The future of wedding video?

[John Wiley]

I think DSLR's are a 'fad' but they have opened up our eyes to the way things can be done with weddings - the capabilities of DSLR's and their small form factor have, I believe, led to many more people experimenting with things like sliders, glidecams, monopods (as opposed to big tripods) and an overall more 'cinematic look'. I think soon we'll see a balancing effect whereby the majority people start to incorporate some of those elements into the more traditional style wedding videos (and perhaps the clients come to expect it), but the "music video" highlights style videos will become a thing of the past.

When I think about the broader future of wedding videos though, the only thing runnning through my head is "Please not 3d, please not 3d..."

[Chris Harding]

Hi John

My thoughts exactly on 3D!! We already have a local Perth studio who says he is making 3D wedding videos.... Take a look at the Pansonic 3D Pro Camera at around $21K (and you should be using 2!!)

For a $42K investment I don't think it's worth it...and guess what?? 90% of brides will say..."Nana hasn't got a 3D TV so can you make a DVD for her????"

If they REALLY want a 3D ceremony just duplicate the footage on your NLE ... filter the colour on each track and give the bride a few pairs of red and cyan glasses..voila...3D footage at no extra cost!!!

When every 2nd home has a 3D TV that you can view WITHOUT glasses THEN I'm interested...of course there is a good chance I will be pushing up daisies by then anyway!!!

Bill??? Australia is pretty good economy wise too!!! More than enough work and less earthquakes !!!
Either place you will be welcome but be VERY careful...all our cars have the steering wheel on the wrong side...and we drive on the wrong side of the road too!!!!

Chris

[Alex Pineyro]

After reading all of this thread with so much interest, the only thing on my mind is:

"Triple cheese burguer with extra cheese".

Now that´s strange... isn´t it?

To stay on topic. Industry´s old-timers will tell you like war storys about every fad we have seen. From video toaster wipes to slow motion to magic bullet filters to shallow dof.

What makes all of them chessy and at the end forgetable (and unnusable) are not the effects per se, but the way people implements them without propper justification, just because they have them at their disposal.

I still remember when a well focused, lit and correctly white balanced video with simply straight cuts and a couple of dissolves was considered professionaly made.

Now I want my triple cheeseburguer... this time with bacon.

Alex

[Aaron Almquist]

Regarding giving a client what they want... Clients don't know what they want, they hire you because your the professional and you stand by your work. I would rather give up a job then be micro managed by a stock broker with a big budget with no sense of filmmaking.

I don't consider myself to employ any of the fads in my wedding films. Instead I model them after the fine techniques Hollywood directions have used for years to tell a story. Look at the history of cinematography from Hitchcock to Spielberg, they created masterpieces which will go down in history and continue to be studied and appreciated. Every time I hold a camera in my hand I'm not thinking about how much someone paid me to be there, but what kind of impression will this make in the lives of people who view this.

We live in a time of YouTube & camera phones, all I can say is that the cream rises to the top and everything below it is like watery skim milk.

[John Knight]

Cheeseman here! :)

It's been a long road for me. I'm 40 now and filmed my first wedding when I was 18yrs old. I guess the biggest thing I've learnt is that storytelling is key.

I've seen my competition crash and burn due to switching to DSLR. The quality of the image does improve, but the content has gone right down the loo... consisting of twiddling the rings on the table, rack focusing from the back of a couch, to the makeup being put on (why? I don't know) A really tight shot of a cufflink. A groom doing up his tie. All shaking around like the Blair Witch Project with "burnt film" transitions after every shot.

Don't get me wrong - if you master the DSLR it is stunning. Many examples from people in this forum will prove that. But it's HARD work to get the image, and nail all the shots in such a dynamic environment.

When I show brides examples of my work, "Wow, it's so clear", and "It captures so much emotion" is probably the comments I here the most. So why change if you've perfected the formula for your particular market.

I'm lucky to have very little competition here in NZ. Occasionally a film-grad will pop their heads up, make a nice website, show some stunning DSLR skills, then disappear after 2 years. I think this is either because they realise what a rotton way to spend a Saturday night the job becomes, or headed off overseas for their big OE. "Kids these days" don't seem to have much stamina or commitment. (How did I get so old?)

I love my toys, but know it's Sony/Panasonics job to convince me that what I have is no longer cool. Resisting that is painful at times, but when I do upgrade gear I make sure it's an absolute need, not a want.

Reputation has been critical as well. Working my way into a position where photographers, celebrants and caterers rave about me. Heavy heavy networking. I do free promotional videos for all the above, making it a mission to get my embedded work on nearly every suppliers website with a little credit and link back to my own.

Regarding cheese... ok, so I don't make my wedding videos cheesey, I've just accepted that weddings are, by nature, dripping with cheese. And I try and recreate that atmosphere of 'being there'. Face it, how does dressing in a ridiculous white dress that you can hardly walk in, putting a pillow case on your head, and walking down a red carpet whilst crying and holding a bunch of flowers not look cheesey!?!

[Joel Peregrine]

Hi Patrick,

Just my opinion - but I think you should produce what you want to watch. If your heart isn't in it it shows. I'm not the type that can shoot and edit for a product just because there is a market for it. I'd rather create something unique that I get enthusiastic about and let the people that appreciate that style come to me. You have to be confident enough in your work to know that if you like it there are a lot of others that will too. Otherwise you're just guessing.

Originally Posted by Patrick Janka

Hey, I'm just getting into the biz, but from what I gather the industry is moving towards a more stylized music video/short film type edit, especially with the use of DSLR's. Would you say this is the case? I'm looking at demo videos from local videographers here and everything is so cheezy. Almost every shot is in bad slow-motion and the music is overtly sappy. It all screams 1980's. The best looking videos I've seen have a more modern feel, which is a little more fast paced both in music selection and in editing style. This seems to be the norm in places like L.A. I know of one such company here in Orlando that prides itself on the use of DSLR and more filmic style shooting/editing. Would you say there's a progression going on or is the sap and slo-mo still a viable style?

[John Wiley]

Originally Posted by Alex Pineyro

What makes all of them chessy and at the end forgetable (and unnusable) are not the effects per se, but the way people implements them without propper justification, just because they have them at their disposal.

Alex, you took what I was trying to say and said it much better, and much more succintly.

When each new fad dies down and people stop using things just because they're new and "because they can," hopefully what we are left with is another skill/technique/tool which can be integrated into our work at appropriate times, to increase the production value of our work.

[Chris Harding]

Hi Joel

As long as your taste is the same as the bride's taste that's fine...I guess if your style is way out of wack from what bride's expect then the industry isn't for you anyway.

I think that saying "This is what I like so you had better like it too" is a little open to videographers expecting a bride to accept whatever you offer... If she says I want all live audio with no cheesy love songs then as a supplier, you have to decide to give the client what she wants or reject the job outright.

If you have having to reject jobs cos they don't suit your style exactly then you are not going to make much of an income. I just enjoy shooting weddings and if the bride wants certain parameters adhered to it still doesn't make me less enthusiastic. Of course if it's not your living then you can be as fussy as you want to!!

Chris

[Joel Peregrine]

Hi Chris,

I like couples that see what I do and say 'do that for us', so having a body of work that isn't cliche and isn't a formula copied from a seminar or a convention seems like the best way to differentiate yourself based on what you offer rather than what you charge. Its something they can't price-shop for because there is nothing to compare it to. I'm probably full of hot air though - I've been a full time wedding videographer for 20 years and I'm no where near having all the answers...

Originally Posted by Chris Harding

Hi Joel

As long as your taste is the same as the bride's taste that's fine...I guess if your style is way out of wack from what bride's expect then the industry isn't for you anyway.

I think that saying "This is what I like so you had better like it too" is a little open to videographers expecting a bride to accept whatever you offer... If she says I want all live audio with no cheesy love songs then as a supplier, you have to decide to give the client what she wants or reject the job outright.

If you have having to reject jobs cos they don't suit your style exactly then you are not going to make much of an income. I just enjoy shooting weddings and if the bride wants certain parameters adhered to it still doesn't make me less enthusiastic. Of course if it's not your living then you can be as fussy as you want to!!

Chris

[Ryan Czaplinski]

For me in SLR shooting I don't try to mimmick others out there. My goal is to help tell their story using not just music, but dialogue captured from the day and genuine moments. I never stage shots. Everything is shot as it happens. I don't like the idea of pre-composing people in scenarios and making a fake video from it.

It's my job that in meeting with the clients I get a feel for the type of people they are, get a really good idea of the tone of their wedding, the reception and the family/friends. It's not til after the last shot is done I begin thinking how I'm going to put this together.

Yeah I get some of the technical shots of things, but sometimes they don't fit. My goal is that I have hopefully told a story with their words and visuals and make people feel like they were there all over again. I never think, "Gotta get that token gown shot." "Oop, there's that jewelry shot I need." Yeah the detail shots have importance, but things are not done the same every time.

DSLR has afforded me the opportunity to shoot amazing stuff with that great separated depth of field I have been trying to achieve with cruddy camcorders for years. DSLR isn't me jumping on a bandwagon, I actually prefer it highly despite the challenges of focus during live events. It's the look and feel I'm going for my own personal tastes and not because X amount of people are doing it. I would have never bought into DSLR if I truly didn't love it. I'm personally convinced the look and feel of the imagery I get out of that camera far exceeds that of $7-10k camcorders out there as far as low light capabilities and the shallow depth I really love.

[Chris Harding]

Hi Joel

With you I can understand!! Your brides, like mine, like your style because you have polished and perfected it over 20 years ...(me too actually..but dunno about the perfection bit!!)

I was talking more more the newbie guy who is obsessed by having the latest and greatest and once he has that he essentially shoots what he likes and expects the bride to like it. He hasn't had any basics in film-making nor experience slogging at weddings for countless years like we have.

With your vast experience, although you set your own individual and unique style it is still drawn from many years of wedding shoots so it will more than satisy the brides that see it.

Chris

[Roger Van Duyn]

Hi guys,

I'm not really a wedding videographer, but rather an event videographer who sometimes shoots very special events, some of which are weddings. Although I haven't shot nearly as many weddings as some of you guys, maybe not even very many of you guys, I do listen to what my clients say to me.

I have had SEVERAL clients tell me this, and maybe it only made an impression on me because I haven't shot that many weddings yet. But, no kidding, they told me they hired me because I was NOT a wedding videographer. They wanted someone who took a minimum of artistic license with their special event.

Really. It got my attention. They didn't say anything about the other stuff being cheesy. In fact, one or two actually mentioned the wedding videos they had watched were from very talented filmmakers. But they didn't want a lot of artistic license. They wanted a more documentarian approach. They wanted the memories of family and friends sharing their special day preserved. They weren't interested in a Cinderella story.

Granted, I don't do many weddings. But I listen to people. Especially the ones that hire me. I take note of the feedback I get. Now the weddings I shoot are mostly from mature couples. They are paying for the wedding themselves. Their outlook is probably different than younger brides and grooms having the wedding paid for by their parents.

[Chris Harding]

Bravo Roger!!!

All my weddings are (and will always be) documentary style ..it's a accurate record of the day and focuses on the bride and groom capturing their emotion, laughter and tears and not trying to show off how good I am. I actually get a lot of work mainly because I don't make "music videos". My weddings have a story from beginning to end and anyone who was not there can re-live the moments.

I figure that if the BBC can shoot the wedding of the year in doc style then that's good enough for me. If the bride wants a host of shots with special effects and the latest chart topper then I tell them to grab the stills from the photog and make a slideshow !!

I'm not against video set to music by any means ..it just isn't my style of shooting so no offence meant to the guys and gals who have great success with that sort of style. Each to their own!!!

Chris

[Roger Van Duyn]

Actually, I do offer a music video short if they want one to post online. The music has to be licensed. But I'm a firm believer in recounting what actually happens. A lot of what actually happens at an event can be missed if you don't know where to look for it.

Actually, I wonder about a short version without a music track. How would I be able to pull it off? I haven't really seen one done by anyone else, and don't really know where to start. All the wedding shorts I've ever seen on line have been music videos. If I've seen one that wasn't, I don't remember seeing it. Really, I'm learning from all you other guys that have been doing this longer than me.

As for being a documentarian, first you need to know where to look. Then you point your camera there. If you've been a careful observer of life, you tend to anticipate where to look before something happens. With me, it's partly from training, thirty years working in a medical laboratory, where details are important, but only as part of the big picture. There were just so many details to sort through from all those patients, with all those samples, and all those tests. Discerning what is relevant and what isn't can't be learned overnight.

With the microscope, I knew when to use high power, and when to use low power to get a big picture. It's the same being a videographer. And what's wrong with that word anyway? My customers tell me that's one of the keywords they used in Google to find me.

The camera ops on the news crews around here are called photographers. It's a two person crew, the reporter, and the photographer. So I call myself a photographer too. And I do take stills for my clients when they want me to. However they would like me to document their event is open for discussion. Then I bring my tools to do the job. I serve them. That's what they hire me for. It's not about me. It's their special event. I try to do a good job for them. I still have a lot to learn. Sometimes I mess up and have to make things right for the client as best I can. Sometimes clients are very pleased.

[Vaughan Wood]

Interesting Thread!

I've been doing weddings for 15 years now, and started when small digital cameras hit the scene.

I did a 10 minute wedding edit using a computer and it took 23 hours to render! Then fixed my mistakes and waited another 23 hours to view it....etc, etc.

15 years later I'm still doing mainly a 10 minute highlight package, but my clients always get all my unedited footage as well, even on my full edit jobs. So they have the best of both worlds.

As far as editng style goes, I always make my clients supply me with the music THEY want on the video, so their music dictates how their video will look, faster (swing) music, more cuts: slow romantic music, more slo mo, and dissolves.

This has always seemed to work for me.

Cheers,

Vaughan