Another new clip- Photo Session montage
 

Amazing as usual! What are you using to get those high angle shots? Some sort of crane? Love the wide angle shots too.

Wow
 

You are absolutely incredible. Very nice touch

Making good use of the monopod and fisheye I see!

Very nice Glen. Your slo mo is very smooth, is that vegas slo mo?

Cheers

Mike

Great work! Just curious, how do you get away with the music (Titanic in this clip)?

Exactly what I've been wondering. Have seen some wonderful clips from participants in the forum but it seems like there is a huge amount of popular commercial music being used in them and I'd expect it's unlikely that rights have been secured on most of it. Aren't you guys worried about the risk exposure in using it in your product or has too much been made of the dangers? Especially posting your samples on the web seems to be waving a red flag in front of the copyright lawyer bulls. Are you guys trusting to luck or is there a wrinkle I don't know about?

This issue has been discussed at great length elsewhere on the forums. The last thing I want to do is start an argument over the issue, I appologize if I offended anyone. My intention was to show some edits to possibly inspire and answer any questions regarding editing and shooting techniques.

Just to point out, if y'all would like to have a discussion on music and copyright laws, the business forum is the place to do it. We have lots there already, but always welcome more. If you keep the discussion around the technique rather than the legal aspect, I'm sure the original poster would appreciate it.

Oh, and I'd like to know about your slow motion technique too. Very smooth.

I'd also like to know if did use a boom or crane, did you have any issues with the clients objecting to it intruding on the occasion?

Mike & Dylan,
Thank you- yes the "boom" shots were created with a monopod. I've found with a little intuition and practice you can mimic jib/crane styles of shots. Monopods that have the mini-tripod legs on the bottom are especially good for this, as they allow you to use them to brace against your body (usually waist/hip area) while going through the movement. The additional point of contact with the body helps a great deal in the stability.

Another tool that helps exaggerate the spacial length is a super wide-angle lense. Despite only moving maybe 3-4 feet..it looks as though your up in the rafters. The lense I use is a .3x raynox (screw mount).

Lastly the slow motion is standard 60i slowed down in Vegas via the "ctrl+drag" method- thus the reason I don't have any magic numbers as far as speed. I simply go by how the footage "looks" when adjusting the playback speed via ctrl+drag method.

Have no arguments at all nor was I offended or being critical, just was wondering how people's real-world experiences stack up to the text book discussions on the topic as I'm rather paranoid about using such music myself, much as I might like to. Last thing I need in my life right now is some lawyer breathing down my neck LOL. Last 4 books on DV production I've read, including Jay Rose's 2 books on audio techniques, and DSE's series of articles here have been full of cautions about the dangers, giving the impression that it is open season especially on wedding and event videogrpahers and that many have been put out of business. Was just curious why so many still seem not to worry about it very much.

Glen,

I have been using the monopod legs in my armpits lately and that seems to come out really nice. Very stable.

Mike

Exactly.

I mean, quite honestly.. even if it's just a simple piece designed to either 1) show off skills, or 2) give people ideas for their own work, a halfway competent lawyer could contribute financial well-being to including copyrighted work not having a right to use.

Yeah, the topic has been discussed ad nausem elsewhere (and business is more appropriate) but I think this is a unique instance largely because the person posting the material is a moderator posting content in the subject area of the forum he moderates.

Anyway, if Glenn is up for answering it, I'd like to know how he uses the music that he does. I'm really not trying to be an ass. I'd love to use music the way I think would work best (rather than just using what I can use). But if the answer is what I suspect it is, I think it's a bit risky (esp. for a mod - regardless of the talent level) to appear to condone copyright issues.

IMO, $.02, etc

I used to use that method- compared to using it with leg extensions it's night and day. What model of monopod are you using. Some bogen models can add them without having to change models.

im not sure about other countries, but here in Aus the governing body pertianing to music replication/duplication/mechanical(sync) requries a yearly license.
AMCOS/ARIA police business' and make sure they follow the laws pertaining to copyright.

Its amazing how many business' dont license the use of copyrwritten material and i would have to say that 100% of producers here in aus use commercial music regardless of whether or not theyre licensed.

Clients request it, the producer supplies to that requirement else he'd lose the client.

Either way, without a license, the duplication is illegal. The use of the music in syncronous with the footage would be illegal, and the fact that a profit is being made makes it even worse, which in turn means that the producer can be sued for the sale of pirated music..

http://www.apra.com.au/general/corporateApra.asp
will give u info, if u search for similar bodies in your country, you may be able to take care of this copyright issue for your own business in your own country.

moving back to the topic of this post, the work itself is in the usual class of what Glen offers. I only wish i had as much time to work on my own projects this way :)

Id also like to know what monopod is used as im currently looking for one which alows for quick release. I was shooting a wedding once and a guest actually bought an 8 foot long monopod with a bracing bracket of his own, and we used it to good effect, but he got too drunk b the time we gave it back to him so i didnt get that info lol

C'mon guys. The creator of this thread, Glen, does NOT want to discuss musical rights in this thread. If you can't post related to the original subject, please refrain from doing so.

Glen, I thought your clip was wonderful. It made me open up Premiere and look at the dance recital that I just finished to see if I could add a little spice! Two questions - 1, is there an effect in Premiere similar to Vegas to give you that suttle white glow? And 2, do you know of free or cheap compression software that I should get so I can post examples on here? And if there isn't one worth getting that's cheap, which bullet should I bite and go for the best quality?

And I was remiss in not commenting that Glen's work is outstanding!

Glen, thanks very much for the post! Each one I review from you and others gives me valuable ideas and insights. Thanks for sharing.

Thanks Matt.

1) The effect in Vegas is called "glow". I'm not too familiar with Premiere but I do believe they have something similar- maybe called "diffusion glow" or "white diffusion".

2) You shouldn't have to purchase additional software for encoding- baring the fact your using Premiere 7+ (pro) you should have all templates to render out to any format from MPG2 to WMV. I personally prefer WMV for the web- it's a good balance of compression and quality. Usually my encoding bit-rate is between 512k to 900k.

If you are, indeed, running an earlier version of Premiere which doesn't have all the rendering codecs included- there are several free encoding programs on the web. TMPGEnc comes to mind- a really good free mpg encoder.

The monopod model I use is:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/cont...goryNavigation

Along with the 3232 Swivel Tilt Head.

I add a q/r plate to the 3232 head to enable me to switch from handheld, to monopod, to tripod, to glidecam.

I was having a conversation Sat night with someone (a friend) who saw the first wedding I did (lot's of mistakes) and she said it was great. I tried to explain that it was okay but there were mistakes and I have tried to correct them but it is a learning process. She basically said hogwash (my fiance agreed) and we left it at that (I generally don't like to argue with people who tell me I'm doing things right). When on Sun my fiance and myself watched your clip I looked up and said "see" and her exact words were "that was really good...really, really good". So the reason for my story is I will now be watching your stuff, listening and following your advice in a dark room from now on so I don't risk people comparing me to you :) Great work as always and thank you for sharing this stuff with us.

Thank you for the kind words.

Well I don't think videography can always BE comparable. Like traditional art- it's very subjective. Granted, you can shoot in a style that a majority will find appealing but there are always people who might favor a different style.

What I do is study the works of the videographers I admire and try to pick out what I like about it. After watching it and soaking it all in, I'll go back and try to specifically hone in on certain aspects I felt made it favorable in my mind. I take these and try to apply them to my work.

Don't ever fret about "comparing" yourself to others- just produce the best work you possibly can and worry about keeping your clients happy.

Best of luck.

Glen, I do have the extendo legs on my tripod, I am using the same ones you are (and von Lanken uses). I stick one of those legs under each armpit and hold the pole above my head.

I also use the Von Lanken method but for some reason I am more stable right now with the stinky legs method. Go figure.

Cheers

Mike

What filters and cam are you using Glenn?

Cam- VX2100

Filters- Vegas...Levels, Color Corrector, and Glow

No diffusion filters on the cam? The footage looked pretty soft.

Boring?
 

Beautiful work Glen. Great composition, great filtering, sweet "boom" moves.

So I might be opening a can of worms here but did anyone else find it a bit on the boring side? Don't get me wrong. It is technically and aesthetically very well done. But, to me, it's BEEN done over and over and over. Slomo and pretty music are not enough to grab my emotions. I need back story. I want to know what the bride and groom are thinking/feeling. I want to hear the funny comments that were made during the photo-shoot.

I think one of the biggest challenges of wedding videography is character development. I know what you're thinking - weddings aren't scripted. Yup. That's why it's such a challenge. How do we make these montages feel personal and not just generic? How do we get the viewer emotionally invested in the "characters" (bride and groom)?

rant over

(Nothing personal Glen just trying to stimulate discussion)

peace
jesse

Not taken personal whatsoever. I understand your viewpoint and in some ways agree with you. When a piece is left with only the music to drive it- it loses something. It's less personal and charming and more generic and "commercial"esce. Keep in mind however the use of this piece in a finished production. It's serving as merely a seguay to the formal entrances at the reception. I'm saving all the juicy voice over's and natural audio sound bytes for the highlight vignette.

While I agree with you about the "character development" I can see both sides of the issue. You have to keep in mind who the target audience is...the couple and their family. The clients themselves and their family already "know" the lead characters thus I feel "character development" isn't always key as it would be in a short or otherwise- which has a script and characters that "need" to be developed. On the other hand- storytelling does play a part in wedding videography. Albiet the script we work with doesn't vary quite much- so you can focus on the thoughts and feelings of the bride and groom. Thus the reason I work on getting vo's from the couple during the day. I usually ask them some very informal questions to spawn conversation and verbal descriptives about their partner. These can then be used reflectively over footage to further emotionally charge a piece that would be somewhat "generic" and "distant" otherwise.

No diffusion filters on the cam. The softness all stems from the use of diffused highlights.

Glen, could you expand on this. Are you saying this is a chapter on the DVD, or that it will be included in another sequence? Would you mind sharing what you typically include on the DVD?

After the recieving line I'll transition into this clip and out of this clip into the formal entrances/first dance. I have lots of standard, multi-cam, coverage but about 3 vignette style pieces breaking it up throughout. Opening (bridal prep), middle (photosession), and end (highlight vignette).

Agreed Glen - we are seeing this clip out of its larger context. I too use musical montages to set the scene or transition from one context to the next. We're all in the same boat!

I have to disagree with you on the target audience. Yes, immediate family will be the first to watch the finished DVD, but they won't be the only ones. It's been my experience that as soon as the bride and groom have seen their DVD they want to show EVERYONE - friends, family, and even strangers. The wedding day is meant to be shared- that's why people invite hundreds of guests to the ceremony.

Even if the only people to ever watch a wedding DVD are the immediate family, they still don't know what the bride and groom are thinking/feeling. They may know the background of the characters, but that doesn't mean they know at any given moment on the wedding day what the bride&groom are feeling. For this reason I think it's great that you do informal interviews throughout the day.

One last rant: (not directed at you glen) It seems to be a trend in current wedding videography to gravitate towards "romantic," or "emotional" We tend to over-use slowmo because we think it instantly adds a certain feel to the footage. Unfortunately, this over use leads to the footage feeling sappy, cheezy, and forced.(IMO) I'm not saying don't use slowmo or try to make something look romantic. I think the key is building the characters and story at the beginning. Get the viewer emotionally involved with the characters and the story, so that when you hit them with the slomo, it REALLY hits them and it sticks- without feeling forced. Wouldn't that shot of the groom crying mean so much more if you (the viewer) had learned at the beginning of the film that he NEVER crys at weddings?

Good discussion


peace
jesse

"One last rant: (not directed at you glen) It seems to be a trend in current wedding videography to gravitate towards "romantic," or "emotional" We tend to over-use slowmo because we think it instantly adds a certain feel to the footage. Unfortunately, this over use leads to the footage feeling sappy, cheezy, and forced.(IMO) I'm not saying don't use slowmo or try to make something look romantic. I think the key is building the characters and story at the beginning. Get the viewer emotionally involved with the characters and the story, so that when you hit them with the slomo, it REALLY hits them and it sticks- without feeling forced. Wouldn't that shot of the groom crying mean so much more if you (the viewer) had learned at the beginning of the film that he NEVER crys at weddings?"

Interesting thoughts there..
I have to agree with the comments made here from everyone, but i think its starting to detract from the actual post itself..

Hey Glen, being a mod, you would be able to move these posts to a new thread and we can all discuss the differences of opinion on wedding videos as oppsed to having it impose on your thread.

Id like to contribute, but this particualr thread isnt the place for it.

Yeah sorry. I sorta hi-jacked the thread. Didn't mean to do that. The rant started as a mini-critique of glen's original video he posted.
Back on topic: I wouldn't mind hearing more about these "boom" shots that Glen coaxes out of a monopod. Glen, do you have a fulcrum that you are balancing the monopod on or are you just bracing it with your body?

peace
jesse

Hi Jesse,

I'm not Glen, but I can show you one technique in getting the "boom" look. I use a monopod with 3 small retractable feet. I also have a tripod head on my monopod. That way I can angle the head downward. The last element is a wide angle lens. I use either a .7, or for a more dramatic effect a .3 fish eye.

Here's a sample from the training DVD, The Art of Moving Camera Techniques. I have put together a few shots of behind the scenes footage. Please ignore the audio track. I took scenes from different portions of the monopod chapter. Here's the link.
http://www.tulsaweddingvideos.com/vi...opodsample.wmv

Monopod focus
 

Mark,

Thanks for sharing that sample with the monopod.

One question -- how did you handle focus, manual or auto?

Hi Pete,

You're welcome. I use manual focus. When using moving camera techniques, manual focus is a must. As the camera moves the focus will change if you are in the auto mode.

Mark,

I figured manual focus. Since most weddings have low ambient light, and thus requiring large aperture and shallow DOF, how do you obtain the wide DOF to make sure everything stays in focus as you move the camera?

I get lazy sometimes- it really depends on the shot. If I'm doing a reveal with an object close in the foreground you DO have to lock manual focus. However shots like the table crane I skimped by on auto. *shhh don't tell anyone*

Hi Pete,

Good question. If you keep the zoom in the widest position, the focus isn't as critical, so you can get away with a shallow DoF as the camera moves.

By the way, your work on this was great!

A question about your Mono Pod. I am considering one, do you leave the legs on or take them off. Several people I've spoken with don't care for them, thus when I've tried theirs out, they don't have them any suggestions?

When using the monopod as...well...a monopod- I don't like using the legs extended. I have more mobility to pan the camera without them. I used them soley for stabilizing my overhead and faux crane shots.