Do you film family/bridal party posed shoots?
 

When filming a wedding I get bored with these. They are predictible, unexciting, and the photog will give the client a better product of the exact same thing.

I wouldn't shoot them at all, but I have nothing better to do, and I don't want to look like a slacker to my clients.

Do you guys film them?

hey Dana,

Yup you're right. It's one of the most boring parts to record. But - we film them just the same,

1. for safety and more importantly
2. what we actually shoot is the hugging, back patting, kissing, light banter and giggles in between poses. We go in tighter for these shots. During editing, you can use the shots straight up at the prereception part or use them as cutaways if any of the family members make a speech.

Hope this helps.

We try and keep those lists as short as possible so there ae fewer photos to take, but we do film them either way. Just ecaue an event is borig and predictable, doesn't mean you coverage of it needs to be the same. We don't focus on getting every single family combination but rtaher just try to get some creative shots and candis that we can tie toether to lead into the fun part of the photosession afterwards.

This is my approach to this. We film the families and a little of the wedding party photos at the church, but then follow along for their more fun and exciting photo session (usually outdoors). We have gotten some amazing stuff from doing there. I throw it all together in what we call a Photo Session Montage. If we do Wedding Party interviews, they are all mix in here as well. Turns out great, and most clients absolutely love this part.

Suggestion... It is boring to video the entire bridal party posed and smiling for a photo. But before the break the position, keep the camera rolling and have them do something fun. I always have the bridal party turn and look at B&G while they kiss. There are a few things you can do here to make the video portion "not so boring", and its simple stuff that takes a second or two!

I respectfully disagree with this practice. Were I a photographer and had somebody interupting my poses I'd certainly take issue with this. I know firsthand this is why some photographers try to keep their sessions private and closed to me.

If you're going to do any recording of this event and think it's too boring to record it quietly without interfering consider scheduling your own 15 minutes with the wedding party either before or after the photographer does his. I prefer to do it before because I can help "round up" the party for him and they generally stay put so he can finish.

I apologize, I didn't proofread what I wrote... It was supposed to say that I do this after the photographer is done with a pose, and before they actually move (break the pose). I have never run into a problem with photographers becoming upset with me for this. I actually have experienced the opposite, they are snapping photos of my directed shot.

I should add, that I try to read the photographer and couple ahead of time, and if I do feel this would be a problem, I just quietly film without piping in. I also try to explain to the photographer my intentions ahead of time, so they know its coming.

Just didn't want you to think I was constantly interrupting the photographer while they work... I try to practice quite the opposite.

It depends with us. If the b&g do not want it, we don't film it. Since we typically run multiple cameras, I'll usually set the back one on the photo session and tear it down last. One of our more recent ones turned out very nice, mainly because of the church background went very well with the colors etc.

This is one of those areas that is very difficult to navigate sometimes because traditionally the photographer has priority, unless you're a package deal.

To me, if I was getting married, I would want it filmed, because some of the more meaningful stuff happens between the pictures.

Yes, I figured you meant that. You must work with a different breed of photographers than I do. Mine have a script and a time table to adhere to and don't need guests (or me) disrupting it. And this theory of photographer and videographer holding hands and working together harmoniously for the benefit of the client sounds good but is sedom practiced IMO. We merely "tolerate" each other a lot of times. Given the choice, I think 100% of them would chose "no interruptions" during the formals which is rightfully theirs to direct (but not exclusively theirs to shoot).

So I still think the best "works-every-time" solution is to carve yourself out a chunk of time well before the wedding day just like the photog does and schedule it - preferrably communicated by the B&G just like they tell you when he's going to start. Or just shoot it "as is" from the side without saying a word.

The ceremony and reception is another story of course.

And I can't believe I'm sticking up for photographers becase a lot of them are indeed arseholes. :)

I agree. A good photographer can loosen them up too so they can get "whacky" at times.

It's also those little sound bites that can make or break this footage.

I disagree with the idea that the shots will end up just like the photographers. If the photographer is doing a group shot, then they are not able to also do close-ups of everybody as well. My philosophy is faces, faces and more faces.
I also stay completely out of the photographers way.

I'm going to start bringing it up when we sign the contract, letting them know that I won't be filming each of the family combos, but will be looking for the in-between fun.

I like the idea of using those clips during the toasts. We've found toasts to be strangely unpredictible. People never stand where they are supposed to, and it's hard to film without blocking a ton of people, so in the meantime it's easy to lose essential coverage -- even with two cameras rolling. I might start using pose clips both as a backup and a nice cut-to.

A thought re the formal photos from a newbie (4 weddings).

I don't think a video of the formal photos is anything like what the photos are like. You have all the movement and jostling to get in the photo, and have a different angle and zoom - and then the 'freeze' for the photo and the relaxation and dispersion. Also no one is looking at the video camera.

Most of the video I've got of such times has been really lovely, and clearly different to the photographers. Might only end up using a couple or so seconds from the footage for each one, but to my mind it has its place.

I almost always tape the session but there are a couple of things here. 1) I work with the same photogs a lot so they know my style and I know theirs. For the most part we all work very well together. 2) I look for the stuff in between poses, the bridal party sitting around waiting, the parents doing the same and yes, I will give some direction to the couple and the bridal party BUT only when the photog is done with the pose. Some of the stuff can be a lot of fun.

Don

This is where I shine, I get involved and make them do things for the video. I become a motion photographer. I try to balance the time so the photographer is able to get the traditional shots out of the way and then, we go to town creating moments and action shots that work for both video and photography. This has also been one of my great networking secretes. A lot of the photographers have enjoyed working with me because I am able to create shots they never would of tried and they get to shoot some things from a fresh perspective. It also takes some of the pressure of them having to come up with ideas and usually, we are able to get a decent groove on where we fed off each others eyes and creativity.

I have removed most of my videos off line but here is an example of how I approached weddings (hey, that past tense sounds good)
www.dmbvp.com/video/button.wmv

David,

You Canadians, I tell you what... You have some ingenious ideas. Thank you for sharing. I bet that client was happy.

BTW, what do you mean by past tense?