Uncle Bob's video vs yours - Selling yourself
 

I posted something in the 24p/30p thread because I thought of it while a discussion of sticker shock for the uninitiated was being brought up. Here it is in its own thread (per Dylan).

I had an idea while reading... As a part for a demo reel, why not ask a receptive/apprecitive bride/groom if you can use an alternate camera at their wedding for your demo reel. Have someone 'video' the service and some reception work with a consumer cam like Uncle Bob. Picture in Picture that into your demo footage. The hand shaking, newbie zooming, tunnel audio with Aunt Ester asking why they choose 'those' colors might help sell why someone wants to hire a pro?

Maybe?

Why? You have heard it before. "$3000! My Uncle will do it for free and he has a video camera. " A 'real world' comparison of what you offer over the relative with the VHS-C. :D

George, good point.

I can't see any bride/groom having any big problem with it. If they do, then offer then $100 off or something. I'm surprised people don't do it already. Really though, you don't necessarily have to have side by side footage. You could take anyone's bad wedding video and put it side by side to yours, and there are plenty of bad ones to choose from!!!

Another good idea that I had from your thoughts, is to have someone video YOU so that you can include shots of you working into your demo reel, to show that you dress and act professionaly and don't get in the way.

We did something similar once between a full-size VHS unit and a Canon XL-1. The biggest thing we emphasized was the color difference. In the VHS, the brown walls were "gray". On the XL-1, the colors looked true.

To be honest, I'm not sure it really helped in marketing and we no longer use it. Instead, now we just show "what they can expect".

I filmed a friends wedding with my GL2. It was my first wedding and I did it as a favor. They had her cousin help film with a JVC mini DV they had bought for Christmas last year. They were blown away by my video and the quality my camera had compared to their's. Doing that first wedding showed me just how (NOT PREPARED) I am to do wedding's. It still turned out 100% better than any joe would have done, but as my own worst critic I have work to do.
I do like the picture in picture idea though.

I recently addressed this issue in communicating with a friend's sister who's debating whether to hire me or just have one of her friends videotape her wedding next year. I ended up summing up what I offer something like this: "more and better cameras, better sound quality, more sophisticated editing, and a custom-prepared DVD in a formal keepsake cover." I also pointed out that by hiring me she doesn't have to worry about tying up one of her friends trying to videotape everything, so they can all relax and have fun.

Whenever I have this discussion I try to make a point of emphasizing that sound quality for a video is a much bigger issue than most people realize. Even under the best conditions an amateur video probably won't have particularly good sound quality, and there's just no way it's going to include the little whispers and things which a good wireless mic can catch. This is one of the biggest single differences between what a determined amateur can do and what a properly equipped professional can do, aside from the obvious issues of artistic talent and knowing what needs to be done to capture the event properly.

What cracks me up is that people won't hesitate to pay $2-3K or more for a few dozen photographs in a pretty album because they understand the value of hiring a professional for that, but they balk at paying an equal amount for a videographer for the same event. I think this is starting to change a little, but it's a slow shift.