Latest Sample Wedding Introduction
 

I haven't posted a sample, let alone an introduction in quite a while. This is the same clip as my "Professional Difference" clip I posted several months ago except this is the finished form. This is from my October wedding shot on a sunny but windy day with an XL1 with the 16x IS lens. Most of these shots are hand held because I did not have the MultiRig Pro at that time (and besides, the XL1 is too heavy for that mono-pod). Post production in Vegas8. Extensive color correction (thanks to Douglas & Glenn Chan for the great info in the Color Correction DVD from VASST). Ambient audio was recorded on the default mic (again, before I had my AT897 & muffs). Soundtrack is from Magnatune.com though due to licensing costs (they want $114 for one song on a web site) I'll be pulling the clip in a week and replacing it with something from cinescore unless someone out there has a good piano piece that will work for the intro.

So thoughts on any of the following (or more):

• pacing of the intro. this is just the first 2 minutes... there are another 2 minutes to the intro which show more setup. Too slow? I was going for a very relaxed pace, but I hope I didn't go too slow.
• Color correction: Did I pump saturation too much? The greens were a bit more bright in the "Professional difference" clip and I toned it down a bit.
• shot selection. do you have a pretty good idea about where the wedding was held? Many relatives were not able to make it to this wedding, so my video was the only thing they saw (and my photographer's pictures).

Thanks for any and all feedback.

Edit: Here is the sample.

Link to the video?

Hah!
 

I thought for sure I have that in there. Thanks for the catch. Modified now. and here (quicktime) and here for WMV

For me the pacing would be too slow if there is still another 2 minutes of intro showing setup. The pacing was relaxed, but almost felt too relaxed. Might just be style preference for me, though.

I didn't think it was over saturated at all. Colors were fine.

Shot selection seemed okay in terms of getting a feel for the location.

For the title of the video, with the shot of the ducks, you might consider placing the title in the lower right corner to improve visibility with the background and give that scene some added design.

A few shots in the beginning had noise from the nearby waterfall. I'd just remove that sound because waterfalls just sound like static on video. On the shot where you zoom into the waterfall you could leave the sound if you really wanted, but any shot where you don't see the waterfall shouldn't have that "static" waterfall sound.

I also have to say I'm not a big fan of seeing photos in video. Again, this could be a personal preference on style, but I tend to feel like I'm being cheated if I'm watching a "video" of "photos".

Anyways, that's what I have for critique. I hope it helps!

Thanks!
 

I should say that the remaining 2 minutes is mostly bridal room prep shots & some of the ring bearer helping setup the reception tables. So the 2 minutes you saw are the only two minutes that feature just the area with no people (excepting the shot or two of the groom from this clip).

I've always kept my intro title work extremely extremely simple because, frankly, I hate key framing title stuff in Vegas. It is just a pain in the butt. Once I have a chance to go through the "What's new in Vegas 8" DVD from Douglas that I got back in Nov, then I might change my tune (especially about the "new" titler).

That was one of the parts I was not so sure about. I wanted to use the ambient audio from the ducks quacking after getting a gold ball hit in their direction on the pond, but I wanted to avoid having background audio pop in, out to just music, in to a combination, out to just music, etc. I think mixing in and out background audio is distracting. May be just for me and not listeners. So I used some waterfall under the visuals before that shot so I could have more continuity between shots. I also could have just re-arranged the clips that did have background audio that I wanted, and placed them all together at the end / beginning, which would have maintained a solid section with BG audio while also not resorting to filler.

Dang you noticed. :-) I flipped back and forth a few times on that shot. I knew the mother of the bride would love it (she was my client after all) and it showed the groom very well (but in a similar if not almost exactly the same shot) to my video. I basically wanted more play time for that scene (the groom is a huuuuuge fan of golf.... 2-3 times a week he will play 18 holes) so I knew I needed as much footage of that as possible. But I do agree that it kind of brings you out of the "movie" mode and is says "Hey! Here is a still the photographer took!"

Did you notice that all the flower pics were stills? I guess I still rely heavily on stills for macro work, so that is of course a stylistic choice. I have not seen a standard def video that could capture those incredibly tiny details as well as a good still from my photographer. I didn't have the WD-58 or the .3 semi-fish-eye for this wedding, so my shooting may change a bit, but I still will probably rely on macro stills for those sort of things.

Thanks for the insight and tips. I may not be a P. Moreau or a J. Magbanua but I'm hoping to bring the expectations of my clients up a notch with wedding cinematography as opposed to "wedding videos".

This groom was blown away when I delivered the movie and sat with them to watch it. His expectations were for a slightly higher end version of the uncle cam type production. So as soon as he watched the first few shots of the intro he said this was waaaay more than he was expecting. That just made my day. The client (remember who paid) was extremely difficult to deal with, but he just made my day.

Glad the groom liked it. At the end of the day, we need our clients to be happy with what we do.

Bump?
 

Any other feedback? I'm seeing 160 unique hits so someone is looking at it. :-)

Like I mentioned, I have already delivered this production, but I'd love to know what ya'll think could be done to improve it so I could transfer those suggestions to the next project.

It was way too slow for me.
A wedding to me is about people etc. I personally found the shots of waterfalls, flowers and ducks frustrating.
Is it just me or is the standard 'random black & white shot' (and dutch angles) just a bit cliche in wedding videos?

Maybe I just have a bad attention deficit?

B&w
 

Glad to see a comment about the B&W. I put in the slow-mo with B&W to lead up to the fade from B&W to full color on the reveal of the ceremony location. It looked a bit more awkward with just a single shot that was 1/2 B&W so I added the golf swing B&W. I generally do not use B&W unless it will help draw attention to a shot. In the case of the flowers with the yellow color pass, the bride loved flowers so I spent time focusing on them in the intro and in order to make the shot stand out, I added the yellow color pass. That shot may seem random and I have to agree. I could have left it full color and the yellow flowers might have stood out a little less, but still worked.

I don't remember taking any Dutch angle shots, but may be one slipped my memory.

As far as the pace, the next two minutes of footage is the bridal prep, the flower boy setting up the reception hall, etc.

So may be the take away lesson from the comments so far (only two comments so not exactly a stamped but at least it is unanimous), is to spend less time on setup for the location and skip to the people sooner.

Thanks for the feedback.

Anyone else? Heh heh, did anyone like it? This wedding would be the 8th (or 10th.... somewhere in there) that I have done. Obviously I still have room to improve by the standards of many here. So here is your chance to help out! :-)

wow, i didn't know xl1 can produced such colors. But a bit slow and that ok some ppl like that way.

Heavy Use of CC
 

Check out this clip to see some of the "before vs after" footage from that shoot.

I was NOT impressed at all with footage from the XL1 / XL1s. It looked like everything had a thin gray film over everything. The Vegas Color Correction instructional DVD from VASST was the key to unraveling the mystery of this footage. Using the Levels fx I pull the darks all the way down to 0, and then push the whites up to 100. Then I applied several secondary CC to give what was a completely flat white sky some blue. I also take the flat greens from the grass and give them just a bit more punch. Then I applied the VASST "film like" color curve preset.