This is a sort of sneak-preview of a wedding video I did over the weekend, made a time-lapse of the ceremony with a few regular shots cut in.

The time-lapse is gopro. The open shot, kiss in the middle and closing shot is LS300 with 35mm Veydra.

Curious any input, feel free to fire way it helps me and I appreciate it. One of my issues with color correcting J-log is I'm a little color blind, learning to go by the scopes more and more.

https://youtu.be/4LlrxSwOBsM

That was, uhm, special? :) Not sure what to say about this, the openingsshot when they walked towards you look great but after that I didn't like it anymore. Also, a part of the voice was mono and came out of my left speaker only. Sorry if I come across as negative but the gopro view from all the way back and the tilt-shift effect did not do it for me. Are you going to use this on your website or is the couple going to place this on their facebook?

Is this an example of an idea you have for a unique style for weddings and is the finished product longer?

My initial reaction is that it looks like a speeded up spy cam video and I agree that the tilt adds nothing apart from making it look amateur. Wedding videos tend to be either documentary style long form, or short form cinematic style. The point of both styles is that they capture faces and emotions of the day and I feel that your video does neither. The GoPro footage is too far away to show any sort of detail at all, and the LS300 footage is extremely limited and captures no details of the wedding.

Without knowing the point of the video, it is difficult to be objective, but I can't see the couple feeling that it represents their wedding.

Sorry to be negative, but I can't think of anything positive to add apart from the fact that it is 'different' but not in a good way.

Roger

Interesting replies, can't come up with anything positive, good stuff man. But, as I said in my opening sentence, it's a "sneak-preview" of a wedding video I am making, not the finished product. It was an experiment for a teaser, as in "not revealing all the good stuff".

Just wanted to share some of the LS300 shots, I thought the camera performed great, switching to 400 ISO in bright light in J-Log works better for me.

The rest of it, different strokes for different folks, the bride flipped out and loved it, said she's never seen anything like that at a wedding, thought it was cool to see the place fill up in fast time since she wasn't there for that. She's looking forward to the final product, so for me the "preview" part worked okay, bride happy I'm happy as far as that goes.

I didn't like it at all Jay, but if there is one thing that I have learned in 32 years of making wedding videos it is that the only opinion that matters is that of the Bride and Groom. So in that department you obviously have a winner :-)

Roger

Perhaps it could be half the length maybe a little less.
It's certainly an odd venue as everyone is so spread out, not particularly intimate.

Interesting replies, can't come up with anything positive, good stuff man. .

Don't take it too personal, you asked us to "fire way as it would help you and you'd appreciate it" but apparently not :)
I gave you a honest reply, I said I liked your openingsshot and I told you had a problem with your audio, I just didn't like the rest but that's just me, like Roger has pointed out, as long as the couple likes then that's all that matters.

Honestly not talking it personal at all, I think "I cant some up with one thing positive to say" is kinda funny, I can always come up with something positive if I had to, it's an interesting thing to note is all, IMO.

Yep I wanted the input for sure, it does help. Unlike others, I mean no one posts video here much, I appreciate and use the feedback, I'll correct that mic channel on the full video, thanks. You don't like the time-lapse, that's cool too, variety is the spice of life.

The "interesting" part to me was that it seemed to be critiqued as a full wedding video, when I tried to clearly state it's a preview of a wedding video, that's all.

-----
Perhaps could be shorter Duncan, then the people would be moving too fast and you couldn't see the sunlight/shade moving thru as well to me, but it likely won't be as long start to finish in the full video.

Always interesting how people can see things very differently. One overriding comment I got from that video was how beautiful the venue was, nothing close to "certainly an odd place for a wedding." No worries at all, to each how own, "odd venue" just never crossed my mind, that place really was gorgeous.

Giddy up.

I didn't critique it as a full wedding video as you did mention clearly it was a sneak-preview so there was no misunderstanding from my side.

It's cool Noa, that's just the vibe I got, like that was the whole thing. And "that's special" as critique is vaguely subjective, I'm taking it to mean "that sucks" in this case lol.

It's all good, and if I thought it was a full video I'd think it was bad too. Just an experiment, my real regret is not just shooting the go pro regular time and speeding up for a very similar effect, I'd like to have that wide shot in normal time on a couple of the applause lines to cover me moving around.

I'm taking it to mean "that sucks" in this case lol.

That are your words, not mine.

You also said you wanted to showcase the ls300 but there are only 3 shots in there that are not from the gopro, the very first shot I liked, like I said before, but the two next it looks like only the second one is from the ls300 but not the first as it covered a different angle, but I didn't find these 2 very short shots representative of what the ls300 is capable off, the footage looked soft and the added blur effect didn't make it any better.

I said it was "weird" because that's how it looked to me because most of it is a one angle gopro shot way in the back with some fast forward and stop motion effects, I have seen this tilt shift effect been applied in trailers before and if used in a correct way, like when you want to show a few shots of a part of the city where the wedding will be, it can add something to the film, as long as you don't overuse it because it can look out of place very quickly and this feeling I got with your teaser.

I also didn't critique it as a full wedding video, as you described it as a sneak preview. However, I would expect a preview to reflect the style of the full video, otherwise why not describe it as an idea for a small part of a full video. I often include speeded up GoPro footage of guest arrivals as part of a typical 90 minute full video, but wouldn't put that section of it out as a preview.

Personally I never put any of my wedding footage on any forum for critique as I am not the slightest bit interested in what other professionals think of my work. I have my own style that I have developed and continually refined over decades. The only thing that matters to me is my client's response to my work and the sustainability and growth of my business based on the quality of my work and the comments of my clients.

However, you posted an example of your work and asked for critique so I responded with my opinion based on what you posted. I repeat what I said earlier though, all that matters is your client's response :-)

Roger

"I'm taking it to mean "that sucks" in this case lol."
That are your words, not mine.
Correct. Your words were "That's um, special", which is open to interpretation so I interpreted. :) I can live with "weird".

You also said you wanted to showcase the ls300 but there are only 3 shots in there that are not from the gopro, the very first shot I liked, like I said before, but the two next it looks like only the second one is from the ls300 but not the first as it covered a different angle, but I didn't find these 2 very short shots representative of what the ls300 is capable off, the footage looked soft and the added blur effect didn't make it any better.
I didn't say anything about 'showcasing' the LS300 in this video, your word, not mine. :) I said there are a few shots in there.
On those shots, I wrestle with that 'softness' of J-log and added a sharpen filter, unsure just how far to go with it, I don't use much and try to just lose that little "halo" of softness before the shadows come in. Sometimes I think it's just going to be a little soft, but I'm not sure I never thought I'd need a sharpen filter at all.

On a shot like the last one, we just see it differently. There's no blur effect, and I thought it was nice and sharp once I found the focus, that's why I used it. So that's just different takes on it. Cool.


Roger, I don't do weddings, 90 minutes sounds like a long time to sit thru a wedding video, is that a normal length? I think mine's going to be about 20-30 minutes maybe.


Like I said I don't do weddings, I didn't think the time-lapse would be the focus, mostly curious about the few LS300 shots, color and look and so forth, my fault for not just posting one with more shots in it, I'll do that later. And like Roger said, it doesn't matter what anyone thinks but the customer, I'm just trying to get better on the camera and there's no one to kick it around with.

I didn't say anything about 'showcasing' the LS300 in this video, your word, not mine. :) I said there are a few shots in there.

You said you wanted to share some ls300 shots and I made it showcase so a wrong choice of words on my part but in both cases meaning that you want to show how the camera performs. You otoh confused "weird" or in my case not liking something with that it sucks which was not was I meant at all.

There's no blur effect
I attached a framegrab of that last shot because this is how I see it on my screen when played back in the highest quality, when I look at the feet of the persons sitting in the left bottom corner that area is softer then their faces, I also attached a framegrab of one of my own films shot with the ls300 to show the difference which is quite big, the framegrabs I posted are not even the native resolution, just a copy of what is shown on screen when I pause the film so the added softness my also be youtube compression.
Eventhough my framegrab was not shot in jlog I can get the same detail out of that, you have to bear in mind that in jlog all sharpening is turned completely off and you are supposed to add that back in post or at least have the choice if you want to leave it as is.

Whenever you post your work online and ask for input you also have to prepare for reactions that you might not expect, in this case it actually doesn't matter what the bride thinks because you are asking us for feedback and then you can expect different opinions. I also post my work here now and then and it happens that I get a weird remark (to me) like last time when someone said my work was generic, I asked what he meant by that but he never came back with an explanation.
The difference between you and me is that I don't take it as personal or get defensive, I can appreciate different thoughts and I find it interesting to know why, I also don't have to agree with all other opinions because that's just what they are; someones opinion and we all know everyone has one but that doesn't mean I don't value them and I have learned from some remarks I have got on my work.

Last thing I want to say is don't get discouraged or stop posting your work just because you are not getting a reaction like you expected, it take guts to show your work and ask for others that are active in the field to show their view, as you may know we look at a film in a different way then a bride does so you can expect more pixel peeping.

I rarely ask for a critique of anything I've made, and then I just ask my wife.
She works in live TV but looks at my work objectively as she has no real interest in it. Ha!

I think I aware of my own limitations. Most obstacles I come up against are dull subjects, poor locations and a lack of communication from third parties. All out of my control I believe.

I hope this thread cheers up a bit.

Roger, I don't do weddings, 90 minutes sounds like a long time to sit thru a wedding video, is that a normal length? I think mine's going to be about 20-30 minutes maybe.


Hi Jay,

There is no normal length for weddings, with professional output varying from a few minutes to several hours. My own wedding productions cover the entire ceremony and speeches, with preps, arrivals, reception and evening all being edited down to keep them interesting.

Your comment about '90 minutes sounds like a long time to sit through a weddings' is certainly true if you are watching a wedding where you weren't involved and didn't know anybody. Personally, I find other people's weddings are usually repetitive and boring with the same old ceremonies, readings and speech jokes. However I enjoy the challenge of filming and editing them and being an observer on other people's big day.

What I have found after filming over 2000 weddings, in just how little most couples actually remember of their day after all the months of planning it. In our case, we get booked because the couple and their families can sit down afterwards and see all the details they missed and all the people they didn't get a chance to talk to or sometimes even see. For many people it is the one time in their lives where the whole of their family and friends gather together apart from their funeral, and they want to see the whole thing.

HOWEVER- not everybody wants a full length documentary of their day, so increasingly companies are going down the cinematic short form route, with the cream shots of the day set to music. That is absolutely fine, but is a totally different product to the documentary style. We offer a short form if couples want it, or a very short highlights video set to one song as an add on. What I have found at wedding shows, is that most new wedding companies don't offer the full documentary style, but offer a cinematic short, with some giving full speeches and ceremony as an unedited or quick trimmed addition. It is easy and satisfying to be drawn into being creative and original with blockbuster type cinematic shots and scenes with glorious romantic music, particularly after watching other people offering just that. Weddings though are very intimate and personal and often couples are not interested in blockbuster style films, they want to see their day unfold infront of them in their own time and in a linear portrayal of what happened. There are no rules, you choose how you want to work.

We have picked up a lot of work because we offer the full documentary style rather than creative cinematic shorts. I'm also surprised at how many couples now assume that all wedding video is very short because of what they have watched on line and are often delighted that there are longer alternatives. The important thing is to find out what your customer expectations are, coupled with what it is that you want to produce. Make sure your demo videos are typical of your end product and believe in what you are selling.

Roger

I attached a framegrab of that last shot because this is how I see it on my screen when played back in the highest quality, when I look at the feet of the persons sitting in the left bottom corner that area is softer then their faces, I also attached a framegrab of one of my own films shot with the ls300 to show the difference which is quite big, the framegrabs I posted are not even the native resolution, just a copy of what is shown on screen when I pause the film so the added softness my also be youtube compression.
Eventhough my framegrab was not shot in jlog I can get the same detail out of that, you have to bear in mind that in jlog all sharpening is turned completely off and you are supposed to add that back in post or at least have the choice if you want to leave it as is.

I'd like to reboot, was thrown by perceived snark I guess, I personally wouldn't start a comment the same way, to me it sets the tone, but it's okay people are different. Y'all don't like the timelaspe, thats fine, we'll move past it and focus on the JVC footage, I'm editing some samples and want to try a different approach.
---

Noa, the shot you posted isn't "the last shot" that I mean, I mean literally the last shot in the video of the two standing together, there is no blur effect on that shot. And like I said I add a sharpen filter because the J-log turns it off. If thats still too soft-looking would be because I shot in 4K and my large monitor acted up on me had to use the small LCD for focus, was worried about that.

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b345/KaCopics/seth%20emily%20married%20pic_zpsucdejqdu.png

The shot you posted of the crowd was heavy graded and blurred to try and match the look of the go pro.

Roger that's cool, I can see a bride wanting it to be plenty long for posterity, thanks for the breakdown.

-----------
It wasn't a good example of JVC footage, that's my fault, I'll just post that from now on, I'm interested in more technical coloring issues that I can't tell what's going on well, not getting pats on the back. I can think something looks okay, take a fresh look or opinion on it and not so much. A good example is the soccer video I posted, the first one was horrible, I was lost in weird grade land, and Lee's comments got me back in the right direction and really helped out.

Ah ok, I didn't even see that shot because I didn't watch your video until the end :)

That's one way to offer insightful critique on the last shot of a video. :)