1 Camera and 2 Cameras wedding videos
 

What % of you guys use 2 cameras (2 cameraman) for weddings?

For me, 99.9% of weddings uses only 1 camera (1 person) because people are not willing to pay too much for a wedding video. And people are very happy with the finished product with 1 camera.


*Note that most small weddings still don't have a videographer because of the cost but they always have a photographer.

2 cameras 100% of the time. While people dont want to pay I wouldnt be happy with the product and a lot of what I do is for the enjoyment. It also gives me the ability to do cutaways for when I want to zoom or if somone knocks the tripod.

I will stick with 1 camera and if people wants 2 cameras they have to pay extra for a 2nd cameraman.

I work solo but use a lock down for the 10 seconds of footage I need t ocover a big move from the front to the back or whatever but I always try to shoot as if there is no other camera running even if there is another manned camera. Ya never know, they cam might go down or the guy running it falls asleep.
I learned how to shoot wedding with 1 camera because no one could afford 2 back then and most of the teachings stuck with me.
Sometimes less is better.
Don

I use one camera all the time. It's a lot more work, and you have to be a lot more careful if you want to get interesting video and not just a static shot of the B&G the whole ceremony. I just do this part-time (10 or so a year) so it's not really worth it to buy a second camera for this.

T

Anthony,
I think that two is a minimum for me, just because I always want a safety shot no matter what. I need that security of a wide cutaway if I get blocked, etc. It is up to me to provide the most effencient video i can, and two cameras makes that possible. I do work alone though. Second camera is always unmanned.
Bill

3 cameras for ceremonies (2 videographers), 2 for main dances, and 1 for everything else at the reception. Up to now I have been doing this even for my low price package, but unless they pay extra it will be 2 camera, 1 videographer.

2 cams for ceremony, 1 for everything else.

I use 2nd and sometimes, like the last one, 3rd camera, but only when client is ready to pay for it, which is rare :)
I never use unmanned (maybe I should try) cameras, so to me it's always an expense that someone should pay. and to get an experienced wedding videographer with the camera for a day is at least $500;
Something extra for B&G? sure, starting this year I give to every couple one free BD of their wedding even if they don't ask, I know they will thank me later, but that's one night of rendering and less than $10 for a blank, things like 2nd/3rd camera, crane or SDE are package upgrades and should be paid accordingly;

One camera but I always have another one (TRV80) for standby and also for some shots while the main camera is on a tripod on it's own.

Stelios

Anthony - you sound like an adamant one-camera-man, but surely you have your back-up camera in the boot of your car? Why not plonk it on a tripod and let it run unattended as most of us lone workers do? As Danny says - it allows much greater editing freedoms (2 cameras can be made to look like three on the edit bench) and it means you can make the odd slip-up without the world coming to an end.

Shooting with one camera gives you no backup. If your tape crinkles your viewfinders will look perfectly normal. Zoom into the ring exchange and focus is out? Cut to the second cam while you refocus. Run to the back of the church to be ready to film the couple's exit and cam 2 continues filming the last hymn.

It's all about options and backup. Saying the couple need to pay more for a second cam isn't an excuse when your cam goes down in the vows. You wouldn't film a wedding with only one audio channel, would you? No. So don't trust this one-off, real-time situation to a single cam.

Ask yourself this - would you employ someone to film your daughter's wedding if he said he had no backup cam running in the service and the speeches?

Quite.

tom.

I always use 2 cameras. The main reason is that fr one, you have a CYA camera just in case. And second you have different cutaway perspectives to work with in post.

I either have a second camera person, or will mount 2 cameras on one tripod using a Bogen Tripod Accessory Arm Bogen / Manfrotto | 131DDB Tripod Accessory Arm | 131DDB | B&H, which I have mounted with 2 Bogen 702RC HDV heads.

This way I can man both cameras and control two different focal lengths on the same subject. I mainly only use this for important events at a reception like speeches and such. the remainder of the time I might set one camera to roll B-roll and go handheld for most of my A-roll footage.

In a few instances might use 3 cameras for a ceremony, 2 mounted on one tripod (one aimed at door for processional entrance and the other shooting medium frame down the aisle. Once the bride enters, one camera stays wide and one goes medium.), manned by second camera person, and myself up front and off to the side up front.

One man show, so have to be creative... although my wife can shoot too, but is concentrating on photography, so that's a limited option.

IMO, you should have AT LEAST 2 cameras, one as a backup for mechanical failure. That one can be unmanned (or check in on it once in a while, maybe change the zoom a bit) on a high tripod for your "safety"/cutaway shot. I wouldn't charge extra, it's there as much for your peace of mind as anything else.

I've ended up using a different approach to get angles where I would be if I had wings or was invisible... In addition to a cam on tripod/safety (start wide, zoom in during most of the ceremony, then zoom out near the end), one or two small cams are set to get the front angle shot(s) of the bride and groom. I set a bit wide and plan on taking advantage of the extra res of HD to tighten up in post for SD DVD delivery.

Ideally I'd like to have two manned cameras moving as needed, with the wide shot from the back, but shooting 4 cams works for me, giving enough angles to keep things interesting and guarantee I don't miss anything if I fumble a shot!

Reception is usually just one cam, with a backup handy if needed.

I personally always have at least 2 going because I always want another shot to go to or have running if I need to up and move for some reason. Besides, I believe it really adds somethingto the video..especially for ceremony and dances. A lot of times for the ceremony we'll use 3 cameras.

Matt

un-manned cameras i don't mind.

but a 2nd or 3rd cameraman on the day, how can the 2nd or 3rd cameraman make a living? I bet they have a full time job doing something else.

correct....I always have a second person with me...most of the time it's my wife and the other times I have assistants that I hire to come help. It's a part time/ freelance job for them and they do have their own normal full time jobs. I usually don't keep them as long as I'm there either....start later and leave earlier.

Anthony 99.9% of my jobs are one camera thats just the way its done here i noticed people in the U.S tend to always use a second shooter. It's your choice if you can charge the second cameraman out fine.

Rob

The biggest wedding i have done was about 700 guests and they only pay for 1 camera because the couple thought video was not very important but its good to capture something on the day.

one cam, sometimes (3%) 2nd for ceremony.

I can coordinate my work better this way - and offer not too many options sometimes is better too...

uli

It upsets me to say it but couples always put photography before video i dont know why

prosumer: pro is the image quality, sumer is the build quality.

you turn up at a wedding without a spare camera, gutsy play!

Simple, photography has been around for years before video and everyone has been bought up with the idea photography is the thing to have. Lets hope the new gen start realising that's not the way.

Keep in mind customers compare to commercial product, pick up a magazine and the photographer can do the same shot for peanuts, watch a commercial and its 10k+ so the couple puts the photographer ahead as they can achieve supposed higher quality work then video. Which is of course not true, but that's how it is right now in Australia.

Shot another wedding all day yesterday (in the rain), and realised I'd filmed one of the bridesmaids as a bride over two years ago.

I always like to ask how they view their photos and DVD after a couple of years have passed and know what? She said (and her hubby agreed with her) that although the pictures were nice to have, technically excellent and so on, it was the DVD they returned to time after time.

'And to think we very nearly couldn't afford to have a movie done', she said. In hindsight she knows full well which medium encapsulates the day, the light, shadows, laughter, movement and happiness, and it ain't bits of 10 x 8 paper.

tom.

I always explain very carefully what client can advantage in resulting film having 2 cameras.. So about 15-20% agrees. Sometimes I work with assistant only to have more creative lighting all the way.. And I have unmanned wide-angle camera that is used on imporant moments. This camera can become manned if I work with assistant. Sometimes its footage helps great.. So when I speak about 2 cameras there are actually 3 for most of key points..

4-cam minimum, usually 5-6, max I've done is nine. This is all by myself with no assistant unless they book more people. No cameras are ever static as I hate static, lifeless shots. I always move them when possible, depending on situation, obviously. Client pays for any cameras over 4.

Nine cams, one operator, all moving? Does not compute Marshall. Probably better to pay full attention to one and have the others running a backup and timeline options.

It's difficult, but not impossible. And I don't make a habit of doing more than 6 in most cases. I actually have an article in EDV about this. And yes, while it's always easier to use one or two, using more is not impossible as some seem to imply.

How do you move up to 9 cams - alone?

I think talking of a "moving camera" means a manned camera ??

Uli

It depends on the situation, but let's assume a church ceremony. If I did nine cameras, I'll have the manned (my primary cam) at the front for the processional, hand-off, etc. It'll then be moved to the back aisle. There will also be one on each side, left and right, to get the bride/groom during the transition of when I move in the back. I don't typically use balconies and instead have another at the back, about 13' up on a supported light stand with lowered remote. I'll then have two, one of each side corner, focused on parents, g/parents, or whomever else sitting down. If there's an alcove in the back/side of the sanctuary, I'll put one or two there as well to get a different angle. I'll also have another that I mount to the aisle itself to get the back of the dress, any kids in the wedding party, and so forth. Depending on the situation either the primary cam or another will be used for various cutaways.

I always go back and forth to the cameras, when possible and appropriate, to adjust the angles, focal distances, etc. I am not one of those people who run all over the place, either, and move only when I realistically can, such as a transition within the ceremony itself. For instance, if I place a camera on a mounting bracket to focus on the grandparents, but know that I can't get to it, I am not going to try and disrupt anything to adjust; sometimes this happens but it's fine. I'd rather chance a shot with approximating a camera placement than be in the way in some cases.

Most all of my ceremonies are 4-5 cameras, typically 5-6 and the clients pay for anything above an alotted number. I've done 7-8 quite a bit and the most was 9 because that's what the client wanted.

It can certainly be challenging but it's not impossible. I started with two cameras years ago and quickly found it to be boring. One moving camera, one on the balcony on a wideshot - I just hated the look. I then quickly moved to three and then four, and went from there. Also, not every camera is on a tripod, either - I couldn't even imagine hauling nine tripods! I use a lot of brackets, mounts, etc. that work just as well as a tripod and have a much smaller profile.

It typically takes me about 20-30 minutes to setup everything, too. I'm very organized when doing things like this in order to minimize stress and maximize time.

If someone wants to book more than just me, that's always an option; if it's not booked, I only have others help when I feel necessary.

Even with two cameras, two tripods, two radio mics and two audio recorders it's still takes a great deal of time dismantling this little lot and getting it to the car for the drive to the reception venue. Time that I should be spending with the b & g outside the church of course.

As I've had the church locked behind me before now, leaving the locked-off cam still recording I feel I have to take the time to dismantle my kit and lose the shots that are happening every second outside the church doors.

tom.

What in the world would possess somebody to need 9 camera angles at a wedding where the talent pretty much stays put?

How do you switch those cutaway shots without driving a viewer's eyes batty?

And what knucklehead would pay for such nonsense?

And what guest would want to walk in and sit in this environment?

But if you're getting $10k+ for such gigs... disregard all this. :)

One was an Indian wedding, a good 500 or so guests, in a massive church. The groom was very particular with the shots he wanted and while I don't push added cameras as I think it's overkill, if it makes the client happy, then they shall receive.

In terms of the 'obtrusiveness' or whatever, it's a heck of a lot less intrusive than photographers, or guests, who run all over the place. I parallel what the guests do and have never had any issues.

As far as cost, yeah, it gets up there, but they paid for it and I'm good to go.

Regarding editing, I switch shots when appropriate, anywhere from 10-15 seconds to a few minutes. This wedding I mentioned was about two hours or so.

I've done other crazy-number cameras but it really doesn't phase me at all...

I would never show up for any paid video shoot with less than two cameras, since you never know when one camera might conk out. And if I have two cameras with me I'm going to run both to the extent it's convenient to do so, even if I'm the only shooter and one camera is a fixed shot on a tripod. This way I have more footage from more angles to work with in editing, and can be more creative with the manned camera shots. Plus this gives me another reason to justify higher fees for my work, and avoids "nickel and diming" customers for something which should be considered standard these days. All modern wedding videos should make use of at least two cameras, and more if you can swing it.

Yep, at least 2 plus one backup.

I don't even offer a single camera package or base my prices on how many I'll use like I see a lot of other folks do. I charge them extra for an additional operator but will always shoot with 3 regardless of how much a client is paying.

Why should I penalize myself in post by having to scrounge around for decent camera angles for less money? Sure, it's more footage to process but a lot less stressful. If you have the cams, use 'em.

Couldn't have put it better myself Rick and Kevin. And all I'll add is that should you have to use your backup cam in earnest, make sure it's as good as the Nr 1 cam.

I never understood this "mismatched" camera strategy myself. I know it's cheaper putting a crappy consumer camera up in the balcony but you never know when you'll have to rely on that thing for more than you planned.

And I actually like using some static, wide footage from my #3 "backup" camera every now and then. It just makes sense to cutaway to this angle for a few seconds when the minister is addressing the congregation or something less than stellar is happening. You can even put a subtle pan/zoom on it to make it look manned.

But I certainly wouldn't do this that often if the footage didn't match the other 2 or I had to put all kinds of lipstick on it in post. (I've been here before).

Now that I have the emergency cam (GS320) I run two at all weddings. GS320 up the isle and GL2 facing bride. The only variables is if I have a 3rd camera. THen I can actually get some new or creative shots.

@Marshall: I like the idea of having cams faced to the grooms/brides parents...

Though I personally never would use that number of cameras.

On one hand here in germany budgets for a wedding video are quite small compared to other EU countries (Italy...) or USA. Other things are rated as more important, well ok, I am working on it ;-)

On the other hand, people dont want to see too much of camera work in the church (and there are usually not more than 80 people in the church, a pitty..), so I am happy with my one camera setup. German weddings always follow the same liturgy , so I know exactly when to do what. Sometimes a 2nd cam helps, I have always a backup with me.

(Once the CRT viewfinder died 10minutes before the ceremony!)

ULI

Our Clients always get 2 cameras 2 videographers, no extra cost. Being a husband & wife team does have some advantages, My wife is the main editor & I am the main shooter.
supplying her with a HV30 to Suppliment My A1 and training her to shoot has been a big bonus. Besides having a backup shooter ,being there working with the clients helps her to better understand the individual bride & groom & helps to produce a product more specificially suited to them.
Seems to work great for us, also the brides seem to be more comfortable with a female shooter during the pre ceremony get ready. So this arrangement seem to work out well
for us anyway.

What? So you have to work WITH your wife, plus miss the best perk of the job?? Man I've got it good....