Renting a Serious camera for a wedding? at DVinfo.net

Oleg Kalyan · April 16th, 2009, 08:39 AM

Keep thinking of shooting part of a wedding with a SI2, Thompson Viper for example.
Am I going nuts or does it make sense to go for a more cinematic quality of picture?
Lighting is a must off course in this case.

Have anyone thought of similar approach?

Matthew Craggs · April 16th, 2009, 10:16 AM

My only concern with renting the gear is would you have enough time to get familiar with the gear? If you're picking it up the morning of, things would obviously be tighter than if you picked it up a couple days in advance and had time to explore it.

Of course, if you have already used the gear than my point is irrelevant. Otherwise, if you have the will, go for it. I have considered the same thing many times and one of these days am going to take the hit for the rental for the sake of awesome quality.

Tom Hardwick · April 16th, 2009, 10:24 AM

Renting a camera and lights for a real-time wedding shoot? Sound of air being drawn in past clenched teeth from this end. You have a crew to help set-up and tear-down?

How will the client be viewing the final product? If it's off DVD then the bare minimum is a V1 and tops is the EX3. These allow you to move fast, and moving fast is a serious requirement on a day that has no rewind button.

tom.

Oleg Kalyan · April 16th, 2009, 12:45 PM

Great point, I should say it's for the part of the wedding where there is not a lot of movement, obviously not a documentary part, set up, photo session, setting up the lights prior to the shoot, gels, etc.
In Russia, when you rent a camera, part of the package/deal is an assistant.

Getting familiar for sure, all the workflow, not just shooting..
And off course its for multicamera shoot, back up, additional angles with normal typical cameras.
that's just an idea to consider, worth it?

Lukas Siewior · April 16th, 2009, 01:16 PM

It's cool idea Oleg, especially if customer is aware of what you are doing and what you have used to shoot their wedding. Unfortunately most ppl won't see the difference between film camera and regular HDV cam with 35mm lens. Maybe instead you should do HD + 35mm. And if you have control over environment, you could play with extra lights, maybe a little of script and directing??? Just my $.02.

Nicholas de Kock · April 18th, 2009, 04:16 AM

As an enthusiast I'd love to shoot a wedding with gear like that but only if I get to experiment for free! I think unless you shoot a movie, using a Viper for a wedding is a complete waste. I'm a sucker for technical specifications however lately I've been viewing the wedding world a little more rationally (commercially), unless you are getting paid close to $1Mil and making use of some serious 3D effects and having your film projected in cinema there really is no need for a Viper. Oleg the work you have done with a little 5D shows that less is more when you factor creativity into the mix, an EX1/5DII combo should give you equal results. The little boy inside of me would shoot a wedding with a Viper though :P

Dylan Tobias · April 20th, 2009, 12:29 PM

I think there are more important things for live events then the camera's technical output quality. If I could afford all the money for rentals of that level I would rather pay for multiple assistants doing walk around audio and lighting for me while I move around with a steadycam on just my ordinary main cam.

Very fast moving around following the event from shot to shot is more important then technical output quality of a camera in a live event to me, and the size of that camera setup does would not seem to make that kind of movement easily possible either.

The shots that you may have wanted to get which would have been more impressive on that expensive rental cam may never even be possible for you to get in a live event. Yes you will be able to get a couple shots that would be nice, but there would be too few of them. You know that things happen in live situations which you can never do over, you usually have no time whatsoever to setup shots or lighting at all and have to keep moving constantly just to even get in position to use a fully auto camera before the people moved out of the position you wanted them in in the first place, let alone to have time to setup a camera like that to be able to get the shot in time.

These are some reasons why I think paying for assistants is way more important for a live situation.

Tell me what you think anyways.

April 16th, 2009, 08:39 AM	#1
Oleg Kalyan Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: MOSCOW Posts: 860	Renting a Serious camera for a wedding? Keep thinking of shooting part of a wedding with a SI2, Thompson Viper for example. Am I going nuts or does it make sense to go for a more cinematic quality of picture? Lighting is a must off course in this case. Have anyone thought of similar approach?

April 16th, 2009, 10:16 AM	#2
Matthew Craggs Major Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Welland, Ontario Posts: 311	My only concern with renting the gear is would you have enough time to get familiar with the gear? If you're picking it up the morning of, things would obviously be tighter than if you picked it up a couple days in advance and had time to explore it. Of course, if you have already used the gear than my point is irrelevant. Otherwise, if you have the will, go for it. I have considered the same thing many times and one of these days am going to take the hit for the rental for the sake of awesome quality.

April 16th, 2009, 10:24 AM	#3
Tom Hardwick Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Billericay, England UK Posts: 4,711	Renting a camera and lights for a real-time wedding shoot? Sound of air being drawn in past clenched teeth from this end. You have a crew to help set-up and tear-down? How will the client be viewing the final product? If it's off DVD then the bare minimum is a V1 and tops is the EX3. These allow you to move fast, and moving fast is a serious requirement on a day that has no rewind button. tom.

April 16th, 2009, 12:45 PM	#4
Oleg Kalyan Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: MOSCOW Posts: 860	Great point, I should say it's for the part of the wedding where there is not a lot of movement, obviously not a documentary part, set up, photo session, setting up the lights prior to the shoot, gels, etc. In Russia, when you rent a camera, part of the package/deal is an assistant. Getting familiar for sure, all the workflow, not just shooting.. And off course its for multicamera shoot, back up, additional angles with normal typical cameras. that's just an idea to consider, worth it?

April 16th, 2009, 01:16 PM	#5
Lukas Siewior Major Player Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Lyndhurst, NJ, USA Posts: 408	It's cool idea Oleg, especially if customer is aware of what you are doing and what you have used to shoot their wedding. Unfortunately most ppl won't see the difference between film camera and regular HDV cam with 35mm lens. Maybe instead you should do HD + 35mm. And if you have control over environment, you could play with extra lights, maybe a little of script and directing??? Just my $.02.

April 18th, 2009, 04:16 AM	#6
Nicholas de Kock Major Player Join Date: May 2007 Location: KLD, South Africa Posts: 983	As an enthusiast I'd love to shoot a wedding with gear like that but only if I get to experiment for free! I think unless you shoot a movie, using a Viper for a wedding is a complete waste. I'm a sucker for technical specifications however lately I've been viewing the wedding world a little more rationally (commercially), unless you are getting paid close to $1Mil and making use of some serious 3D effects and having your film projected in cinema there really is no need for a Viper. Oleg the work you have done with a little 5D shows that less is more when you factor creativity into the mix, an EX1/5DII combo should give you equal results. The little boy inside of me would shoot a wedding with a Viper though :P

April 20th, 2009, 12:29 PM	#7
Dylan Tobias Regular Crew Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Toronto Canada Posts: 71	I think there are more important things for live events then the camera's technical output quality. If I could afford all the money for rentals of that level I would rather pay for multiple assistants doing walk around audio and lighting for me while I move around with a steadycam on just my ordinary main cam. Very fast moving around following the event from shot to shot is more important then technical output quality of a camera in a live event to me, and the size of that camera setup does would not seem to make that kind of movement easily possible either. The shots that you may have wanted to get which would have been more impressive on that expensive rental cam may never even be possible for you to get in a live event. Yes you will be able to get a couple shots that would be nice, but there would be too few of them. You know that things happen in live situations which you can never do over, you usually have no time whatsoever to setup shots or lighting at all and have to keep moving constantly just to even get in position to use a fully auto camera before the people moved out of the position you wanted them in in the first place, let alone to have time to setup a camera like that to be able to get the shot in time. These are some reasons why I think paying for assistants is way more important for a live situation. Tell me what you think anyways.