package, and if I am doing a solo dual shoot I will video the preparation before taking the stills of each group.

Roger

Roger I'd like to quote that statistic to prospective couples - do you have a link to the survey? I've googled but can't find it

Hi Peter, I spent an hour trying to track down that particular quote, but there are hundreds of wedding surveys and hundreds of Daily Mail wedding orientated posts that quote many different surveys, although finding complete survey results is almost impossible, they must be subscription based. Several here saw the original figures and it is a shame that I can't now find them.

The figures for US weddings are considerably different, with video seeming to have a higher priority than in the UK at about 30%+. The whole approach to weddings seems more entertainment and media based in the US with much bigger budgets and social importance.

Roger

I'm not sure even if you did track the Daily Mail article, it would act as proof of the validity of the figures. I can just imagine the look on a prospective couples face as I explain this survey and say, 'well it must be true, it was published in the Daily Mail'.

LOL Yes I normally say a national bridal magazine in conjunction with the Daily Mail!! Mind you there are so many 'wedding surveys' out there that you can probably pick the one that suits you best. They seem to be run by venues, photographers, dress suppliers, care hire companies and probably the local chip shop.

I thought of conducting a survey of all my past brides to see what percentage had a video :-)

' A UK wedding company conducted a survey of 2000 brides and found that after looking at the options, 100% had chosen to have a video of their wedding day'

Roger

A survey recently published shows UK brides spend on average £659 on a video - It doesn't state what sort of coverage they get for that and it's quite a bit less than I charge for my most popular package - having said that there is a husband/wife team in my town that advertise a full day for that price!

You & Your Wedding survey reveals the average cost of a wedding is over £20,500 | Immediate Media Co ? The Special Interest Content and Platform Company (http://www.immediate.co.uk/news/brand/you-your-wedding-survey-reveals-the-average-cost-of-a-wedding-is-over-20500/)

A survey recently published shows UK brides spend on average £659 on a video - It doesn't state what sort of coverage they get for that and it's quite a bit less than I charge for my most popular package - having said that there is a husband/wife team in my town that advertise a full day for that price!

You & Your Wedding survey reveals the average cost of a wedding is over £20,500 | Immediate Media Co ? The Special Interest Content and Platform Company (http://www.immediate.co.uk/news/brand/you-your-wedding-survey-reveals-the-average-cost-of-a-wedding-is-over-20500/)

I wouldn't worry too much Pete as I saw another one today that says the average price paid for photography is £500. I think the word average is key here, because that will include those that used family members who charged nothing or minimal costs. When it comes to prices, averages can be very misleading.

The couple that advertise that price in your town may actually have various add ons that take the price up as the definition of 'all day' can be interpreted in many different ways. I visited a potential client this week who had won a voucher for a 'Free Family Portrait Photo Shoot'. The shoot didn't include any of the photos which they had to pay for. They had one small canvas and a 9x6 in a cheap frame that cost them just over £200! Things aren't always what they seem.

Roger

Hey Pete

Surveys are getting to the stage where the public don't believe them any more ... I can survey 50 people and ask them "would you have had a video if the budget allowed" - if 40 say "Sure" then I can truthfully say ...90% of the people surveyed said they regretted not having a wedding video" Far too easily manipulated!

How about finding a willing couple to do a short video about regretting not having a wedding video ... it would probably strike a few heart strings via your website and make them positive prospects

One Regret from Our Wedding - YouTube

Whenever I see a survey, I'm reminded of one I had to do as part of my Geography GCSE. I had to come up with a questionnaire and approach shoppers to a local supermarket to answer them. Anyway being a bit cheeky, I added a last question - 'Do you ever lie on surveys?' I got an almost 100% response - 'yes'. Whilst my teacher didn't like it and I had to sit in the naughty chair for a class, it shows how much we should take surveys seriously.

All I know is, I met with a photographer I like working with yesterday and we have defined 3 base packages that offer photo and video.

1 - 1/2 day photo and video
2 - full day photo 1/2 day video
3 - full day photo and video

I plan to send out this info to the 200 brides on my mailing list from the bridal show I did and we'll see if anyone bites. lol