Filming permission from guests?

[Danny O'Neill]

Ahhh, but there not. Here anyway. Here in the UK the church is always open. Any passer by can walk into a church ceremony and sit at the back. Ive seen it happen twice. I have no idea why. I wouldnt dream of walking into some strangers wedding. Civil ceremonies are a little more private though.

The chances of someone from the street walking into a strangers ceremony and then getting the grump because they were filmed is very small indeed. But you just know there is someone out there who has done just that and made their complaints.

Everyone is free to leave and we know the look the says "Go away".

[Chris Harding]

Hi Danny

In Australia you don't need permission to film someone in a public place, only in a private place. Since our Churches are also open to the public during the day (and they wander around and take photos too) I would guess they are too, public places so people cannot object to being filmed! Likewise a lot of civil ceremonies are done in public parks so the same conditions would apply.

I often see people at the back of the Church who are not guests and simply like to watch a wedding!! Little old ladies make this their Saturday afternoon outing at some of our bigger cathedrals, but my last wedding at a big Church saw the lighting and sound guy (near the door) politely turn away visitors while the wedding was in progress!!

Chris

[Danny O'Neill]

Sounds like here. I believe we too can film in public places but being allowed and being wanted are often different.

I was merrily filming the setup for our last wedding. Everyone was cool with being filmed but one guy asked me not to film him and delete anything I had of him (he was just tieing some ribbon to a chair).

[Jeff Harper]

Good points all, no matter how you slice it, the permission thing is nonsense for a wedding. In addition, it all comes back, in my mind, to that is is reasonable that at a wedding photos and/or video are normal occurrences and to be expected.

[Jeff Harper]

Danny, I've had people tell me the same thing, and I smile and say ok and then I promptly forget it. It's usually women who don't feel attractive, and it's normally someone who will not be in the final product anyway.

[Jawad Mir]

Like what few said, it's very simple.

Ceremony and Reception or anything for that matter related to wedding are not taking at personal property. They are private property so if people have issue either hide yourself or disappear. But it does help to have a clause in contract to cover yourself.

[Luke Gates]

I've always wondered, if everyone is required to sign a release, then how do the papparazi get away with what they do?

[Brian Drysdale]

Originally Posted by Danny O'Neill

Sounds like here. I believe we too can film in public places but being allowed and being wanted are often different.

In the past, when shooting news at some church yard funerals we tended not to film the grave diggers if possible, they could be doing what is termed "the double". That is working and claiming social security..

[David T. Green]

I think that the purpose of the filming is what determine if you need to get people to sign a release form. I worked at a television station and we didn't need to get persons sign if we were filming for news but if were doing something for productions which was going to be used for commercial purposes then we had to get everyone sign a release form.
The BBC was probably doing something which have a commercial element to it. I don't think that none of us will be taking any of the wedding that we record and make them available for sale to the public. So there is no need to get anyone sign anything.

[Michael Johnston]

You don't need permission or releases for news or documentary shooting. TMZ and the papparazi, and the photos/video they take are considered news. You could also claim the wedding video is a documentary in which case you don't need Antibes permission.

[Colin McDonald]

I've just remembered about the lady who asked me not to be filmed filling her plate at a reception buffet (presumably because she piled it too high with food and didn't want to appear greedy). That was a first for me.

[Jeff Harper]

Many people, particularly women, do not enjoy being filmed at a buffet, or while eating. I personally would be extremely irritated to be filmed eating.

I do film buffets, but only to provide glimpses of faces etc as they move through, a few closeups of foot going onto a plate, etc. for the purpose of continuity.

[Chris Harding]

Hey Jeff

.....and filming that foot must have been a practical example of really and truly putting one's foot in one's mouth??? (Only pulling your leg about the typo!!!)

When I still used to do ethnic weddings they are actually offended if you don't film the guests eating!!!! They need to know that everyone with mouths full is a sign that the meal is delicious and being enjoyed!!

I film the buffet too but never people eating .... besides if you have a nice bride you also should be eating!!

Chris

[Jeff Harper]

We have cannibals here, and we do film them eating body parts, that was not a typo. A foot on the plate of every guest shows demonstrates the host's wealth, as feet are an expensive delicacy in these parts. It's a status thing. When the guest are done knawing all the meat off, it is customary to toss the bones over ones left shoulder for good luck. I do like to get a group shot of people tossing bones, as we call it.

[Corey Graham]

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

Yes we have cannibals here, and we do film them eating body parts, that was not a typo.

I need to move to Cincinnati!