Save the Date Video - comments welcome!
 

This is my very first save the date video. There were a number of behind the scenes complications but I won't go into any of that right now. Just take a look and tell me what you think. Thanks!

http://www.vimeo.com/1248894

Nice job Travis. Clever concept.

Thanks, Rick!

Good job Travis. I really like the concept.

I felt that you could have tried to minimize the "staged" shots (ex. the whole getting into the car and leaving shots). I understand that you did those shots to portray the story properly, but when I watch the video, those shots clearly shows as "staged" and that brings down the realness of the clip. Letting couple doing their own thing and capturing those moments candidly would have brought more life to the clip.

Cool concept though. This concept is actually an eye opener for me to try new things with save the date video. Thanks for posting.

Loved the clip. as already said, great concept. I like the cutting at the start (car scene) leading to the abandoned place.

Some backgrounds are a bit blown out though but I understand the difficulty of getting outdoor shots under a full sun.

The man boobs got to me when they were first shown up close, perhaps a looser shirt or a different angle could have remedied this.

Thanks for sharing.

Thanks for the comments. Part of the reason behind the staged shots was that I was dealing with a groom that quite honestly did NOT want to be there shooting this. That changed by the end of the shoot (thank God!), but in the early stages he just wasn't with it. So I had to start setting up some shots to make sure I got what I needed.

The other reason for the staged shots was that I needed multiple angles of things happening so I could do the quick cuts in the video. I was the only one shooting, so there wasn't any other way to get that other than doing some staging. Still maybe I could have done something different with the shooting to reduce the "staged" look?

Thanks again for the comments. I'm trying to develop a list of creative "save the date" ideas for the coming season, so we'll see what happens next!

Thanks, Jason. I've actually used some "overlay" compositing and blown the video out on purpose. Maybe the look isn't working? I feel like I really struggle when it comes to giving my video a distinct "look". I can do full color and standard B&W and tones just fine, but any more advanced type of color grading seems just out of my reach. I'm not really sure what to do different.

Regarding the "man boobs" I totally agree, but I don't really have much control over that. I needed a closeup of them walking away from the store, but I wanted more than just their faces because they were holding hands.

Just minutes before I shot that the groom actually stated not to shoot any "butt" shots, so I was really feeling the pressure to try and respect his insecurity but still get usable shots. I also specified white T-shirts and jeans, but they showed up in grey shirts and he had shorts on - and I honestly feel like the clothing worked against him, but what can I do really? And like I already mentioned, he didn't really want to be there shooting this so I felt a lot of pressure to just get shots and keep things moving.

Anyways, thanks for the comments and I definitely agree about that shot. I simply don't have anything else to use in it's place unfortunately. Any tips you can give regarding color grading to get a "look"? I use FCP.

I should also probably point out that I hadn't had the opportunity to meet the groom yet, so I had no idea what he looked like until he showed up with a bad attitude at my place for the shoot, lol. I would have rather the couple worn more stylish clothing that was more flattering to them, but obviously they were going to be getting paint on their clothes so they needed to wear something that was disposable.

Ahhh... this is one of those rare "groomzilla" moment you had to deal with. Well, give your self a pat on the back Travis, as it didn't show at all in your clip. Job well done.

Thanks. In his defense I did schedule this shoot for right when he got off work, and he's a construction worker so he probably was just tired and wanted to go home and chill. Not to mention who knows what his fiance had told him about the shoot. He was probably pretty much in the dark on what was going on.

I learned a good lesson. If I haven't met the groom and earned his trust and gotten to know him, then I probably should speak with him about when the best time for him to shoot is. At first I thought maybe I should have just picked a weekend, but then who knows maybe that's when he was planning to go golfing with his buddies. I learned I should consult with COUPLE on a shoot time and not just the bride.

My initial plan, since I hadn't met the groom, was to ride with them to the store so I could have a chat and get everyone in the mood and relaxed. Well, despite me telling the bride to make sure the car was washed and cleaned out, it wasn't, and I couldn't ride with them to the store. So since I wasn't able to earn his trust and cooperation in the car I simply laid it on the line when we all got to the store. I told them that the key to this video working and looking right was them having fun and enjoying themselves. I told them I needed to know that they were both up for it that night. That made only a slight improvement to his attitude at the store, but it was enough to get the shots. Once they started painting he loosened up little by little.

The other problem was that they showed up late, so we had to rush the shoot at the store and get to the factory before the light was gone. That meant I had to shoot the footage of the driving TO THE FACTORY after they had already done the painting. Of course this meant they already had paint on their clothes and faces and hands, etc. So a lot of the shots I had planned or that I did had to get trashed because you could see the paint, and it wouldn't work with the continuity of the video.

The worst is that I had a really cool shot from outside the passenger window looking through at both of them while they were driving. Yeah, I had to put myself out the backseat window and hold the camera about two feet from the open window to get the shot. It would have been worth it but the bride had paint on her cheek on that side, so I had to dump the shot. Them being late sure did make the editing of the driving portion a real pain, lol!

Great job, especially considering the challenges you faced. I like the opening sequence, well cut and paced. The 'moobs' (man boobs) shot should be an incentive to the groom to drop a few pounds (as women are oft to do before a wedding). Maybe he can get a 'manzziere' or a 'bro' (Sienfeld anyone?)
What were you using for a steadycam? Fig rig?

Thanks, Oren. I'm a huge Seinfeld fan and quote it all the time around my wife ... she's only mildly amused.

I was using a Steadicam Merlin handheld for some of the shots. It was a pretty breezy day, and the breeze was funneling through the factory so that was no fun. Plus I still just need more practice with learning to walk properly with the Merlin.

LOVED IT and loved the idea you chose!

Thanks, Kelsey!

Very nice
 

The only thing that kind of bugged me was I kept waiting for a DOF shot at the very start but the couple never came into focus till a cut. Not a biggie, I just was sitting there thinking...... "and..... focus...... nope....... annnnnnnnnd..... focus""

And naturally I'm interested to know what surface you actually had her painting on that was in front of the camera.

I enjoyed seeing the merlin in use and the only shot with it that stood out was walking through the weeds and into the building where the side to side rocking is visible. But the rest looked pretty dang good for a new piece of gear. My MultiRig floating shots are never that smooth, probably because I leave the shock pod attached when I should hold in my hands instead.

I am sympathetic on the struggle of finding a color pallet that is "my look." I've tried colorization a few times and either I cannot remember how I tinted things last time, or I just have no inspiration for a tint / effect.

The video kept me entertained especially once the painting started. I found myself thinking, "what are they painting....?"

I thought the concept is great, well executed and entertaining. If I were the subject, I would be very pleased. the staged shots were well staged, and I believe they added to the telling of the story. Nicely done.

Hey Travis,

That's a great video. Fun, inventive, kept my attention all the way. I even watched it twice and enjoyed it again. Great work.

I swear to you, I watched it before I saw Jason's feedback, but I had the same reaction as him. Very unflattering first shot of the couple. I understand the restrictions you had to work around, but there's always a way to fix it. How about cropping out part of the shot to show a more flattering area. You start with cropped frames, so that would have worked. Or, start with your second shot if them instead, then the first. Subconciously, we would get that these are not tiny people and would be ready for the other shot. Or just leave out the first shot of them altogether. Leaves it more mysterious. It's not a necessary shot at all.

Or mix it up a bit. Use just a couple of the later shots where they look great, that don't give the story away, but foreshadow where we're going. Then move on to the coming out of the store stuff.

The shot of her painting the glass in front of the lens was great, but I felt it led nowhere. I really wanted to see something cool after it, but was disappointed. I wanted to see the reverse of the shot, I guess.

The shot with you running through the weeds up to them. You weren't using your merlin there, were you? It looked just hand held and didn't really fit the smooth shots preceding.

Anyway, this is nitpicky stuff. I really thought it was great and they are going to love it. I liked the look you gave with the colour grading.

All right, now I watched it three times...

I had the opposite experience than you did this weeked. I got the entire bridal party to take off their shoes and walk in a fountain IN THE RAIN and they went for it. I couldn't believe it. Sometimes you get zilla, sometimes you get gold.

Great Work!
 

I agree with Bill S on the staged shots. I liked the pacing of the cuts and it looks like it cost a fortune to produce.

Whatever you're making your under paid :)

Niether of them were going to win any beauty contests and you made them look cool, so my hats off.

I can't hold a candle to your work so I feel really wierd even commenting but..... as much as I like the close up shots of a brides face I could sort of see that she may not have brushed her teeth for an undetermined period before the shoot.

Once again I loved the entire thing but in the interest of any and all feedback this was mine.

Thanks again for sharing :)

Travis,
I have two very sensitive questions here. Number one, how long did this take? Setup, shooting, editing, etc. and What did you charge? I know for me, an add-on to a video is always great, jsut curious about those things. Great job btw. The only thing I kept thinking is wondering if they were going to get around to the whole "save the date" part of it. And they did. Great concept well executed.
Bill

How is a "save the date" video used?
 

Question about the concept: How is a "save the date" video used? We don't know the concept at all here in the Netherlands. Do B&G send DVD's to their guests? Or is it placed on a website and do they mail the link to their guests?
More and more I get the idea that wedding videos and all that comes with it, is a much bigger business in your country then it is in mine. If I only see the fees you guys can charge ...

The market is still very regional. In Idaho, (hit up google to find us), wedding videos are still an "new thing" but in other larger metropolitan areas like California, they have been popular for several decades.

I was wondering about that DOF too. I actually created that in post, since I don't own a DOF adapter. I have the titles coming in and so I kept the DOF. Maybe I should consider dropping the last title and bring the focus in.

The bride purchased some sort of foam insulation. Not at all what I had asked her to buy, thus the annoying lettering on the back. I had asked her to purchase either foamcore posterboard or a cheap canvas. She also called me to ask it foam brushes would work instead of actual paint brushes - they are cheaper. Thankfully she took my advice and just spent a few dollars more for the real thing.

I'm getting better with the Merlin, but that "rocking" shot was bad. The first try was nearly perfect, but she was supposed to turn and put paint on his cheek when I gave her the word when I got close. I got close, gave her the word, and she wasn't paying attention (they were talking) and didn't do it. So I had to do it again and I wasn't nearly as stable the second time around, but she hit her cue. I would have done it a third time but I was kind of feeling rushed with the light leaving and the groom's attititude.

I'm glad you found yourself wondering what they were painting. The whole concept revolved around that, with a big reveal at the end. It sure is hard to shoot shots of them painting without showing what they are painting!

DOF is pretty easy to do on the GL2. Put on the ND filter, crank open the iris, crank up the shutter speed till exposure is even, and then engage manual focus and rack it from foreground to background. The only tricky part is the annoying servo focus control. My LANC doesn't control Focus (I don't even know if that is possible, but it should be with a servo focus control).

I've shot a few of these and they did work out pretty well. Mostly I'm shooting flowers in foreground with couple in the background.

Isn't that annoying how you walk the same shot path and one time you nail it and another time (usually the one that counts) it gets fubar'ed? I practiced my "grand exit reverse walking" path a few times on this Friday's wedding before the couple actually came out. I don't even have HD space to record the footage (HD is in the mail) so I don't know if my practice runs helped. I sure hope so.

Well, I did do DOF on that shot in-camera, but I wanted a stronger DOF so I did the rest in post. As for LANC control, my LANC's can control the GL2's focus, but they are difficult to impossible to get a "rack focus" look with.

Thanks for the comments!

I'm going to take a hard look and see what I can do to fix this shot. I already know the couple is very conscious of their appearance, so if this shot isn't sitting well with me and the rest of you, then it probably won't sit well with them.


Really? I thought it just led right into the shots of them painting. I had a shot of them both painting the "lens" together, but it was the final take of the night and they painted too hard and moved the "lens". Maybe that would have worked better, since the next shots show BOTH of them painting. By the way, I say "lens" in quotes because that shot was actually done with me holding a CD case against the lens hood on my camera. d;-)


Unfortunately, yes. That was the 2nd take, and I don't know what the heck I was doing. The first take was beautiful, but the couple wasn't paying attention and didn't hit their mark so I couldn't use it. For some reason I just screwed up the 2nd take and didn't realize is during the shoot.


Nice. I hope you post that because it sounds cool!

This was for free. So yeah, I'm getting underpaid on this one. d;-)


Very good catch. I already tried to minimize this in post with color correction, and wasn't sure if I'd done enough or not. I think at this point I may go with a shot that just removes all of the color but the red paint on her cheek. Should solve the teeth issue once and for all. Again, good catch and excellent comment ... because I was still wondering if the correction I had done was working well enough.

I'm estimating I spent around 20-25 hours total on this project. That includes all of the time spent generating the idea and refining it, then retooling it for this couple (the concept was originally planned for another couple but they had to postpone their date). And also the time to find a fitting song and edit it down (and then edit it down even further after this shoot didn't produce all of the footage I had planned). Plus the time on the phone going over details with the bride, the time spent researching locations, the time spent planning out the shoot, the time spent shooting and editing, etc. Shoot time was about 3 1/2 hours, and edit time was around 4 hours or so.

This particular video was done for free, as I am trying to get a sample together for selling this next year. Again, this was not the original couple I had planned for this idea, so this was basically plan "B". Target price point for this type of shoot for next year will be $400-600. Still trying to determine that based on idea possibilities and potential complications and so forth.

Well, I'm still working that out. At the moment I plan to offer the "Save the Date" shoot/edit for a set price, and this will include placing the video online for the couple. They could then add a link to the video in their wedding invitations. It's a way for the couple to remind their guests to save the date, but it's also more about the couple "impressing" their guests and getting them excited about the wedding.

My end goal is to get couples to send out DVD invitations. The DVD will include the "Save the Date" video as well as all of the standard invitation information. A couple could also do a "hybrid" DVD where they send out a regular physical invitation that has the DVD included as part of it. Lots of possibilities.


Only in certain parts of the US. Like Jason mentioned, in California it is big business (but that's kind of a duh because of the film industry there). In Idaho, where Jason and I live, video is generally an afterthought and is very difficult to sell. I am trying to force the market in my area, and this next year will really show how open our market can be, as I have a lot of new options coming. Although brides aren't looking for this kind of stuff here, I figure they never will if no one steps up and starts offering it. That also means I won't be making what I'm worth for a while still, but hopefully it will all pay off down the road.

Hey Travis,

Yes, I can see your reasoning. But, when you are presented with a closeup like that, you expect to see the reverse closeup, or maybe a reverse medium closeup. Or at least the reverse. Not a wide shot from the side. And the shot of her painting the glass is very "intimate", and needs to be matched with another intimate shot. And to be picky, she looks like she's painting something low to the ground, but you cut to a shot where they are painting relatively high.

But, Travis, this is so nitpicky. You did such an amazing job with no time, that it would be a miracle if you managed to pull it off with no issues. It's easy for me to watch the video and tell you what could be better, but I wasn't there dealing with all the problems, was I?

I'll post it if I can, but I'm not sure if I'll be the editor for that job. I hope so, cause it was a great day....

Travis, I can only express my appreciation of your work. It's top notch.

All the best...

FFFRREEEEEEE like no charge?
 

OMG DUDE! I was thinking at least a grand! At least. As an add on to a 3-5k wedding package min.

Your work is really good and I wish you all the best in the future! I hope you can charge enough to live and keep up with equopment depreciation and the rapid evolution of software, hardware, editing techniques, waistlines, and fad diets :)

I had a similar concept but it involved stock footage and titles :) You have officially put that concept into a death spiral of shame :)

Another great catch. As soon as I captured the footage and saw that shot I was like "Well that came out well, except I had the tripod too low." It's another one of those things I'm sure I would have caught onsite if the shoot hadn't felt rushed, but oh well. I did adjust that clip shortly after posting it to make sure her eyes were completely in the shot the whole time. In this edit you only see her eyes for a second and then they are partially out of frame and it doesn't look right. It's fixed now, though.

By the way, I post stuff here to hear the nit-picky stuff too. So don't ever hold back. I want to get better.


Thanks, Vito. It helps to hear that because I'm trying pretty hard!

"Death spiral of shame ...", that's the funniest thing I heard all day!

Anyways, yeah, I'd like to charge a grand for this product, but I'll be really lucky to get brides to pay half that. Most of the couples I meet with are looking to spend around $1-2k tops on their wedding videography (many are even looking for $500-600, crazy), and I'm already having to convince them to jump to $3k just for their package with no options. It helps that my wife is a photog and so I get to meet with more couples that way, but she charges top dollar for her photography and if a couple gets really sold on her stuff they often cut me out of the picture entirely. It's a weird situation to be in, lol.

Thanks again for viewing and commenting!

Very odd, I would have almost expected the opposite, that it would bring in more. But I suppose if she is a top producer, then clients go with her because their focus is on Photography not videography.

I've adjusted the opening (not visible via this link). The "bars" of video in the beginning now slide in twice as fast and it looks much better I think. I also cut out the title for the musical artist and instead used that part to reverse the DOF I created in post.

I tried to find a way to "fix" that first closeup clip of the couple walking, but nothing I tried seemed to help. Unfortunately I don't really have a different clip to use there. I guess it stays as is. Thanks for all the comments and suggestions on that part, though.

Very nice travis, the latter part of the clip was very stylish. I especially liked the shot of the white paint dripping down the canvas.. the location was stylish as well. However, that being said, that stylishness did not exist in the beginning of the clip with them loading their car in the parking lot... I don't know what I would have done differently since you have to convey them getting the material...

To be clear, I've booked better with her doing her thing because I get more exposure. But I do find myself not getting booked because a couple is dumping all of their money into photography sometimes. It's like a two-edge sword.

I know exactly what you are saying, and I think I know what the difference is. The latter part of the video has a heavy focus on the couple and their interaction whereas the earlier parts do not. The reason for that was that the couple had a different attitude early on, and the interaction was not very good. It wasn't until they started painting together that they started having fun together.

So for the initial part of the shoot I felt I had to pull the focus away from the couple somewhat to make sure I didn't convey the groom's obvious lack of interest, plus they just weren't interacting much and I didn't want to force it. I also had much better plans for the driving portion, to really emphasize the couple and them interacting, but due to them arriving an hour late to the shoot I had to shoot the driving stuff AFTER the painting. And because they had paint all over their clothes and hands and faces, etc. ... I couldn't shoot most of the shots of them that I had planned. I actually had to re-edit the song to shorten it some because I just didn't have enough usable shots from the driving (too many shots with paint showing). I couldn't show paint on them BEFORE they arrived to do the painting.

So I think that's what you're catching. I felt it as I was editing, but there just wasn't much I could do about it. Sharp observation on your part, though. Thanks.

Very nice Travis. I'm glad you didn't fall out of the car while filming the tire.

Well at least it all goes into the same home, so net win. :-) If you had an outside partner you worked with, that would be different, and not as good of an arrangement.