New Highlight Video

[Peter Szilveszter]

Hi Everyone

I have just finished editing our latest wedding video and would like to share the highlight. At this stage shooting on an Xha1 and hv20, no steadicam (really wish I had one already) or DOF adapter.

Would love to hear your feedback!

blog.185films.com.au

http://www.vimeo.com/1151720

[Peter Szilveszter]

Hey there

I see I have had a few people look at the highlight, but no comments, would like to hear some C&C. It's my first HD wedding and shooting 2 cams, so I'd like to know what works and doesn't.

[Joel Peregrine]

Hi Peter,

Nicely done. I'm sure the couple are ecstatic.

I found the vignette filters and coloring to be distracting, but that's just me. I tend to think that anything more stylized than a warmer-than-normal tone and boosting the contrast is taking it too far. I've never been a fan of skewing the skin tones more than that. Again - just a personal preference. I feel like you run the risk of dating the look of the piece if you start making it look like you tried too hard in post. Ditto on the jump cuts that don't follow some sort of continuity. Also, the timing didn't feel right when combined with the pace of the music. Would have liked more close ups too.

Ackkk. Just re-read what I wrote. It really was quite good, just not my style.

Originally Posted by Peter Szilveszter

Hi Everyone

I have just finished editing our latest wedding video and would like to share the highlight. At this stage shooting on an Xha1 and hv20, no steadicam (really wish I had one already) or DOF adapter.

Would love to hear your feedback!

blog.185films.com.au

http://www.vimeo.com/1151720

[Peter Szilveszter]

hehe don't worry its all good feedback for me. The style for the highlight I tend to make it a bit more different to the full edit so I guess just trying to find my style at the moment.

[Jason Robinson]

Liked the ring shot. Very nice solid black BG makes the white ring case jump out.

The couple's name was displayed a for very short time, give the leisurely pace of the music. In my opinion, the music needs to really match the pace of the visuals. My latest trailer has shots that match the music, but the music is kind of militant for a wedding.

The veil shot hanging on the backlit window was very neat, but ended abruptly, so either there was a bump in the camera motion (many times that is why my shots end) or that was intentional.

I loved the shot 2:54 in where the bridal party is sitting and not moving and you blurr the peopel around them. How did you do that? They obviously had to hold still, but did you use a very long shutter? 1/15th or something?

[David Schuurman]

you use a 35mm adaptor for much of that?

looks good in my books. I liked the green tint in some of the clips.

[Peter Szilveszter]

Originally Posted by Jason Robinson

The couple's name was displayed a for very short time, give the leisurely pace of the music. In my opinion, the music needs to really match the pace of the visuals. My latest trailer has shots that match the music, but the music is kind of militant for a wedding.

Yeah with the name I wanted to sort of do a cheeky torch light pass but maybe its a little too fast. The timing in this edit is little strange but my instinct said stick with it.

Originally Posted by Jason Robinson

The veil shot hanging on the backlit window was very neat, but ended abruptly, so either there was a bump in the camera motion (many times that is why my shots end) or that was intentional.

It was intentional but in hindsight would have worked better if it dissolved into the next shot. Or if I had a Steadicam :P

Originally Posted by Jason Robinson

I loved the shot 2:54 in where the bridal party is sitting and not moving and you blurr the peopel around them. How did you do that? They obviously had to hold still, but did you use a very long shutter? 1/15th or something?

I did this trick on a previous wedding at the reception where everyone else was dancing except the couple (which works better I recon). So I figured this could work again so I shot it like a time lapse (let it run for a minute) and then Its done in post, sped ramp up and using a time trails and set it to really blur the motion. As far as the shutter you can slow it down but then run the risk of maybe the shot not working. Post is more effort but with clean footage you have a lot more flexibility.

[Peter Szilveszter]

Originally Posted by David Schuurman

you use a 35mm adaptor for much of that?

looks good in my books. I liked the green tint in some of the clips.

Thanks, used nothing but stock cameras and tripods.

Can't wait for the next lot of weddings, I will shoot with Merlin and a 35mm adaptor :)

[Jason Robinson]

Originally Posted by Peter Szilveszter

Thanks, used nothing but stock cameras and tripods.

Can't wait for the next lot of weddings, I will shoot with Merlin and a 35mm adaptor :)

So OT, but what made you decide on the Merlin? I have been running around my yard with my MultiRig in "flying mode" and I am just NOT happy with the quality of footage I get from it for flying shots.

And I've got some very specific shots in mind, but I don't seem to be able to do them with the MultiRigPro. I've been thinking about actually breaking down and buying either a very short jib so I can "fly" for short distances (and get altitude shots) or a steadicam type device.

Which led me to the Steadicam Merlin vs Glidecam 2000/4000 vs everything else. What made you decide on the Merlin?

[Peter Szilveszter]

I decided because its very cost effective device that will get you the great "flying" shots very close to its big brothers which are around 8 times more expensive. just check out Matthew Ebenezer's SDE he posted about a week ago, excellent testament what you can do with the hand held version plus many other clips I've seen people do with it. I haven't seen any other steady device at that price that could compare. Just need to build a bit of arm muscle :)

I think the Multrig is great for fighting fatigue and putting other devices onto it, from what footage I've seen it will make the shots less bumpy and smoother but certainly doesn't do what the Steadicam stabilizers will do.

[Jason Robinson]

Originally Posted by Peter Szilveszter

I decided because its very cost effective device that will get you the great "flying" shots very close to its big brothers which are around 8 times more expensive. just check out Matthew Ebenezer's SDE he posted about a week ago, excellent testament what you can do with the hand held version plus many other clips I've seen people do with it. I haven't seen any other steady device at that price that could compare. Just need to build a bit of arm muscle :)

So you didn't even consider the Glidecam 2000/4000 stabilizers? or were you looking for a more polished device (ie no obvious weight stack at the bottom)

Originally Posted by Peter Szilveszter

I think the Multrig is great for fighting fatigue and putting other devices onto it, from what footage I've seen it will make the shots less bumpy and smoother but certainly doesn't do what the Steadicam stabilizers will do.

That is basically how I have used it. Just to support the camera so I can go mobile and get wherever I need to be in order to get shots. It really did work wonders at my massive April wedding where I was hand held following the MC around for HOURS. Perfect use case for that setup. Also helps to attach light & mic.

I am actually a little worried about the Glidecam / Merlin type devices because I cannot see how I would attach a wireless receiver for my mics, an on cam light, and mic (obviously one of those would go in the cam's cold shoe).

[Peter Szilveszter]

Originally Posted by Jason Robinson

So you didn't even consider the Glidecam 2000/4000 stabilizers? or were you looking for a more polished device (ie no obvious weight stack at the bottom)

Yeah I'd looked into it but I think for the applications I have in mind the Merlin will be the best

Originally Posted by Jason Robinson

I am actually a little worried about the Glidecam / Merlin type devices because I cannot see how I would attach a wireless receiver for my mics, an on cam light, and mic (obviously one of those would go in the cam's cold shoe).

I think for me its the planned shots where I will use the Merlin and then go back to mono/tripod. So for example when the couple do the waltz, during the reception/ceremony I have digital recorders to get the sound. The light not sure if it will be too heavy but I have ideas how to tackle that if it needs be.