Any one only offering highlights?

[Craig McKenna]

Love Roger's comments!!!

I am someone who adores Ray Roman, and I've taken a lot from his course, along with Rob Adams' banned course. However, after editing my two recent weddings, I realise that I don't have a lot in common with either of them... my films just don't flow like theirs. I understand a lot about what people say about finding your own style now... I'm hoping to carve one of my own, but I have a long way to go.

I'm hoping to share my latest, which is around 15 minutes. I've spent the past two days on it, but I'll finish it tomorrow. Around 16 hours in, so I'm hoping to do another 4 hours tomorrow, which will take my edit down to 20 hours, plus around 8 hours for the ceremony and speeches. Along with the shoot, that's around 40 hours. I don't think that's so bad.

Anyways, as for offering highlights only, it's definitely something that I've considered in my proposed packages, but I wouldn't shoot less. That would be unprofessional as far as I can understand it.

Enjoying the debate though.

[Peter Riding]

I find myself so much in agreement with Roger that I suspect we time-share one brain.

To the comments he made when it was his turn I'll add: I find the shorts on the whole totally cringeworthy.There is soooo much truly great story-telling in film around together with sky high production values and attention to detail; whether its terrestrial TV e.g. the current Peaky Blinders on BBC, the recent Cilla on UK ITV, cinema such as Wolf of Wall Street, or satellite such as Boardwalk Empire.

Then you've got wedding videos ....... oh dear!

Some shorts are better than others. But as a concept. Please NOOOOO.

But however sure I am that 1) the true value of a wedding video is in recording in full for the family history, and 2) no one other than the bride and the occasional parent actually really wants to view it (everyone else she asks is being polite), there's no denying the power of the short as a marketing hook. Doesn't seem to matter that its totally formulaic / predictable / boring / sterile / missing essential moments etc :- )

Pete

[Chris Harding]

Hi Roger

Absolutely not ! Like Pete I also agree with most of your comments on the forum so sorry Pete I have to also claim a small portion of the timeshare.

I really cannot help thinking that these creative "wedding film makers" plucking bits and pieces from the footage with mostly staged shots anyway are doing thing the completely wrong way. Surely the client here is the bride? Every short form I watch seems to be shouting "Look at my great shots, I'm the best film maker here and everyone should tell me how good I am" ...

What about the bride? What does she want ? Surely your responsibility is to providing her with well covered memories of her special day and the last thing she wants is a "film" that satisfies the film maker's over inflated ego which is exactly what it does.

I seriously cringe a bit every time I see a new "high light" on the forum asking for "comments" but sadly (apart from a few people) most are looking for praise on their work and self adoration rather than something like "do you think the bride will like this"


Keep doing the right thing and making it all about the bride and her day

Chris

[Daniel Latimer]

Originally Posted by Chris Harding

I really cannot help thinking that these creative "wedding film makers" plucking bits and pieces from the footage with mostly staged shots anyway are doing thing the completely wrong way. Surely the client here is the bride? Every short form I watch seems to be shouting "Look at my great shots, I'm the best film maker here and everyone should tell me how good I am" ...

What about the bride? What does she want ? Surely your responsibility is to providing her with well covered memories of her special day and the last thing she wants is a "film" that satisfies the film maker's over inflated ego which is exactly what it does.

I don't think every "creative wedding film maker" is staging every shot. You can make a compelling short form video without staging moments. I know some do, but's it is not mandatory to create a short form.

There's probably more than one bride demographic. There are those brides that want the full day wedding documentary and appreciate how you capture those moments. There are also brides that one a "film" and appreciate those creative shots.

If every bride only wanted the documentary of their wedding day or only wanted a short form video, why do both continue to get booked?

[Gabe Strong]

I'm with Daniel 1000%. Every time this topic gets brought up, there is a group of
people who decry the 'short form' and talk about how they are somehow 'cheating'
brides, because of course brides want the whole day recorded. As I've said about
1000 times and as Daniel said in his post, some brides like one, some like the other.
Because brides are, you know, individuals not some neat group we can clump
together that all like the same things. I've done both, and been booked to do both.
Most recently I partnered with a photographer to offer 'multimedia' packages. I
only offered a 3-5 minute music video (which was in addition to her photo album).
They have been very popular. The big thing is making sure the bride knows what
you are offering, because there are a ton of different styles of wedding videos
offered. If the bride is happy and willing to pay for the type of video that you do,
who cares what people on the internet tell you a bride likes?

Is it a viable business model? Sure, depending on your market. One idea is to offer
both and see what brides pick to get started. I prefer short form, but if a bride comes to me
and wants long form, I will do it, but they are going to have to pay for it. I've had brides
seemingly more willing to pay more for highlights films and seemingly want to pay less for long form.
Maybe because there is less implied 'artistic effort' in long form? I have no clue and
this probably doesn't hold true in many places, it's just one persons observation.
But, if they are willing to pay, I'll do either.

[Chris Harding]

Hi Guys

I don't for any reason decry short form video delivery. If done correctly (and I'm sure many do) and cover the wedding in a condensed format then I'm all for it. All I was saying was there are too many trailers that seem to show off the videographers talents and shots rather than showing off the event, seemingly to get lots of "wows" from comments on the forum and too many people mistake them for short form delivery.

Chris

[Peter Rush]

As Audio plays a big part of these cinematic shorts I can think of a couple of weddings over the last few years where I would have struggled had I offered this to the couple - very basic legal civil ceremony with no meaningful vows followed by speeches that lasted no more than 10 minutes for all of them (best man had stood up, delivered his speech and sat down before I barely had chance to focus). For this type of storytelling great spoken audio is a must - not something I get at every wedding, I find people quite often are just not that eloquent.

Pete

[Noa Put]

It took me 9 years to finally find a style I and my client can be happy with, for me that means a 3 minute trailer which looks about the same as you described but works wonders to get clients attention online and then I do a 20 minute film with all the highlights of the day and I give them the ceremony, speeches, acts, first dance filmed from beginning to end separately. In that way the couple has something to show their friends online (the 3 min trailer), their family (the 20 minute highlight) and themselves (the full version of longer events during the day like the ceremony.)

In that way they don't miss out on anything, it's all there, from long, to medium to short form.

[Roger Gunkel]

Originally Posted by Gabe Strong

I'm with Daniel 1000%. Every time this topic gets brought up, there is a group of
people who decry the 'short form' and talk about how they are somehow 'cheating'
brides, because of course brides want the whole day recorded. As I've said about
1000 times and as Daniel said in his post, some brides like one, some like the other.
Because brides are, you know, individuals not some neat group we can clump
together that all like the same things. I've done both, and been booked to do both.
Most recently I partnered with a photographer to offer 'multimedia' packages. I
only offered a 3-5 minute music video (which was in addition to her photo album).
They have been very popular. The big thing is making sure the bride knows what
you are offering, because there are a ton of different styles of wedding videos
offered. If the bride is happy and willing to pay for the type of video that you do,
who cares what people on the internet tell you a bride likes?

Is it a viable business model? Sure, depending on your market. One idea is to offer
both and see what brides pick to get started. I prefer short form, but if a bride comes to me
and wants long form, I will do it, but they are going to have to pay for it. I've had brides
seemingly more willing to pay more for highlights films and seemingly want to pay less for long form.
Maybe because there is less implied 'artistic effort' in long form? I have no clue and
this probably doesn't hold true in many places, it's just one persons observation.
But, if they are willing to pay, I'll do either.

I don't disagree with any of the points that you are making Gabe. There is a market for the Cinematic short form, most bride's love it and nobody is being cheated out of something. The whole point of my post and reason for my anger at the attraction of the style to the new wedding videographer, is that there is a wonderful opportunity with every wedding to capture something meaningful and worthwhile. The trouble is that few ever take that opportunity, instead choosing to offer something that gives instantaneous gratification with no substance whatsoever. It's the orgasm with no love, no chance to build something lasting and deep.

Every highlight I look at shows people talking and laughing, but always those words and sounds are removed and replaced with romantic music. Totally ignored, or usually not even realised, is that the lady mouthing her words briefly to the couple while smothered out by a pop hit, has flown 2000 miles to read a carefully thought out and emotionally spoken tribute to the couple, or that the gentleman in the corner has only weeks to live but was determined to be at his granddaughter's wedding. The speeches that are so mercilessly discarded or hacked down have been carefully prepared, spoken from the heart with great trepidation and convey invaluable memories and images of the couple through happy and sad times during their lives. How can they be dismissed as 'boring' when so much thought and emotion has been put into them. They are boring if you are a boring film maker with no imagination. Sure not everybody wants to sit through a couple of hours of video, but that is where the highlights video is king. It is not a replacement for a real film of the day, it is a summary and trailer of the main event, in the same way that a movie trailer is.

So many people bleat about the lack of opportunity for serious film making, yet they are happy to put their head in the sand with a wedding. You cannot make a serious wedding film unless you put yourself out to do a bit of research, find out who these people are, why they and their friends and family are there, and make a story out of this one huge day in their life. Most videographers turn up on the day, capture the bits of surface gloss that they see and chuck it together with some clever technical shots. They are photographers with a video camera who want to take a great shot but have to cope with movement. If you want to really make a name for yourself, make a genuine film of the day full of Characters, Narrative, Emotion and Love. Get people to feel uplifted at the end of it and maybe even chuck in a highlights video for their mates.

Roger

[Danny O'Neill]

To answer the original question. A Highlights only is a great option and a wonderful way to lock brides into your offerings.

We do a highlights only and its proving to be our most popular option now. Which is great for us as its still a decent price and half the work of a full film (20 minutes is our full film).

We also say to our couples when they come in that they dont need to decide now which option they want. Start off with the highlights and if they find they have the additional funds closer to the date then great, upgrade if you wish. By locking them in with us on a highlights package it stops them going elsewhere.

Sure, some believe its too short and brides wont go for it and their 2 hours are better. But why not offer it and let the bride decide? Its also about how you sell it. Do you bring up the subject of the highlights and say "Well, we do have this but its shorter" and you look all sheepish like your chacing your arm. Or do you say "The highlights is a fantastic option to go for, my own sister had the pick of our offerings for her wedding and went with the highlights". and your all enthusiastic and give the impression its by far the best option you offer. When in truth, you should be as enthusiastic about ALL of your offerings.

Whenever I buy anything from the apple store, those masters of sales do you know what they always say "Thats the best xxxxx, I have one myself". Bought a space grey 64gb iphone for myself and "It was by far the best colour and capacity". Went back a few days later and bought a gold one for my wife from the same guy and you know what "Gold is by far the best colour, I have the same myself". When you hear that its re-enforcing your beliefs and makes you feel good. Its a little white lie that helps with your sales.

Offer a highlights, be enthusiastic about your highlights, tell them its the best option you have and they may even think they have saved a fortune by not going for your higher priced option and spend more money on your optional extras which have fantastic margins like extra copies or the raw footage (dont tell me people that you give away raw footage!!!!).

[Peter Rush]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

It took me 9 years to finally find a style I and my client can be happy with, for me that means a 3 minute trailer which looks about the same as you described but works wonders to get clients attention online and then I do a 20 minute film with all the highlights of the day and I give them the ceremony, speeches, acts, first dance filmed from beginning to end separately. In that way the couple has something to show their friends online (the 3 min trailer), their family (the 20 minute highlight) and themselves (the full version of longer events during the day like the ceremony.)

In that way they don't miss out on anything, it's all there, from long, to medium to short form.

Interesting Noa - How many music tracks do you normally include for your 20 minute highlights? and for your 3 minute highlight do you get them to select from some royalty free music so it can be used online?

Pete

[Peter Rush]

Originally Posted by Danny O'Neill

Offer a highlights, be enthusiastic about your highlights, tell them its the best option you have and they may even think they have saved a fortune by not going for your higher priced option and spend more money on your optional extras which have fantastic margins like extra copies or the raw footage (dont tell me people that you give away raw footage!!!!).

I never, ever release raw footage Danny - to be seen uncorrected, ungraded and out of context with all the out of focus and shaky shots could be detrimental to my business IMO - Imagine the family showing around their favourite bits of the raw footage and linking it to your company! A good example is the 10 minutes or so as soon as the couple leave the church - I run my camera for the whole time and just wander around reframing to get the best shots - 50% of that one long shot is garbage - I would't want anyone else seeing it!

[Noa Put]

For their 20 minute version I ask for about 5 to 6 songs that they like to be used in the edit, for the 3 minute trailer I decide what song to use and use themusicbed or envato audiojungle to buy licensed songs.

[Robert Benda]

Originally Posted by Jeff Cook

I know you said you shoot with your wife. Do you have time to get both bride and groom preps? or do you simply focus on the bride makeup and her dress fitting? I have been having a heck of a time trying to get makeup and the groom prep.

When we can, there are two of us so shooting both is easy. If not, I try to get them to schedule their prep at different times. The bride needs more, so she goes first. Groom needs 5 minutes. Of course, in that version, it's just about the basic shots instead of hanging out and trying to get a few genuine, spontaneous moments.

With or without a first look, we usually have plenty of time in the hour before the ceremony to get church details and maybe some family interviews. Despite promoting our 15 minute wedding films, like Peter, I'm a fan of the family aspect of weddings, and often try to get parents and grandparents talking on camera, telling stories, like how they met. It gets its own video, though.

As for 'highlight only'... to me, that does not mean a 3 minute trailer, like the guy I've seen a few times who doesn't film everything, he just gets his perfunctory shots. Joe Simon's work is what originally inspired us, but he's not just delivering a 3 minute video to these clients. That's the sizzle.

#Peter Rush, I, for one, don't let my clients anywhere near picking their own music. Since I have to go royalty free, I wait and try and pick something that fits the footage.

#Peter Riding, why do you assume no one except the B&G and their parents want to watch the video? We post our 15 minute films online for them to share, and average is 125-175 views, though a few got 250 or so. That is just too many for it to be politeness. I have had a few tell me they haven't watched their full length.. its too long. One with Catholic mass, full speeches, ended up being over two hours long.

[Roger Gunkel]

Hi Danny,

Again I really don't disagree with what you are saying, which is that you produce highlight videos that your brides love, you love and you sell it enthusiastically. That's great, it works for you and your clients and there is absolutely no need to justify what you do. It is a product and you market it well.

The difficulty for me is that many coming into the wedding video business are seduced by the gloss of the short form and see it as a way to be creative, original and modern. It can be all or none of those things, but it does seem to be a way to follow a particular style with a particular type of equipment. It is also a way to provide a product with the minimum involvement in the wedding and all it's facets. I'm not suggesting that it is a cop out, it is an alternative product, but one that is seen as something to aspire to for new wedding videographers.

It is a shame to me, to see so many not using the opportunity to really be original and creative by building a genuine insight into something as personal as a wedding. Some day, next week, next year, somebody will put a link on to a full length wedding that shows real creative and artistic talent. Not a highly stylised shortform that can't be sustained for more than a few minutes, but a real 'Film'. The sort of thing that is skilled enough for people to want to watch even though they know none of the people involved. Everyone will want to start emulating the style, people will pay big money to have their wedding captured in that way and the producer will travel round the world selling out seminars and selling video tutorials to the wannabes.

Meanwhile we can all sell what works for us and our clients.

Roger