Point well taken Danny! Kevin's stuff is just scary good...

I will now declare I am a "WP".... has a sort of ring to it, if no one asks what it stands for! or maybe it can mean "Wedding media Producer"... yeah, that's the ticket...

I'm with you on Video Producer. It's generic without stereotyping to a particular genre, style or mode of recording. Our local association uses Video Producer as part of their name - it encompasses both the corporate and special event arenas and in some ways, allows an individual to interchange b/w markets.

Video producer - I like it!...

A few more suggestions:

Event video producer;
Event videographer;
Event Video operator;
Digital moviemaker...

you know here (in Cyprus) we are called " the camera man"...although latetly they started using the term "opticographer" from the two greek words "optikos" = visual and "grapho"=write in other words you are "writing"=taping, visual things.

Stelios

wedding film-maker for me!

Santo

I personally like the term Wedding Filmmaker as well however I'm whatever the client thinks I am. To some I make movies to others I shoot video, idiots refer to me as the dvd guy, the rich will refer to me as a cinematographer and even though I market myself as a cinematographer I'm nowhere near able to shoot Hollywood movies, I don't consider myself a true cinematographer worthy of the title. I think 'camera dude' sums it up.

Thanks, Shaun. My favourite post of the week (note correct spelling of "favourite").

Hehehe...

Pretty happy with wedding videographer really. It's tough to battle entrenched linguistic assignments.

Just a thought - instead of changing that term which defines us, why not change the definition/connotations instead?

Isn't it better to be a videographer who does awesome work than a filmmaker who makes crap.

I agree with Jason. Videographer is a more modern term than filmmaker. The only reason we might cringe when using it, is its association with bad work. Filmmakers and Cinematographers are perfectely happy with these old labels because we associate them with great works.

The more good work we do as a group, the better viewed we are, whether we call ourselves videographers, filmmakers, producers, dudes, whatever..

You can change the name, but if the work still sucks, who cares?. A good friend of mine introduced me to the phrase, "no matter how much you polish a turd, it's still a turd." I try to remember that when I'm feeling lazy.

I think you're spot on. it's like the banks spending huge sums in advertising telling us how good their service is are instead of spending the money on actually improving that service.

Changing what we call ourselves is easy if we can pick a term but that isn't going to change peoples perception of us, we need to establish an new image in the purchasers mind.

right now it's..
VHS tape, black & white, poor quality, dated, something old married farts have on their bookshelf and never watch, unnecessary

while we want them to think..
essential, modern, made for the future, a must have.

The biggest change we can make is to constantly strive to improve our work and a forum like this is a great tool to help us. I do wonder however, just who sees this 'good work' if it's just the couple and family/friends then there are still a lot of prospective customers out there with the old image and no reason to change it.

We need a way for more people to see the best that we can offer and make it something they want for themselves - but maybe thats a different subject alltogether

ermm.... I still think that changing the name will help... if the word videographer already got bad image.. why still use it..?? rebranding is a method that might work.

Not that I'm seriously suggesting about it though.. just open for discussion. I don't think anyone here really care what other people call themselves really :P

I guess the only thing that keeps me from putting some "videographer" words on my website and blog is because of SEO.. thats it.

at the end, use the one that will get you clients.. and then make them call you "awesome videographer/film-maker/cameraman/dudes..."

because if you dont have the client, then no one can call you anything.

A wedding documentary filmmaker describes what personally I strive for in our line of work.
Is it a bit of exagerration of a term? Probably so.

Still what most of us in the industry do, can be called a wedding clip maker, presenting aproduct in a short form, a clip of some kind, which heavily dependent on a musical score, a soundtrack, which regretfully we do not write, produce.

Secondly, seldom we see a complete film approach, a 3 act structured story with distinctive beginning, middle, end, in other words a story structure. And essentially we all want to tell a story of a wedding day.

The degree of creating a convincing emotional experience of any kind determines if can we call ourselves filmmakers.

videographer is not bad, it's has implied limitations.

The English suffix -graphy means "writing" or a "field of study"

Video is the technology of electronically capturing, recording, processing, storing, transmitting, and reconstructing a sequence of still images representing scenes in motion.

Paradoxically nowhere we see an implication on a story telling. Story recording at most.
Which are totally different things!

Interesting isn't it?

i would say it has been a rather easy and short battle for us within our market and with our couples. being we should worldwide, the language we use in relation to our films has been very well received and very effective in communicating something different.

why not change the connotations? i would wonder how effective it would be when the majority are still producing old school videos. the idea behind a different term is that it denotes something different.

as for filmmaker vs videographer - why not go for awesome filmmaker vs one that produces crap. is not one of the biggest issues that has plagued our industry been that we collectively aim too low and are okay with mediocrity....

P.

Patrick, even if you retained the term videographer, but output the same work that SM does, you would still sell.

The evolution of your work came ahead rather than your change in nomenclature.

If everybody's work improves, across the board, a name change is the least needed for one to market effectively.