Harsh?

[Chris Harding]

I really don't see the big deal here. It's the bride's wedding and she has decided she doesn't want the video guy around during the photoshoot so go relax and chill out. I can see the photogs point too and we do both photos and video and there is nothing more annoying than doing a video shoot while the photog is getting in your way and vice versa !! On the few occasions where someone else is doing the photos, I take the couple only away for a slomo shoot that takes 10 minutes and then hand them back to the photog and head off to the reception and do guest comments on camera or even relax and do nothing !!! Just tell the photog you need the couple for 10 minutes to do a personal shoot and then they are all his to work with. We have done this for many years and the photogs appreciate it when we have one around.

[Steven Shea]

Interesting points all around.

For me, the bride and groom's wishes would be the most important. I have had a few that have asked me to go get candid shots, rather than get footage of the photoshoot. I do as they wish. I'll film a brick wall for 40 minutes if that's what they want. It is their video after all.

That said, the photo session does often present some great footage. Depends alot on the bridal party. Those who are very animated and lively will get you some excellent stuff. Not so much during the posing, but all the candid laughter and carrying on between pictures, or with people on the sidelines waiting.

Others are much more reserved and the footage is more dull as a result.

I've never had an issue with a photog at this time, but I stay out of the way and don't interrupt their job. If the bridal crowd as a good one, it's easy enough to get great stuff without being intrusive.

I've been lucky to not have to deal with any real jerky photogs yet. The worst is some will block cameras from time to time, but it usually seems like an honest mistake and once I ask them to move, they do. We both know we have a job to do, and try to compromise as much as possible.

[Noa Put]

I think you missed the point, it's not the bride that doesn't want Peter to be there, it's the photographer and he managed to convince the bride, it's also not the brides wish to have Peter standing at the "wrong" side during the ceremony, it's the photographer who doesn't want him at that spot and yet again he is using the bride to get what he wants. Maybe he"ll get back to the bride telling he doesn't want you to use a videolight in the venue (and lets assume your camera needs that extra light) as it will ruin his photo's, what do you think the bride will tell Peter? How far would you let this go on?

[Noa Put]

@ Peter, am I right in assuming the photographer is at least twice as expensive as you are?

[Nigel Barker]

To be clear this is just the couple's photo shoot & not the group shots. I know some videographers don't film the group shots but I always found I got nice footage not if the posed groups per se but more of the guests larking about in between the shots. In this case the photographer is either incompetent or full of himself. Why does he need an hour alone with the couple? 15-20 minutes is ample. Don't the couple realise how much of their day they will be missing? If they went for a portrait session in a studio it wouldn't take an hour. Having said all that if the couple are happy with the photographer being such an arse then just let them get on with it & film guests or the venue or just put your feet up for an hour.

[Steve Burkett]

In this case it is the Photographer making the demands and using the Bride to get his own way. Regretfully as she values Photography over Video, your hands are tied and whilst you can argue your case and hope to change her mind, in the end if she sides with the Photographer, you have to go along with it. That doesn't mean you can't make the best of it. I've frequently shot from the Bride's side and still got good coverage and missing just the couple's photo shoot is no big deal. There's more to the Wedding Day than that. In fact some couple's I have filmed didn't even have personal photos, it just wasn't for them. I filmed one in May where it was just 2 family members handling the photos and there were no formal photos at all.

If the Photographer really starting to add to the list such as banning lights, restricting cameras and movement, I think you would have a stronger case and even suggest the couple would be better off without having their Wedding filmed given the number of restrictions. Otherwise you'd be well in your right to make restrictions of your own and I think by then the Bride will have just got fed up with all the demands.

[Peter Rush]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

@ Peter, am I right in assuming the photographer is at least twice as expensive as you are?

I would have expected that Noa but no - they do a two-tog full day for just £100 more than me. No album but interestingly they create an online video of the stills (no doubt using something like ProShow)

TBH I aren't stressing about it, I've shot several weddings without filming around the photoshoot for several reasons and it's been no big deal. My real worry is the amount of time it seems they may remove the couple from the wedding party - you can't have a wedding film without a bride and groom! I strongly suspect I won't get my 15 minutes and that will be a pain.

At worst If I feel my quality has been compromised by the photographer's demands I won't do a trailer. When I meet with a couple I always say that I will do them a trailer if time allows. I don't automatically include one in my packages as let's face it, we've all done weddings we'd rather not publicise! If that happens and she asks why, then I'll tell her that the restrictions imposed by the photographer, and agreed by her, resulted in a wedding film that is not up to my usual standard.

I'll let you know how I get on. I may run into trouble with my lights for the first dance but they'll be staying on regardless - by that time of the day i take sh**t from no one!

[Nathan Buck]

Ah man, I hate the whole Photo vs Video guy. I think the email you got was a little harsh and overly firm in tone. Who is he to tell you what to do? You should not listen to him. The only people you should listen to is the couple - so I'd email them mentioning you've had an email from the photographer.

Weddings are SO MUCH easier when the two of you get along so I have no idea why this guy is trying to make things unnecessarily awkward before you've even met each other.

For me personally, they're welcome to have their 'private photo shoot'. That's fine. It's their video. But I prefer a 'fly on the wall' approach to shooting. I don't care if the photog is in my shot (provided they're not constantly blocking a manned camera) and for the photo sesh I have a zoom and hang back and let them do their thing. It looks weird to film posing people so I always try get the photog in shot. I don't interact with the B&G at all. I may ask for a cheeky walking shot when it's not a 'photo sesh'. I'd politely point out to them that they'll barely notice I'm there. If the photog has some weird thing about being filmed then that's fine I guess. That's not my issue it's theirs and I'd respect that and it's down to the B&G to convince them if they wish to.

[Peter Parker]

It will be interesting to see what the reception venue say about the photog taking an hour for his pics. Do they know? If not, the chef will not be too well pleased if he has a time to serve the food and it all goes cold. Re the lights at first dance, we had a photog who had been a real pain, so at the first dance we made sure that one of the two cameras, both with lights, was directly opposite him when he tried to take pics. I dont do weddings anymore, too old! due to this sort of hassle. If the bride and groom have been brainwashed by the tog, if you can't talk them round, so bit, get some cutaways of the guests and have a rest.
I could also never understand why some togs took literally 1,000s of pics. They might as well have used a video cam.
I'll be interested to hear how you get on ☺☺

[Craig McKenna]

I'd also be interested in how you get on...

As for what has been said here since yesterday, I would agree with Nathan and email the client explaining why the demands of the photog may negatively affect their video.

Ultimately, it doesn't seem like the photo / video relationship is improving. It's a great shame considering that you can be a big help to them as Noa states. Last weekend, I shot my seventh wedding and was told that I was great to work with, as the photographers never knew where I was (usually behind them and to the side). I like those compliments and think that we are capable of making the same impression.

There's also a great difference in the importance of these activities depending on your deliverables. For instance, my package is all about the highlight, and so this would be a big deal for me. Whereas if you're not delivering trailers and are straight documentary style, then it may not have as big of an impact on your work.

Let us know how you get on Pete! All the best for this Saturday!

[Peter Rush]

Craig in 8 years this is only the second time it's happened - I can count the number of awkward togs on one hand. I've made a few good friends from photographers and get lots of recommendations - what I don't like in this case is the implication that my work is not as important than theirs.

I aren't going to stress the bride as it's so close and she's already said she accepts the situation (her email to me said 'The photographer says you are not allowed etc etc') so that's that.

If I don't get my 15 minutes for a few beauty shots then maybe they won't get a trailer (which I never promise anyway)

[Nathan Buck]

Sounds reasonable, Peter.

If I was in your situation I'd make the most of the time they are away and get tons of shots of everyone else. Father of bride, mother, grandparents etc. I find the videos start to get a bit boring when it's all the couple and no one else. They also want to see the bits they missed which can be just as valuable.

[Pete Cofrancesco]

I often get compliments from photographers. Maybe because of my unobtrusive style or that I have photographed weddings too so I understand and respect both roles. But I get the idea thats the exception to the rule. I usually start off by having to explain to the officiant I'm not that type of person. I also have a conversation with the photographer how we can work together and stay out of each other's way.

[Craig McKenna]

Originally Posted by Peter Rush

Craig in 8 years this is only the second time it's happened - I can count the number of awkward togs on one hand. I've made a few good friends from photographers and get lots of recommendations - what I don't like in this case is the implication that my work is not as important than theirs.

I aren't going to stress the bride as it's so close and she's already said she accepts the situation (her email to me said 'The photographer says you are not allowed etc etc') so that's that.

If I don't get my 15 minutes for a few beauty shots then maybe they won't get a trailer (which I never promise anyway)

That's great to hear, Pete. I think you would be able to do deliver a great trailer either way! You're an inventive videographer and great at solving problems, so I'm sure you'll get worthy footage elsewhere whilst they are away! :) All the best!

[Roger Gunkel]

I agree to a large extent with the view that if the Bride doesn't want the video on the photo shoot then that is her choice, but I also think that she has been cleverly led by the photographer.

I have never had any particular problem with photographers, as I make it clear to them from the start that I will always defer to their choice of position except ceremony and speeches. I always cover the photo shoot as it is part of the couple's day, but only to show what they are doing and never interfering with what the photographer does as he needs to work closely with the couple. I do though frequently wonder why photographers seem to click away endlessly through the speeches when the couple are highly unlikely to want speech photos in their album or hanging on the wall.

If you don't need the photo shoot, then it doesn't matter at all, but if there was no photographer at the wedding, most videographers would probably still want some shots with just the B&G on their own, walking, talking and a little more artistic than the rest of the day. That is probably the only time of the day when it is possible to get the couple away from their guests and is not a time that should be just for the photographer. TIme doesn't normally allow for both photographer and videographer to take separate shoots and the photographer is unlikely to be prepared to miss out on available time to give it up for the video. It seems perfectly reasonable for the videographer to therefore capture some of the time that the photographer is using and a little bit of friendly negotiation is all that's needed.

I also agree that sometimes the video is undervalued by the couple until it is actually delivered and by then it is too late to do anything about it. In my experience, the video becomes more important to the couple with the passing years, while the photo album gathers dust. Photographers generally just do not understand video or see the point of it, they just think you point a camera and press a button with little skill involved, unlike their own specialized craft as they see it.

Roger