Another "what would you do"

George Kilroy · September 11th, 2010, 05:14 AM

On my booking agreement the clients do have to tick and sign a line that they have permission to record in the church and that they have paid any fees and are aware of any restriction that my be imposed. I do not normally get in negotiations with the church minister until the rehearsal where we are face to face. I find then that personality can have a great bearing on negotiations.

The concern I had with this one is that the rules were changed after booking had been made at a time when permission had been granted, or at least hadn't been denied. I did a wedding there earlier this year with the same priest with no problem.

Anyway the update is that I tried phoning without being able to reach him so I sent a follow up email pointing out that he had allowed me to record a wedding there at the end of May and this is his reply:

Nothing personal, George. Absolutely not.

No, it's all to do with the Sacredness of celebrations (and me feeling
terribly uncomfortable being video-ed).

Maximum allowance = Video in and Video out.

Keep up the good work - I enjoy working with you.

Fr Philip

So no relenting or explanation of his recent conversion. I've now got one distraught bride (her wedding is next week) and three potential upset ones when I contact them to tell them of this, unless he has already told them.

Don Bloom · September 11th, 2010, 06:35 AM

Hmmm, this thread upset me. I think it's really an outrageous matter for the clergy to do this to the brides and grooms that have already made arrangements to have the service covered. The very least they could have done was set a date so that the couples that had already contracted and paid for the video could have it and the couples coming to their churches would know upfront that they couldn't have video in the church. Changing the rules midstream smacks of the kind of thinking that only small minded people do to gain control over their minions.
I've worked in churches that are very restrictive and that's bad enough but to be cut out almost comletely like that especially in the way it was done and leaving so many B&Gs out in the cold so to speak is really a sign, to me at least, of why, in my area of the world, more and more couples are getting married outside of the church. I'm not dissing any religion I'm just saying that a lot of churches and officiants set such ridiculous and extreme rules about video/photo that a lot of couples lately are going elsewhere.

Good luck with whatever you do.

Nigel Barker · September 11th, 2010, 06:57 AM

A study of the marriage statistics in the UK is very interesting National Statistics Online - Product

The total number of marriages in the UK has declined enormously over the last 30 years. There were about 370,000 in 1980 & only 232,000 in 2008 (most recent year that stats are available). Of those marriages the proportion of religious ceremonies has decreased even faster so back in 1991 it was about 50:50 between civil & religious ceremonies but now about is 70:30.

The one big growth area since the mid-1990s has been marriage ceremonies in 'approved premises' i.e. hotels, stately homes and historic buildings. Until the legislation was introduced at that time the only options were a religious ceremony or a civil ceremony in a Registry Office which is frankly a bit dowdy & unromantic (I speak as someone who was married in a Registry Office). In 2008 there were just 76,000 religious ceremonies but there were 105,000 ceremonies in 'approved premises' which of course would not be hired as venues if they provided the customer service that many churches seem to offer.

David Schuurman · September 12th, 2010, 08:26 PM

If I was in that situation I would act as a guest and use an hv30 or something and give the groom a DVR "to at least get the audio even if we cant have the video" I'd also get a go pro or something and give it to the groomsmen. I would do my best to secretively pull it off.

George Kilroy · September 13th, 2010, 01:47 AM

David I think this is the sort of behaviour that may have caused this. Going against the express wishes of the vicar is the quickest way to get all videographers banned from a church.

In all the time that I've been doing weddings I've tried to cultivate a professional relationship with everyone involved in the wedding. That means not going against agreements, even if I disagree with them or the other person is not acting professionally. My clients know that. The very last thing I want is a scene in the church.

Allan Black · September 13th, 2010, 04:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Bloom

Hmmm, this thread upset me. I think it's really an outrageous matter for the clergy to do this to the brides and grooms that have already made arrangements to have the service covered. The very least they could have done was set a date so that the couples that had already contracted and paid for the video could have it and the couples coming to their churches would know upfront that they couldn't have video in the church. Changing the rules midstream smacks of the kind of thinking that only small minded people do to gain control over their minions.

I agree and that's why Fr. Philip suddenly decided he doesn't like being videod now .. after all these years, along with inconveniencing you and upsetting his next booking in a week. And what a liberty to add .. 'I enjoy working with you' that's just being rude. He doesn't realise he's about to lose future bookings.

George I think you've got valid reasons to take just ONE more shot at it .. and in person. Wear a tie and good luck from all of us. Let's know the outcome.

Cheers.

George Kilroy · September 13th, 2010, 05:03 AM

I've a feeling that someone has either done as someone has suggested and tried to do it surreptitiously or have blatantly gone against his directions or argued with him over the coverage. He had always made it clear to me that he didn't want to have his readings and personal words to the couple recorded and I always respected that, maybe others didn't. Anyway he will not allow anything further so I will now wash my hands of it.

The bride for next weekend wants to cancel as she only really wanted the ceremony filmed because her mother can't be there and it was that priest who suggested me in the first place. She was only having the rest of the day covered because I won't do part days.

I have just sent letters to the other three brides who are booked for next year to advise them. I hope that they won't look for someone who will offer to do it "undercover".

Nigel Barker · September 13th, 2010, 05:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Kilroy

The bride for next weekend wants to cancel as she only really wanted the ceremony filmed because her mother can't be there and it was that priest who suggested me in the first place.

If this is the same priest that is now forbidding video then his actions beggar belief.

George Kilroy · September 13th, 2010, 05:30 AM

The very same one, and if you see his reply to me that I posted above his new ruling is nothing to do with me, but I think that someone has upset him.

I do feel peeved at having to accept the cancellation, (she did make it clear when booking that the ceremony was the only part she really wanted recording) but also sorry that the bride's mother won't now be able to share in the moment. The bride won't visit the priest with me as she feels she'll say something she'll later regret (Catholic priests seem to have a supernatural hold over their believers).

I won't contact him again as any negotiations we have are tangential to my agreement with my clients. In the end it's up to them to accept his ruling.

Anthony McErlean · September 13th, 2010, 06:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Kilroy

..The bride won't visit the priest with me as she feels she'll say something she'll later regret ...

That could be... but someone should, perhaps the parents of the bride and groom, no point in you talking to the priest Goroge,he wont listen to you.

Anyway good luck.

David Schuurman · September 14th, 2010, 12:25 AM

Quote:

David I think this is the sort of behaviour that may have caused this. Going against the express wishes of the vicar is the quickest way to get all videographers banned from a church

George, why would the officiant ban videographers if a guest is filming the wedding from a pew? I am assuming there is a major distinction with this guy between a professional videographer walking around filming the ceremony and a guest getting some shots with his new handycam.

David Schuurman · September 14th, 2010, 12:36 AM

Sorry George disregard my comment as I didn't realize that you and the officiant know eachother therefore you are most certainly not a guest no matter where you're sitting. However, in the instance where you and he don't know eachother I would still proceed as a guest.

Dan Asseff · September 14th, 2010, 05:51 AM

Are they letting the photographer still shoot? If so act like a photographer and use a dslr to shoot video.

Dan
Forever Moments Video Productions

Glen Elliott · September 15th, 2010, 03:39 PM

George this is a tough situation. First and foremost make sure you have in your contract that you aren't liable for any loss of production quality or lack thereof due to restrictions at the Church. Secondly you can contact the Priest/Pastor (preferably in person) and explain your plight. Explain that you've shot there several times before and have never caused an issue because you make an effort to NOT be obtrusive. Go on by explaining how what occurs during the service is essentially the most important part of the day. It's the entire reason for the wedding "celebration" in the first place.

In other words show that not only will you not be a threat in regards to disturbing the service- but additionally garnish personal respect for the Holy Sacrament that the service, indeed, is. This has helped me disarm many Priests/Pastors that were originally objectionable to wearing a wireless mic.

Dave Blackhurst · September 15th, 2010, 05:06 PM

I get the feeling that the priest is a bit self conscious and this is the source of some of the discomfort with videotaping. Not sure if there's anything you can really do about that!

I do think the idea of shooting with a DSLR or even a small P&S with video, while being sure to omit any of the officiants speeches (sometimes they are great, sometimes better eliminated ANYWAY!), is worth consideration, but you'd risk being sent to purgatory indefinitely!

September 11th, 2010, 06:35 AM	#17
Don Bloom Inner Circle Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 6,609	Hmmm, this thread upset me. I think it's really an outrageous matter for the clergy to do this to the brides and grooms that have already made arrangements to have the service covered. The very least they could have done was set a date so that the couples that had already contracted and paid for the video could have it and the couples coming to their churches would know upfront that they couldn't have video in the church. Changing the rules midstream smacks of the kind of thinking that only small minded people do to gain control over their minions. I've worked in churches that are very restrictive and that's bad enough but to be cut out almost comletely like that especially in the way it was done and leaving so many B&Gs out in the cold so to speak is really a sign, to me at least, of why, in my area of the world, more and more couples are getting married outside of the church. I'm not dissing any religion I'm just saying that a lot of churches and officiants set such ridiculous and extreme rules about video/photo that a lot of couples lately are going elsewhere. Good luck with whatever you do. __________________ What do I know? I'm just a video-O-grafer. Don

September 12th, 2010, 08:26 PM	#19
David Schuurman Major Player Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Hamilton, ON Canada Posts: 369	If I was in that situation I would act as a guest and use an hv30 or something and give the groom a DVR "to at least get the audio even if we cant have the video" I'd also get a go pro or something and give it to the groomsmen. I would do my best to secretively pull it off. __________________ http://www.davidschuurman.com http://www.dsweddingcinema.com

September 14th, 2010, 12:36 AM	#27
David Schuurman Major Player Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Hamilton, ON Canada Posts: 369	Sorry George disregard my comment as I didn't realize that you and the officiant know eachother therefore you are most certainly not a guest no matter where you're sitting. However, in the instance where you and he don't know eachother I would still proceed as a guest. __________________ http://www.davidschuurman.com http://www.dsweddingcinema.com

September 15th, 2010, 03:39 PM	#29
Glen Elliott Wrangler Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 2,898	George this is a tough situation. First and foremost make sure you have in your contract that you aren't liable for any loss of production quality or lack thereof due to restrictions at the Church. Secondly you can contact the Priest/Pastor (preferably in person) and explain your plight. Explain that you've shot there several times before and have never caused an issue because you make an effort to NOT be obtrusive. Go on by explaining how what occurs during the service is essentially the most important part of the day. It's the entire reason for the wedding "celebration" in the first place. In other words show that not only will you not be a threat in regards to disturbing the service- but additionally garnish personal respect for the Holy Sacrament that the service, indeed, is. This has helped me disarm many Priests/Pastors that were originally objectionable to wearing a wireless mic. __________________ Glen Elliott Cord 3 Films

September 11th, 2010, 05:14 AM	#16
George Kilroy Major Player Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Midlands UK Posts: 699	On my booking agreement the clients do have to tick and sign a line that they have permission to record in the church and that they have paid any fees and are aware of any restriction that my be imposed. I do not normally get in negotiations with the church minister until the rehearsal where we are face to face. I find then that personality can have a great bearing on negotiations. The concern I had with this one is that the rules were changed after booking had been made at a time when permission had been granted, or at least hadn't been denied. I did a wedding there earlier this year with the same priest with no problem. Anyway the update is that I tried phoning without being able to reach him so I sent a follow up email pointing out that he had allowed me to record a wedding there at the end of May and this is his reply: Nothing personal, George. Absolutely not. No, it's all to do with the Sacredness of celebrations (and me feeling terribly uncomfortable being video-ed). Maximum allowance = Video in and Video out. Keep up the good work - I enjoy working with you. Fr Philip So no relenting or explanation of his recent conversion. I've now got one distraught bride (her wedding is next week) and three potential upset ones when I contact them to tell them of this, unless he has already told them.

September 11th, 2010, 06:57 AM	#18
Nigel Barker Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK Posts: 3,531	A study of the marriage statistics in the UK is very interesting National Statistics Online - Product The total number of marriages in the UK has declined enormously over the last 30 years. There were about 370,000 in 1980 & only 232,000 in 2008 (most recent year that stats are available). Of those marriages the proportion of religious ceremonies has decreased even faster so back in 1991 it was about 50:50 between civil & religious ceremonies but now about is 70:30. The one big growth area since the mid-1990s has been marriage ceremonies in 'approved premises' i.e. hotels, stately homes and historic buildings. Until the legislation was introduced at that time the only options were a religious ceremony or a civil ceremony in a Registry Office which is frankly a bit dowdy & unromantic (I speak as someone who was married in a Registry Office). In 2008 there were just 76,000 religious ceremonies but there were 105,000 ceremonies in 'approved premises' which of course would not be hired as venues if they provided the customer service that many churches seem to offer.

September 13th, 2010, 01:47 AM	#20
George Kilroy Major Player Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Midlands UK Posts: 699	David I think this is the sort of behaviour that may have caused this. Going against the express wishes of the vicar is the quickest way to get all videographers banned from a church. In all the time that I've been doing weddings I've tried to cultivate a professional relationship with everyone involved in the wedding. That means not going against agreements, even if I disagree with them or the other person is not acting professionally. My clients know that. The very last thing I want is a scene in the church.

September 13th, 2010, 05:03 AM	#22
George Kilroy Major Player Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Midlands UK Posts: 699	I've a feeling that someone has either done as someone has suggested and tried to do it surreptitiously or have blatantly gone against his directions or argued with him over the coverage. He had always made it clear to me that he didn't want to have his readings and personal words to the couple recorded and I always respected that, maybe others didn't. Anyway he will not allow anything further so I will now wash my hands of it. The bride for next weekend wants to cancel as she only really wanted the ceremony filmed because her mother can't be there and it was that priest who suggested me in the first place. She was only having the rest of the day covered because I won't do part days. I have just sent letters to the other three brides who are booked for next year to advise them. I hope that they won't look for someone who will offer to do it "undercover".

September 13th, 2010, 05:30 AM	#24
George Kilroy Major Player Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Midlands UK Posts: 699	The very same one, and if you see his reply to me that I posted above his new ruling is nothing to do with me, but I think that someone has upset him. I do feel peeved at having to accept the cancellation, (she did make it clear when booking that the ceremony was the only part she really wanted recording) but also sorry that the bride's mother won't now be able to share in the moment. The bride won't visit the priest with me as she feels she'll say something she'll later regret (Catholic priests seem to have a supernatural hold over their believers). I won't contact him again as any negotiations we have are tangential to my agreement with my clients. In the end it's up to them to accept his ruling.

September 14th, 2010, 05:51 AM	#28
Dan Asseff Major Player Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Port Orange Fl Posts: 317	Are they letting the photographer still shoot? If so act like a photographer and use a dslr to shoot video. Dan Forever Moments Video Productions

September 15th, 2010, 05:06 PM	#30
Dave Blackhurst Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Apple Valley CA Posts: 4,874	I get the feeling that the priest is a bit self conscious and this is the source of some of the discomfort with videotaping. Not sure if there's anything you can really do about that! I do think the idea of shooting with a DSLR or even a small P&S with video, while being sure to omit any of the officiants speeches (sometimes they are great, sometimes better eliminated ANYWAY!), is worth consideration, but you'd risk being sent to purgatory indefinitely!