Top 5 internationally?

[Warren Kawamoto]

My wife just brought up an interesting point. Most of the posters on this forum are male. We think steadicam, crane and dolly shots are way cool. A majority of these are wide shots. Wide shots generally don't convey emotion.

Her perspective is that these kind of shots, while nice as an establishing shot, focus the attention on "how the shot was done" rather than what the bride and groom are feeling. To her, the best shots are those that you "feel" emotionally. Lots of good closeups. Hands. Eyes. Facial expressions. Does the shot connect the viewer with what the bride and groom feel for each other? Can you feel love by watching their video? A good wedding video goes beyond the eye candy and goes very deep. It connects our definition of love with the couple's no matter where they are in the world.

There are videographers who get incredibly beautiful shots, but can't really edit a sequence to convey love. Then there are those who aren't the greatest shooters, but are lavishly praised because their edited sequence pulled the right heartstrings. Where do you stand as a wedding videographer?

If your work can touch a bride emotionally to the point that it's almost spiritual, consider yourself one of the best in the world.

[Rick Steele]

Originally Posted by Warren Kawamoto

My wife just brought up an interesting point.

Your wife is a wise woman.

But sometimes the talent doesn't cooperate with our hopes and we're left trying to make silk drawers out of burlap. In this business they call this the "documentary" edit. :)

[Bruce Patterson]

Originally Posted by Rick Steele

Why is this a problem? These people don't last long anyway.

At the risk of "irking" you further I believe the inverse. That a lot of people in this business think you MUST create a WEVA award winner in order to be successful. And there's quite a few award recipients out there that do this part time because they still need day jobs. It all depends on what your definition of "success" might be. Purely subjective.

And I still maintain that if you put a monkey in front of an NLE he's bound to hit it given enough time and the right footage. (And no bills to pay).

It's a problem b/c it's simply not true and it perpetuates the myth that uncle charlie is as good as a professional videographer - which he isn't. This notion is one that has plagued wedding videography for quite some time now. By saying anyone can make a masterpiece you are completely de-valuing the talent and experience that many of us are trying to show in our work in order to show that we are different than uncle charlie.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one, clearly. My problem is that you equate time with necessarily coming up with a masterpiece, something which I don't think would help a large portion of people with a pile of tapes.

[Bruce Patterson]

Originally Posted by Warren Kawamoto

My wife just brought up an interesting point. Most of the posters on this forum are male. We think steadicam, crane and dolly shots are way cool. A majority of these are wide shots. Wide shots generally don't convey emotion.

Her perspective is that these kind of shots, while nice as an establishing shot, focus the attention on "how the shot was done" rather than what the bride and groom are feeling. To her, the best shots are those that you "feel" emotionally. Lots of good closeups. Hands. Eyes. Facial expressions. Does the shot connect the viewer with what the bride and groom feel for each other? Can you feel love by watching their video? A good wedding video goes beyond the eye candy and goes very deep. It connects our definition of love with the couple's no matter where they are in the world.

There are videographers who get incredibly beautiful shots, but can't really edit a sequence to convey love. Then there are those who aren't the greatest shooters, but are lavishly praised because their edited sequence pulled the right heartstrings. Where do you stand as a wedding videographer?

If your work can touch a bride emotionally to the point that it's almost spiritual, consider yourself one of the best in the world.

Any good company that doesn't shoot with more than 1 camera, with a specific goal to get tight shots is insane. We shoot with 2 cameras - 1 for steadycam shots, the other on a monopod. The GC is generally "full-back" and the main focus of the 2nd cam is to get all the tight shots.

Here's a mix of the 2 cuts - they are absolutely integral in the emotional end product - you can't have 1 without the other and have a complete film.

Sample of mix of GC and tight shots:
http://www.wedluxe.com/kristinagreg.html

[Roger Beck]

"Remove the fiscal responsibilites from this business and anyone can create a masterpiece given enough time to do it. (I'd need more than most of course)"

I read this a little differently, "Remove the time constraints and a masterpiece can be created out of almost anything".

It's the creativity that takes time and time is money.

[Bruce Patterson]

Originally Posted by Roger Beck

"Remove the fiscal responsibilites from this business and anyone can create a masterpiece given enough time to do it. (I'd need more than most of course)"

I read this a little differently, "Remove the time constraints and a masterpiece can be created out of almost anything".

It's the creativity that takes time and time is money.

His argument isn't resting on time, it's resting on the fact that he clearly thinks all footage is the same, which unfortunately it isn't...