The future of wedding video?

[Michael Simons]

Originally Posted by Chris Harding

Bravo Roger!!!

I figure that if the BBC can shoot the wedding of the year in doc style then that's good enough for me.Chris

hey Chris. Do you think the Royal Couple had any say in who videotaped their wedding? I bet if Kate and William met with many of the UK videographers on this forum that they would have had quite a different style wedding video and would have been very happy. However, I'm guessing they were stuck with the BBC broadcast that was documentary and not artistic in the least. I bet if they had a chance to decide between StillMotion and the BBC covering their wedding that they would have went with Patrick and his team.

[Brian Drysdale]

In that case it wouldn't have been a royal wedding watched live worldwide, it would've been a private wedding. They're very different animals.

[Ryan Czaplinski]

I think if they wanted some very high production values and cool special technical shots LIVE that would be some crazy stuff. It looked like the key was to not be too obtrusive in letting the cameras being noticed, otherwise I think they woulda gotten some full on crane action and crazy dolly stuff.

[Philip Howells]

Originally Posted by Michael Simons

hey Chris. Do you think the Royal Couple had any say in who videotaped their wedding? I bet if Kate and William met with many of the UK videographers on this forum that they would have had quite a different style wedding video and would have been very happy. However, I'm guessing they were stuck with the BBC broadcast that was documentary and not artistic in the least. I bet if they had a chance to decide between StillMotion and the BBC covering their wedding that they would have went with Patrick and his team.

Michael

Quite apart from your presumption that you know how the couple feel about their wedding video, you obviously have no idea of the scale of the production. To suggest that any private producer could have made that programme reveals a serious lack of understanding of the television business.

Even William's father's second wedding was handled by a publicly quoted company and they did nothing inside the register office.

Furthermore, if anyone's into betting, my guess is that the future children of couples buying an "artistic" wedding video today will, in years to come, ask why they didn't have it done properly.

That's why most people we talk to at wedding fairs want intelligently crafted, sensitive, emotional documentary programmes, although artistic producers make most of the noise I don't think they're making most of the programmes. We've only had one couple last year ask about an artistic format and they needed to satisfy two audiences, one speaking only English, the other speaking only Russian. Once the understood the cost of transcribing, translating and subtitling the entire programme, they agreed that an artistic programme was just what they wanted. i recommended someone I know who does that sort of work and I believe they're very happy.

[Michael Simons]

[QUOTE=Philip Howells;1647749]Michael

Quite apart from your presumption that you know how the couple feel about their wedding video, you obviously have no idea of the scale of the production. To suggest that any private producer could have made that programme reveals a serious lack of understanding of the television business.

I'm not concerned with the television business. I'm just concerned with making the bride happy and I'm sure Kate had no say in her "wedding video" and I think that is quite sad.

[Joel Peregrine]

Hi Philip,

Originally Posted by Philip Howells

That's why most people we talk to at wedding fairs want intelligently crafted, sensitive, emotional documentary programmes,

I think that may say more than you intended it to. In my experience couples planning weddings with the biggest budgets don't attend fairs. That puts a price ceiling on what fair vendors can charge - otherwise eyebrows will go up at the first mention of cost. That puts the videographer into a position of economizing the amount of time and resources that goes into their productions (not a bad thing for any business owner). This invariably leads to an efficient shooting and editing style, or as we call it 'documentary style'. Its doesn't mean the videographer is cutting corners, just that their style is streamlined and more consistent from one wedding to the next - things happen in order and the events are faithfully portrayed. I think the question I'm getting to is a chicken or the egg situation. Are docs offered more at fairs because the that is what the market will bear or do the doc videographers need to be at fairs to fill their schedule?

[Travis Cossel]

Originally Posted by Philip Howells

That's why most people we talk to at wedding fairs want intelligently crafted, sensitive, emotional documentary programmes, although artistic producers make most of the noise I don't think they're making most of the programmes. We've only had one couple last year ask about an artistic format ....

The truth of the matter is you tend to attract what you sell. You obviously sell a more documentary-style production, so you attract those couples. We sell a more cinematic-style production, and those are the couples we attract. So I don't think it's at all fair to say that 'most' couples want one style or the other unless you've done an actual research study. d;-)

[Brian Drysdale]

Originally Posted by Michael Simons

I'm not concerned with the television business. I'm just concerned with making the bride happy and I'm sure Kate had no say in her "wedding video" and I think that is quite sad.

I suspect if Kate wants a personal version she can have it edited. A usual wedding video wouldn't capture her wedding day, there would be a lot going on that she wouldn't even be aware of and she'd only see when she watches a recording of the broadcast version.

That's not to say that she doesn't have personal video shots which can be used in her version.

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Michael Simons

I bet if they had a chance to decide between StillMotion and the BBC covering their wedding that they would have went with Patrick and his team.

Your not serious right? :) That's royalty, it would not even cross their mind having 2 or 3 guys covering a wedding event like this that is broadcasted worldwide. At events like this camera's are almost invisible and preferably lot's of them and all high end so you don't have to worry about dslr moire and aliasing with all that fine detail, I couldn't imagine seeing guys running around with their monopod and dslr's. With these type of weddings people don't care about shallow dof or a "cinematic" approach, everyone wants to see the whole picture and preferably crystal clear.

[Jeff Harper]

I was actually approached about videotaping Kate and William's big day. I turned it down when they started nitpicking over my sample videos. I knew they were going to be difficult and I referred them to the BBC. That's how they got the job.

[Michael Simons]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

Your not serious right? :) That's royalty, it would not even cross their mind having 2 or 3 guys covering a wedding event like this that is broadcasted worldwide. At events like this camera's are almost invisible and preferably lot's of them and all high end so you don't have to worry about dslr moire and aliasing with all that fine detail, I couldn't imagine seeing guys running around with their monopod and dslr's. With these type of weddings people don't care about shallow dof or a "cinematic" approach, everyone wants to see the whole picture and preferably crystal clear.

Noa, I believe you couldn't be more wrong. It's usually the higher-end bride that hires a StillMotion. Do you really think Kate is going back and watching the BBC coverage over and over?

[Philip Howells]

Originally Posted by Joel Peregrine

Hi Philip,
I think that may say more than you intended it to. In my experience couples planning weddings with the biggest budgets don't attend fairs. That puts a price ceiling on what fair vendors can charge - otherwise eyebrows will go up at the first mention of cost. That puts the videographer into a position of economizing the amount of time and resources that goes into their productions (not a bad thing for any business owner). This invariably leads to an efficient shooting and editing style, or as we call it 'documentary style'. Its doesn't mean the videographer is cutting corners, just that their style is streamlined and more consistent from one wedding to the next - things happen in order and the events are faithfully portrayed. I think the question I'm getting to is a chicken or the egg situation. Are docs offered more at fairs because the that is what the market will bear or do the doc videographers need to be at fairs to fill their schedule?

Good points Joel and cost is relative but at about $4500 we don't seem to be in the lower price bracket.

Originally Posted by Travis Cossel

The truth of the matter is you tend to attract what you sell. You obviously sell a more documentary-style production, so you attract those couples. We sell a more cinematic-style production, and those are the couples we attract. So I don't think it's at all fair to say that 'most' couples want one style or the other unless you've done an actual research study. d;-)

And the research is as I alluded to, based solely on my experience at wedding fairs over the past six years; totally unscientific but true for what it is. At wedding fairs, unlike any other promotional media we're just people with screens of moving pictures. We always attempt to greet people and few if any specifically ask about artistic styles.

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

I was actually approached about videotaping Kate and Andrew's big day. I turned it down when they started nitpicking over my sample videos. I knew they were going to be difficult and I referred them to the BBC. That's how they got the job.

Jeff, you could have added that you, like most of us, couldn't give them an SDE! Your posting should be the last word on this. It is for me.

[John Wiley]

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

I was actually approached about videotaping Kate and William's big day. I turned it down when they started nitpicking over my sample videos. I knew they were going to be difficult and I referred them to the BBC. That's how they got the job.

And you didn't think to refer them to one of your fellow DVinfo Members? :)

We could've even all joined forces to make one large production crew, shooting on a combination of Camcorders and DSLR, doing a combination of cinematc and documentary style with both a full length, G-rated "Extended Queens Cut" version and an uncensored, highlights only "Royal Romp" edition.

What was that saying about too many cooks...

[Warren Kawamoto]

I just had a good chat with a matron of honor, I'm shooting her best friend's wedding next month. The matron of honor got married more than a year ago, and her video was done by a company that shoots their weddings entirely with DSLRs. Her initial reaction was that her video was really cool, cutting edge, and very modern. That is, of course, until the excitement wore off. In hindsight, she now thinks she made a mistake. A majority of the wedding was shot with a very shallow depth of field, focusing mainly on the couple, or pairs of guests. At the ceremony, the cameraman struggled to keep the bridal party in focus as they walked towards him during the processional. At the reception, there were great shots of the couple cutting the cake, and great steadicam shots of the couple as they danced, but everyone in the background was always out of focus. She said that after awhile, selective focus shots became annoying to watch because she wanted to see her friends in the audience, but couldn't. She said watching her wedding dvd was like looking through a peep hole...you saw what the cameraman wanted to show you, but there was much more going on that couldn't be seen! So be careful people, don't overuse that shallow depth of field!

[Brian Drysdale]

Originally Posted by Michael Simons

Noa, I believe you couldn't be more wrong. It's usually the higher-end bride that hires a StillMotion. Do you really think Kate is going back and watching the BBC coverage over and over?

Can you tell she isn't? The scale is totally different to even your usual higher end wedding. They may have video of the more private parts of the day, on the other hand they may just have wanted to get away from cameras.

When you've had a real royal wedding with a cast of tens of thousands, you don't need to create the cinematic impression that you've had one.