New video on YouTube

[David L. Holmes]

I've just posted a new video on YouTube. This was shot with my GL2 and a homemade video dolly. I used Magic Bullet White-Diffusion and the Vignette filter in Adobe Premiere Pro CS3. Comments would be greatly appreciated as I'm trying to refine my technique for future videos. Thanks,

Dave

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuBb-V1HUfM

[Jurgen Geevels]

I like your shots and very clean travels, too bad that its a bit boring, even for a wedding-intro, i'd like a bit more dynamic things
but don't mind me i am just a product of the MTV-style stuff : >

[Michael Nistler]

Hi David,

Thank you for sharing. Looks like you're coming along fine with your dolly shots although wedding videographers are using glidecam/steadycams or monopods - churches aren't going to be fond of dolly gear during weddings and it's not very mobile.

As far as the shots go, most will agree with Jurgen that we want a faster pace. One or two of these shots interspersed with action would be fine. Better yet, use opacity to mix this type of slow moving action with other camera shots. I did like the foreground/background shots with the candles at minute 1:56 - these types of shots are classics for wedding videographers, including movement through flowers/bushes, through stair posts/fences, etc.

Otherwise, nice music and cinema - keep it up!

Warm Regards, Michael

[David L. Holmes]

Hey Guys!

Thanks for the comments and please keep them coming! Yeah Jurgen, it's a bit boring, but so are weddings. I need to start watching for more exciting and interesting shots for my B-reel stuff so I can jazz it up a bit. As for getting a stedi-cam system, no way, to much money. This footage was taken the night before the actual wedding, so I had the run of the place.

This is not my profession, only my hobby. I did this wedding for my wife’s sister, and I'm just trying to improve my techniques. Good feedback helps, and I'll take everything you send me.

With only one camera, and a limited budget, I'm trying to get the most out of what I own. My next project will include my newly purchased microphones and 8-track digital recorder so I can get the best sound possible. I'll be shooting my sisters Elementary School production of the Jungle Book. I'll try to get a short video together with the improved sound and new Century Optics 16:9 adaptor.

Talk to everyone later!

Dave

[Frank Simpson]

I disagree that weddings are boring. And if a wedding video is boring, well, it's largely our fault as the videographer.

My comments for this piece would be as follows:

In shooting the sequences I would dolly and zoom a bit faster. Not fast, but not as slow as your current shots.

In cutting this footage I would chop about half of it out completely. The duration of most shots could afford to be abbreviated quite a bit. The first shot of the two vases pouring water is completely superfluous. The second shot, by virtue of its closer framing and tilting make for a much more interesting shot, and tell us everything we need to know about that subject. Aa a rule, whenever possible I try to avoid cutting two shots that have the same camera move. (Tilt down on the vases followed by tilt down on steeple.) If one or the other was a tilt up shot it would make for a nicer complimentary shot.

The altar shots are nice but there are simply too many and too slow. Three shots in a row of the unity candle is overkill to say the least. The fact that the push in is so slow that it has to cut to the zoomed in view is indicative of a major pacing problem. I would have shot it to be a single shot with the push in for the final close up, rather than splitting it up into multiple shots.

Really you could just recut the footage you have and aim for it to be no longer than one minute long. Then you could have a fine introductory sequence for the wedding.

Keep up the good work!

[David L. Holmes]

Thanks Frank, that's a good critique!

I like this forum because I never had the privilege of working with a professional videographer or editor and the comments do help. As a rule of thumb, what is the most common type of editing when dealing with panning shots? Should I avoid having two consecutive shots the same direction, or should I reverse the footage (ex- left to right, then next shot right to left).

I'll use the cliché "Less is more" idea here. Most of the dolly shots are actually slowed down a bit so I can speed them up. Plus the original edit was trying to fill in space on my timeline so I could utilize the entire song. I'll stop worrying about adding "filler" material for my videos and just concentrate on the "story" of the wedding, and not a music video.

With all the ideas, I'll redo the video and post it back up in a few days. Thanks to everyone for helping me with my video endeavor!

[Jurgen Geevels]

It will be an akward effect if you cut DURING a cam movement, the only way you can do this is by using a wipe or mix.
but there are exceptions:

Creeping zoom (subtle zoom)
Zip Pan (fast blurry pan)
Retrozoom (travel out / in with and zooming the other way)
Combination of an object that moves (for example a train)
Cutting in two travels after each other in the SAME direction (unless Videoclips you can use the contrast there)
Contrasting editing: for example someone is tied on a chair waiting on the hero, you can cut to the hero who's coming on his horse and use your travels without any problem.

[Frank Simpson]

I disagree that cutting on a camera move is inherently awkward. In fact, I often try to cut on action (either camera or subject), particularly when implying the continuation of movement from one shot to the other. This avoids the stop-start-stop syndrome.

The question becomes: what is the action? and more importantly what is the desired effect?

Two consecutive pans in the same direction can be either a good thing or a bad thing. If the cut forces the attention of the viewer to check out of the video to "get his bearings" then it's a bad cut... unless of course the desired effect is to jar the viewer! If the cut implies a continuation of the movement or direction, then it will likely work well. As a rule of thumb, if I'm doing consecutive pans (which I would only do if I'm planning my cuts in advance) and the subject/location changes I would have them moving in opposite directions.

In the above-mentioned tilt shots the theory might be like this. If we tilt down on the vases then we, as an audience" are in a "down" position. When we tilt down on the steeple we have to immediately jump to an "up" position, which forces out brains to reassess our position to esablish our point of view. If the steeple tilt were reversed we would finish the vase shot "down", then cut to the low shot in front of the church. We are already "down" so we do not have such an abrupt transition as we look back "up" to the steeple. (I hope this makes sense!)

Really there are not so much "rules" to follow as "isms". No one can tell you what is right or wrong, although certrainly one cut will work better than another. Editing is a deep and wide field of discovery!