Videographer/Cinematographer/Filmographer?! how about one new general term?! at DVinfo.net

Richard Wakefield · June 19th, 2009, 07:21 AM

Over on the UK forum, we're contemplating coming up with new language for what we, as people that film weddings, are.

Most of us hate the label 'wedding videographer', but accept that we really have to stick with it coz it's what all brides mags and forums (and the general population) are used to.

But as an idea, why don't we just all agree on a new modern name? 'Videographer' sounds so 80's IMO!

- Is 'cinematographer' a bit OTT for some of us, and not general enough for everyone?
- 'filmographer'? ('film' seems more up-to-date than 'video')
- or something completely new and fresh?

Let's face it, we all argue about the right, or most appropriate term - so can't we just come up with one new term? Or would that cause more arguments?

Obviously i'm not suggesting we must do this, but just wondered 'why not' if it's a case of the majority agreeing!

Shaun Roemich · June 19th, 2009, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Wakefield

'Videographer' sounds so 80's IMO!

Interesting. I "wear" the term Videographer VERY proudly (usually with "Broadcast" in front of it) on this side of the pond, but I'm also NOT a "Wedding Videographer". Done two weddings in my life and it didn't work for me. Kudos to those of you who do weddings and MASSIVE kudos to those who do it well.

Richard Wakefield · June 19th, 2009, 07:32 AM

yeah, sorry, i should point out that i'm talking about wedding videography only... certainly don't want to offend 'broadcast videographers' :)

Steve Elgar · June 19th, 2009, 07:40 AM

I just get called the "Camera Dude" or "Video Dude ". I guess we could start the "Society of Professional Camera Dudes".

But yes, I'm not overly fussed on the term "Videographer" either.

Richard Wakefield · June 19th, 2009, 07:46 AM

LOL, at 'camera dude' :D

i mean my personal preference is 'filmographer'.

No matter what you shoot with, be it a camcorder, a videocamera, a 5dmk2, an iPhone...or 'how' you shoot (documentary, cinematic...)...then you're still 'filming' - so 'filmographer' seems as general and correct as anything else?

the exciting thing is that we could get all the Bride Mags etc to write an article on this official name change - summing up how oldschool wedding videographers are now modern filmographers. i think it would create some buzz and eliminate some stigma and opinions (well, we get it in the UK anyway!)

Jeff Emery · June 19th, 2009, 07:57 AM

I generally refer to myself as a video producer. But the general public still uses the term videographer so I use the term sometimes myself.

I don't think filmographer sounds very good or is even appropriate. You're not filming, you're videotaping. Accept it.

You can call yourself a grilled cheese sandwich. But that doesn't make you one.

Who cares what name or label they give you? As long as the check clears.

Jeff

Richard Wakefield · June 19th, 2009, 08:04 AM

sorry Jeff, i don't mean to rub you/anyone up the wrong way. i was only asking for opinions, and naively expecting the majority to agree.

Just for consideration, the online Dictionary definitions:
FILM:
Verb
a. to photograph with a movie or video camera
b. to make a film of (a screenplay or event)

VIDEO:
Verb
- to record (a television programme or an event) on video
Adjective
- relating to or used in producing televised images

we're not all technically recording on to video...but 'filming' could refer to recording on to any media?!

as i say, i'm only wondering general opinions....yours is totally valid. if you think it's pointless to even question, then that's fine. it's just that in the UK, there is a definite stigma about 'videographers', and it is only when people actually see us work at weddings, or our demos, do they admit they had no idea how far we'd come.

ur fellow grilled cheese sandwich :)

Shaun Roemich · June 19th, 2009, 08:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Wakefield

certainly don't want to offend 'broadcast videographers' :)

ZERO offense taken! It's just that when I get introduced to new people as a "videographer" they ALL ask "oh, so you do weddings?!?!? My <insert relative/friend/enemy here> is getting married and..." so I pre-empt by adding "broadcast". That way I START OUT sounding like a snob instead of having to EXPLAIN that I'm a snob... <tongue planted firmly in cheek>

Kevin Shahinian · June 19th, 2009, 08:25 AM

What's wrong with "filmmaker"?

There are some inherent issues with Cinematographer (ignores all of the editing work we do) and Filmography, which is already a defined term (a filmmaker's portfolio of work).

Rashdan Radha · June 19th, 2009, 09:26 AM

I vote for "Emotive Visual Motion Artist".

Art Varga · June 19th, 2009, 10:23 AM

I agree 100% Richard - "Videographer" sounds so dated to me and probably to others as well. It seems that the term Cinematographer is growing in popularity among studios over here in the US and may be the best fit at this point. The biggest issue I see is for those studios who rely on clients finding them via web search. I't going to take some time before any new term takes hold. Until then, our customers are going to continue to google "wedding videographer"

Art

Richard Wakefield · June 19th, 2009, 10:45 AM

Art:
yeah, and 'IF' a name change occurred, it would definitely cause a lot of grief, and would prob take 1year+ to get fully implemented, and for people to get used to. There are companies out there with 'videography' in their company name title, so they of course wouldn't be very happy at all!

so we can either all take this really seriously and have a proper debate with an intended conclusion, or just admit there's no point even discussing it as it will cause too much agro to implement

Ram Purad · June 19th, 2009, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Shahinian

What's wrong with "filmmaker"?

There are some inherent issues with Cinematographer (ignores all of the editing work we do) and Filmography, which is already a defined term (a filmmaker's portfolio of work).

Good suggestion Kevin! I would add Event or Wedding in front of it if your studio's primary work is that!

Event Filmmaker is the title being printed on my new business card!

Dave Blackhurst · June 19th, 2009, 12:33 PM

A few random thoughts...

I'm with Steve and "camera dude", he beat me to posting, but it was my first thought... duuuuude!

Language is fluid and often somewhat complex in its evolution. A decade ago if you said you "googled" someone or something, I suspect you might have had a visit from the authorities, now it's common parlance.

We don't go to the "movie store", we go to the "video store" (oddly, to pick up a "movie"/moving picture) on disk, not videotape... (shouldn't that mean we go to the "disk store"?!?!) so I suspect the current expectation of the client is to seek out someone to do a "wedding VIDEO" which is actually a feature shot/edited/delivered digitally in some form or another.

The term "video" is virtually synonomous with "movie" to Joe Q. Public in some respects but in others it carries a stigma of scratchy, jumpy old home videos.

I believe that technology has progressed and continues to do so (particularly the Photo video convergence) and there simply isn't the same stigma when "the public" is used to a wide range and quality of "video" content via YouTube (Shutterfly just added video - it's becoming mainstream and commoditized).

What "Camera dudes" offer as a service varies quite widely, from a cinematic to a documentary "style", much as photographers have fiddled with the definitions of "photojournalist", candid, and "traditional/formal"... I'm not sure how you take radically different styles from "multimedia artists" (hey, how about THAT for a new name!?) and create a catch-all that has enough sex appeal that it "fits" for everyone.

This explains the adverse reaction that "filmographer" (anyone here using "film" as a primary media??). "Film" is that strip of celluloid that gets run through a camera and processed in a lab... no offense intended, but it's "old school". And that may well hold attractions for some markets, but I haven't touched film in a long time, and for my kids it will be part of a history lesson. I'd rather look forward.

Cinematographer is actually nice, yet sounds pretentious - and realistically I ain't no Spielberg... and does he run camera anyway?

Just to toss out some food (and words) for thought, what we do is "personal", we work in "digital multimedia", we produce a "documentary" of an event (or perhaps a "stylized cinematic visual interpretation"). We capture "memories"... and so on.

I think the challenge is to come up with a short word, acronym, or phrase that is inclusive, descriptive, and instantly connotes what us "camera dudes" (editor/producer/director dudes) do. Too bad "dreamweaver" is taken, has a nice ring to it...

Danny O'Neill · June 19th, 2009, 04:14 PM

I like filmmaker, but if kevin is a filmmaker then if I put myself in the pecking order below I would say I am wedding pondscum ;)

June 19th, 2009, 07:21 AM	#1
Richard Wakefield Major Player Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Surrey, UK Posts: 680	Videographer/Cinematographer/Filmographer?! how about one new general term?! Over on the UK forum, we're contemplating coming up with new language for what we, as people that film weddings, are. Most of us hate the label 'wedding videographer', but accept that we really have to stick with it coz it's what all brides mags and forums (and the general population) are used to. But as an idea, why don't we just all agree on a new modern name? 'Videographer' sounds so 80's IMO! - Is 'cinematographer' a bit OTT for some of us, and not general enough for everyone? - 'filmographer'? ('film' seems more up-to-date than 'video') - or something completely new and fresh? Let's face it, we all argue about the right, or most appropriate term - so can't we just come up with one new term? Or would that cause more arguments? Obviously i'm not suggesting we must do this, but just wondered 'why not' if it's a case of the majority agreeing!

June 19th, 2009, 08:25 AM	#9
Kevin Shahinian Regular Crew Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Southern California Posts: 116	What's wrong with "filmmaker"? There are some inherent issues with Cinematographer (ignores all of the editing work we do) and Filmography, which is already a defined term (a filmmaker's portfolio of work). __________________ www.PacificPictures.net

June 19th, 2009, 04:14 PM	#15
Danny O'Neill Major Player Join Date: May 2008 Location: Northampton, UK Posts: 915	I like filmmaker, but if kevin is a filmmaker then if I put myself in the pecking order below I would say I am wedding pondscum ;) __________________ mintyslippers.com

June 19th, 2009, 07:32 AM	#3
Richard Wakefield Major Player Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Surrey, UK Posts: 680	yeah, sorry, i should point out that i'm talking about wedding videography only... certainly don't want to offend 'broadcast videographers' :)

June 19th, 2009, 07:40 AM	#4
Steve Elgar Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Port Stephens NSW Australia Posts: 71	I just get called the "Camera Dude" or "Video Dude ". I guess we could start the "Society of Professional Camera Dudes". But yes, I'm not overly fussed on the term "Videographer" either.

June 19th, 2009, 07:46 AM	#5
Richard Wakefield Major Player Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Surrey, UK Posts: 680	LOL, at 'camera dude' :D i mean my personal preference is 'filmographer'. No matter what you shoot with, be it a camcorder, a videocamera, a 5dmk2, an iPhone...or 'how' you shoot (documentary, cinematic...)...then you're still 'filming' - so 'filmographer' seems as general and correct as anything else? the exciting thing is that we could get all the Bride Mags etc to write an article on this official name change - summing up how oldschool wedding videographers are now modern filmographers. i think it would create some buzz and eliminate some stigma and opinions (well, we get it in the UK anyway!)

June 19th, 2009, 07:57 AM	#6
Jeff Emery Major Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Ohio USA Posts: 222	I generally refer to myself as a video producer. But the general public still uses the term videographer so I use the term sometimes myself. I don't think filmographer sounds very good or is even appropriate. You're not filming, you're videotaping. Accept it. You can call yourself a grilled cheese sandwich. But that doesn't make you one. Who cares what name or label they give you? As long as the check clears. Jeff

June 19th, 2009, 08:04 AM	#7
Richard Wakefield Major Player Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Surrey, UK Posts: 680	sorry Jeff, i don't mean to rub you/anyone up the wrong way. i was only asking for opinions, and naively expecting the majority to agree. Just for consideration, the online Dictionary definitions: FILM: Verb a. to photograph with a movie or video camera b. to make a film of (a screenplay or event) VIDEO: Verb - to record (a television programme or an event) on video Adjective - relating to or used in producing televised images we're not all technically recording on to video...but 'filming' could refer to recording on to any media?! as i say, i'm only wondering general opinions....yours is totally valid. if you think it's pointless to even question, then that's fine. it's just that in the UK, there is a definite stigma about 'videographers', and it is only when people actually see us work at weddings, or our demos, do they admit they had no idea how far we'd come. ur fellow grilled cheese sandwich :)

June 19th, 2009, 09:26 AM	#10
Rashdan Radha New Boot Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: London, England Posts: 17	I vote for "Emotive Visual Motion Artist".

June 19th, 2009, 10:23 AM	#11
Art Varga Major Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Belle Mead, NJ Posts: 552	I agree 100% Richard - "Videographer" sounds so dated to me and probably to others as well. It seems that the term Cinematographer is growing in popularity among studios over here in the US and may be the best fit at this point. The biggest issue I see is for those studios who rely on clients finding them via web search. I't going to take some time before any new term takes hold. Until then, our customers are going to continue to google "wedding videographer" Art

June 19th, 2009, 10:45 AM	#12
Richard Wakefield Major Player Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Surrey, UK Posts: 680	Art: yeah, and 'IF' a name change occurred, it would definitely cause a lot of grief, and would prob take 1year+ to get fully implemented, and for people to get used to. There are companies out there with 'videography' in their company name title, so they of course wouldn't be very happy at all! so we can either all take this really seriously and have a proper debate with an intended conclusion, or just admit there's no point even discussing it as it will cause too much agro to implement

June 19th, 2009, 12:33 PM	#14
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	A few random thoughts... I'm with Steve and "camera dude", he beat me to posting, but it was my first thought... duuuuude! Language is fluid and often somewhat complex in its evolution. A decade ago if you said you "googled" someone or something, I suspect you might have had a visit from the authorities, now it's common parlance. We don't go to the "movie store", we go to the "video store" (oddly, to pick up a "movie"/moving picture) on disk, not videotape... (shouldn't that mean we go to the "disk store"?!?!) so I suspect the current expectation of the client is to seek out someone to do a "wedding VIDEO" which is actually a feature shot/edited/delivered digitally in some form or another. The term "video" is virtually synonomous with "movie" to Joe Q. Public in some respects but in others it carries a stigma of scratchy, jumpy old home videos. I believe that technology has progressed and continues to do so (particularly the Photo video convergence) and there simply isn't the same stigma when "the public" is used to a wide range and quality of "video" content via YouTube (Shutterfly just added video - it's becoming mainstream and commoditized). What "Camera dudes" offer as a service varies quite widely, from a cinematic to a documentary "style", much as photographers have fiddled with the definitions of "photojournalist", candid, and "traditional/formal"... I'm not sure how you take radically different styles from "multimedia artists" (hey, how about THAT for a new name!?) and create a catch-all that has enough sex appeal that it "fits" for everyone. This explains the adverse reaction that "filmographer" (anyone here using "film" as a primary media??). "Film" is that strip of celluloid that gets run through a camera and processed in a lab... no offense intended, but it's "old school". And that may well hold attractions for some markets, but I haven't touched film in a long time, and for my kids it will be part of a history lesson. I'd rather look forward. Cinematographer is actually nice, yet sounds pretentious - and realistically I ain't no Spielberg... and does he run camera anyway? Just to toss out some food (and words) for thought, what we do is "personal", we work in "digital multimedia", we produce a "documentary" of an event (or perhaps a "stylized cinematic visual interpretation"). We capture "memories"... and so on. I think the challenge is to come up with a short word, acronym, or phrase that is inclusive, descriptive, and instantly connotes what us "camera dudes" (editor/producer/director dudes) do. Too bad "dreamweaver" is taken, has a nice ring to it...