videography = 1/2 * photography ?

[Susanto Widjaja]

Direct copy and paste from the enquiry email:
----------------------------------------------------

Hi,

Just after some information please.

Groom is getting ready in Drummoyne
Bride is getting ready in Stanmore

The Ceremony is at St Marks church in Darling Point at 2pm

Photos will be down at the quay about 5 mins away and maybe the Lighthouse or Circular Quay

Reception will be in the Museum of Contemporary Art.

We would like to know what sort of long version we recieve as well as the type of highlight video you make.

Can you please let me know what we can get as our budget is quite small between 2000 and 3500 for video and 5000 to 6500 for photos

We are also looking for photographers so if you know of any please feel free to offer your recommendations.

We are not in Sydney at this time due to work commitments, but we will be going over all the info we recieve and make appointments to meet upon our return in March

Thank you for your time

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

ok have to say that his budget is quiet decent for videography... its not like really low or anything... but what sort of disappointed me was the fact that he budgeted twice as much for photography. the question is why?

why wouldn't he budgeted $6000 for videography? the answer is probably because he never heard of a videographer charging that much of money. or maybe he just thinks that videography is worth half of what photography is worth..

what do you guys think? does this email sound irritating or its just me?

Santo

[Lukas Siewior]

There is a solution:

get together with some photog, and then split the money in half :-) Then $5k each sounds great !!! Couple doesn't have to know about it.

[Vince Baker]

Plus of course the 10% commision to Lukas for the idea ;)

[Noel Lising]

Hi Susanto, photographers do charge more because there's a lot of hard cost involve. With the 5k budget, you have to consider the cost of a Coffee Book Style Album, cost of the Digital Lay-out Artist, how many prints do the couple want aside from the main album, Engagement Photo Shoot, Portrait with signature Mat, Thank You cards, Printing Cost ( I assume they don't go to walmart for ther pirnts) the 5K would easily be down to 3K.

my 2 cents and opinion.

[Chris Davis]

Maybe they're expecting to get some big fancy handmade gilded frames. :)

[Kyle Root]

Photos have always taken precedence over video.

What we are finding state side is, brides want an all in one solution.

Find a good photographer and develop a package where you both win.

[Kren Barnes]

Sadly some of the answers we received from brides are their concern for the ever changing video technology.. Photographs are easily accessible even in 20 years while video format and media changes every so often..(betamax)

[Travis Cossel]

Susanto, I understand your frustration. The simple answer here is that photography has been around much much longer.

Because of this it is a top priority for brides. You just don't hear about weddings without a photographer. Photography also has a higher established value because of this.

Hard costs ARE a factor, but more in the justification of what a photographer is charging and less a factor in how that relates to video. As a fusion studio, we're quite aware of both sides of this issue. One of of our top goals right now is to constantly increase our profit on the video side. From our experience, the extra time and expertise required to produce an amazing video easily balances with the hard costs required to produce an outstanding album.

So basically, we all just need to be constantly increasing the quality of our work, and increasing our prices accordingly. I believe that the tide is slowly changing as our work as an industry has been improving and the generations of today are growing up with more dynamic media content. I think in another 10-15 years the video element could easily be as important or more important as photography to the average bride. Granted, none of us want to wait that long, but maybe it will happen sooner ...

[Dave Blackhurst]

Originally Posted by Kren Barnes

Sadly some of the answers we received from brides are their concern for the ever changing video technology.. Photographs are easily accessible even in 20 years while video format and media changes every so often..(betamax)

These would be the same folks that really appreciate the thoughtful addition of a "cupholder" on their computer?? i.e. the CD/DVD tray...

DVD is likely to be accessable longer than most marriages last nowdays, even BR is backward compatible. OK, so VHS might have gone into the dustbin (I'm aware SOME peopel still use it... don't shoot me), but how long was that a valid and viable format?? And one can transfer VHS to DVD presuming the tape hasn't degraded. Plus, once a file is in digital format... geez.

Oh, and anyone notice that photographers are using DIGITAL files, some of which are in formats that may be difficult to read (some RAW)??

[Denny Lajeunesse]

I guess editing isn't a cost then?

I think a lot of this comes from the days when the photographers used film and had to develop and print it themselves.

[Susanto Widjaja]

Thanks for the replies guys.

Regarding hard costs.. I agree with Travis where our editing time easily balance with the hard cost of producing an album (which I know doesn't cost a bomb since I work with a photography studio before and know about their album costs)

I think The only post-production benefit that videography has over photography is that clients are less particular with video compared to photography. I've seen couples going back and forth with their album for ages but not with videography.

I think I'm frustated because I really really want couples to understand how videography is not something that they get just for the sake of having one. I've done meetings with couples who are ony interested in seeing how much dollars they are spending.. and also with clients who don't care about the price, they just like what they see.

i know you guys might say ("grow up dude! stop whining! thats what it is!")

lol

maybe everyone here can give one 10 sec footage of their best work and we can make a showcase where we show how wedding videography has changed over the years in every part of the world?

it will be one of the hardest thing to choose that 10 sec footage though lol

Santo

[Jeff Kellam]

It's the disparity in equipment investments between video and photo that tear me up.

The videographer shows up with:

2 cams 8K
wireless 2K
2 tripods 2K
lights 2K
digital recorder & mics 2K

16K of venue equipment

Then goes to the shop to put serious work on the workstation, hard drives and printer dealing with 50 GB of data.

The photographer shows up with:

2 cameras 4k
3 lens 4K
lights 2k
misc 1K

11K of venue equipment

Then goes to the shop to put light work on the workstation, hard drives and printer dealing with 5 GB of data.

There is definately a problem with a wedding videography model that works this way.

[Travis Cossel]

The 'problem' is twofold.

The vast majority of wedding video work is still not crossing the artistic boundary, and quality is also lacking. Our industry has made great strides in the past decade, especially in the past 5 years, but there's no denying that the majority of what is offered/provided out there is still representative of that 'wedding video' stigma. Until more of us up our game and provide a better product, the undervaluing of video will remain.

The other issue is that most of us are undercharging for what we do. We may have improved our product/service, but we're still not really charge what it is worth. So if I'm producing a product at '5 star quality' and I charge $4k, but a competitor is offering a very similar product for only $2k ... where are the brides going to go?

As an industry we really need to raise up the quality of everyone around us AND get them to adjust their prices accordingly.

[Anthony Vu]

Travis:

+1

Truer words couldn't have been spoken.

There is huge value in capturing weddings on video, and as a part of these changing times, we have to market the value better. There is a lot of "not so good" wedding videos that hurt us. There are also a growing number of wedding videos that help. I'd like to be on the side that helps it.

:)

antz

[Mike Brice]

I am not sure what photographer you are using to base this on, but 11K is way too low for most pros. I am a photographer looking to expand into digital, and here is what I am packing for this weekend's wedding.

D3 5K
D300 - 1500
Leica M8.2 5K

Lenses -
14-24 - 1500
24-70 -1500
70-200 1500

Leica
21/2.8 - 2000
35/2 -1500

Two flashes - 1000

I have three more bodies and about 6 more lenses that would take this $20,000 for a simple kit to $40,000 for a more complex kit/shoot.

But I agree with your premise - I have been pricing video (not for wedding but for corporate work) and seeing the expense of the gear vs the rates, I don't know how anyone makes it in the video world.

Originally Posted by Jeff Kellam

It's the disparity in equipment investments between video and photo that tear me up.

The videographer shows up with:

2 cams 8K
wireless 2K
2 tripods 2K
lights 2K
digital recorder & mics 2K

16K of venue equipment

Then goes to the shop to put serious work on the workstation, hard drives and printer dealing with 50 GB of data.

The photographer shows up with:

2 cameras 4k
3 lens 4K
lights 2k
misc 1K

11K of venue equipment

Then goes to the shop to put light work on the workstation, hard drives and printer dealing with 5 GB of data.

There is definately a problem with a wedding videography model that works this way.