Hey all,

I posted a early version of a demo I did for a company I do work for here in Montreal. It's complete now. Thanks to all for the feedback.

Feel free to beat me up about the final version. I can't change it now, but comments are always helpful for my work in general.

http://tinyurl.com/37e4d9

Cheers,
Vito

+ Original style overall. Funky & fun but not irreverent. Definitely not run-of-the-mill "cinematic wedding". :)

- I think it was the very first shot that had the bride coming down the aisle or through the lobby or something (offset 1:34). It looked like it could use color correction - it just didn't seem to match with the look of the rest of the demo, and didn't contrast enough to seem like it was intentional.

- There were also a few transitions where a flash of golden color was used to transition between shots that were both using the slightly desaturated look. I just thought it looked a bit odd to see a face fade in as goldish yellow and then desaturate... Offset 02:25 or so.

Hope this helps,
-- Elliot

Hey Vito,

To be honest, I didn't like the split screens, personally I just don't like them in general on wedding videos, although many guys use them.

However, overall I loved it, great sense of flow to it, very, very nice. Keep up the good work!

Hey Guys

Thanks for the feedback. It's always nice to get some reactions from fellow videographers to get a sense of what does and doesn't work.

Alan, while I actually don't mind split screens, though I don't use them much, in this demo they were used purposely to emphasize that we were using two cameras. Our clientele finds two cameras a tough sell, and we're trying to move there more and more.

Apparently, it's working, according to the response, which is great.

Thanks,
Vito

Vito:
Great work! Looks good. I like the overall feel of the video. What were your settings for the playback for window size. I shoot in 16x9 but cant seem to get the right size for playback.
Thanks,
John

Hi John,

Thanks for checking it out.

I used a calculator to give me a quick frame size. From 1920X1080 I divided down by four to get 480X270. I used Sorenson Squeeze v.4.3 to encode to wmv files.

Cheers,
Vito

Really enjoyed it Vito...

How refreshing....and you had a great bride to work with too!

It would be really interesting if you could give a quick run through of the various techniques you've used in post...I for one would learn a lot.

As a showcase of the range of things you can do, and the value of a two-camera shoot, it works really well.

Has it been a good tool yet to persuade other couples to say 'yes' to a two-camera set-up?

I'm sure the couple featured are delighted with the end product - and that's what's important!

Sean

Really enjoyed it Vito...

How refreshing....and you had a great bride to work with too!

Thanks, Sean. And yeah, she was great. Really happy. Easy to get nice footage for a demo from her.

It would be really interesting if you could give a quick run through of the various techniques you've used in post...I for one would learn a lot.

Do you mean what type of effects? Or how do I approach the edit? Give me an idea of what you are asking, and I'd be happy to respond.

Has it been a good tool yet to persuade other couples to say 'yes' to a two-camera set-up?

Absolutely. The response to this demo has been incredible. Bookings are up in general, and two-camera bookings are happening now, when before, we could never talk anyone into it.

Cheers,
Vito

That's great news...a happy couple and you've got extra bookings - that's what I call a result.

The answer is 'seeing is believing' - once a couple can 'see' the value that a second camera gives - then how can they settle for second best?

I (and I'm sure others) would be interested in both - a. the effects you've applied and b. how you've approached the edit.

It's quality work - and you've clearly put a great deal of time and effort into it. And that shows.

Cheers, Sean

Looooooved that demo!

Okay, Sean. Here we go.

First, we knew that we wanted to use this video for a demo. I shoot with a Z1, and we got a second shooter with an FX1. We ended up with a fair amount of footage, perhaps 7 hours, which was plenty.

Since the couple had ordered a video, I started by first editing that for them. I always capture complete tapes. I don't log clips beforehand, as I find it unnecessary in this age of cheap hard drives, and I don't like the extra wear and tear on our decks/cameras. I put the full clips on the timeline, and start cutting down. This technique works very well for projects that are generally chronological, such as a wedding.

As I rough cut, I try to put aside clips to use for a highlights section. I like to include a good portion of clips in the highlights that won't be seen in the main video, so that it's not a straight repeat.

After the rough cut is done, I add music to sections that demand it (groom and bride's preparations, photo shoot, etc), then do a fine edit to the music. I also make the ceremony a complete section, audio mix, etc, and do the same to the reception.

Then I colour correct the entire video as needed.

Finally, I copy my sequence, remove all the audio, and put the song in for the highlights. I remove all clips that I don't want to have in the highlights, and add in the ones that I had put aside earlier. I edit that to the music. Then choose a group of transitions that I think might work well for the music and footage. I add those where needed.

Finally, I try to find a 'look' that could look nice to set the highlights off from the rest of the video. A colour effect (B&W, Sepia), or Bleach Bypass, Film Effect, whatever. Sometimes, as in the demo you looked at, this will be a stack of four or five layers to get a desired look.

For example, the demo used a stack of (for much of it):

1. Colour correction
2. Bleach bypass
3. Film Grain
4. Film damage
5. Vignette

from bottom to top.

Whew! That's a quick description of what I do. I've left a lot out, as the edit process is quick a bit more complicated than that, but you get the idea.

The whole edit takes me about 25 hours.

For this demo, I took the highlights that I had done as a starting point, then rearraged/added/removed material to suit the purpose of the demo.

I have no idea if this process resembles what others do, but it works for me!

Cheers,
Vito

Looooooved that demo!

Thanks, Justine! Means a lot to get nice feedback.

Vito:
Another question. You have what appears to be a quick cut of film leader in the video. I have been looking for something like this as a plug in. Is this a plug in you used?

Thanks,
John

Hi John,

Actually, it's small pieces of an academy leader that I downloaded from archive.org.

You can download the same leader in various formats here:

http://www.archive.org/details/Countdow1960

The archives there are amazing. Tons of movies, clips, whatever, much of it public domain or royalty free. I've found some great stuff there.

Vito:

Fantastic! Just what I was looking for.

Thanks,
John

My pleasure, John. Have fun on archive.org. I've been stuck there for days at a time before.

Ciao,
Vito

Vito,

I hate being critical but IMO there was WAY too much film damage...and i was starting to think i had tunnel vision from the over-use of vignetting

sorry, it was otherwise fantastic :)

Criticize away, Richard! I did post and ask for it.

I tend to agree with you anyway. The look was a very specific request from my client.

It was interesting. I shot the footage in HDV, and downconverted in camera for the edit. On the downconverted footage, the vignette was much less evident. When the edit was complete, I recaptured in HDV and compressed for the web from that. Suddenly the vignette was much more evident and sharp. Too precise for my taste, but again, the client loved it, so what could I say?

In his defense, he has been getting a stellar response in his meetings with prospective customers, so I guess he was right...

I waffle back and forth about the file damage and vignette. Why use it at all? How much is too much? I mean, it's copying the look of a film that has been badly preserved! Wouldn't we rather see the footage undamaged? Yet, clients love it...

The vignette has some positive effect. It focuses the attention to the centre, and removes us a bit, but at the expense of tunnel vision, as you noted.

Anyway, long response to a simple critique. Thanks for watching and giving your opinion. Always appreciated. And you have confirmed what I suspected anyway.

Cheers,
Vito