Cool wedding editing

Daniel Ross · October 27th, 2007, 03:09 AM

His sense of timing is good, but it's just over the top and stupid.
A wedding is not a music video. Heh.

The FX also really aren't that amazing. They're pretty well done, but nothing phenomenal.

Walter S. Chelliah · October 27th, 2007, 03:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Ross

A wedding is not a music video.

Yeah, they're supposed to be drawn out and boring, right?

Scott Shama · October 27th, 2007, 04:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Ross

His sense of timing is good, but it's just over the top and stupid.
A wedding is not a music video. Heh.

The FX also really aren't that amazing. They're pretty well done, but nothing phenomenal.

Wow...I really like how you called someone elses hard work stupid....that was so....well....stupid of you....

Saying you don't like it is one thing....calling it stupid though...

Daniel Ross · October 27th, 2007, 04:33 AM

His skills should be applied elsewhere.
I didn't call him stupid nor his style. Applying it in this case IS stupid, in my opinion.

On top of that, your phrasing sounds as if he's a working man trying hard to make a living... well... no. He doesn't, I don't suppose, have much trouble creating these videos, considering his experience. He's a professional and quite used to his tools. He does his job and does it well (objectively-- it's well done, though the intent may not be a good idea), but it's simply a method for financial gain-- because the flashy graphics are impressive. In that sense, the method works, but to me, I find it laughable. Too many people not versed in technology just love anything flashy. I think it's kinda a shame. Just think about showing the average person how to reverse a video clip. Oooh the possibilities! They'd probably put that in their wedding too... but... eh... ew.

Noa Put · October 27th, 2007, 05:08 AM

I saw one clip were the couple was dancing (probably against a green screen) and looking at the effects that were used it was quite impressive. It could be broadcasted on mtv if you ask me. As long as the couple who hires him know what to expect there's is nothing wrong with his type of editing, calling it stupid or laughable is just a personal opinion.

If this is the only way he edits his wedding video's then his client base is very limited but if he uses it as an (extra paid) option in his wedding packages it will give him an advantage against his competitors.

It's much like trash the dress, here (belgium) f.i. it's very difficult to get it sold, people often find it stupid or laughable as well while Patrick Moreau seems to get his year fully booked with it. It's all about personal opinion and how open people in certain countries are for it depending on the traditions.

Daniel Ross · October 27th, 2007, 05:49 AM

Makes sense.

I guess that the limited client base is the most important thing, then.

And, yeah, it could go on MTV. But... a wedding that goes on MTV? Weird, I say.

Thomas Quinn · October 28th, 2007, 05:45 PM

Lots of sour grapes about this persons work I think it is just brill Just show it to your next Potential bride and ask her

Scott Shama · October 28th, 2007, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas Quinn

Lots of sour grapes about this persons work I think it is just brill Just show it to your next Potential bride and ask her

Only one person's sour.....

Ben Winter · October 28th, 2007, 07:21 PM

Hopefully having the the wisdom to look past the present is a gift granted by being married...that said, I can't imagine anyone over fifty enjoying something like this...

A new twenty-something couple may like flashy effects to match the excitement they feel then, but when they yearn to relive the day twenty, thirty, forty years from now...and recapture the sentiment that comes with exchanging vows, starting a family...this would be nothing but an obnoxious headache and waste of money...

This Cube guy may be very talented visually, and caters to his audience, as young as they are...but does not appreciate the meaning of archiving an event like this.

My grandfather was the sole photographer for my parents' wedding and ruined all but one photo. That is the only memory I or my parents have of the event. It upsets me to this day.

Scott Shama · October 28th, 2007, 08:23 PM

Ok, two...

I think the thing that you guys are missing is that I bet these clips are like his highlight piece. I would think the couple still gets the ceremony and toasts and such in a more normal form.

I think the real thing here is a few people maybe think that if the industry goes this way, they'll be out of work... ;)

Heiko Saele · October 29th, 2007, 05:10 PM

I have to say the editing is great, good ideas, the rhythm, the style, everything is great.I just don't want to watch it for more than 2 or 3 minutes. I can tell you for sure that my parents wouldn't want to watch it for more than 30 seconds... so... I don't know...
It kind of reminded me of the movie trailers for all the big hollywood movies. More FTB than actual footage, hooking music, but, well, something's lacking to draw my attention for more than a little while. The editing is great, as well as the camera work (well, as far as I could see that) but the over all impression was just "I'm gonna switch to the next channel and see what they've got there"

Lisa Ivey · November 6th, 2007, 12:53 AM

Well, put me in the class of "over 50" and I enjoyed the heck out of it. You don't have to be young to enjoy creative editing. This guy is doing something that not many people can do. And I bet he's making a lot of money by doing it. I would love to have such a creative mind!

Robi Nalt · December 13th, 2007, 05:01 PM

The only suggestion i would make about his editing is that it immediately starts with the effects. Sometimes that cannot be avoided, but when using progressive music like the one with the Scorpions "send me an angel" which later went to "wind of change", then i would suggest a more that he goes to the short cuts and effecsts progressively up to where the music is cilmactic and in a way elongate that moment , just to slowly come back down.

Anyhow, the editing is great, i am sure that the editor does not film it himself. He probably requests differnt style of shots from the videographers, with different angels, speeds, motion, distance etc etc and then he follows the musical line rhythmically and dynamically.

Great job as something like that takes a lot of time.

Ger Griffin · December 14th, 2007, 03:16 PM

Dont get me wrong, I like a lot of what he has done (not all of it).
I worked for 3 years doing nothing else but compositing and fx and
realise how long it takes to do what he has done.

I have only recently returned to the wedding business,
I cannot see this approach to weddings working for a number of reasons.

The first is the sheer lenght of time it takes to do edits like these.
Clients would need to be paying enough to buy the editor/company for at least 4 weeks. If that is the case then good luck to him. I only wish I could find clients like that in this country.
Which leads me to my second point. On my return to the wedding business recently, it was my intention to subtley introduce fx to the edits and build up templates over time. I suppose being honest my ultimate aim was to end up with wedding videos something similar to his (although not in style).
My first job was edited heavily, I used some fx and i thought they worked well. The clients were happy. They originated from NY and came over here for the wedding.
My next potential clients came to see me. They were Irish. We spoke and to put a long story short they explained to me how they did not want too many effects used in their wedding video. They pointed at a paticualr effect i did, where i used timewarp in ae to go quickly and slowly from one bridesmaid to another. Believe me I had spent time on the day shooting with this effect in mind. I was actually quite happy with it but would make adjustments on my next shoot to get it even better.
They had the cheek to say it looked like an afterthought. I was actually offended, although I didn't show it.
So my approach to these people was to be very straightforward in the edit and shooting style.
In retrospect, its easier to do this and I think it does suit the wedding style of video to not be excessive on fx. I know this is just my opinion and I could be slammed by people here saying " what do you know, your work is crap"
Well I can take it!

You know in retrospect I prefer the second one. I think it has a better pace, and a nicer & more appropriate wedding style. Not to mention that in a few years it will still look the same. The effects on the first video, will end up looking cheesy (if they dont already!)

This one was the first I did, with the FX (although very few) (no need to stick with it after the breidesmaid shot)
http://www.iol.ie/~griffinpromedia/d...&dnewmain.html

The second is after I got scolded for too many effects by my next customers. (no need to stick with it after the photog session)
http://www.iol.ie/~griffinpromedia/d...aulaphoto.html

I have found myself really waffling on here, I'll shut up now.

October 28th, 2007, 07:21 PM	#24
Ben Winter Trustee Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 1,675 Images: 1	Hopefully having the the wisdom to look past the present is a gift granted by being married...that said, I can't imagine anyone over fifty enjoying something like this... A new twenty-something couple may like flashy effects to match the excitement they feel then, but when they yearn to relive the day twenty, thirty, forty years from now...and recapture the sentiment that comes with exchanging vows, starting a family...this would be nothing but an obnoxious headache and waste of money... This Cube guy may be very talented visually, and caters to his audience, as young as they are...but does not appreciate the meaning of archiving an event like this. My grandfather was the sole photographer for my parents' wedding and ruined all but one photo. That is the only memory I or my parents have of the event. It upsets me to this day. __________________ BenWinter.com

October 27th, 2007, 03:09 AM	#16
Daniel Ross Major Player Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Marin & Davis, CA, USA Posts: 418	His sense of timing is good, but it's just over the top and stupid. A wedding is not a music video. Heh. The FX also really aren't that amazing. They're pretty well done, but nothing phenomenal.

October 27th, 2007, 04:33 AM	#19
Daniel Ross Major Player Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Marin & Davis, CA, USA Posts: 418	His skills should be applied elsewhere. I didn't call him stupid nor his style. Applying it in this case IS stupid, in my opinion. On top of that, your phrasing sounds as if he's a working man trying hard to make a living... well... no. He doesn't, I don't suppose, have much trouble creating these videos, considering his experience. He's a professional and quite used to his tools. He does his job and does it well (objectively-- it's well done, though the intent may not be a good idea), but it's simply a method for financial gain-- because the flashy graphics are impressive. In that sense, the method works, but to me, I find it laughable. Too many people not versed in technology just love anything flashy. I think it's kinda a shame. Just think about showing the average person how to reverse a video clip. Oooh the possibilities! They'd probably put that in their wedding too... but... eh... ew.

October 27th, 2007, 05:08 AM	#20
Noa Put Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Posts: 9,510	I saw one clip were the couple was dancing (probably against a green screen) and looking at the effects that were used it was quite impressive. It could be broadcasted on mtv if you ask me. As long as the couple who hires him know what to expect there's is nothing wrong with his type of editing, calling it stupid or laughable is just a personal opinion. If this is the only way he edits his wedding video's then his client base is very limited but if he uses it as an (extra paid) option in his wedding packages it will give him an advantage against his competitors. It's much like trash the dress, here (belgium) f.i. it's very difficult to get it sold, people often find it stupid or laughable as well while Patrick Moreau seems to get his year fully booked with it. It's all about personal opinion and how open people in certain countries are for it depending on the traditions.

October 27th, 2007, 05:49 AM	#21
Daniel Ross Major Player Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Marin & Davis, CA, USA Posts: 418	Makes sense. I guess that the limited client base is the most important thing, then. And, yeah, it could go on MTV. But... a wedding that goes on MTV? Weird, I say.

October 28th, 2007, 05:45 PM	#22
Thomas Quinn Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Co Tyrone Ireland Posts: 60	Lots of sour grapes about this persons work I think it is just brill Just show it to your next Potential bride and ask her

October 28th, 2007, 08:23 PM	#25
Scott Shama Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Beaverton, Oregon Posts: 399	Ok, two... I think the thing that you guys are missing is that I bet these clips are like his highlight piece. I would think the couple still gets the ceremony and toasts and such in a more normal form. I think the real thing here is a few people maybe think that if the industry goes this way, they'll be out of work... ;)

October 29th, 2007, 05:10 PM	#26
Heiko Saele Major Player Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Wurzburg, Germany Posts: 316	I have to say the editing is great, good ideas, the rhythm, the style, everything is great.I just don't want to watch it for more than 2 or 3 minutes. I can tell you for sure that my parents wouldn't want to watch it for more than 30 seconds... so... I don't know... It kind of reminded me of the movie trailers for all the big hollywood movies. More FTB than actual footage, hooking music, but, well, something's lacking to draw my attention for more than a little while. The editing is great, as well as the camera work (well, as far as I could see that) but the over all impression was just "I'm gonna switch to the next channel and see what they've got there"

November 6th, 2007, 12:53 AM	#27
Lisa Ivey Tourist Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Covina, Ca Posts: 1	Well, put me in the class of "over 50" and I enjoyed the heck out of it. You don't have to be young to enjoy creative editing. This guy is doing something that not many people can do. And I bet he's making a lot of money by doing it. I would love to have such a creative mind!

December 13th, 2007, 05:01 PM	#28
Robi Nalt Tourist Join Date: May 2006 Location: New York USA Posts: 4	The only suggestion i would make about his editing is that it immediately starts with the effects. Sometimes that cannot be avoided, but when using progressive music like the one with the Scorpions "send me an angel" which later went to "wind of change", then i would suggest a more that he goes to the short cuts and effecsts progressively up to where the music is cilmactic and in a way elongate that moment , just to slowly come back down. Anyhow, the editing is great, i am sure that the editor does not film it himself. He probably requests differnt style of shots from the videographers, with different angels, speeds, motion, distance etc etc and then he follows the musical line rhythmically and dynamically. Great job as something like that takes a lot of time.

December 14th, 2007, 03:16 PM	#29
Ger Griffin Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: Ireland Posts: 579	Dont get me wrong, I like a lot of what he has done (not all of it). I worked for 3 years doing nothing else but compositing and fx and realise how long it takes to do what he has done. I have only recently returned to the wedding business, I cannot see this approach to weddings working for a number of reasons. The first is the sheer lenght of time it takes to do edits like these. Clients would need to be paying enough to buy the editor/company for at least 4 weeks. If that is the case then good luck to him. I only wish I could find clients like that in this country. Which leads me to my second point. On my return to the wedding business recently, it was my intention to subtley introduce fx to the edits and build up templates over time. I suppose being honest my ultimate aim was to end up with wedding videos something similar to his (although not in style). My first job was edited heavily, I used some fx and i thought they worked well. The clients were happy. They originated from NY and came over here for the wedding. My next potential clients came to see me. They were Irish. We spoke and to put a long story short they explained to me how they did not want too many effects used in their wedding video. They pointed at a paticualr effect i did, where i used timewarp in ae to go quickly and slowly from one bridesmaid to another. Believe me I had spent time on the day shooting with this effect in mind. I was actually quite happy with it but would make adjustments on my next shoot to get it even better. They had the cheek to say it looked like an afterthought. I was actually offended, although I didn't show it. So my approach to these people was to be very straightforward in the edit and shooting style. In retrospect, its easier to do this and I think it does suit the wedding style of video to not be excessive on fx. I know this is just my opinion and I could be slammed by people here saying " what do you know, your work is crap" Well I can take it! You know in retrospect I prefer the second one. I think it has a better pace, and a nicer & more appropriate wedding style. Not to mention that in a few years it will still look the same. The effects on the first video, will end up looking cheesy (if they dont already!) This one was the first I did, with the FX (although very few) (no need to stick with it after the breidesmaid shot) http://www.iol.ie/~griffinpromedia/d...&dnewmain.html The second is after I got scolded for too many effects by my next customers. (no need to stick with it after the photog session) http://www.iol.ie/~griffinpromedia/d...aulaphoto.html I have found myself really waffling on here, I'll shut up now.