Chris,
certainly not making big money at all. But we've discussed this ad nauseum. So, no big.
Bill

A lot of interesting discussion here. For what it's worth, I do weddings, but I certainly don't
make my total living doing them. I do corporate video, interviews, freelance news, pick up editing,
pretty much whatever someone will pay me for. And one of the reasons, is what some here have
alluded to. At pretty much every wedding around here, there is a professional photographer. Maybe
20% even THINK about hiring a videographer. When I get a call, the ONLY thing they want to know
is how much it will cost, often they don't even care about watching my demo. OK, so you may
think that the brides around here don't care about quality. But it's not so simple as that. Even
though I try to show my demos and the reasons for choosing a more expensive package, the
cheapest one is almost always chosen. But then later.....let me give a quick example.

Bride gets three choices. She predictably choses the cheap, one camera full ceremony option.
I make sure I explain to her, that with this option, there is no editing as there is no other cameras
to cut to and that if it gets blocked for some reason, I have no backup. She says that's fine, they
just want a cheap 'video documenting the event'. So I finish the shoot, put titles in, author
the DVD and give her a call. I am told that the photographer basically was a total bust and claimed
that he had his laptop stolen from the venue, so there were NO pictures for the couple. (I wonder why
he didn't still have the pictures on the original cards, but not my problem I guess.) Because of this
bad experience with the photographer, the bride and groom wanted to 'take a look' at the DVD and
'see if we need to change any shots' before paying me the rest of what I was owed. I reminded
them that they had chosen a one camera wedding, and were specifically told that there would NOT
even be an OPTION to cut to another shot! Then of course they were mad at themselves for not
choosing the more expensive option. Almost every time I do a wedding they do this, and I get to
hear about how they wish they had chosen a better package. Seems that the couple is so busy
dealing with everything else around the wedding, that the value of a good video is only a thought
AFTER the wedding is over.

Anyways, there is no way in the world I'd do a $299 wedding. I don't care if I just aimed the camera
and hit record. I have to pack gear, drive to the location, unpack, set up, do the shoot, pack up
drive home, dump to computer, add titles and slate screens, author the DVD or blue ray, burn and
deliver the thing. There is no way that $299 would cover that. I guess we all have different
standards, but I have no idea why I'd want to do volume business and do 'more, cheap' weddings.
The cheaper my prices are, the more work is thrown at me, until clients want me to work all the
time for no money. That's kind of a joke, but if I need money, I could always tape a dance recital
or basketball game or something and sell DVD's to the participants and their parents at $25 a pop.
I make more doing that than a $299 wedding, and they don't expect nearly the quality that
the couple will.

Hi Gabe

The $299 came from me actually cos I found some videographer offering weddings for $299 (yep the ceremony and part of the reception!!) It was obviously a "example ultra low cost"

I wouldn't lift my behind for $299 even for a short civil ceremony as you say you have to get there and back and lug gear etc etc....I in fact reluctantly have done a few civil ceremonies (about 30 mins plus travel) for $600 but anything less than that just isn't worth the effort and you would surely lose money on the deal!!

Most brides want at least from the ceremony to the speeches as an absolute minimum!! Don't think I have done a "ceremony only" for many years!

Chris

I see the poor humble slider is getting another pop. I confess to owning one but being a single shooter, it gets infrequent use, but if I have the time I don't mind whipping it out and getting a few beauty shots. I've seen a few negative comments about depth of field and slow motion here too, which I find surprising. I appreciate that some Videographers use them as their raison d'etre, but then I've seen some videos over-baked with Looks too. Doesn't mean I should stop using this software to colour grade my footage.
Sliders, stabilisers, low aperture lens, lights, slow motion etc - they're all tools to be used wisely. I see nothing wrong with throwing a busy background out of focus when videoing the Bride and Groom, or to have a slow and smooth camera move in towards the Bride via the slider. These shots mixed with footage of for example the Bride having a laugh with the Bridesmaids add variety and a little spice to my video, without being the main course. I'm not knocking those who don't use sliders or prefer videos to have a deep depth of field - we all have our style, choice of tools we use in our videos. It's apart of our style as Videographers. Do the Brides appreciate all these shots - I don't know. Then again do they really notice such techniques like shallow depth of field in all those big budget movies they see at the cinema??

Maybe
20% even THINK about hiring a videographer.

There is a well known very busy Belgian wedding forum and I checked just now how many new posts posted by brides in the photo section compared to the video section the past 20 days.

The photo forum: 16 new posts (the last post was posted yesterday)
The video forum: 1 new post (that 1 post was posted 20 days ago)

Need to say more?

Do the Brides appreciate all these shots - I don't know. Then again do they really notice such techniques like shallow depth of field in all those big budget movies they see at the cinema??

I can honestly say, they don't appreciate it.

They concentrate on who's wearing what, who looks moody, who looks happy basically the whole emotion of the film.

Which also explains why people prefer photographs.

You always take a photo of people smiling most of the time.

When I started this thread, it was because I had noticed the level of detail and amount of equipment that some wedding videographers introduced into their work. What has become increasingly clear is that there seem to be two fairly distinctive groups, I call them the Realists and the Idealists for convenience.

Realists tend to use good quality fairly minimalistic equipment, usually filming with one person and one camera, sometimes with a second locked down camera if space and situation requires it. They normally capture the action as it unfolds, looking from the outside in, allowing the day to take it's own course, editing for visual flow and shot consistency. Output to the client tends to be full length video with sometimes a short form as well.

The idealists take a much more artistic approach, frequently using multi cameras, gliders, steadycams, sound recording systems etc. they tend to require more movement, use of shallow DOF for effect, full use of artistic editing and processing and music to emphasise romance and drama according to the videographers style and preference. Output to client is usually short form but sometimes with unedited long form.

Pretty general overview and many mix both styles, but there is a definite difference, with seemingly a preponderance of the artistic short form in the US.

I think that Chris's comment on the $299 video has been taken out of context by others and used as some sort of cheap video guideline price, which is not the case at all and should be forgotten in the context of the thread. But there is a big difference between high end big time and cost video and lower priced less time hungry offerings.

Many in the higher end of the market are passionate about their artistry and equipment, with the feeling that if brides are properly educated in video, that they will gladly pay for a masterpiece. Others, which include myself, perhaps feel that the high end is not something they want to concentrate on, and that the remaining 80% of the 'no video' market could be educated to appreciate the worth of a video at a price that they would feel acceptable.

The other side of the coin of course is why are you offering weddings at all? Do you want to make stylised and artistic films and find that weddings give a vehicle to achieve that? It is much simpler than getting a sponsor for a cinema production and gives the opportunity to apply skill, artistry and interpretation to an intimate and romantic subject. In my case, I love observing the whole wedding feel, with family and friends witnessing two people in love pledging their lives to each other. For me, the drama and romance is already there in the whole atmosphere of the day, with no requirement for me to shape it or add dramatic effect. I capture close up moments and general scene overviews, but allow shots to dictate themselves.

I work to live, rather than living to work and I can't see spending weeks editing one video, even at a very rewarding price, when I have a life to enjoy and places to see. I love my work, but it is a means to earn a living while making my clients happy and giving me time for myself and family. I am very good at knowing what I want as I film, and can edit a video in a day if I get my head down. I normally allow a couple of days, but it gives me time to fit my work round my life. That is the whole reason I have worked for myself in audio and video for the last 45 years.

Roger

Hi Roger

Perfectly put!! I'm a bit of a realist too as I don't want to have my entire week or weeks taken up with just one wedding and then you have the equally horrifying situation with 4 weedings in a row (or more) and with weeks of editing you develop a serious backlog and irate brides as well.

I shoot weddings for a living too but they don't take over my life ...I try to limit them to one per weekend and log footage on maybe Sunday afternoon, edit the whole show on Monday and it's wrapped up on Tuesday morning and that gives me time for myself or commercial week day shoots.

It's an excellent point that weddings are actually not the ideal vehicle for the creative shooter..dunno about in the UK but here the bride always seems to run out of "photo time" between ceremony and reception (that you are sharing with the photog too) Not exactly the best time to carefully set up sliders and shots without rushing. BTW: I do have a DIY slider and it works very well too BUT time restraints at weddings tend to convince me to leave it at home most weekends!

Maybe the title of your thread should have been "Are we becoming obsessed with shooting weddings" ?

I have been shooting my way (very similar to your way too) for 23 years now and I have never had a bride complain so I will continue on this route so I also have time for myself too!

Chris

Hi Roger

and then you have the equally horrifying situation with 4 weedings in a row

Chris

I totally agree, a gardening backlog is not a good place to be when you spend too much time on weddings :-0

Seriously though, are those who spend so much on very sophisticated equipment, then spend sometimes weeks editing a masterpiece, genuinely earning a living from predominantly wedding video work? If so I would be interested to now how it is possible to take so long finishing a wedding, but be able to take on enough to earn a decent living and pay for equipment.

Perhaps some high end videographers already have other lucrative video work or other employment which enables them to spend the time and have the financial security to only pick well paid wedding work.

Roger

Roger,
I realized with all of the silly talk about markets, I never answered your original question. Here's my experience. When I started to focus on quality, not image quality necessarily, but overall quality; the impact I started to have on the brides increased 10 fold. They don't know what it is that makes them excited about it, they just know they are excited. It was a lot of hard work to completely change my company over from a straight documentary style to the short form style we have now. As a result of that change, I'm able to charge about double what I did for the basic doc. The way I handle my backlog is through editors. I have 2 independant contractor editors that work with me, and I pay them per wedding so I can control the costs. So, as a result, I haven't edited a wedding in about 18months. I'm simply a director, they send me cuts and we revise until it's right. I make about 60% of my income right now through weddings, and the other 40% is made up through corporate work. I'm in the process of a creating a market there as well, staying away from 30sec tv and long form workshop stuff. Which is, btw, something else people said would never work in my market because I'm the only one I know that's doing it. I own a slider, and use it occassionally, but I'm concentrating on relationships and finding every couple's story. I do weddings because of the creative outlet. Brides don't generally give us any guidelines other than what they are planning for their day, it's up to us to hit the mark and get it right. There's an adrenaline there that just doesn't exist in scripted work, and it keeps my skills honed. Hope that answers your original question.
Bill

Bill it is clear from all the widely varying comments, that there is no definitive answer and as your methodology works well for you in your part of the world, then you have got it right!.

It most definitely would not work for me, the costs alone would make it prohibitive, especially finding editors that would give me full confidence in their ability to produce what I want. I would assume that either they have their own editing facilities, or you use a facilities house, or they use yours. None of that would be suitable for me.

I totally agree with you about the excitement of filming as it happens with nothing scripted, which is why I have continued to film weddings for so many years.

Your style of working, in my opinion, only works for certain types of customers and they are people that I rarely find here. The very type of work that you obviously enjoy doing, would frighten away many of my clients. I recently contracted a couple who were very indifferent when I first visited them, but they started to relax and become chatty as they watched my video. After a while they looked at each other and said 'shall we tell him'? It seems that they had tried to ring me to cancel the appointment but I had already left. I was the seventh video guy they had seen and the previous six had made them decide not to have a video. They had all left showreels which they suggested I took with me and watched.

Every single showreel was of artistically filmed and stylised footage, with romantic soft closeups, slowmo moments, and film like movement and crane work to varying degrees. Romantic music entwined shots and scenes to add to the film effect. They videographers all wanted to discuss requirements and planning with pre wedding meetings and site visits. I was the only videographer to show moments like the bride's mother getting her heel caught in a grating, the bridesmaids huddled together for a sneaky cigarette, and a very natural fly on the wall documentary style. No pre planning and no site visits. They said that it was exactly what they wanted and booked me immediately.

That sort of response and comment I have had time and time again over the years and the company's that offer the more cinematic approach seem to pop up like mushrooms then disappear just as quickly. That is of course just my experience in my area of the UK, and very occasionally I do get asked for something a little different, but not enough to make me think I could create a serious demand.

Roger

I don't make enough money to live off weddings alone.

I have other jobs to get me by (not video related).

The whole reason I got in to weddings 2 years ago was because I just happened to do a family event ... and after everyone loved it, I started reading up on the topic even more and now offer my services and have invested a considerable amount on equipment. Near enough £5000 with lenses, camera, tripod/slider etc.

I think I would have to do what you guys do. Offer documentary style long form edits, and at reasonable prices to take on more work. At the minute, I have a glossed up website. But my prices aren't affordable enough. And to me it isn't worthwhile making the effort for anything less ...

1 out of 15 enquiries is a booking.

I think that says a lot about cinematic weddings.

On the other hand, if I actually bothered doing documentary style filming I might get more work. But problem is, I have no examples on my website. So im terrified, if I accept work for less, on the basis im providing a documentary style edit. The clients expectations will still be high as they only see cinematic style work on my website.

James, I though it better to answer this on the thread about how you sell your service :-)

Roger

When I started this thread, it was because I had noticed the level of detail and amount of equipment that some wedding videographers introduced into their work. What has become increasingly clear is that there seem to be two fairly distinctive groups, I call them the Realists and the Idealists for convenience.

Realists tend to use good quality fairly minimalistic equipment, usually filming with one person and one camera, sometimes with a second locked down camera if space and situation requires it. They normally capture the action as it unfolds, looking from the outside in, allowing the day to take it's own course, editing for visual flow and shot consistency. Output to the client tends to be full length video with sometimes a short form as well.

The idealists take a much more artistic approach, frequently using multi cameras, gliders, steadycams, sound recording systems etc. they tend to require more movement, use of shallow DOF for effect, full use of artistic editing and processing and music to emphasise romance and drama according to the videographers style and preference. Output to client is usually short form but sometimes with unedited long form.

Pretty general overview and many mix both styles, but there is a definite difference, with seemingly a preponderance of the artistic short form in the US.

I think that Chris's comment on the $299 video has been taken out of context by others and used as some sort of cheap video guideline price, which is not the case at all and should be forgotten in the context of the thread. But there is a big difference between high end big time and cost video and lower priced less time hungry offerings.

Many in the higher end of the market are passionate about their artistry and equipment, with the feeling that if brides are properly educated in video, that they will gladly pay for a masterpiece. Others, which include myself, perhaps feel that the high end is not something they want to concentrate on, and that the remaining 80% of the 'no video' market could be educated to appreciate the worth of a video at a price that they would feel acceptable.

The other side of the coin of course is why are you offering weddings at all? Do you want to make stylised and artistic films and find that weddings give a vehicle to achieve that? It is much simpler than getting a sponsor for a cinema production and gives the opportunity to apply skill, artistry and interpretation to an intimate and romantic subject. In my case, I love observing the whole wedding feel, with family and friends witnessing two people in love pledging their lives to each other. For me, the drama and romance is already there in the whole atmosphere of the day, with no requirement for me to shape it or add dramatic effect. I capture close up moments and general scene overviews, but allow shots to dictate themselves.

I work to live, rather than living to work and I can't see spending weeks editing one video, even at a very rewarding price, when I have a life to enjoy and places to see. I love my work, but it is a means to earn a living while making my clients happy and giving me time for myself and family. I am very good at knowing what I want as I film, and can edit a video in a day if I get my head down. I normally allow a couple of days, but it gives me time to fit my work round my life. That is the whole reason I have worked for myself in audio and video for the last 45 years.

Roger

Hi Roger,

Those are some interesting observations. But after reading this post, I'm a bit confused about what was the point of this thread exactly? Was it to confirm that you have noticed that there were different ways to approach wedding videography? Or were you actually interested in knowing how many of us really care about offering high quality work?

A couple observations....

You can focus on "only 20% of brides are looking for video", and get really depressed...

OR you can focus on 20% ARE interested, and there's a HUGE pool (80%) out there that just isn't aware or thinks it's too expensive or whatever... who might well be interested if exposed and educated a bit.

"Marketing" is not just buying gear, getting some business cards, and sitting by the phone waiting for it to ring... have a local newpaper do a "interest story" on your business, network with other vendors, get out there and show your "stuff"... EVERY successful business eventually has to figure out how to make the phone ring!!

To do that, you need to understand what your unique VALUE is to a potential client - are you offering a "cinematic" artsy final product? A "document your day as it happened" approach? A hybrid of some sort? Pretend to be the client for a moment, what is it that would make you as a client WANT, desire, NEED to include video in the budget?? How do you get that message in front of your potential clients?


The practical fact is "budget" is a real world factor - ignore it at your own risk. This applies to the client "budget" and to your own business "budget". Sure you WANT to shoot with a Red... but will you recoup the costs? The client might not be interested in video or only have a "beer budget", but when presented with a well shot showreel that MOVES them, they might BECOME interested... maybe even develop a "champaigne taste"!



I found Gabes comments interesting - one thought, if you're there ANYWAY, because the client booked the "el cheapo" package, how about being the "hero" that shot with a couple extra cameras/angles, and when the 'tog blows it, you've got the extra footage to "save the day"??? You can ALWAYS deliver a one camera product, but the idea that you might be able to "upsell" later is worth considering.



I've quoted the $299 price point as well, because it came up here, but I've SEEN it locally... so it's not completely absurd that you may be competing with this sort of "competition". That the "competition" may produce horrid unwatchable drek (seen it at local bridal fairs!) is probably helpful to those who insist on quality, but it's still good to be aware that such "competition" is out there, Know you will sooner or later probably hear "but I can get it for $300" from potential clients and be prepared to point out the strengths in your own product/experience (yes you can include "equipment" in the mix, but is it REALLY going to impress the bride? REALLY??)

I would hope one would always strive to produce "best" quality product, no matter what the price point, and if the product is good... word of mouth, networking and a little promotional marketing should lead to enough work to make a real business of it! I don't see it as being "obsessed with quality", but rather that I expect to produce quality PERIOD, with the equipment at hand (or readily affordable).

I'll stir the pot and suggest that IF you can get the shot (or the clip, with video), you should be able to pick up a darn smartphone and shoot workable footage! Yes, every device has limitations, but in the end it comes down to knowing how to SHOOT and later edit, not how big or expensive your "gear box" is....

Hi Roger,

Those are some interesting observations. But after reading this post, I'm a bit confused about what was the point of this thread exactly? Was it to confirm that you have noticed that there were different ways to approach wedding videography? Or were you actually interested in knowing how many of us really care about offering high quality work?

Hi LT,

I thought the point of the thread was quite clear, which was are we obsessed with obtaining the highest quality at all costs, at the expense of a much wider field of opportunities that are also out there.

I think that like all threads, it has thrown up a number of points that have also been expanded on, although I also feel that much of my original post has been answered very succinctly by Daves post just before this one.

Roger

Dave,
that was awesome.

Hi LT,

I thought the point of the thread was quite clear, which was are we obsessed with obtaining the highest quality at all costs, at the expense of a much wider field of opportunities that are also out there.

I think that like all threads, it has thrown up a number of points that have also been expanded on, although I also feel that much of my original post has been answered very succinctly by Daves post just before this one.

Roger

Hi Roger,

Please forgive me if If I'm not fully understanding the message you are trying to get across. When you say "at the expense of a much wider field of opportunities that are also out there", are you suggesting that people who care about delivering high quality product are missing opportunities because the type of brides they cater to are part of a minority in the large market scale? If that is the point of this discussion, I think that the idea of "missing opportunity" could go both ways, depending on how you see it.

Whether you decide to drop quality to keep your cost low and cater to the mass market or you want to raise your standards and target a higher end clientele is your personal choice. There is absolutely nothing wrong with either business model as long as you are able to reach the target brides YOU want to cater to and make the type of films YOU want to make.

The problem only occurs if you are not getting the weddings you want to book or you are not feeling fulfilled doing the work you do. If that is the case, there are SO MANY things you need to consider on top of the "quality obsession" question.

Hi Long

I don't think that Roger was suggesting a quality reduction of any sort..we all deliver the best resolution we can. He was simply comparing the guys who take 60 hours to produce an absolutely perfect product and correct every single detail taking weeks which sadly the bride doesn't appreciate or even notice.

The main point I think was dividing time between shooting weddings and having time for yourself. If like Roger and myself do edit/packaging within a few days then you do have more time and you can still make a decent income at the costing rate you deserve. If my total shoot/edit/travel time was say 70 hours (10 hours shoot +60 hours edit/package/travel) I would have to charge $5250 to achieve my $75.00 an hour and my market wouldn't support that sort of pricing. I can comfortably do a wedding with a total cost time of only 25 or 30 hours all up and sell that for around the $2000 figure and still achieve my $75.00 per hour and have more time for me and more brides that are interested.

Of course if the USA and Canada have lots of brides willing to over the $5K figure for a basic wedding then there is nothing wrong with that.

Chris

Hi Long

I don't think that Roger was suggesting a quality reduction of any sort..we all deliver the best resolution we can. He was simply comparing the guys who take 60 hours to produce an absolutely perfect product and correct every single detail taking weeks which sadly the bride doesn't appreciate or even notice.

The main point I think was dividing time between shooting weddings and having time for yourself. If like Roger and myself do edit/packaging within a few days then you do have more time and you can still make a decent income at the costing rate you deserve. If my total shoot/edit/travel time was say 70 hours (10 hours shoot +60 hours edit/package/travel) I would have to charge $5250 to achieve my $75.00 an hour and my market wouldn't support that sort of pricing. I can comfortably do a wedding with a total cost time of only 25 or 30 hours all up and sell that for around the $2000 figure and still achieve my $75.00 per hour and have more time for me and more brides that are interested.

Of course if the USA and Canada have lots of brides willing to over the $5K figure for a basic wedding then there is nothing wrong with that.

Chris

Hi Chris,

The problem with this kind of comparison is that it can easily become completely irrelevant as soon as people start talking about their own clients and their own market.

The statement that brides don't appreciate or even notice quality is as true as it can be false. It all depends on who is speaking on whose behalf.

A fast food restaurant owner can say that customers only appreciate the quick and cheap meals while a fine dining restaurant owner can say that customers actually care about good quality food. If both of them are running a successful business respectively, it becomes pointless to try and compare the two.

Chris you said
************ If my total shoot/edit/travel time was say 70 hours (10 hours shoot +60 hours edit/package/travel) I would have to charge $5250 to achieve my $75.00 an hour and my market wouldn't support that sort of pricing. I can comfortably do a wedding with a total cost time of only 25 or 30 hours all up and sell that for around the $2000 figure and still achieve my $75.00 per hour and have more time for me and more brides that are interested.***************************************

Your point is well taken. The reality is that most wedding videographers aren't realist. When you add equipment cost, shoot time, edit time, booking and office time, the $2000 videographer could easily be making $15 bucks an hour just like the $500 wedding guy. Most wedding videographers will dance around this topic their whole career.
The cost of multiple cameras, multiple audio devices etc. The setup time and edit time for multiple devices can be off the chart. You hear guys constantly bragging about how many cameras they set up for all the different angles.. All the audio devices to back up the other audio devices. All the sliders and dslr rigs.

You hardly hear them mention the cost of that gear? The time it takes to setup and tear down? How many hours they spend on wedding day? And you will rarely ever hear the REAL numbers on how many edit hours.
And even more rare is you never hear anybody say, I'm putting in the time but I'm getting $6000 for that wedding. And I realize in every market there are a few that do.

But I do believe because we are so obsessed with equipment and quality that average wedding videographer relegates themselves to roughly $15 bucks an hour. Admit it or not.
Al

Thanks Al

Trust me, if I could do just ONE wedding a month for $8000 it would be far better, time management wise, to do that instead of doing 4 x $2000 weddings. The only point however (as $8K is a pipe dream here!) is that if you do a $2000 wedding then spend 25 hours on it, not 60 hours so your profit margin is sustainable. It's great to see someone slave over footage over and over attending to minute detail but it sadly doesn't make business sense. I leave that sort of obsession to personal stuff I might shoot but not on weddings where profit margins are concerned.

Chris

A couple observations....

You can focus on "only 20% of brides are looking for video", and get really depressed...

OR you can focus on 20% ARE interested, and there's a HUGE pool (80%) out there that just isn't aware or thinks it's too expensive or whatever... who might well be interested if exposed and educated a bit.

"Marketing" is not just buying gear, getting some business cards, and sitting by the phone waiting for it to ring... have a local newpaper do a "interest story" on your business, network with other vendors, get out there and show your "stuff"... EVERY successful business eventually has to figure out how to make the phone ring!!

To do that, you need to understand what your unique VALUE is to a potential client - are you offering a "cinematic" artsy final product? A "document your day as it happened" approach? A hybrid of some sort? Pretend to be the client for a moment, what is it that would make you as a client WANT, desire, NEED to include video in the budget?? How do you get that message in front of your potential clients?


The practical fact is "budget" is a real world factor - ignore it at your own risk. This applies to the client "budget" and to your own business "budget". Sure you WANT to shoot with a Red... but will you recoup the costs? The client might not be interested in video or only have a "beer budget", but when presented with a well shot showreel that MOVES them, they might BECOME interested... maybe even develop a "champaigne taste"!



I found Gabes comments interesting - one thought, if you're there ANYWAY, because the client booked the "el cheapo" package, how about being the "hero" that shot with a couple extra cameras/angles, and when the 'tog blows it, you've got the extra footage to "save the day"??? You can ALWAYS deliver a one camera product, but the idea that you might be able to "upsell" later is worth considering.



I've quoted the $299 price point as well, because it came up here, but I've SEEN it locally... so it's not completely absurd that you may be competing with this sort of "competition". That the "competition" may produce horrid unwatchable drek (seen it at local bridal fairs!) is probably helpful to those who insist on quality, but it's still good to be aware that such "competition" is out there, Know you will sooner or later probably hear "but I can get it for $300" from potential clients and be prepared to point out the strengths in your own product/experience (yes you can include "equipment" in the mix, but is it REALLY going to impress the bride? REALLY??)

I would hope one would always strive to produce "best" quality product, no matter what the price point, and if the product is good... word of mouth, networking and a little promotional marketing should lead to enough work to make a real business of it! I don't see it as being "obsessed with quality", but rather that I expect to produce quality PERIOD, with the equipment at hand (or readily affordable).

I'll stir the pot and suggest that IF you can get the shot (or the clip, with video), you should be able to pick up a darn smartphone and shoot workable footage! Yes, every device has limitations, but in the end it comes down to knowing how to SHOOT and later edit, not how big or expensive your "gear box" is....


So, in the interest of full disclosure. As you said, I WAS going to be shooting the wedding anyways.
So guess what? I had an HD Hero cam on a slider (mounted on a tripod) to do a couple 'artsy' shots
and then when the ceremony started, I just centered the slider on the tripod and recorded to have a
'save my butt' angle just in case my main camera got blocked or something. It's things like this that
drive my wife crazy as she always tells me I am not running the business correctly. If they refuse
to pay for the second camera, I shouldn't be going to the work of actually using it! Alas, I often do.
And then I often make the music video that is supposed to be a $500 add on. Then, since I made it
anyways, I will often throw it on the DVD and they end up getting it for free. In this particular case,
I didn't want the client coming over to pick and chose shots, especially since she had agreed that
I would be doing a one camera shoot. So I reminded her of that fact over the phone.
One of those things where I wanted to be very firm with her as she was starting to make me
nervous that she was going to be 'one of those' brides. Wanting to come over and choose which
camera angle she should be seeing after she agreed that she wanted the low budget single camera
wedding??? Really? After I reminded her on the phone, she got very apologetic and told me I was
right and that they would be glad for whatever video I was able to make them, especially since
she had got absolutely no stills from the photographer. Which of course made me feel bad for her and
I put in extra editing time to cut in extra angles from the GoPro, which of course drove my wife crazy....
stinking vicious circle. BUT, the good thing, is what this whole experience taught me.

I was talking about the whole thing with a friend of mine who does wedding photography. She is
very good, and does roughly 50 times the amount of weddings I do, because....well she's a
photographer, and not a videographer. She told me, that what I do, is make the music video,
and then SHOW the clients the video, and offer them the CHANCE to buy it! If they don't, then you
don't put it on the DVD. But she said, if they see it, they will usually want to buy it! Which
is totally true. As I've seen, they often choose the cheap package, and then after the fact
want the expensive one! She often does this with her photography, and when she shows them
the 'extra' photos, she says they ALWAYS buy them. She also told me that all the expos she
attends, the photographers are being pushed to offer video services as well. She like me,
immediately saw the flaw in that plan as it is hard to do both good photos and video at the
same wedding. Even with DSLR's that shoot HD video and camcorders like the VG20 that shoot
16 megapixel raw stills, you are making decisions (like shutter speed for example) for one medium
or the other. Not to mention, that you may miss a good photo opportunity if you are recording video,
or vice versa. So her idea, was to partner with me, and she would do the 'documentary' style
coverage with the photos, as well as the traditional photo shoot, and I would do the
'cinematic' music highlights video. Apparently, in talking with her brides (and this is a photographer
who does hundreds of weddings) they are NOT interested in a one or two hour long video that
shows everything. They can't get their friends to sit through that, it just isn't interesting enough.
Now this may be a cultural thing (short American attention spans), or an age thing, or who
knows what. Apparently some of you have different experiences and have brides that want
the whole 1-2 hour ceremony plus 3 hours at the reception, and an hour or so of prep captured,
and want to watch it all. But I was told that if I offered the highlights video she would package
it with her photos and sell us as a 'multimedia' package deal as she absolutely loves the highlights
video and thinks it will sell. So I am trying a new venture this upcoming summer. It might be
worth it for some of you to try and find a talented 'one person band' wedding photographer who
doesn't have a big enough business to offer video services, and partner with them to offer
'multimedia' services. Who know, I may get very little work out of it, although we have had
some prebookings already, which is not something I am used to getting. I am also raising my
prices. But the worst that can happen is that people think I am too expensive and don't book
me, in which case I have more time to play with my kids. That definitely won't ruin my summer!
If wedding video was the only work I did, I may have a different opinion, but I decided a long
time ago, not to put all my eggs in one basket so I do TV commercials, events, corporate and
non profit promotional films, and all kinds of other video work. Most times, when one
segment of my business is down, another is up, which keeps me from worrying too much
about something like wedding bookings being low. I just take the free time I am gifted and
spend it with my family, after all that's what's important anyways!!!!

Thanks Al

Trust me, if I could do just ONE wedding a month for $8000 it would be far better, time management wise, to do that instead of doing 4 x $2000 weddings. The only point however (as $8K is a pipe dream here!) is that if you do a $2000 wedding then spend 25 hours on it, not 60 hours so your profit margin is sustainable. It's great to see someone slave over footage over and over attending to minute detail but it sadly doesn't make business sense. I leave that sort of obsession to personal stuff I might shoot but not on weddings where profit margins are concerned.

Chris

Hi Chris,

If we refer to your own example, I'm not sure what doesn't make business sense here.

If you spend on average 25 hours per wedding and need 4 of them to reach your $8000 monthly goal, then you'd end up working 100 hours at the end of the month to make the same amount that a single 60 hours wedding would make. In this case, wouldn't you be the one overworking yourself to reach the same financial goal?

As far as the "$8K is a pipe dream" comment goes, we are once again falling into a pointless debate about "MY market vs YOUR market" which always ends up with a "good for you, but it doesn't work like that here where I live" type of comment which, once again, is completely irrelevant depending on who's looking at it.

It is just funny to see how some people are so determined to pull out numbers taken from their own personal situation as a reference to what is supposed to be "real" and automatically believe that everything else doesn't make sense.

I read this thread with some interest and it seems to me that it's not about quality...it's more about style! Give less than good and you won't be getting any work. I'll tell you the story of the guy here who started off with low prices, going gangbusters, then got so much work he couldn't keep up, either with he new clients he kept taking or the old clients that he didn't deliver to. Stopped answering emails, phone calls etc... Not only did he get slammed on the wedding websites but he got taken to court. Gave us all a bad rap!

Just because I do a long form doc style doesn't mean the quality is anything less than any of the "cinematic" edits I've ever seen and we all need to keep in mind that market dictates style as well as pricing more than anything else. If you're in a market where the majority of work done is cine style at say a $2500 price range and you come out at $5000 you probably won't get too much work, you will then either have to lower your prices or get out of the business and I've seen both. Go the other way and charge too little and 2 things happen. One is you get so much work you can't keep up and Two, people are suspicious of your pricing an don't book you.
Regardless it just seems to me that this thread is more about style not quality and since style doesn't dictate quality (at least no to me) it's gotten way off track.
Since I'm at the end of my wedding career and only have 20 booked for the entire season (down from an average of 50+) and all but 1 came from referrals or family repeat business (sisters, brothers, cousins) I don't really care except for the one thing that every wedding I've ever done, long form, short form, cinematic or documentary style share and that is while the style may be different the quality is always the 110% best I can produce each and every single time.
Like I was taught many years ago and tried to pass on to my own kids, "there's never enough time to do it right the first time, but there's always enough time to go back and do it again" except there isn't! Anything but the best quality you can produce under the circumstances is unacceptable. The style however is a different thing!
Just my $.02 worth from doing the few weddings I've done.

As far as the "$8K is a pipe dream" comment goes, we are once again falling into a pointless debate about "MY market vs YOUR market" which always ends up with a "good for you, but it doesn't work like that here where I live" type of comment which, once again, is completely irrelevant depending on who's looking at it.

Traditions in a countries are difficult to change and from a outsider that's hard to understand, especially when they live in a country where there is a videoculture. Just the fact that people think there is no difference between Russia and Belgium is a good example how little is known about traditions in Europe. So I wouldn't say pointless but rather realistic, it just becomes pointless when people continue to say you don't know what you are talking about.

I don't make enough money to live off weddings alone.

I have other jobs to get me by (not video related).

The whole reason I got in to weddings 2 years ago was because I just happened to do a family event ... and after everyone loved it, I started reading up on the topic even more and now offer my services and have invested a considerable amount on equipment. Near enough £5000 with lenses, camera, tripod/slider etc.

I think I would have to do what you guys do. Offer documentary style long form edits, and at reasonable prices to take on more work. At the minute, I have a glossed up website. But my prices aren't affordable enough. And to me it isn't worthwhile making the effort for anything less ...

1 out of 15 enquiries is a booking.

I think that says a lot about cinematic weddings.

On the other hand, if I actually bothered doing documentary style filming I might get more work. But problem is, I have no examples on my website. So im terrified, if I accept work for less, on the basis im providing a documentary style edit. The clients expectations will still be high as they only see cinematic style work on my website.

James with regards to bookings - when I started 5 years ago I always used to respond to enquiries via email with a quote etc and had about the same conversion rate as you - then i started to offer a home visit and now 90% of people book after visiting them. The personal touch really works!

I work documentary style - long form edit with other sequences (arrivals of guests/photoshoot etc) set to music and a little more 'artistic' but not really cinematic - and this is exactly what my couples want - a no-fuss recording of their day as it actually happened - not how I think it should have happened.

Noa ,
What's pointless is that no one can tell you that you're wrong because you're the only Belgian. So, it's pointless to tell you that you can have brides that pay more and appreciate video as much or more than photography because of your whole culture is against video. So I'm done with that argument. I think Dave framed the argument perfectly but it saddens me that so many of us have constructed this box that we must live in. I'm not sure what's so scary out there but the world ,the whole world is your oyster. Go get it.
Bill

It's pointless discussing with people that don't know what they are talking about yet persist on knowing they do. I do wish you guys luck though .

I wouldn't say pointless but rather realistic, traditions in a countries are difficult to change and from a outsider that's hard to understand, especially when they live in a country where there is a videoculture. Just the fact that people think there is no difference between Russia and Belgium is a good example how little is known about traditions in Europe.

Hi Noa,

You are right, we all live in a different part of the world and are faced with different sets of challenges. That is the exact reason why I think it is rather pointless to try and argue about business concepts. It is very easy for some people to knock on other people's ideas and say that they "don't make any business sense" simply because it doesn't apply to THEIR OWN personal situation.

Every single time there is a discussion about business approach, there will always be someone that needs to come out with the "good for you" or "too bad for you" comment. And that can come from any side. Can't we just stay open-minded and share ideas and concepts and take them as they are without judging each other's business model? If there is something interesting we can take from certain ideas, then it's absolutely great. But if some of them don't apply to you, then just leave it.

Hi Guys

Again a sensible and practical explanation from the great Don Bloom. A few weddings Don?? Yeah right ..you must be well over the 2000 mark by now and still threatening to give them up next year.

Quite correct this topic has drifted way off course and now has become a heated debate between the high end shooters and the low end shooters and little has been said about actual IQ which is what the original post was about in the first place.

Simple answer?? Brides have no idea what resolution is and videos a few years back that I have reluctantly submitted to brides where I was definately not happy with IQ (tons of back lighting, awful venue for speeches, no space and it all goes on and on) I expected some serious complaints but the bride was over-joyed with her video and "cried the 10 times I watched it" ..She also referred me to two new clients ..thankfully that was my only bummer for the year!!

Conclusion? Give them good content and stay in focus and they will love you for it regardless of the IQ!!

Chris

Agreed Chris. IQ is irrelevant to brides. I did, however see a great presentation by Michael Wong at Infocus in 2012 about removing distractions from your edit. I think we can engage our audience more, whether it be short or long form if we remove distractions like color balance issues, shake, messy backgrounds, etc. We are attempting to do this and not always succesful. I think those distractions can take away from the impact but as far as resolution, pixel depth, dynamic range, they don't know and they don't care. Show them a story. Don't spend(and I have to keep telling myself this) $6500 on a C100 just to get more dynamic range. It won't make you more money. I do rely on my mkIIIs high ISO to make things easier on me. I don't have to worry as much about darkness, and I remove at least a little bit of the headache in post. Although we disagree about markets, we agree about IQ. Doesn't matter.
Bill

As I've said for years. No matter the style of product (I am talking only about weddings) if you give solid stable, well composed properly exposed footage you're golden. IOW get the real shot first then play with your dutch angles, filmic look, reality TV shaky look, sliders gliders and steadicams. It's all good but if you don't have the ONE solid steady well composed properly exposed shot and all the other stuff looks like crap (pardon the expression) you're stuck. Remember you can't edit what you don't have. Style doesn't matter if you haven't got quality. Please keep in mind that we ALL have used shots that have less quality but have a high value but that might be 1 or 2 shots in any given wedding or it might be none for 20 weddings and then we get zapped with 10 in a row where we need to decide, high value and less quality or nothing at all. I would be surprised if too many of our clients noticed the slightly shaky or slightly out of focus BANG shot that we used for a total of 3 or 4 seconds. they see the shot, we see the shakiness, or the slightly out of focusness (is that a word?) or the slight discoloration...sometimes we worry too much about the technical end and forget we're there to capture the events of the day first and foremost.
Chris, YES....This is my last year doing weddings. I'm already doing more other types of work than I have in the past few years (gotta make that HM700 pay for itself) and I'm loving it. Promos, webamercials, legacy videos...heck I just listed my PDs on Ebay. I feel like 2 of my old friends have died but...Anyway, yes, this is it!

Hi Roger,

Please forgive me if If I'm not fully understanding the message you are trying to get across. When you say "at the expense of a much wider field of opportunities that are also out there", are you suggesting that people who care about delivering high quality product are missing opportunities because the type of brides they cater to are part of a minority in the large market scale? If that is the point of this discussion, I think that the idea of "missing opportunity" could go both ways, depending on how you see it.

Whether you decide to drop quality to keep your cost low and cater to the mass market or you want to raise your standards and target a higher end clientele is your personal choice. There is absolutely nothing wrong with either business model as long as you are able to reach the target brides YOU want to cater to and make the type of films YOU want to make.

The problem only occurs if you are not getting the weddings you want to book or you are not feeling fulfilled doing the work you do. If that is the case, there are SO MANY things you need to consider on top of the "quality obsession" question.

Perhaps I am mistaken in thinking that the thread topic was quite clear, but I am certainly not trying to get a message across, rather setting a question I had for general discussion and opinion. i don't want to continually come back to the same point, but it was basically that in the quest for higher and higher technical quality and incredible artistic interpretation, are we missing the fact that 80% of all weddings don't have a videographer at all because they can't afford it or don't like what they see. Is this killing the market in some ways by putting the wedding video out of reach of many people?

Roger

********************Perhaps I am mistaken in thinking that the thread topic was quite clear, but I am certainly not trying to get a message across, rather setting a question I had for general discussion and opinion. i don't want to continually come back to the same point, but it was basically that in the quest for higher and higher technical quality and incredible artistic interpretation, are we missing the fact that 80% of all weddings don't have a videographer at all because they can't afford it or don't like what they see. Is this killing the market in some ways by putting the wedding video out of reach of many people?******************************

Roger, I'm not sure what we are supposed to feel from this 80% statistic? When i was doing weddings I had more business then I desired and that statistic was the same or worse. 20% of the market is huge. On the other hand the reason photographers have that 80% is their market is more saturated with budget vendors. Much more than the video market. Who gives a crap if only 20% of brides get wedding video as long as I have all the business I need? If someone was really dumb enough to care about that statistic, you would hope they would be dumb enough to remedy the situation by switching to photography. You could get in a lot cheaper and immediately be a part of that 80%.

The problem for most wedding videographers is that that they follow trends rather than set their own model. I got out of weddings in 2004. Living in New Orleans a typical ceremony last 40 minutes, or 1 hour for Catholic. A reception is a maximum of 3 hours. I would typically get back to my studio with a max of 2 1/2 hours of footage. I know you guys spend way more time and shoot much more raw footage. For me the thinking was if you shoot it, you have to deal with it in post. I din't wan't that. I know you guys hate to put your coveted prices out but I'll tell you what mine was. I shot single camera ceremony and reception for $1500. This is 2004 and before. In my market there were 2 videographers that were higher, one was very good the other just had a slick marketing plan. But for all the rest, and there were many, those were the multi-camera, brides house, love story, you name it all included in a much lower price. Granted , I offered these things but at substantial extra cost. about 50% of my clients took the add ons and I wish they wouldn't have. The added time and expense didn't do much for my bottom line nor my quality of life. Quality of life is something else usually not factored in. I actually made more money with the straight up $1500 shoot and had far more time to pursue other projects, like my girlfriend.

I'm not sure if you guys still do this, but do you remember when wedding videographers would put the titles for the whole wedding party in the video? Well I do, and I remember the day I quit, everybody in my local association said brides wouldn't go for it. Once i started charging $200 bucks for it, nobody missed it. And I got no backlash about it.

I shot a wedding last Saturday for a friend of a friend of a friend. At my 2004 price of $1500 for 1 camera. I captured it on Sunday night (Sony EX1r) and they are picking it up this evening. The will get the edit plus the raw footage. When I say that I mean they own it from that point. I don't want to keep raw footage , masters or anything else. I wipe my drive afterwards. I know that's not typical, but HAPPY IS HAPPY RIGHT?

So 20% is a huge market, it's just a matter of where you want to be. Create your own space in that market, stop following trends, consider your bottom line and how it relates to your quality of life.
Al

80% of all weddings don't have a videographer at all because they can't afford it or don't like what they see.How many of those 80% wouldn't have a video at any price because their impression of what a wedding video is has been so coloured by what they have seen in the past. By the way I am pretty sure that 20% of weddings in the UK don't have a video. Friends who just do photography tell me it's less then 10%. We have to ask ourselves why the vast majority of traditional weddings where the bride has a big white dress & the groom hires a suit will have a professional photographer but won't have videographer & it's not because they can't afford it.

Perhaps I am mistaken in thinking that the thread topic was quite clear, but I am certainly not trying to get a message across, rather setting a question I had for general discussion and opinion. i don't want to continually come back to the same point, but it was basically that in the quest for higher and higher technical quality and incredible artistic interpretation, are we missing the fact that 80% of all weddings don't have a videographer at all because they can't afford it or don't like what they see. Is this killing the market in some ways by putting the wedding video out of reach of many people?

Roger

I think it's an interesting question, but I think you are oversimplifying the answer. From my
experience there are many reasons brides ignore the wedding video. Price is the reason for
some and not liking what they see for others. But there are many other reasons. And many
brides don't even think of wedding video. I looked at the 'to do' list from several wedding
planners. Things like when to buy the dress, hire a photographer, rent the site, get a DJ,
find your caterer, and so on. Less than 30% of the coordinators I surveyed even mentioned
a videographer. So not only do we have work to do to even get in the brides conscious thoughts,
but to be in the thoughts of the events planners. I have tried to make friends with as many vendors
as possible. Almost every one of the few weddings I do get, is because of a referral from the
photographer, DJ, or event planner that I have made friends with. It helps coaching youth sports
as I've had all their kids on my teams :-)

Gabe,
I think that's a great point. We need to be on the mind of the wedding planners and the brides. We need to make sure the planners can use our video to sell themselves to future clients and thus help them out. Our marketing is one of awareness and not necessarily pushing what we do. That 80% is an awesome target market. Don't target the 20% target the 80%
Bill

[QUOTE=Gabe Strong;1785520]I think it's an interesting question, but I think you are oversimplifying the answer. From my
experience there are many reasons brides ignore the wedding video. Price is the reason for
some and not liking what they see for others. But there are many other reasons. And many
brides don't even think of wedding video. I looked at the 'to do' list from several wedding
planners. Things like when to buy the dress, hire a photographer, rent the site, get a DJ,
find your caterer, and so on. Less than 30% of the coordinators I surveyed even mentioned
a videographer. So not only do we have work to do to even get in the brides conscious thoughts,
but to be in the thoughts of the events planners. I have tried to make friends with as many vendors
as possible. Almost every one of the few weddings I do get, is because of a referral from the
photographer, DJ, or event planner that I have made friends with. It helps coaching youth sports
as I've had all their kids on my teams :-)[/QUOTE

Gabe,
While networking is a good approach it's only a small part. You have to build your own business and make a name for yourself, just like the people you want to network with. It didn't just happen for them either. In your words you say the "few weddings that you get" as if it weren't for others you wouldn't have any. Let's say you've done a few weddings. Then you already have the best referral system in the world. Usually when I do one bride, I do her friends, relatives and the like. You do a good job for them and they advertise for you. I have done entire wedding parties. Why is that not working for you? You have no one to blame.

If you are at the same wedding as a given photographer that means you guys are already fishing in the same pond. But yet you need him to bait your hook? Why? All these percentages are crap, it has nothing to do with you.

It pays to be professional, quality certainly pays, but above all it pays to be friendly, likable. Who wants to work with someone they don't have a feel for. I built many extremely close relationships with clients. I've been invited to parties and BBQ's long after the wedding is over.

I also know there were brides who came to me sometimes and I knew instantly I didn't want to work with them. So I guess they feel that way at times too.

And for those who think the economy is hurting your business, statistics actually show that there are more weddings in hard times then good. Consolidation becomes a good idea.
If you want to spend time sucking up to photographers and others so be it, but it could be better spent improving the totality of your own business.

Building a wedding business is not the rocket science some seem to portray it as. Good work and satisfied clients will bring other clients ten fold.

Al

I don't see why you should think all these percentages are crap! Nigel has stated that the figures in the UK may suggest that only 10% of weddings have a videographer. I'm not trying to give answers, just stimulate open debate, but if you are running a business and 80-90% of the market is not interested in your product then we all have an image problem.

As I have said several times in this thread, I am looking at my best year ever, but if more video companies are looking at sharing that small and possibly shrinking market, then I am interested in what I can do about it. I have already taken steps in my own business to get a greater share of the wedding market and increasing the percentage in my favour. That means offering something new and thinking a little laterally, both to increase the return and outsell the opposition.

For those that are perfectly satisfied to continue what they are already doing, then great, but I am not convinced that the wedding video market generally is particularly healthy at the moment. If less people have a video, then the less people will see it as a requirement.

Roger

Hi Roger

Percentages will vary all over the world...In Perth we have a HUGE following of marriage celebrants so a massive number of weddings are conducted privately in a back yard or public park...there are no "registry offices" here so a big majority of weddings won't even make news! (My very own 2nd wedding was at a friend's house with family only and from the street it would have seemed nothing was going on)
We have over 1200 registered celebrants here that do marriages constantly that we never even see.

The figures for 2009 in our state was 11,000 for the year! Divide that my probably 20 at best videographers doing 30 -40 weddings a year and the percentage is tiny and on analysis seems not worth the effort to even do weddings. Yet, like you, I'm busy (I do around 35 per season which is all I want to do!) and I'm sure others do much the same and we are all happy with business.

Chris

Perhaps I am mistaken in thinking that the thread topic was quite clear, but I am certainly not trying to get a message across, rather setting a question I had for general discussion and opinion. i don't want to continually come back to the same point, but it was basically that in the quest for higher and higher technical quality and incredible artistic interpretation, are we missing the fact that 80% of all weddings don't have a videographer at all because they can't afford it or don't like what they see. Is this killing the market in some ways by putting the wedding video out of reach of many people?

Roger

I will only speak for myself since everyone has a different approach but to me, as long as I get the bookings that I want, I don't see the need to try and make my service accessible to the entire population. I seek quality and take pride in what I do because it is what I'm passionate about and what keeps me fulfilled. I want to attract couples who value my work and hire me because they care about their films as much as I do.

Is my service something that most people can afford? Probably not. But in a world where the majority of the population would look for discounts on Ebay and eat at McDonald's, there will still be a sustainable percentage of people who shop at Louis Vuitton, drive luxurious cars and enjoy fine dining. I only need to make sure that they are aware that I exist and that my work is appealing enough for them to consider my service when they get married.

If other companies around me would rather shoot lower end weddings and cater to the 80%, I'm happy with that too. Because it means that I have less competitors to worry about when selling my service to my target brides. I also don't limit myself to local brides only. I try to market myself internationally and would gladly accept commissions anywhere in the world as long as couples are willing to fly me over to shoot their wedding.

Long,
That's what I'm saying. Carve your own space. Your strategy makes perfect sense.
Al

Al,

So since I live in a small, remote town in Alaska (no road access, only way in or out is
by airplane or boat), the value of your referral system only goes so far. In fact I am
actually the only full time video production company in town. I have a little competition
from some weekend warriors, but they are doing it for extra spending money as they have
other full time jobs and I don't try to compete with their prices as I'm in a whole different
situation. Thus I get a very large percentage of the local weddings in which the bride
wants a video. Many however don't even think about doing video for whatever reason.
But they almost all hire a wedding photographer. This is where 'sucking up' to
photographers and wedding planners helps. See, I can't close a deal in which a bride
never even calls because she doesn't think of doing video. But as she is making wedding
plans with other vendors it helps if other vendors mention your service, now the bride becomes
aware and thinks about the possibility of doing video. Also, I would guess that maybe 75% of the
weddings here are tourist 'destination' type weddings. Those almost always are going through
one of the local wedding planners or such. For example one owns a B&B and couples book
her as a place to stay for the night after they get married by her. So she is a good person
to know as she will get me more work than referrals from happy brides in my town will.
The entire population of our town is less than the number of tourists that visit here in
one day in the summer. I do have a website so far I get 1 or 2 weddings a year where a
bride finds me online and calls to hire me as she is planning her destination wedding.

When I started my video business about 11 years ago, there were 4 or 5 other video companies.
They have folded or moved down south. The local PBS TV station manager who has ran the
TV station in town for a long as I can remember (and gave me my first job out of college)
told me that I am the longest lasting video production company that he has ever seen here,
I must not be making the most horrible business decisions ever.....

This is a very interesting debate. And something I really need to think hard about to be honest.

Im with 'Long Truong' here wanting clients that VALUE my work for it's creativity & story because im passionate about being creative.

Problem is, if I want to make this my day job and source of primary income. I need to cater to everybody ... I have had family tell me the same also. Saying you need to consider lowering prices and offering to shoot films doc style where you simply keep the camera still. Record things as it happens and may be inbetween the moments capture one or two creative shots if possible to throw in to the mix.

I have also had family criticize my existing work saying they don't understand the value of my 'creativity' questioning why this is out of focus, or why that is out of focus. The family that have said that are my grandparents and the older folks. The younger generation love the new 'film style' craze.

I still believe the market has completely changed since pro's had access to the likes of the Canon 5D MK2 with it's large sensor. OR everybody would still be offering documentary style films.

@Long- i don't disagree in any way with your method of working or your point that there will always be those who will pay more for the highest quality. I am not trying to persuade anyone to change their way of working or to only take bookings from the 80% who wouldn't otherwise bother. Rather I would like to raise the profile of wedding video generally so that 100% of the potential market are seriously considering it. You and others would still carry on filming for the same type of clients, but there would be less chance of Video being seen as an expensive niche market if there was more choice available across the board.

@James -documentary style doesn't mean keeping the camera still or not using imaginative shots, it is more about capturing the day as it unfolds, rather than with carefully arranged shots or manipulating situations for the camera. Personally I think that it takes as much skill and experience to capture doc style well, as it does to produce artistic and cinematic styles. Doc style tends to use less equipment and needs the videographer to be able to work very quickly and efficiently, and have the confidence and skill to know how to get the shot whatever the situation.

Roger

And for those who think the economy is hurting your business, statistics actually show that there are more weddings in hard times then goodIn the UK marriage has actually been in steady decline over the last thirty years. The peak was in 1972 when there were 426K & numbers declined year on year till 2009 when there were only 231K. There was admittedly a slight increase to 241K in 2010 which is the most recent year where the statistics are available. The decline in numbers is despite the rising population so the incidence of marriage is actually declining even faster Marriage rates in the UK | News | guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/feb/11/marriage-rates-uk-data#data)

What is even more dramatic than the decline in overall marriage numbers is the decline in church weddings since the introduction of the 1994 Marriage Act which permitted venues other than register offices to hold civil wedding ceremonies. Twenty years ago over 50% of all weddings were religious ceremonies now it's about 30%.

James, I can't speak for the UK but I promise you that here in the USA there are far more people doing doco style than cine style but in reality most are doing some sort of combination style. Doc with some cine thrown in at certain areas of the video; IE Prep, photo shoot, highlight. I'll also state that shooting doc style has not hindered my ability to garner business over the last 30 years and it certainly hasn't hindered my income or creativity when I need to add it in. Don't knock the style, it paved the way for cinematic style wedding videographers and that is what we are isn't it?
Style and quality have nothing to do with one another. You can do doc style and do a lousy job of it as easily as you can muck up a "cinematic" style job and as was said before, doc style doesn't necessarily mean 1 camera although for many of us that is how we learned and for the better. I still to this day shoot as if I have the only camera running even if I'm using 2, 3 or more. Things can happen to the other if they're unmanned so why chance it. Shoot like there are no other camera and you will always get good footage, so quality shouldn't be an issue. Now it becomes style.
Different strokes for different folks.
BTW again as I've stated, over the last 30 years taking all the numbers in, good years, not so good years...I've averaged about 50 weddings a year and have had years years that were way more than that. None of the number coincided with the economy. GOOD economy, BAD economy, it didn't make a difference. People still got married and I still did my share.

Completely off topic Don.

But doing 50 weddings let alone more scares me to death. So I have to hand it to you - bravo!

It takes me a good two-three weeks to produce a Cinematic style film. Because I usually finish a first draft myself, which I re-visit after a while when my mind if fresh with new ideas.

How long are you spending on average to produce a doc style film for your client?