wedding speeches: massive windows behind head table

[Don Bloom]

That's why I don't piggy back at receptions anymore. I run a Sennheiser E604 drum mic in front of the DJs or Bands speakers and run a hypercaroid on the camera. In the years I've been running that way I have to say my audio is pretty good. Meaning, good levels, no hiss hum squeeks or pops.
The most important thing is that no matter where the person speaking is or goes, I can still pick it up. One track or the either if not both and I don't worry about my mic getting tossed around.

[Philip Howells]

Tom's experience, having your microphone potentially trashed, must chill us all, but surely this argues for radio mics on each speaker and guns on the other channels to cover the asides and banter from the guests?

The only decision our speakers have to make is whether they'll keep their jackets on or if they'll throw them (and the mic) over the back of their chair.

Of course nothing's fixed and there'll always be exceptions - like an event we're recording in Mayfair, London next month where all the speeches will be made from a lectern on a raised dais - with such an obvious fixed point we're planning to risk a fixed mic (an AT133A plugged into a radio pack) with three (AT897) short guns for banter and backup. It's not the sort of event we do frequently so if anyone's got any suggestions they'd be welcome.

[Jeff Kellam]

Brian:

Since Im guessing you have already shot the video and it didn't work out too well, maybe you can add in some timeslipped cutaway shots if you have any that are appropriate (if you you weren't shooting the reception with 2 cameras).

Im starting to shoot receptions 2 camera just because of either backlighting issues or someones big head right in the way.

[Dana Salsbury]

Here's our little trick: My wife and I have black knee pads from Lowes. We lower our tripods to about three feet and get down on our knees right in front of them. We MAKE SURE the DJ/MC calls the speaker to stand flanking the couple (behind them) on either side. Our lights give us plenty of light because we're so close, and we don't block anyone because we're so low. Sometimes we may have to move a glass or flowers to the side, but that's it. One of us shoots the toaster and one shoots the couple (or all three if possible). We can avoid light reflection by shooting kitty-corner instead of straight ahead. We decide at the time which is better.

[Tom Hardwick]

Not a bad idea Dana, and as most zooms are a stop and a half faster at wide-angle that means less gain-up in the gloom.

The low POV might look a bit odd at times though?

[Doug Bennett]

I've gone close and low a time or two - and yes the POV can be a problem.

A bigger problem is the trend to use a wireless mic and have guests toasting from their tables after dinner.

[Dana Salsbury]

No, as usually the B&G are seated, so they are eye to eye with the camera. The toaster is looking down, but that's the same perspective that the B&G has. When they watch the video later they will remember that perspective and trigger more memories.

On rare occasion that we're just too close, we'll shoot the subject who is farther away from us.

[Doug Bennett]

Dana - if you are still at eye level with the couple how does your trick help when they are sitting in front of a bright window?

[Dana Salsbury]

It's evening. It's never bright unless our lights are hitting it. By changing our angle it's not a problem.

[Philip Howells]

Originally Posted by Tom Hardwick

The low POV might look a bit odd at times though?

Tom is right of course. No-one is flattered by a low angle portrait.

[Dana Salsbury]

It doesn't seem low to me. our lens is eye level to the sitting couple, which is the ideal shot considering they are ideally lit and maybe one guest has to look around our light. The speaker is looking down to the bride, so the other camera essentially has the same view as the bride.

Try it out and see what you think. That's the only way to really tell. I would rather have that shot than block a bunch of guests and annoying the photographers.

BTW, our lights are fairly high above our cameras per an adapter that we both use, so even being down low we can light them well.

[Philip Howells]

In that case Dana it seems to me that you've missed the point which started this thread. I'm trying to visualise your description but it it seems to me that if you're not shooting low angle, you have two cameras blocking the view of many guests and have lights on sticks even further impeding the guests' view.

Originally Posted by Brian MacKenzie

i am using an FX1. i don't use a light at the reception for speeches. what is the preferred method of trying to control the lighting when the couple, or speaker, is sitting/standing in front of a massive window letting in the brightest sun you've seen?

i guess a light on the camera would reduce that, but in the situation i was in the other weekend, my only position would have been reflecting the light right back into my camera...i had to strategiacally place myself so my reflection would not been in the shot (which would have only been noiceable once the sunlight started to dim near the end of the speeches.

[Tom Hardwick]

My mental picture is exactly the same as Philip's. I think we need a real picture to overwrite these mental ones.

[Danny O'Neill]

Hi Brian, we use the FX1 also and shoot in manual, bright backlights shouldnt be an issue. The backdrop will be blow out but as long as the subjects are lit correctly you should be ok.

In auto the camera will close down the iris, even with the backlight button pressed it still isnt right.

Go manual and use the iris to get you where you need to be, if needed, you can boost the gamma in post.

[Dana Salsbury]

Just keep doing it the way you're doing it. Try my way if you want. We block far fewer people by physically staying low with only the camera and light popping up.