How well do you think wedding films will age?
 

When couples select music for their wedding videos, I have wondered how well they will like it 10, 25 or even 50 years from now. Some of the choices made for highlights music are very trendy and in some cases even hard to listen to frankly. This is more often the case with very young couples. Do you counsel couples that they need to think in terms of 'timeless' with respect to their choices of music or do you just let it be their problem?

I try to set things up so I make the music choices. I try to get a general idea of what they like, who their favorite musicians are as well as some of their favorite songs. I recently had a client who particularly likes Jack Johnson's music. Most of his music is too dark and heavy to use but a couple of his songs are very nice. One is 'Better Together' and the other is 'From the Clouds'. I'm sure they will enjoy it on their silver anniversary as much as they do today.

But if they pick a rotten song, do you try to steer them away from it or do you just look the other way? "Oh sure, you can lay the "I have creative control" bit on them but that's easier to sound off on a forum about that it is in 'real life.'

Do you not like the music you listened to in high school or college?

Their hairsyle and clothes will be dated too but I don't think you'd convence clients not to wear the latest bridal fashion or hairdo.

We don't let the couples the chance to select their music, for various reasons, and there are some debates in this forum as to if this is right or wrong. But anyway, regardless if the music is selected by us or the couple, most chances are that the wedding videos will sound (and of course look) anachronistic in 20 years, at least most of them will.

What do we feel when we look at old films from 70s and 80s, films that were totally normal and trendy in looks and sounds when we were watching them back then? The clothes are funny, the cinematography and editing are old-school, the music is too... well... old? Don't get me wrong, you can't do anything but be amazed when you watch some masterpieces from Kubrick, Copolla, Leone and others of course... There are films so powerful and timeless that bypass the above general rule. But the average flick (the majority), it wouldn't look and sound that good because most of them follow the seasonal trends in shooting, editing and music department (remember that amazing fast zooms in Bruce Lee's movies? Priceless! :) ). Imagine the comparisons with films and weddings (since I am cynical enough to believe that there are no Kubricks in our job and they will never be), and you have the result. Our wedding films will mostly look and sound... so 2010! Most of the weddings today are using music that will be out of fashion in 8-10 years time, let alone 25. At that point, our today's selection will be equal to watching a 1985 wedding with some Cindy Lauper soundtrack. It will be cute... but timeless? I don't think so.

Of course if there is something timeless in all this, is the emotions and the memories recorded and edited. No matter how bad or good the overall work, after 25 years this footage will move the hearts. If the work is good, the impact will be greater, agreed. But timeless like say, "2001, Space Odyssey" or "Ghandi" or "The Godfather" or other even less than classic works? Don't see it that way.

Sorry again if I am a cynic about it.

It's all part of the charm. When I watch my daughter's wedding video in 25 years, I expect it to look and sound 25 years old. I don't see a problem with that.

Besides, I'm not going to be watching to see my editing skills, I'm going to be marveling over the young-looking faces of family members, the style of clothing and the fond memories of friends and family long since deceased.

I'll toss out an opinion, what the heck. :-)

I am 56 for a few more days and what we thought would be "timeless" back when I was in high school is so forgotten now. As Chris mentions though, hearing a few of those does bring back some real fond memories. What is interesting coming from that era, is what has proven to now be still popular and "timeless.

So IMO, picking something popular today that will become "timeless" is a 1 in 10 crap shoot.

Do brides and grooms need some "guidance"??? Sure they do. Some stuff just plain doesn't work with editing styles etc. But approaching it like you did Jim I think is the correct way to handle it. You gave them pretty much what they want, and got them something that "works" for the mood, style etc.

I think a good parallel is good ole' cinema. Movies that are 25 years old have a certain look to them. There's no denying that there is going to be a bit of tongue-in-cheek humor to anything that is made in a different decade (or more). Clothes change, hair changes, and editing styles change. However, that being said, films especially have stayed more timeless simply by staying simple - cuts and fades as transitions, and good solid production values.

That is what I strive to do with my work - use the simple but effective techniques to tell the story. I think doing that will always be timeless. As for the music, the hair, all the things that date the film - it's all part of the charm, IMO.

Hey Jim, here is our approach. First and foremost we treat a highlights video quite different from say .. a short form video. For us, we want the short form to have a classic and timeless style to it. For the highlights video, we want it to get that dated feel to it. This way couples have two completely different ways to relive their wedding day.

So that also means that WE choose all the music. We will sometimes take suggestions from the couple for the highlights video, but they choose nothing for the short form. Our short forms are entirely composed with instrumental music, and the couple would never be able to select this music appropriately. As it is, we sometimes take a full day or more just to find the music we want to use for a short form.

Hope that helps!

Style
 

Style will always be rooted in the times that spawned it. I think that it makes the most sense to try and capture the style and zeitgeist as perfectly as possible to make a sort of time capsule for the couple so that in 50 years, they can look back on these days and marvel at how antiquated their style choices then seem. If you are dealing with a stylish/trendy couple this is certainly the best way to approach it. Top 40 pop songs will get this over well.

If you are dealing with a couple with classic sensibilities. You know the type: plain ivory dress, top and tails, black + white + red colours etc. then an all classical score would work. Or even a string quartet doing some more modern music in a classical feel.

I just think that it pays to put a little imagination and tailoring into the process. Find out more about their personalities and deliver a product that fits them instead of forcing your tastes onto people.

Thoughts?

Congratulations on spawning such a thoughtful thread Jim. I smiled when I read Geoffrey's question (which I'm sure he meant to be rhetorical) because I loathe most of the music that was being played when I was of college age - Bill Haley was in his ascendancy and we'd not heard a note of the cacophony of the Beatles, let alone worked our way through it to the more complex music which followed - Beach Boys et al. My personal preference.

But more seriously, I find myself agreeing with Bill and Sean especially. We do ask the clients to give us their choice of music and from that we choose a suitable piece for the highlights (our "Dream" wedding). I regard it making their choice work as part of the challenge that stimulates me through the more routine phases of the edit

But, regardless of the style we may or may not seek to achieve in our work, I''ll bet a gold sovereign that if I am allowed to see some of my work 30 or 40 years from now I shall still wish I could have made the pan a little smoother, the zoom a little tighter and the baby crying through the vows in church a little quieter - but that's event programme production.

I seriously wonder if weddings do really "age"

I always notice that when the DJ at receptions play all the "golden oldies" both the young and old are on the dance floor..let the DJ switch to club music and it almost empties!!

My bride from Friday gave me her list of songs (she's in her early 20's) and top of the list was " Unchained Melody" probably recorded long before she was even a twinkle in the Dad's eye!! In another 20 years it will still be appropriate too!!

I do however let the bride choose the songs!! It's her wedding and it's her choice.

Chris

Rather than worry how my films will age stylistically I'm more concerned with how they'll stand up physically.

Within the last few weeks I've had a 2 different clients from 2004 contact me to say that their DVDs have stopped working. These are previously playable discs that now will not play correctly. One is not recognised at all, one plays on some machines, but it is impossible to copy or strip the VOBs from the disc.Neither of them appears to be damaged or scratched. Fortunately I have the edited masters on DVCam tape so it will be possible to remake a DVD for them.

In 2004, GBs were too expensive to store everything on harddrives so every edited video was stored on DVCam tape, as even then I was concerned about the longevity of optical discs. Now I store every thing digitally, the raw clips + project on one drive, the edited HD films on another, the DVD-MPEG on another and an ISO of the DVD on yet another.

Having shot on Std and Super 8mm, Umatic, VHS, SuperVHS, V8, Hi8, DV, Mini DV, DVCam, HDV and now to cards and lived through times when film that had to be transferred to VHS for people to watch it then VHS that was transferred to DVD etc. I can't even conceive what the playback system will be in 25 years never mind how fondly or not the couples will look back on the hits of the day.

Just on the note of music, I always give my clients the option of choosing the music, with advise if I think a track will not work or will distract from the intention of the video. My work is bespoke for each couple, after all they are paying me. If I were editing for a general paying audience, or for submission to a film festival or putting forward for an award, then of course I'd be a bit more precious about every aspect of my productions. Although it would be easier to have a tracks that I know work and a sort of template of shots to use with it, I find that there is great satisfaction in succeeding in the challenge of making tracks work that I'd never even heard before. It keeps me fresh and from slipping into too much of a routine - a killer for this sort of work, because if the enthusiasm goes it could become just another job.

"Unchained Melody" is a 1955 popular song with music by Alex North and lyrics by Hy Zaret. Rerecorded in 1965, it became one of the most recorded songs of the 20th century, by some counts having spawned over 500 versions in hundreds of different languages.[1]

In 1955, North used the music as a theme for the prison film Unchained, hence the name. Todd Duncan sang the vocals for the film soundtrack.[2] Les Baxter (Capitol Records catalog number 3055), released an instrumental version which reached #2. Then song recordings were released by Al Hibbler (Decca Records #29441) reaching #3 on the Billboard charts, Jimmy Young which hit #1 in the United Kingdom, and Roy Hamilton (Epic Records no. 9102) reaching #1 on the R&B Best Sellers list and #6 on the pop chart.[3] Hundreds of other recordings followed.

It was the July 1965 version by The Righteous Brothers that became a jukebox standard for the late 20th century, regaining massive popularity when used in the 1990 blockbuster film Ghost.

Unchained Melody - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I wouldn't worry too much about whether a wedding video will become dated. When your couple pops their blu-ray into their backwards-compatible player, they are EXPECTING it to be dated. Along with all the other choices and decisions that went into their day. And to be honest, the first few times they watch their video will define what they'll always think about it.

As to who gets to pick the music, just make sure you have veto power at the very least. Unless your client works in video production and will be looking over your shoulder while you edit, they don't really know what's going to work. So protect them from themselves. I don't like this attitude that "the customer is always right." I don't go to a restaurant and tell them which spices to use on my steak. This is a creative field and YOU are the creative person in this scenario ;)

I always let them choose, it's their wedding and if the dvd has music they like they will like it even better. I don't even care if they don't like their music choice anymore many years later, they did the day they got married and that's all that counts. With video you try to capture a moment in time and all the feelings that belong to that timeperiod and that includes music as that brings back memories as well. I mean, you don't tell your client to choose a timeless hairstyle or weddingdress as 20 years from now both can look very outdated as well, they even might say, "what were we thinking?" :) but that's just the fun part about memories and seeing how much has changed during all these years.

We choose music for our clients... They like that and they know this before they hire us. It's like hiring a world class interior decorator just to tell them you want shag carpet. That's not why you would hire an expert. I'm not saying I'm world class at anything, but our clients trust us and love that we take hours, days, even a week just to find that right song that fits who they are. They are always thrilled... And if they weren't I would gladly change it. Music aside, we try to stay away from trend, but it's everywhere and there is no way around it.

We go with a mix of music, sometimes chosen by the client, sometimes by us. Some clients just don't bother to give us music preferences so for them we have no choice.

Having said that, of course wedding videos will look dated. When I look back at videos we shot 20 years ago things look dated (hair, fashion, music) and today's videos will be no different. It's reasonable to assume that the clients will look at it with fond nostalgia rather than with a critical eye though.

You could say Inglorious Basterds is dated because it is set in 1944, or Star Wars is not dated because it is set in the future. But we don't use the word in that way.

A "dated" movie is one where the stylistic choices made don't work for modern audiences, with the implication that they did work for audiences in the year they were made. Likewise hairstyles/outfits etc. - any element of mainstream popular culture that at one time enjoyed widespread popularity.

I don't think you can really apply the term to wedding video because there is no style of wedding video that enjoys widespread popular acclaim. Other than the Royal Wedding how many people have ever watched a wedding video?

Well...
In the hands of a good cameraman, and editor, even a cheesy 80's style wedding, will be around as long as there are VCR's available.

Unfortunately, the cinematic style and short form edit, will last a lot less..

Yes, it's dynamic, it impresses me, and it WOWS potential clients....
But in twenty years from now, are the shots of timelapsed clouds, flash cuts and inanimate objects of any real importance??

Don't get me wrong, i definately enjoy watching, and would love to shoot this style of wedding, but as the poster asks. How well do you think wedding films will age?
As well as the faces on those videos are implanted in your memory.

I had an acquaintance pay handsomely for his wedding video.
It was gorgeous, it was a SDE, and it was shortform..

Unfortunately, there wasn't a single important, or memorable shot of his parents.

Hi Peter

Thanks why I shoot my weddings in documentary style ..in 20 years time, yes, the grndparents may not be around any more and watching the wedding DVD will bring back fond memories. I had a "dad" (the bride was in her 50's at her 2nd wedding) who cried openly ..certainly something a creative shooter would want to omit but for the bride it's absolute magic.

Sometimes I think wedding film creators go a bit over the top to the stage where they are showing the bride their own creative skills rather than capturing the raw emotion of the day and the people. I'm often saddened when I see the live audio replaced with music of the bride's choice... I actually often have bride's who book me because I leave all the audio in place and here and there I might add very subtle music tracks but essentially the original audio stands!! It's quite staggering how many don't want what they call "pictures set to music" ... If you look at the next post here I also make a point (actually my "trademark") of doing guest interviews before the reception...that's something that will never age!!

Chris

Peter M and Chris H,
There is no wrong or right. Do what you want to do for what ever reason you want to do it. I shoot "cinematic style".... And to be honest, I didn't start doing it for my brides, I did it for me. Simply for "burn out prevention". I shot long form for years and got bored. It was a personal decision that just happen to work out for me. Luckily there is a market to fill, just like there are brides who want a very traditional video there are those who do not. Many of my brides tell me they did not want a "wedding video" until they saw my product. They were going to forgo the "old school" video completely. At the same time I have had brides request things like longform edits or guest interviews and I simply let them know that I do not provide that, but would gladly set them up with a videographer who would. I provide a product that I feel is the best I can produce and still by happy in my career. It's working well, I don't believe years from now any of my clients will watch their wedding films and be any less happy as time goes by... It's what they wanted then knowing full well what options where out there at the time. I also don't believe that just by being creative means you would ever want to omit priceless moments... Especially emotional moments. With that said, I make sure all my clients know full well that there is no guarantee I (nor anyone else they could hire) can capture every single important moment or person throughout the day... I let them know that I will do my best. They also know that my goal is to create a compelling film comprised of moments, details, and emotion it's self from their wedding day that they will want to watch over and over again, not a play by play documentation of their wedding day. There are lots of amazing videographers who take the documentary approach and do it exceptionally well, I'm just not one of them and my brides know that before hiring me. Anyway, my (very long) point being, editing style, use of audio, choice of framerate, whatever... They are all personal choices we make as professionals. There is no right or wrong, we all have different clients with different tastes and style. Videographers are no different than any other artist... Some painters prefer oil, some water color, some are contemporary while others are more abstract... There will alway be someone who appreciates one style of painting over another and that's what is so great about art. As long as there is an audience, it's art, so keep making it!
*gets off soapbox*

Music is universal, but song choices are not. My background and upbringing make me more inclined to listen to particular radio stations, while a bride and groom may listen to other stations. I'm 100% for couples choosing their songs. If they absolutely love a songs, chances are it will work just fine with the footage.

Will there be "wedding films" or will it be a more user controlled multimedia experience? I do expect some wedding films shot today will be deconstructed and reassembled into something new.

Wedding films came out of video technology and music videos. As technology and tastes change the product delivered to the bride will change. Take a look at the new ideas of books on devices such as the ipad. We're at the beginning of something new.

Some 100 year old wedding photos look fantastic. I think high production value helps produce timelessness. Will a very high resolution 3D video age better than a typical HDV shot? Maybe. I find old high res black and white immersive. Most video to date not so much.

I can only predict that in 20 years the wedding video will be very different, if it exists in its current form at all.

Hi Jim,

If a song is "rotten" or I think would not fit the short form, I'd always ask them first why they choose the song.
If they just like how they sound for no reason, we tell them we can "consider" as long as it fits to the shortform.
It might mean a lot to them even if the music doesn't appeal to us. for example, that music was used as a proposal song or their parents wedding music ...
That one, we can't have control. I'd suggest you include that on their DVD. You actually are sure they will like a certain part of the DVD you produced just because you included their song. Again if it is "rotten" for you, you don't have to play the whole entirety of the song, just some parts of it would be ok.

I understand that music tastes vary and that what appeals to some may not be liked by others. For example, country and western music isn't appreciated by some but that doesn't mean country and western style music isn't appropriate for use in a highlights piece for example. But how would you like to be asked to produce a highlights piece to something like this? It's a bit extreme but somebody buys it.

Amazon.com: Heavy Metal Thunder: Saxon: MP3 Downloads

Easy to replace music in the future. Not so easy to explain why there's a shot of the wedding dress in some bushes, or why the DOF is so thin that only the brides left nostril is in focus.

I love the appropriate use of shallow depth of field (see Hollywood films) but the extreme stuff that some use is just weird and ugly. It's a bit like a mother loving an ugly baby. But some are using it as the latest "Wowie-Zowie". It's a bit like the overuse of slow motion that some used to inflict on everyone. or wiping heart transitions. Maybe after the newness wears off, we will start to see shallow depth of field used in a more professional manner. Did you ever notice on that nice 50mm prime there are other numbers that come after f1.4 like 3.5, 4, 5.6? There's lots of 'professional' choices of numbers to make. ;-)

although I shoot a 2.8 or lower throughout the day when the reception comes around and the hall goes dark I tend to open up as much as possible because its better to have shallow DOF with better exposure than low exposure and deep appropriate DOF.

Don,
Artistic decisions and professionalism should not be confused. The use of depth of field to direct the viewers eye or taking a dress and choosing a better location to shoot something that is important to the bride rather than try and shoot a white dress hanging on a dry cleaner's hanger up against a white wall in a dark hotel room is in the best interest of the bride. To me (personally) I think settling for the boring hotel room with bad lighting is lazy... therefor, less professional.

Unfortunately the word professional has become one of those 'buzz' words like gourmet... as in gourmet tv dinner. Everyone uses it... considers themselves to be it... and often times feels if others are not doing what they are doing then others are not it.

Sure, there are those who do things because they see others doing it... there are fads.. and they wont always last. Then you have those who are doing the same thing they have always been doing, playing it safe, often times getting in a rut or stuck in their ways refusing to change. Then there are those who are constantly trying new things, being different, not caring about what other 'professionals' think, doing what makes them and their clients happy.

I admit I've watched some wedding videos on-line and thought to myself "Gee, that video kinda sucked... or... Yeesh, I would have never chosen that song... or it's too fast... too slow... whatever"..... only to find a comment from the bride who absolutely LOVED her video. I'm a lot less quick to judge others work now... maybe we all should be the same.

Really trying not to be too preachy here... but I see a lot of this back and forth between the old school and new school's of thought on this forum. There is no wrong or right, who are you to say someone isn't professional unless they are doing it a certain way. Just be yourself and respect others who do the same. This is a great community, there are a lot of people who are making a huge effort to help others out there, and I believe it's those individuals who are really making a difference in our industry.

Andrew: Amen.

Christopher, I'm the biggest Doors/Jim Morrison fan there is, that doesn't mean I am going to use "Light My Fire" on a brides wedding video. However, I still choose the music for the videos because it is my work. Heck, she may even want me to use LMF but I know it wouldn't work so I wouldn't use it.

Andrew, You make a good point about not confusing artistic expression and professionalism. You have earned your position in the profession. You work is a pleasure to see. You do a great job of illustrating artistic expression. I'm not sure what Don was referring to but I got the impression he was referring to sloppy or bad shooting. Leaving a dress in the bushes that shows in the frame or overusing or misusing a tool is an affront to professionalism. As you know, maintaining control of focus on a DSLR camera is difficult. Your work shows that you have mastered it. Using shallow depth of field with a deft touch adds enormously to the production value of a piece. That's a far cry from some of the ham-fisted stuff where it isn't used effectively.

Artistic expression or creativity aren't cover all terms for slop. There is a difference - a huge difference. For example, effective use of shallow depth of field adds to the mood, feeling and attention focus of a production. But if it's just thrown at you as a 'wowie-zowie' trick, it's jarring or irritating and can actually interrupt the story. There is a term that I have grown to dislike. Although it's a legitimate description for a type of shooting that can be used to achieve a desired feeling in a production, the use of the term "organic shooting" has degenerated into a catch-all term for bad shooting. It's out of focus - just call it organic; it's a shaky shot - just call it organic; exposure or white balance is off - just call it organic. No thank you, I call it bad shooting.

My hat is off to people who lead the way with new artistic expressions that are produced in creatives ways but that has nothing to do with inept junk that pretends to be artistic and creative. People can see the difference too - in an instant. The hacks and pretenders can hurt us all because those who pay for our work aren't willing to swallow anything that is coughed up just because it has a red ribbon tied around it called "artistic expression."

You're right Jim, you make a great point as well. There is a lot of, what I call "sub-par" work out there... as with any profession artistic or not. I feel good work comes from those who are both an artist and a technician, one who has an eye and can be creative or think out of the box, but just as importantly can think on a technical level and understand fundamentals of light, sound, etc. There are many who are one or the other, but not both. All of my employees have been hired based on being both an artist and a technician... it's a must in this business!