Name Change
 

As of now, I'm listed as "Videography". It seems everyone is now using the term "cinematography" or "cinema" and they have been watered down. I've been thinking about changing the name of my services to "Motion Pictures". Any thoughts?

It sound better than 'videography', in my opinion.

Uncle Bob does video.

Joe's Videography does all things video.

Michael Simmons: Cinematographer is DIFFERENT and commands a level respect not given to Uncle Bob...

Although Uncle Bob may be one heckuva nice guy!

I've branded myself as cinematography from the beginning when branding my company due to a difference of shooting style and philosophy from videographers. I don't see it as a "marketing term" but more of a differentiator. If someone asks you what the difference is, could you tell them? I definitely get less overall hits being cinematography branded but I get more precise hits with brides looking for Wedding Cinematography in my area.

In regards to your thinking about changing to "Motion Pictures", if you want to be different, then sure it should be a good change. However, if you're looking to stay "relevant" and have familiar terms couples or brides understand, I'd say you'll lose a few in translation. Are you planning on saying "Wedding Motion Picutres" or something to that effect under your logo? If so, it may help bridge that gap.

Bride is sitting in the hairdresser - yakking on and on about her upcoming wedding...

Does the hairdresser say:

(a) Are you going to hire a cinematographer?
(b) Are you going to get a motion picture?
(c) Are you going to get a video?

Peter Jackson and George Lucus are cinematographers.
We make videos.
We are videographers....
... who wish we were cinematographers.

Hi John

Absolutely correct!! Over here even it we called them wedding films or whatever we wish to call them the brides will still call them wedding videos.

If you clean toilets for a living you can call yourself a "sanitary engineer" but the bottom line is that you still clean toilets!!! I make wedding videos so I'm a videographer.. why confuse the poor bride????

Chris

FWIW,

I have the phrase "Cinematic Wedding Videos" on the back of my wedding biz cards. But I have two distinct and separate brands. The wedding stuff is completely separate (2 different websites, etc.) from my corporate/narrative stuff.

Bold, blanket statement to make. So if George Lucas shot a wedding "video", he's a wedding cinematographer or a wedding videographer? One would need to be a cinematographer in the motion picture industry FIRST before being able to consider themselves a wedding cinematographer?

Please define your definition of videographer and cinematographer and what one would need to do in order for them to make the switch. I'm sure we'll have different interpretations.

I have brides who search for the term wedding cinematography and find me thru that term, not wedding video, so again, this is a blanket statement that isn't necessarily true in all parts of the world. In fact, I've found that more discerning brides understand the difference when I speak with them.

Trends and market perception change thru repetition, not thru being complacent. If you (you not being Chris but in general) want to continue calling your product a wedding video and others want to call theirs wedding films, let people be. I'm sure there will come a time when there is a stark difference between wedding films and wedding videos due to the hard work and persistence of those who believe they are trying to produce something more and pushed to tactfully correct people who called them by the wrong term.

I'm with Randy on this...

Personally, I'm trying hard to distance myself from the negative stigma of 'wedding videos', so I use the term 'cinematographer', not videographer. Technically, it may not be true, but I went to film school 20 years ago and studied cinematography, not video school to study videography.

Everyone can chose their own thing. Whatever suits your style and your market.

This is pretty much the reason I've stayed with "videographer" bc most people know us by that word.

Even though videography doesn't even come up as real world in spell check or dictionary, I hate this whole "Cinematographer" crap. We shoot weddings. We are wedding videographers. That's how everyone knows us as. Don't confuse the client even more, they are already confused by all the video terms. Google searches for cinematography is like 3% compared to videography. It's like calling a house painter an artist. Calling a cab driver a race car driver to "differentiate" each from other cab drivers. Why not? I can charge more and sound like I can get to the location faster than any other cab driver. But who really cares?

I just shot a feature on RED ... does that mean I'm a videographer ??? I shot a doc on a 5D a few months back - would I still be considered a videographer? A cinematographer tells a story through moving images ... regardless of the format. For those of you offering long form boring ass videos to your clients ... you can continue to call yourselves "videographers" all you want - because that would be an accurate description of your product/service.

I studied Cinematography at the American Film Institute - who shoots weddings - I'm a cinematographer.

End rant.

Underlying this whole thread is, I suspect, a universal dislike (to one degree or another) of the term videographer and I'm no different to everyone else.

And like everyone else we've toyed with the alternatives.

Just our 2c.

Cinematographer sounds to us rather grand, very expensive and at six syllables is almost as difficult for the population at large to say as vide-o-grapher.

We settled for the more explicit if no less wieldy "Wedding Video Production". It communicates easily and is "exactly what it says on the tin".

But it's a compromise.

Incidentally we registered the domain moving-pictures.co.uk - Moving pictures Resources and Information. at the end of last year in preparation for a merger with a wedding photographer who actually suggested the name (our pictures move, his move people who see them). In the event the merger took a different form - we now offer a combination service under our own name (using the same photographer) and intend to use the "Moving-Pictures Manchester" brand to sell a different type of video production service - more later).

What a polite heated argument.

Every once in a while I would have the opportunity to shoot something dramatic that would air on the news and I would be introduced as "Photojournalist John Kilderry." Whenever it came time for a raise I was John Kilderry the news photographer.

The truth is the dramatic piece was the easier shoot while the "news photographer" part of the job was the part that demanded creativity on the fly and making something out of nothing.

My point is, we can call ourselves whatever we want, but our body of work ultimately determines what other people call us.

Remember, there are people that call themselves cinematographers that shoot porn. ; )

From Wikipedia:

The cinematographer selects the film stock, lens, filters, etc., to realize the scene in accordance with the intentions of the director. Relations between the cinematographer and director vary; in some instances the director will allow the cinematographer complete independence; in others, the director allows little to none, even going so far as to specify aperture and shutter angle. Such a level of involvement is not common once the director and cinematographer have become comfortable with each other. The director will typically convey to the cinematographer what he/she wants from a scene visually, and allow the cinematographer latitude in achieving that effect.

So, to clarify, when I shoot weddings I am the director, although that consists mostly of bossing myself around.

The definition from Merriam-Webster Dictionary is as follows:

Definition of Cinematographer: a specialist in cinematography

Definition of Cinematography: the art or science of motion-picture photography

Nowhere in that definition does it say anything about the term being exclusive to Hollywood films or should I say Hollywood digital movies for those not shot on film. My point being...I think technology is starting to blur the lines a bit on who we are and what we do. There is no doubt that cinematographers are highly trained individuals who specialize in lens and filter selection, film stock, etc. but I really don't think it matters what kind of camera you shoot on or if your making a Hollywood digital movie or wedding film etc. Now I'm not suggesting that anyone who picks up a handycam for the first time is a cinematographer but I would expect that a large number of us here have had formal or on the job training to become a "specialist in the art or science of motion-picture photography" and therefore have a complete understanding of film stock, lens, filters, apeture, shutter angle, etc. That...by definition would make you a cinematographer. Me personally, I hate the term videographer. It conjures up images of Americas funniest home videos...you know, those shaky home movies filmed by non cinematographers. Come to think of it, my choice of words in that last sentence is all wrong..."home", "movies", "filmed"...but thats the point, a lot of these words seem to be interchangable nowadays.

Just my 2¢

Generally, when I speak of what I do in the global sense... I'm a 'video producer'. When I talk to corporate clients that is.

When I market my services to brides/couples, I'm a cinematographer, that is - that i strive to do something decidedly more cinematic, compelling and interesting than simply videotaping a wedding. Which by definition could simply mean setting up a couple of cameras at wide angles and pressing record.

I 'videotaped' my first wedding 20 years ago. Did a few and gave it up until 3 years ago when I was inspired by some of the greats on this forum to look at weddings in a completely different, much more cinematic way. And now I aspire to create works of art, not merely to record an event.

Hey, but that's just me...

Then you produce wedding videos, then you are a wedding video producer.

Claire (video producer) and yes, I have broadcast TV credits as a producer but in my maiden name (so don't bother looking in IMDB cos I aint there :)

Good luck with the new business Philip.

I've had two clients approach me recently using the term cinematography vs video. I do believe it makes a difference in perception. Timex sells watches. Rolex sells timepieces. Which term would you associate with a higher quality product?

Thanks for sharing your experience Art. :)

Hey, shooters. I just wanted to take a minute to apologize if I offended anyone with my comments. It wasn't my intention to further divide us on the issue. Peace.

In my mind, it came down to what I think my Brides are going to be searching Google for.

9 out of 10 will search for Wedding Videographer because that's what WEDJ, The Knot, etc.. call it. They care that you do a great job at capturing moving pictures with sound and I care that they can find me.

So what I came up with is: I'm ok with calling myself a videographer, but I don't shoot wedding video, I make wedding films.

What a great thread! You guys are cool.

I would say most of us here are videographers. We make wedding videos. We are video producers. We use (high-end) video gear. We struggle to educate our clients the value of videography because of the stigma of "Funniest Home VIDEOS" and Uncle Bob's trail of destruction during birthdays and family reunions.

(A) If you have professional industry-recognised training at a film school, shoot on film, CineAlta, RED etc, use focus pull assemblies, work with a director, sound team, lighting team and produce content which is destined for large screen release - you could rightly classify yourself as a DOP, or cinematographer.

(B) If you are producing wedding or event videos by yourself or with a couple of assistants, using video gear (DSLR's, Canon/Sony prosumer, PC/Apple editing suite), smack a bit of Rod Stewart or Celene Dion wailing over the top, (or worse, some royalty free piano music you downloaded and shared with a mate) burn it onto DVD-R, give it to your client for private domestic viewing - hate to break it to you, but you are a videographer.

There is quite a clear distinction.

HOWEVER - There is a grey area of people who ARE videographers, but claim to be cinematographers because the word video makes them feel dirty. This is just insecurity. And to justify their crazy prices. (or the clients "investment" I think their new website term is) They could rightly claim to produce videos with a cinematic look and feel... but cinematographers they should not claim to be.

WIKIPEDIA - A "wannabe" (slang for "want to be") is a person with an ambition to be someone or something that she/he is not. The term is mildly pejorative, intended to convey the foolish nature of the desire due to the incompetence of the "wannabe" to accomplish the goal.

This is all true. It's written above - and it's on the Internet - so it must be! ;)

By your post and logic, the majority of the leading studios in the wedding filmmaking industry who consider themselves wedding cinematographers are wannabe's. Quite the bold statement mate. ;) I'm secure with myself to know that others can say what they want about the difference in terms and marketing and it not effect me one bit, but to go on record and call people wannabe cinematographers...wow. I venture to say that there is talent in the wedding filmmaking industry that is good enough to work in hollywood and on sets. I mean heck, the NFL has one of the top wedding studios shooting for them on a regular basis as does MLB. It borders insulting to call people wannabes in my humble opinion. A better choice of words would have been better off there bro.

Also, I would find it silly to say that if a run of the mill videographer attended a prestigious film school and shot with some fancy equipment, that they have the "right" to call themself a cinematographer while still doing run of the mill work when on other hand, you have self taught guys who started from the ground up shooting from sony mini DV then to HD DSLR and now produce excellent work aren't able to call themselves cinematographers but produce "cinematography". That's a head scratcher. A piece of paper or amount of hours in attendance doesn't qualify anyone in my mind. I feel it's the approach, the work, and the thinking...but hey, I'm for sure in the minority in this subject.

On another note, there's a huge difference between being insecure and wanting to change the perception and direction of wedding and event filmmaking. Discerning brides DO know the difference between a videographer and a cinematographer. Let's not insult their intelligence by just saying that it's just a marketing term or videographers being insecure and wanting to separate themselves from videographers with a fancy word while ignoring the fact that MOST (not all) of the time, there is a difference in the quality of work.

Cheers

Hi Randy - sorry if my post offended you. I've read back over it however and stand by it.

How does one achieve the title of cinematographer? When does one make the leap from being a videographer to cinematographer?

You can be both. But it depends on what the job and setting is.

Back to an earlier analogy: If George Lucas was filming his cousin's wedding with a Sony Z1 - he would be the videographer. A bloody good videographer with lots of cinematography experience... but his role at the time would be described as a videographer.

Now, if he bought a crew along with him, had cranes and jibs flying all over the place and shouting at the priest 'ACTION!' through a loud hailer.... well then he's probably going to introduce himself to the guests as the cinematographer.

You haven't offended me, it doesn't matter what your definition of a cinematographer is in relation to calling myself a cinematographer. I'll call myself an astronaut if I feel like it accurately described what I do based on MY definition ;).

Now that I know what you deem a videographer and a cinematographer is by definition, what you say makes sense based on that. We all have different views on what defines a cinematographer and videographer. You describe yours based on the gear and the production going on, I base mine on the work and the approach to shooting. There's no point in pushing the discussion further (for me) as we're at an impasse.

To each his own. Cheers.

I go by the title videographer, I hope to switch my name to "Videomaker" as it is what I do.

When asked what I do I would say "I make videos" until some one asked if I worked in a Sony factory. That was in the days of VHS players.
Don't know if the sense of this translates to the US but here in UK a VHS machine was referred to generically as a video, as was the cassette and the footage that was on it.

Problem is though, that cinematographer is so constraining a term. I'm so much more than a cinematographer. I am sound designer, editor, cameraman, director(in some cases) script writer (in some cases), grip and gaffer. I don't mind floating the connotation that cinematographer has vs. videographer, but it is a very specific and confining term. How about Digital Filmmaker. That sums it up a bit right? btw not a great search term,so..
Bill

I believe there are quite a few major differencies between someone that does video and someone that tries to implement cinematic techniques and storytelling at weddings.

The word "video" brings in my mind low quality home movies, news coverage (ENG), Documentaries and TV series (best case scenario) and also weddings and porn.

The word "Cinema" brings in my mind, my favorite movies, some nice short independed movies I've seen (most of them being shot with regular HDV video cameras) and in my mind this is often very closely related with the word "art".

Since weddings are one shot events and there are no second or third takes, the cinematic approach has to have some limitations in the "coverage" side of things.

When you do video, your priority is to cover the event.
When you do wedding cinematography, your priority is to tell a story your own way.
Accuately covering the actual events becomes second priority and the lead goes to atmosphere, feelings and emotion.
Photography all of a sudden, becomes more important than with simple video coverage.

The end result in video should have no gaps in the coverage and the couple should be able to clearly see what happened at their wedding. No major event should be missed from start to finish and pepole should have neutral skin tones even if the D.J. has pink/blue light show on the dance floor. Artsy stuff when shooting video is not important.
Besides the word "art" doesn't go together with the word "video".
After waching a wedding video we shouldn't have any questions about what happened on that day.

When you do wedding cinematography, the goal is to make a short movie that tells the story of the day in the same way movies do.
Just like in the movies not every part of the story is presented in order excite the imagination.
The cinematographer also shoots other things during the wedding (like let's say a bird that flies on the trees above, a kid that plays with the flowers or the waiter's hands serving the food) and of course doesn't use on camera lights.

The end result has to bring in mind the word "art'.
After seing the movie we should be left with something wanted and some parts of the day should remain a mystery.

Having said all that, one should first think what is it that they do and then decide how to market themselves.

re
 

Im 26, Im still learning , I have been in this business for 1 year now, videographer sounds dated to me, It sounds like a man of 65 called Dave with a camcorder filming a wedding, giving the client a 2-3 hour wedding video on a video tape with bad music. I use "documentary wedding cinematography". It sounds cool, Im trying to tell a story through moving imagery. It sounds fresh, it is fresh and I get some phone calls saying we called you cause it said cinematography in my advert.

I would almost be embarrassed to use the word videographer. It just sounds so so old. But thats just my view.

More importantly i say Im a film maker. Why would i say videographer. Film maker is way cooler.

Well said Spiros.

I'm with you, Bill. I am a digital filmmaker too. But, maybe some day I'll purchase 30K worth of Zeiss cinema lenses for my 5D and rent helicopters for my wedding videos...uhm, films...and finally be a cinematographer. Damn the bill, I'm an artist.

The industry is changing and morphing into providing still and moving images as a package. Sure, there will always be specialties, but this is where we are headed. We will be asked to do it all. Are you ready?

***the below is all based on my opinions and some factual information***

I'm so confused now... after reading through this thread at all the different opinions, I just don't know what to think... I mean people are calling George Lucas and Peter Jackson GOOD cinematographers? Here are their cinematography credits... films you have probably never seen... for a reason... George Lucas - IMDb and peter's credits: Peter Jackson - IMDb

If the cinematographer EVER yelled "Action!" on a set, he could be fired immediately... unless of course the director gave him permission and let the crew and actors know.

Roger Deakins... now that guy is a TRUE cinematographer (and/or DOP). A man who manipulates light, puts the camera in the best places to interpret the directors vision... moves the camera for a specific reason... chooses certain lenses/apertures/shutter speeds/ASA (or ISO) to evoke a certain emotion or to direct the attention of the viewer to something... the camera is the DOP/Cinematographer's playground. If these are things you consider while you shoot a wedding, then heck yes you are a cinematographer/DOP while you are shooting. Once you get home, you are an entrepreneur, and editor, a colorist (assuming you color grade/time your movies), a sound designer, a disc author, an animator, a compositor, a graphics designer... and I'm sure other things. The real question is, are you being honest with yourself, clients, and peers when you call yourself a cinematographer? Do you use light, composition, lenses, shutter speed, aperture, camera movement, and focus for a reason... or are you the kind of guy that bakes cakes with only a couple of the ingredients instead the whole list? Ask yourself... "what am I?"

I have shot on the Red, the 5D, and all sorts of other digital cameras. Maybe we are Digital Artists/Producers? Cinematic Journalists? Vid-e-o-tographers (I know you've heard that one before)? Filmmakers? Movie Makers? Video Producers? Visual Artists? File based Mediaographers?

If you capture things in a documentary kind of way with no vision behind what the final product will be, or how you should use lighting, lenses, aperture, camera movement, etc... you should be a videographer (according to the mighty internet's definitions of videographer).

If you do the opposite, maybe you should consider yourself a Filmmaker, Visual Artist, Digital Artist... judging by definitions, it would make more sense because our job encompasses more than just what the cinematographer does.

For those of you calling yourselves cinematographers just to allude that you are "high end", please stop... unless you really are one. You are giving all the guys who actually have pieces of art a bad rep just like the term "videographer" already has... do we really need to continue the cycle or can we just go ahead and break the cycle?

Sorry for being so brash,
Cody

So you shoot on 16mm or Super 8?..35mm film?

I think all the people in this thread that are calling themselves Cinematographers are in the wrong forum... We're in the Wedding / Event Videography Techniques forum!! :-P

Amen.

John (Cinematic High End Digital Wedding Video Production Videographer)

All markets are different, but...

I've attended (as an exhibitor) 7 Bridal Shows over the last 3 years, with over 300 brides per. So 2,000 or more brides in the last 3 years, and I can tell you from my experience that IN MY MARKET, the term 'videography' and 'wedding video' has a negative stigma where they relate to weddings. This is largely because of the lack of awareness on the part of brides, as to the evolution of digital cinematography, and the higher level of aspirations on our part.

You can't compare the work of 20 years ago (or even 10 years ago), with the work of today. This is mostly because on non-linear vs. linear editing. Yet we use the same terms to define it now as we did 20 years ago. Ever wonder why Ford let the brand name 'Pinto' die?

Fortunately, this is changing. In the meantime I avoid both terms, Except when I SEO, because despite the negative stigma, the relatively few brides that seek our services on their own, are going to search the term 'wedding video' not 'wedding cinematography'.

Again, this is based on MY experience, in MY market. Your mileage may vary.

(note. For those who don't know, the Pinto was a vehicle prone to exploding when rear-ended in a collision. This was seen as detrimental to the brand).

Ken

I don't disagree with much of your sentiment but I would feel happier if you were able to suggest a new updated and current term rather than choose others which are already established and have their own connotations in different markets.

Also I think the Pinto link is unfortunate, not merely because the car was considered unsafe by some but, as far as I recall, because Ford knew about the flawed design and decided that it would be cheaper to pay the liability claims than to re-design the car.

I seem to remember that in one case a California court awarded punitive damages aginst Ford because of their decision. It certainly wasn't one of Ford's finest moments.

I certainly mean no disrespect to anyone here who prefers the term videographer but as stated in previous posts...in certain markets, that term has a very negative stigma attached to it. The words poor quality, cheap, unprofessional, shaky camera, etc. come to mind. That’s not to say that's actually the case...quite the opposite. Many of today’s wedding videos are true works of art but that darn "V" word seems to stick in the minds of brides (again, in certain markets).

The world has gotten itself so politically correct that it seems we have to be very careful in choosing a word or term that describes us because we might step on ones toes or hurt their feelings should we choose to apply their word to our business. In an ever changing world of technology, it's hard to know what to call ourselves. I do agree with Philip however in that it would be great if we could establish a new term instead of using words associated with other areas of specialty. I'm not sure how realistic that is though...as it would take years for a governing body to establish one and many more years to make it common place so that brides forget about the "V" word. I just think it would be great if brides referred to us with one common word instead of the current hodgepodge of terms that we use today (videographer, cinematographer, film maker, video producer, camera guy, digital story teller etc.)

I just think it would be great if brides referred to us with one common word instead of the current hodgepodge of terms that we use today (videographer, cinematographer, film maker, video producer, camera guy, digital story teller etc.)[/QUOTE]

the Photographer is the photographer, the florist is the florist, the Limo guy is the limo guy....But us? lol