Let's blow some life back into this weddingvideography section and ask a question, if I end up talking to myself then I guess it's time to close down this section as I"m not the only one that has noticed nothing really happens here anymore (http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/wedding-event-videography-techniques/535794-where-have-all-wedding-videographers-gone.html)

Anyways, a question I asked a while back on a large facebook weddingvideography group I used to be a member of was, "why am I never seeing shots of food in wedding highlights or trailers?"

In my country food is an important part of our culture and generally a large part of the budget is spend on it at weddings, as videographer I often am invited to sit down with the guests when everyone eats but often I get a separate table together with the photog and we get served the main course, if I"m lucky I get to eat all courses they serve. There is also often a large selection of dessert and I can join in on that as well.

I never film people who are eating but I do take closeups from the food, not everything but just a few shots, or I film people who are taking food and then maybe a quick steadycam shot of the food- or dessert table.

The reason why I was referring to my asking this question in that facebookgroup was that the reactions I got there was: "food is boring", "it doesn't fit in their story", "it doesn't fit in my cinematic style"
The only thing they would shoot was the cutting of the cake.

I was the only one it seemed in that huge group of videographers who was taking detail shots of food and another example why I didn't fit in :)

I could not imagine not having some shots of the food, the time the guests spend to eat can cover 3 to 4 hours in the evening so by not showing that it looks like it never happened or that I would pretend it didn't happen.

Am I the only one here as well who does find this important enough to include in the film?

I think only us old folks post on message boards.

I do film the food and some wide shots of dinner, servers bring out the food, people laughing and talking, no close ups of the chomping . My way of thinking the bride likes coverage of all the things they spent money on including the food. It’s good to have a little broll of the food to bridge between parts of the reception.

I think many don’t film because it’s our only opportunity to eat and get our second wind that and it’s unflattering seeing people eat. I once had a client instruct me to setup a camera as lock shot of the main table to film the entire reception.

I have the same way of thinking as you do, some comments I did get in that facebookgroup was also that when the food was served that this was the only moment they could eat and then didn't bother filming it.

Where I live that would be not done, from what I understood average US weddings last 8 to 10 hours for a weddingvideographer, for me that's 15 to 17 hours average, if I had to shoot only 8 to 10 hours I would just bring my own food and make the most out of my limited time that I was present but since I"m doing a double shift my clients never question giving me food, even halfway the day and I never have to ask for it, but they do expect every single detail where they spend money on to be covered.

I don't shoot weddings any more, but when I did...

I included the food. Close-ups of various dishes; utensils going in; glasses being raised etc. but *never* a close-up of a guest eating. Those were always wide, general shots of folks at tables.

The bride and groom cakes were always a big deal too.

I'm with you completely on this Noa. I think that the food is an important and highly sociable part of the day, that takes a large part of their budget. I never film people eating, but always show the courses being served if it is waiter service, or dishes if buffet style.Always closeups of the food, but never enough to make it boring. The gaps in between the courses are a great opportunity to get people laughing and talking without them being aware, something that the B&G always love. It's also those quick big closeups of wine glasses being topped up, coffee being poured etc, that capture the atmosphere.

I've also heard the comments by other videographers that food, meal and people shots are 'boring' and don't fit with their style or cinematic coverage. You have two choices as a wedding videographer in my opinion, 1) You produce a product tailored to your particular ideas of style and importance of content, 2) You capture the day as it unfolds covering all the little details in a documentary way without bias. I do the latter as I feel that I want the couple to be able to see all the details that they always say they missed, and love to see afterwards. They always comment that it is the first chance they have to see their own wedding.

I would add that occasionally I get asked if I can produce a short highlights for their friends to see that don't know the family members and I am always happy to do that as well.

Roger

I think many don’t film because it’s our only opportunity to eat and get our second wind that and it’s unflattering seeing people eat. I once had a client instruct me to setup a camera as lock shot of the main table to film the entire reception.

I always ask for my food to be served when the family and guests eat, as I don't film them while they are actually eating and I always finish long before the next course, so don't really lose any time getting those in between shots.

Roger

If it's a self serve buffet I will film the bridal party serving themselves and maybe the parents and always the buffet as soon as it's put out. Sitdown meals are trickier so I tend to leave them out but might do a few stills if we are doing photos as well. Some ethnic groups seem to place a huge importance on the food and I remember one Indian wedding where they were annoyed that I never filmed the guests eating but then again we never have done that and I consider it rude to film people with their mouth full!!

From a non-wedding videographer, the idea of capturing the drinks and meal seems like it would be a good idea to capture the mood and the more informal part of the celebration. Last summer I had the opportunity to “film” (hey, it is digital!) a wedding and did get some table shots. It was a sit-down affair so not smorgasbord affair.

The hall was really crowded so it was not really possible to walk between the tables. There was an official photographer with an assistant and I was just a last-minute volunteer videographer. In hind-sight it would be nice to take a video of the people at each table but coming up to the table and interacting with them somehow, depending on their relationship with the bride and groom. Ask a few questions and get some reaction. Use someone familiar with the guests to interact so the videographer can concentrate on the video part.

This wedding was in Slovakia and the wedding was a dual language affair, Slovak und Deutsch, and I don’t speak Slovak and my German isn’t all that good so it was an interesting day. Noa raised some good questions here and I think that the food and drink parts would be excellent cam fodder.

Here is a couple screen shots - one of the guests taking a picture of the videographer and the other of the hall looking toward the front table. Everybody was having a good time and that would be good to capture. I had a very good time.

I've avoided food in the past. I don't agree with it not being cinematic enough. Really as opposed to any other aspect of the day like guests mingling, chatting away eating nibbled. I think its more down to preferring to have a break and eat. I once worked with 3 Photographers who didn't leave their food despite there being singers during the meal, with guests dancing on the table and the Groom joining in. It was only me who covered it.

That said, my reasons for not covering the food is that I am often grabbing shots of the venue. Especially now since I've started to use my drone. However in the past couple of months, I've had about 4 or 5 couples ask for food coverage and I've been grabbing some shots. So from this, I agree its an area that should be covered and not ignored and so thing I shall have to address in the future.

I don't shoot it, not sure if its a country/cultural thing, but are you guys talking about cocktail hour, or dinner?

During cocktail hour I'm typically shooting the venue before guests enter & sit down. Tables, cake, table flowers etc. Then I'll venture back in & maybe shoot some cocktail hour if there's time, but sometimes we're taking a few photos of the couple, or family pics etc at the beginning of cocktail hour, so by the time I'm inside, setup for intros, shoot a bit of the venue, there's only 10 minute left of cocktail hour. I typically skip it & remain set for intros rather than shoot a little bit, depends on lighting & how it would look too.

But food? Maybe if I have 30-60 full minutes of cocktail hour, then yeah. But not dinner, almost never. Not that its a 'cinematic' thing. One part is I would hate guests saying to me "What are ya shooting the food, hahaha". (I had a guy say that to me my last wedding, I was adjusting my exposure for indoors & he cracked "What are you shooting, the furniture?!". But also I can't see how I would shoot dinner,. Ask the venue for shots in the kitchen, or shoot it from a guest who's been served?

Most wedding here tend to have servers deliver food, not often buffet, so maybe thats a difference.

I just talking about food in general, here small snacks (don't know the exact english word for it) are served during "cocktail hour" or reception just before the guests are going inside the venue and sit at the tables, there dinner is served which can be either be buffet or servers bringing the food to the tables.

When they serve snacks I get a quick shot of servers bringing the food and maybe one close up of the food and when it's dinner the same, I follow a server while he brings the food to the table and one close up when he places the plate on the table. When it's a buffet I get a few shots of guests taking food and a few close ups of the food.

One part is I would hate guests saying to me "What are ya shooting the food, hahaha"
Here taking pictures or filming the food is no laughing matter, they expect you to cover that part, I don't need to have a shot of every type of food, just 2 close ups and some shots of the guests lining up for the food, the photog for instance always takes a lot of close ups from the food and they cover that part more in detail then I do.

I just talking about food in general, here small snacks (don't know the exact english word for it) are served during "cocktail hour" or reception just before the guests are going inside the venue and sit at the tables, there dinner is served which can be either be buffet or servers bringing the food to the tables.

When they serve snacks I get a quick shot of servers bringing the food and maybe one close up of the food and when it's dinner the same, I follow a server while he brings the food to the table and one close up when he places the plate on the table. When it's a buffet I get a few shots of guests taking food and a few close ups of the food.

This is exactly what we used to do. We also used to make sure we had shots of all the tables with closeups of place settings & table decorations before the guests sat down. It's all part of the day & the couple generally have put a lot of thought into choosing the meal & the table decorations so you need to record it.

A studio I worked for years ago would shoot the cake, catering, ice sculptures, flower arrangements etc. as part of their ongoing marketing so the vendors would have samples of their work to show. We would print photos and give to the vendors. All part of the lead sharing arrangement. Not sure how that might work for video other than perhaps developing a little promo reel over time.

use it as props, for example stick a gopro on a plate that is served.
You will get food in the picture but not as the main subject.
you can also film trough transparent bottles or glasses.
you can shoot glasses being filled. with people in the background.
I mean it is silly to shoot food to show it, who cares about food ?
but integrating it into a scene is nice, like you would do for flowers or cars.

Noa - just had to answer this one ...
I just talking about food in general, here small snacks (don't know the exact english word for it) are served during "cocktail hour" ....

The ‘American English’ word for that is “Hors d’oeuvers.”
Je oubliez très beacoup de mon Français since l’école so I don’t know how that exactly translates, but that’s what we call it.

Looking back at the things I was trying to capture, I wish I would have got more of the food and drink part. I did get a bit of the wait staff as they were bringing the trays out but not so of the actual delivery. As a guest I did my filming more incognito. Also, not knowing most of the people there one doesn't want to impose or film people who may not want to be videoed.

If the video winds up being shared with the guests it becomes one of their memories, too. While the guests are known by the bride and groom, there are family relations who travel sometimes long distances to attend and may not have visited some relatives in a long time, so these videos can be really good.

What is especially nice is having shots of the grandparents and the children. The children grow up so fast and I now have some family video of, say a three or four year old doing some kid thing, say crawling under the dining table, and now they are a teenager. I can now threaten to show it to their boyfriend or girlfriend! Ah, the awesome power of video! I haven't finished editing all the video I shot last summer and had totally forgotten about the little girl taking a picture of me so that's one clip that will be definitely included.

Edit: there are also things like "petit fours" or bonbons that one typically has with coffee or tea.

I mean it is silly to shoot food to show it, who cares about food ?

It is silly not to look past your own country borders, every country has it's own traditions about what people find important. I once covered a Kurdish wedding, the groom insisted that I would film people while they where eating and not just a quick shot, he wanted me to go around and cover as many people as possible while they where enjoying their meal. Maybe silly to you but important to them.

Same as in my country, I never cover people while they are eating except maybe a wide establishing shot but because the food takes up 3-4 hours on average and takes up the largest part of the budget it's expected to at least have a few shots. It's an important part of the day and I would find it weird to pretend it didn't happen.

I mean it is silly to shoot food to show it, who cares about food ?
but integrating it into a scene is nice, like you would do for flowers or cars.

Considering how much the catering actually costs, I've had numerous families over the years who definitely want me to include it. They want to see all the food they were paying for!

Considering how much the catering actually costs, I've had numerous families over the years who definitely want me to include it. They want to see all the food they were paying for!
This applies to any part of the wedding that the couple have thought about & paid extra for whether that's the live band, the magician, the harpist, the candy cart, the chocolate fondu, the dove release, the chimney sweep, the dress etc etc etc

I do have to take cultural difference into consideration as that seems to play a larger role in wether it is important to cover such a shot, like David said, he get's laughed at when he takes a shot of the food and when his clients share that same thought, then I can understand why it's left out.

I do see that the past years there is a more heavy emphasis on "telling a story", eventhough there isn't really one and how you compose your shots (composition is actually something I do find very important as well), something that is passed on during countless workshops that are given buy the more established names in the weddingindustry. We are not making a video anymore but now it's called cinema, and here I think lies the main reason why certain parts of the day, like the food, is not considered cinematic enough or adding onto the story so it's left out.

I remember Patrick from Still-Motion saying years ago; if a ceremony doesn't add to the story that we want to tell about the couple we would leave it out of their film and I guess the food wouldn't take priority over the ceremony :)

Here is also the biggest difference between (older) videographers, like me, who have a documentary approach and who know there will come a day, maybe 10 or 20 years after the marriage that the couple will be glad they are able to see all the little details or boring looking stuff like the food, they, or usually the bride, spend a year or more on preparing and setting up for their upcoming wedding. It almost looks like I have become a dying breed when the entire weddingindustry seems to be moving to full on cinematic approach where all the non relevant stuff is disregarded to make place for a often forced story and extreme compositions, but who can blame them as there is plenty of money to be made.

That doesn't mean adding all details of a wedding will make a film long and boring, mine are around 20 to 25minutes long so I"m sure my clients are able to stay awake during that time :)

There is a definite divergence in product with wedding video. By far the most common today that I see at wedding shows and on line, is the 'Cinematic' tell a story type of video. less common now is the documentary 'cover all' style. The Cinematic short style is very fashionable at the moment and seems to be what all videographers new to the wedding industry aspire to. It's a style that would have been impossible a couple of decades ago, but with the huge leaps forward in technology and affordability, it is comparatively easy to offer a 'Cinematic' product. It also enables videographers to emulate blockbuster type effects and manipulate time sequences etc.

It then becomes the producers choice as to whether they want to construct a romantic story of the couple's day. There are many parts of a wedding that don't come under the heading of romantic story telling, such as bridesmaids sitting round chatting while their hair and makeup is done, the venue being set up, guests laughing and joking, hymns being sung, readings during the ceremony, food and courses being served, speeches full of family jokes, drunken dancing etc. In fact most of what goes into a wedding can be seen as 'Boring' and could be left out of a love story.

The flip side of the coin is a fly on the wall documentary capture of the day that is much longer, and to some extent is an historical record of the day that enables the couple and their friends and families to be able to see much of what they missed on the day and look back at it in years to come. It's a record of voices, faces, hairstyles, fashion and much more, frozen in time.

The two styles are totally different and invoke different emotions and reactions from the viewers, but I am happy to say, like Noa, that the reduction in videographers filming documentary style is noticeably increasing the work coming my way.

I also find it interesting with wedding photography, that those entering the industry are also looking to present their own interpretation on wedding photography, to be different and original. This sometimes overrides the desire to find out what the couple want. I sometimes feel that the 'New Style' video and photography is frequently more about satisfying the producer's creative requirements than those of the couple.

At the end of the day it is about paying the bills, so I suppose from that viewpoint if it works for the producer of the work then the job is done.

Roger

The flip side of the coin is a fly on the wall documentary capture of the day that is much longer

My approach to documentary filmmaking is a bit different as the highlight film is only 20-25min long and I also deliver a 5min film for online sharing, the 25min highlight does include all details and I make use of natural recorded sound as much as I can like the bridesmaids chatting during brideprep (my favourite time of the day) whenever they say something funny or talk about the groom, sometimes I even place a sony tx650 near them just to be able to capture spoken sound a bit better from a distance so they don't see me filming them, speeches are cut short and a full hour ceremony is maybe 5-7 min long but I do include the full ceremony and speeches as a separate film.

Those full ceremony and speeches add-ons are not even an option, they come standard as I don't want my clients to pay for a highlight only because they can't afford the options, I"m sure they will regret not being able to get those one day. Instead my price is higher and I only offer one package. That means that for some people my price might be too high but I rather have them find a videographer that offers a full doc edit at a price they can afford then to hire me and regret later they don't have the full ceremony or speeches. That might not make much sense as a business but since I"m retired and shoot weddings on the side I don't need to do 30+ weddings a year which means I can spend more time on the editing and give the client a memory of which I"m sure they will value in years to come.

The more everyone is diving deep into cinematic storytelling, the more I want to concentrate on documentary storytelling meaning letting the day unfold with minimal interfearing which eventually will make my work stand out as well.

The more everyone is diving deep into cinematic storytelling, the more I want to concentrate on documentary storytelling meaning letting the day unfold with minimal interfearing which eventually will make my work stand out as well.

Yes I feel that a story doesn't need to be contrived, as a wedding day in itself is a romantic family story which can be captured very effectively and unobstrusively whilst maintaining a documentary element.

Roger

The ‘American English’ word for that is “Hors d’oeuvers.”
Je oubliez très beacoup de mon Français since l’école so I don’t know how that exactly translates, but that’s what we call it.

Didn't know you used French words in the US :) Don't they also say "appetizers?", my French is unfortunately non excisting, I only understand a few words which is weird as I live in a country which is half French/Dutch speaking, I grew up with Dutch and German TV so German is the only other language, beside English that I understand.

Noa -
Didn't know you used French words in the US :) Don't they also say "appetizers?", my French is unfortunately non excisting,...
Appetizers is an excellent word but for a restaurants that want’s to add some flair or “panache”, they’d call them Hors d’oeuvres. On the west coast the only French is basically found in restaurants, on crossword puzzles, or in my case, taught in school. Back east in the Louisiana Purchase area I would assume it would be used more, just guessing.

For the two onerous years of studying French in school, I only used it two times, once at a boat show where the owner of the company that sold feathering props was a frenchman so I spoke a bit with him. He was so pleased (that was before I forgot so much!) he gave me a good discount on one of his props.

The second time I used French was in Bratislava, formally Preßburg, to order lunch. The menu was in Slovakian and there was a couple nearby who seemed to have no problem with the menu and they were speaking French so I asked them what some of the menu (French word) items were. The woman’s husband spoke Slovakian and she was French (they lived in Paris) so she was able to tell me what the items were. That was when Bratislava was still under communist rule. Otherwise that was it. Deux times. Could have really put that homework and study time to better use with math and science. But hey, it kinda (not a real “English” word) helped a bit here!

A recent study found that the best years to learn a new language is when you’re really young then up to the mid teens. After that, as a human, we’re over the hill and on a decline. Heck, I could have told them that without them having to spend a lot of money doing research.

As for the cinematic and documentary styles (back on message), I can see both. Some of the “cinematic” videos I’ve seen have been really emotional (if that’s a good word) to watch. Whatever I shoot, if possible, I like to emulate that. But when starting with pure documentary shooting it just depends on when an opportunity arrises. The clip with the screen shot of the little girl picking up her camera and taking a picture of me, I think, is an example. Totally un-planned and I think the parents would like that. If one shoots enough footage (or GigaBytes), hopefully there’ll be a few good clips.

Just did a shoot of a float plane fly-in at the marina this morning and it’s pure documentary style. Plan to go down there this afternoon and see what I can get for fill-in. Using the AX53 since the AX100 is gone now. Facing severe “sellers remorse" for selling it too soon. Really, really wanted the Z90 and 10-bit to play with.

Didn't know you used French words in the US :) Don't they also say "appetizers?", my French is unfortunately non excisting, I only understand a few words which is weird as I live in a country which is half French/Dutch speaking, I grew up with Dutch and German TV so German is the only other language, beside English that I understand.

I think the word that we use most at weddings in the UK for the little snacks that are brought round after the ceremony at the venue is 'Canapes' pronounced 'Cannerpays'.

Roger

I think the word that we use most at weddings in the UK for the little snacks that are brought round after the ceremony at the venue is 'Canapes' pronounced 'Cannerpays'.

Roger

I prefer the term nibbles. Though I agree in posh Wedding Industry, the Canapes is used, even though it's much the same thing, just sounds better. Even if it doesn't always taste better.

When i video if possible, I would cover the staff laying out the dining room and often a clip of their briefing by the wedding planner/supervisor, also try and get a few shots from the kitchen door of the chefs at work!

i'd cover any reception stuff like red carpet, champagne sweet cart etc. it was a 'thing' here at one stage to have an 'ice cream van' parked outside the church to serve whipped ice cream!

I'd also include the start of serving in the dining hall - wine pouring serving the starter to the top table, usually withdraw before the main course to allow them to enjoy the meal, but I'd come back as soon as desert is finished and and cover all the tables, while they're still all there enjoying the atmosphere and companionship.

This is all part of the documentary style that suits me.

Same for us really Rob, although we like to briefly show each of the courses being served before leaving them to eat in peace.

For us it's the progression of the whole day, rather than just a romantic overview of the couple. We find they like to see the details that they didn't have time to take in on the day.

Roger

If there is a buffet, when they uncover all the food (usually just before bride and groom approach) I will do kind of a flyover, smoothly walking down the food line (Steadi-Cam style) to provide an overview of offerings before they get dug into. Then from far end, I might get a close-up of couple, plates in hand, and pull back to reveal the spread of food before them.

Also, for pre-dinner hors de ouvres (sp?) when I see a server walking by with a fresh tray of attractive food I will have them stop for me and I will start with shot of them holding tray and move in for close-up of goodies, just a quick shot. Same for fancy deserts on a platter.

So really none of these shots are more than a few seconds each, but just contribute to the overall flavor of the event (pun intended). It's the little details ;-)

Thanks

Jeff

I will chime in from a different perspective on the cine vs. doco thing. In my world the line between photographer/videographer is not as well defined as it is for wedding guys. To you it almost always differentiates still or video shooting. In my commercial and the broadcast/theatrical world video operators are photographers. They have to be, it refers to their talent and ability to shoot well. It usually does not apply to the medium being used. You will never hear a real DOP claim he is "not a photographer". A DOP is the big gun that has worked very hard to become a Director of Photography.

Most of the guys in this thread are regulars. But for the sake of readers not familiar with Noa's work I am going to use him as an example of my point. In this thread Noa says he is shooting Doco style weddings. If you are not familiar with his work and you think it looks like the evening news nothing could be farther from the truth. His skills as true photographer shooting video are exceptional. He may call his weddings documentary style but he delivers a product full of beautiful, highly crafted shots from start to finish. If he shoots a piece of pie being set down on a table it is going to look so good you are going to want to eat it. That is true talent. He can make the ordinary look exceptional. And these days I believe he is doing it with not much more than a backpack full of gear!

My point is that the lines between doco vs. cinematic can be blurred just like photographer vs. videographer. Noa is proof that a documentary style, as he is calling it, does not mean it has to be a straight forward boring shot. His documentaries are full of beautiful shots that only a skilled photographer can shoot. I was a little surprised here to see him defining himself as a doco style wedding shooter.


Noa, I know you brand yourself as Noa Films. Have you always considered yourself a documentarian style shooter. I am curious what that means to you? I may be missing something because I don't shoot weddings. I am not labeling you in any way, I am curious about how you see this. I do know you make amazing images no matter what their called. Just throwing out food for thought....

Kind Regards,

Steve

Have you always considered yourself a documentarian style shooter. I am curious what that means to you?




answer here: http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/wedding-event-video-sample-clips-gallery/535862-docu-vs-cine-wedding.html

Same as in my country, I never cover people while they are eating except maybe a wide establishing shot but because the food takes up 3-4 hours on average and takes up the largest part of the budget it's expected to at least have a few shots. It's an important part of the day and I would find it weird to pretend it didn't happen.

See, in America, dinner is somewhat rushed, at least compared to what you time it as. 3-4 hours? Jeez, I feel its been too long when an hour's gone by.

For me its generally around 7pm introductions, swept into 1st dance, blessing, toasts myb salad in between, then parent dances. Then once most formalities are done dinner is served, usually before 8pm. At this point, the photog & I take a break, and the DJ plays slower dinner music, often times we all chat. We usually wait or ask the venue when/where our meals will be, and its about a 40 minute window before dancing picks back up, as the B&G & bridal party/parent tables are served first, 30-40 minutes later they wanna be out on the dance floor.

So I think there might be a difference when dinner takes up 3-4 hours as opposed to 45 minutes. Unless I'm misreading or misinterpreting something.

I agree Noa's style isn't traditional docu, but I know why he'd classify himself as one. What & the way he delivers (longform, I'd presume) as well as recapping the day as opposed to reinventing & adjusting timelines as to how it all took place. The lines of photo vs video though are pretty clear in my mind. Video delivers minutes of video whereas photo delivers hundreds of images. One can be a creative videographer/cinematographer, and photographer can dive into videography as well. Although I agree with what someone else mentioned that usually that doesn't work as well, as the amount & learning curve of video editing is pretty high, plus emphasis for audio. It's also alot more of a burden of a day, carry bags & tripods around.

I worked with a photographer who gave video a shot. Has a small studio of a few photographers & offered a video package for free or cheap, to give it a whirl. We talked about the differences the day of & post, and when I mentioned editing & meeting their expectations he responded "Gee, I never even thought of the 'what if' she doesn't like the way its edited'. I laughed a bit & said its rare they ask for changes so long as its good & well done, but I guess its something photographers deal with less, as for the most part WYSIWYG (What you see is what you get).

So I think there might be a difference when dinner takes up 3-4 hours as opposed to 45 minutes. Unless I'm misreading or misinterpreting something.

Dinner starts usually between 19:00 - 20:00 in the evening and ends with dessert around 23:00-midnight, the first dance is usually between 23:00 and 01:30 at night.

Dinner starts usually between 19:00 - 20:00 in the evening and ends with dessert around 23:00-midnight, the first dance is usually between 23:00 and 01:30 at night.

Gotcha. See, our weddings are done by 23:00, sometimes 22:00

I know, you are lucky, weddings can be brutal here, next weeks wedding starts for me at 07:30 in the morning and ends around 1 at night.

I almost always shoot the food because a) it's usually very colorful, and b) sometimes when the caterers see the footage they hit you up to record a spot for them. :D

One of the most interesting things about filming weddings has been getting different people's (couples and videographers) views on what's important and what isn't. Definitely seems to vary.

I'll get shots of food because I think the couple might want it...but I can't for the life of me imagine why ANYONE would care about such a thing. Just seems so dull. It hurts a part of my soul every time I have to film the food. But I've never been big on looking at food, enjoying pics of prepped dishes or anything like that.

In contrast, I've heard many people say that they don't film the portrait sessions and that they can't understand why you'd want to. I get some of the most fun, candid and memorable stuff during those times. Not always, depending on the crowds. But if it's often a gold mine with the right group.

It all depends on whether you are producing a video containing mainly the glossy and glamorous bits of the day or whether it is a documentary record. Mine is the latter, so anything that is a part of their day is fair game for me. That includes hair and makeup, guests arriving, table decorations, flowers, food, kids running around, dancing and of course ceremony, speeches etc. The key for me is keeping all of that visually interesting and forgetting my own likes and dislikes about weddings.

Roger

Even though I'm a primarily a video producer, I actually prefer to do still photography when it comes to weddings. (I don't market myself to the wedding crowd at all. It's only through world-of-mouth.) However, when I do... yes, I absolutely take photos of the food. Maybe it's my background in journalism, but I approach weddings like an event and the food, wine, people are all part of it.

https://www.douthit.org/Einaudi-Wedding/