Re: Did it really need two?
 

James, this is not aimed at you, just a general response with my own thoughts that not everyone will agree with, and that's OK.

Professionals need to hold their own with what ever gear you have and not worry about what anyone else is using. It's the shots you get not the gear you use, at least that's the theory ;)

Consumer gear is getting better all the time and the difference between pro and consumer is becoming more and more blurred. Example, lots of consumer cameras can shoot 50p but my C100 can't. Which is better, especially for slo-mo?

Would it be better to have someone with a 1Dx or D4 that was courteous and considerate or someone with an iPad that was constantly getting in the way? It's not the gear, is the person using it.

If they aren't in my shot, or dragging the attention away from my camera I don't care. If they take the same shot over my shoulder, so be it. They could do that with a P&S or an iPad and still get a great shot if they know how to use it properly.

They could also have it on YouTube / Facebook etc before the B&G even sit down to eat and there's absolutely nothing I can do about that, so I just get on with what I'm being paid to do and no worry about what other people are doing.

For sure it can lessen the impact of my shots if the B&G have already seen something similar, but then there's more to it than just getting the shot, it's about how you edit / grade etc and how the entire thing comes together. If a guest has a couple of great shots then good luck to them, but in the end they won't have the overall production that we have.

If they step out in to the isle while the bride walks down, hey, it happened, and guess what, I have the proof right there on the video and what was I supposed to do? Taser them?

I've always told my clients that I can't control what their guests do, so they have the option of asking them to stay out of the way or accept that occasionally (more and more) our shot gets blocked because Vicar won't allow us to move around in the same way guests can. It's also covered in the contract.

Would we all prefer to shoot weddings where the family & friends don't bring cameras, phones, iPads etc? Of course! But I'd like to drive on open roads instead of being in traffic, and be able to park right where I want to.

It's how life is now and it's only going to get worse, so learn to deal with it or find something else to excite you :)

Re: Did it really need two?
 

With all due respect to Steven.... it's NOT the model # of the camera that is an issue, it's the number of cameras or camera equipped devices that is the issue...

ANYONE can buy a "fancy" pro camera, no laws against that, but it does NOT make them a "pro"... conversely a "pro" can shoot with a cheap camera and know how to get stunning results (anyone recall some pro stuff shot on a "Brownie"?).

I think the cell/tablet cameras are far worse, since now EVERYONE and their dog has one, and so feels obligated to "document" their lives in pictures/video, probably at least secretly in hopes of catching the next viral sensation...

Of course it does not help to be shooting any "event" while competing with a scrum of paparazzi wannabes competing for "the shot", regardless of what they are shooting with.


Image quality of even "cheap" devices is only getting better, but actually getting usable shots... nailing framing, composition, lighting, those things will always be an art/craft... and NOTHING will give a camera equipped dog "the eye" for the shot...

Re: Did it really need two?
 

Gentleman, I have “corresponded” with many of you for quite some time on this forum. Am I opinionated, yes, but I play by the rules and generally am not condescending. The tone of my last post was out of character for me but I meant what I said.

For James to say that if a guest is going to show up with professional level equipment they better not book him is ridiculous to me. I cannot sugar coat my words about what I think of that kind of attitude enough to be appropriate here.

I agree with what Dave P. and Dave B. said. The stuff is out there in all kinds of formats and the people shooting with them come in many different models too. It IS part your wedding shooters world. No, I don’t do weddings. But I am in no way exempt from it either. In over twenty five years of shooting I have covered everything from international sporting events, to broadcast television shows, to corporate meetings and interviews. I know a little bit about being a working professional. Being a professional videographer means we must deal with the enthusiast aspect of image making. What does Aunt Betty and Uncle Bob want? They want to take a picture of their own of someone they are there to honor on their wedding day. Big Deal! My abrasive post was sparked because I read almost everything you guys write. I respect what you do. But here is the caveat, quite honestly some of you guys have tone of your own that makes it sound as though Uncle Bob is Darth Vader walking in and his 5D is a light saber he brought to destroy you with. Uncle Bob is not your enemy and Aunt Betty’s I-phone can’t hurt you either unless your work sucks. That is the real underlying issue for “some” of you guys. When you’re worried about their “pro level gear” you’re really worried that they are going to show you up. Be a professional and do your job. They are not your enemy. In fact, what do many of them want from you? They want to pick your brain and talk about gear most of the time. You are the guy earning money doing what the enthusiast loves to do. They want to talk to you, not hurt you. Get over this ridiculous idea that “I better be the only one there with pro level gear”. Seriously? Really? How you could possibly even think that is beyond me. And, if you are a pro, you should be able to shoot better with an i-pad than Uncle Bob and his 5D anyway.

Steve

Re: Did it really need two?
 

I can't say other people filming really bothers me. I had a Wedding recently, where 2 guys had a handycam; filming the Ceremony and Speeches amongst other things. They never got in my shots and were no trouble at all. You've got to wonder about the point of filming Speeches when I'm doing it, but given they're holding a handycam up by hand, set on wide, whilst I've got 3 cameras, 1 on wide, 1 on the Bride and Groom and 1 on the person speaking, proper audio and all carefully edited for maximum impact, their footage is only going to make the Bride and Groom see the value in what I'm doing, not detract from it.
It's easy for a guest to take some great random photos of the day, but for a guest to do really great video, there's more to it. Great editing for one thing. I have a Guestcam service; the footage I get is a different take on the day, a compliment to my video; but hardly a replacement.
Really if any Guest wants to take it upon themselves to film the Wedding Day to the standards I set myself, they must be bloody mad; I'm getting paid for it and even I think I'm mad trying to cram in as much as I do.

Re: Did it really need two?
 

theres a lot of interesting points in these posts, I suppose people can feel a bit under threat if someone who hasn't been hired arrives on with superior equipment than them, this could apply to various aspects of the event not just imaging!
I did a wedding recently where from the back of the venue, i saw was a young girl holding aloft a ten inch tablet among the sea of iphones, pads phones and various screens etc. which seemed to catch my attention more than the others.
So I zoomed into it a bit and rack focused between the screen and the couple which created a different. effect, so i was using the environment i found myself in rather than fighting it.

But if people walk in front of your camera(s) - the client should be advised that this is a possibility prior to the event, and is more than often outside your control.

Re: Did it really need two?
 

Steven Steven Steven ...

PLEASE GO AND FILM A WEDDING.

We get ONE TAKE and that's it.

Mike pointed it out nicely. I don't want to come back to the office, offload the data on to my computer, start editing to find critical moments RUINED by an enthusiast at the wedding.

Why? Because it ruins my highlight reel, the actual film and last but not least, I have to go out of my way to now explain to the bride if she complains (she might say why didn't I get a better position instead of standing where I was).

Why should I have to have that headache? As a guest, come discreetly. Your iphone or handycam is just about tolerable. But whipping out a 5D MK3 with all the extras on top is simply rude and obstructive. I'm not talking about being intimidated by gear, i'm talking about them ruining my shots that i've been paid to deliver.

Re: Did it really need two?
 

I feel your pain - I have been there, and it's one of several reasons why I don't usually do weddings now. But...

I don't really see why it matters whether the idiot who blocks your shot has an iPhone or an Arri, the result is the same. I find tablets to most intrusive at events, especially the ones in a cover which hangs down doubling the area of blockage.

Perhaps we should be rethinking this as the problem is only going to get worse at weddings and other events as almost everybody brings their camera or whatever. People blocking your shot are a pain in the backside, but regrettably nowadays that is something that we need to take into account when planning how the wedding or whatever is going to be covered.

In broadcast event coverage even though there is more control and predictability, camera positions are chosen so that the shots won't be blocked by unexpected actions of participants, (though it can still happen) and perhaps we need to think along the same lines and not be taken unawares by the unthinking amateurs who are trying to get their own photos and (often vertical :-) ) videos.

What could we do? Instead of being surprised that critical shots are blocked, expect that this may well happen and plan to do our best make make sure they are not. Get some Blu-Tack and stick a GoPro 8 feet up the wall if you can't guarantee a clear shot any other way. Jibs and cranes are expensive and inconvenient, monopods to hold a camera above the crowd are not, neither are robust chairs or portable mini steps. How many people think of getting a lower angle and letting the scrum shoot above us? Forum members here have mentioned using cameras on light stands and high tripods to avoid the total blocked shot situation, but the main thing to do is to expect the worst and not just be trying to compete literally on the same level as the unintentional saboteurs. Very hard when it is a single crew operation, slightly easier when there are two.

I think that the days when guests deferred to hired videographers (if they ever did) may well be past (photographers still usually get away with it because they tend to dominate the proceedings) and we have to learn to deal with it, but I honestly think the the majority of "shotblockers" have very little awareness of the problem they are causing whatever equipment they happen to be using. They just don't get it, and if were are not careful neither will we.

Hired photographers who block our shots are another matter, adequately discussed on other threads.

Re: Did it really need two?
 

A truly excellent notion Colin!

In fact there are many, many times where I have had to resort to using my GoPro footage to clear not only the multitude of guests (yes with tablets too and a full size iPad blocks a shot even more than a phone) but also over enthusiastic pro photographers. Sadly there are not many considerate photog left either as you find that the average wedding photographer now consists of 3 or 4 young guys (in our area South East Asians seem to favour the profession) whose sole purpose is to get as close to the bride as they can with as wide as possible lens.

I did a marathon run for an ad agency a few weeks ago and at the finish line was what I can only call a cunning photog! He had built a mini tower from aluminium so all his still and video cameras were 8' to 10' above the road and of course every shot he got was a clear one as all the others were under him. I liked his approach PLUS he never blocked anyone so he was the good guy.

Chris

Re: Did it really need two?
 

James,
We will probably never agree on this at all and that’s ok. I am not trying to sway your opinion; I am just stating my disagreement. You and I have contributed a lot on this forum so hopefully you know I am not usually cantankerous.

First let me say I don’t shoot weddings because you guys deal with issues that do make things hard for you. I am not discounting the problems. I have nothing but respect for guys that earn their living shooting weddings. I don’t need to go shoot one to understand the difficulties involved in the process. I only post in your wedding threads when I can contribute in a positive way. In this case I DID get on a soap box.

As far as dealing with the still photographer problems and the advanced amateur that breaks out his pro gear issue I have said many times before a big part of solving that is talk to them before the problem occurs! I know for a fact some of you treat them all like adversaries from the start. You say it here. I cover sports, corporate events, and interviews. I am not exempt or ignorant about the issues you face. I talk to every other shooter of any type as a friendly professional before the problems start. I establish the rules before the game starts. Then if they want to play hard ball, the fight is on!

The post Colin made above is exactly what we do in my world. Whenever possible we set up so the problems don’t even occur. He is spot on.

Here are a couple of common scenarios I deal with all the time:
Sporting event coverage: Along with covering the action there is always a few mandatory shots all of us MUST get. The victor raising the trophy over his head for example. If it says ESPN (or whatever the live broadcaster is) on the back of your photo jersey then you are top dog and you have no problems. For the other fifty of us it is a dog eat dog 15 seconds. Still guys will jump in front of my tripod mounted camera or some guys will pull outright stupid stunts at the last second. Elbows and tempers can fly. Jobs are on the line, if you miss the shot you don’t get the job again. And everything is always not as it appears. In those barricaded areas just for credentialed media you might get your shot blocked by a beautiful 35 year old woman with an i-pad (I’ve seen it happen) so you open your mouth and tell her in no uncertain terms that she is not press and she better stay the hell out of the way. The credentialed shooter that swore at her was the one that got an escort out of the media area. She was the trophy wife of a guy who wrote a 15 million dollar check to be a title event sponsor. It is quite common for VIP guests to get a media credential so they can have the same access I have. The problem is they don’t know the rules. So yes, I know a little bit about shot blocking.

This happens all the time too. I also do a lot of interviews of renowned physicians, corporate executives and other people with substantial incomes. After the shoot it is common for them to say “I like to shoot too, can ask you some questions about my camera?”. Of course I gladly oblige, they pull out a LowePro camera bag and guess what’s in it? These days it is a Canon 5D XXX. It is used to shoot their kids birthday parties and vacation pictures. Why? Because they can. That is the true market for that camera. It is not a professional body. It is made for the serious hobbyist. They are all over the place. It is the DSLR fanboys that have elevated the 5D to a professional status. Canon has the cinema line for professionals that are serious about that type of camera style. So I think you are making a big deal out of nothing. Again, I am not knocking anyone’s choice of gear. You see someone with a 5D at your wedding and assume they are some kind of pro or going to be a problem. It is just a camera. They may not even be able to shoot well with it. For you to say they are rude to bring it is laughable to me. That is why I said get over it and do your job. As a professional you can’t worry about what other people are shooting. It is your gig. Do your job, do it well, and no one else can be a problem unless they get in your way.

Steve

Re: Did it really need two?
 

Hey Steve

I'm on your side on this too. A wedding is often an easy task compared to some commercial shoots. Besides quite often you can cheat some wedding shots ? Rings shots? I used to do dummy rings shots on a regular basis when I did stills ...much easier.

Sorry James but you obviously haven't done shoots where National media are involved!! I have done a couple for electric vehicles in our city and involving the Lord Mayor on camera ... You are happily shooting her (yep our's is a lady) getting in and out the car and then giving a little speech when the big boys arrive...they bump, push and jostle with each other to get a shot and you are trampled in the process.

You would be happy (in fact overjoyed) to have a few guests block you at a wedding after that!!

Chris

Re: Did it really need two?
 

Last wedding I shot there where 2 photogs, both shooting with Nikon full frames, I was chatting with the photogs during the reception and the father of the groom came up to us with a small lowepro bag which had a brandnew fullframe nikon camera and a 24-70 f2.8 lens attached to it, I am not familiar with the nikon line up but the photog told me afterwards it was a newer model then they where using.

The father had some questions about the camera and he had some issues getting good photos out of it. I hear him asking questions that I would expect from my daugther when I would give her her first camera at her birthday, he clearly didn't understand what aperture, iso and shutter was and what effect these settings have on the image.

So here you have a guy buying a few thousand dollars worth of photo equipment while he doesn't even understand the basics of photography, like Steve said, he buys the camera just because he can, not because he needs it.

Re: Did it really need two?
 

Yep, there are a lot of people with good disposable income that are happy to pay thousands for the best equipment regardless of knowing it's capabilities and how to use it to it's full potential.

Re: Did it really need two?
 

All this talk of guests with great gear is really more a problem for the Photographer than the Videographers. Guests with a camera can with some skill or luck or both, take great photos. For video, well unless they're skilled handheld, they'd need a tripod or monopod. How many Weddings has anyone been to where a guest has brought one of these along. If a guest turned up with say a C300 and support rig, yeah I might feel a little competition, but that's never happened so far. Closest I got was the DJ taking some shots of the Reception tables and some dancing using a camcorder. He had a tripod with him, and was rather throwing himself into his little video work. I just made sure I got great shots myself, and trusted my work was better than his. I caught him watching me from time to time as I was going about the room, seeing what angles I was going for.

Re: Did it really need two?
 

I have to admit, it really doesn't bother me a little because of their gear, with one exception: if they're firing off a flash right next to me, over and over.

Other than that, it's simply the exact thing we expect from the photog, ourselves, or anyone else: courtesy. Please don't block my cameras. Please don't stand in the middle of the aisle between the bride and the groom. Please don't walk out to them during their first dance song, and stand 2 feet away for the entire song, with your camera/iPad in their face, filming.

Re: Did it really need two?
 

I once had the grooms uncle who insisted to shoot at the grooms place with his 5dIII, I was at that moment shooting the brideprep and could not make time available to go to the groom as well as he was staying a half hour drive from the bride, I even used his material in my film, I had to colorcorrect the footage because the people all got a yellow face but beside that it looked decent enough.

Only he wanted to shoot in the church as well, the bride warned me about him and said if he would interfere to much I could tell him to move out of the way, I rather would her telling him to stay out the church with his equipment but she was afraid to tell him that and cause a discussion.

He came to church with a pana hvx 200 and his 5dIII on a monopod and he had a microphone stand with a shotgun mike in front of the lectern that was xlr connected to his hvx200. I was holding my sony cx730 with a small shoulderrig and a second cx730 on a tripod :)

I ended up using just one shot from him which was a closeup from the grooms face with his 5dIII during the vows, all the rest was useless to me. All his 5dIII shots has such a shallow dof it didn't match my other camera's + they where too shaky and again wrong whitebalanced.

So he had bigger and better gear then me at that moment yet my footage turned out to be of a better quality.

Re: Did it really need two?
 

You can give a thousand monkeys a camera.... maybe you'll get a few usable shots...

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/totem-po...nkeyright.html

And they'll work for bananas...

Re: Did it really need two?
 

I saw Dawn of the Planet of the Apes yesterday, monkeys are much smarter then you think...

Re: Did it really need two?
 

I would venture to guess that a vast majority of the video taken by enthusiasts never gets used for anything or ever even will see the light of day. It is one thing for a guest to get caught up in the excitement of the event and go overboard with taking pictures and video... it is another thing when it comes time to edit and the enthusiasm has worn off, they realize how much work it really is and he would much rather just watch TV instead.

Re: Did it really need two?
 

Totally agree.

Even though I get paid, I lose enthusiasm some times and need a break. I would be surprised if a friend or relative will dedicate that much effort on a film.

Re: Did it really need two?
 

We had this last weekend. Had to have a few nice words in the end.

2 of them, same cameras, same lens and always shooting in the same place. Was a little odd but I think it was the age old problem of a pro with an assistant who didn't want to leave the side of the other and the pro couldn't trust the shots of the assistant so just re-did everything they did.

She would stand in front of me during the ceremony, take a shot and then stand there checking the shot. Just had no idea I was even there. So had to tap on the shoulder and point at my camera and then after just asked them to be more aware of not only us but other guests (standing in front of mum and dad during the ceremony). They were fine after that.

I think sometimes it is lack of experience and sometimes they just arent used to shooting with others.

IT wasn't just me though. The registrar had to have words in the end and also gave them a telling off for full on shooting the signing of the register.

Re: Did it really need two?
 

Hi Danny

More often than not the lack of experience is obvious ... an assistant there purely for moral support. I had two guys also at a ceremony obviously with 10mm super wide lenses and at some stages their lens hoods were touching the bride's arm in an effort to get ultra close shots of the rings. Like yours the celebrant eventually had enough and banished them to behind the first row of chairs. Hope they had more than the wide lenses otherwise they would have been in real trouble.

I also did a wedding and had each photog straddling my main camera ... I think they were having a competition to see who could hit 1000 exposures first of the speaker at the lectern!! Seriously what were they thinking. My photog make sneak up and take 3 at most of each speaker .... these guys were obviously shooting identical frames and literally hundreds of them non stop!!!

I wonder if they work on the assumption that if they are sweating blood and running around like ants people might be impressed at their work effort???

The mind boggles sometimes!!!

Chris

Re: Did it really need two?
 

I blame myself actually. I only said to julie the other day how lately everyone is shooting on 5DMK3 which is lovely as the shutter is silent.

What happens? The next week and EVERY wedding since has been Nikons with shutters that sound like a tea tray hitting the floor. I jinxed it.

Re: Did it really need two?
 

Being a Nikon shooter I sometimes used to cringe doing stills on my D90's but they are pretty quiet ..the full frame Nikons are very noisy indeed " Will you "clunk" John take "clunk" Melissa ........ " I find the FF Nikon shooter are also the ones that want to stand next to the bride and become part of the ceremony so my lav on the groom picks up every shutter actuation!!

Chris

Re: Did it really need two?
 

I just ran into a similar situation. I shot (video) my nephews wedding yesterday and before the wedding started I spoke with the photographer with both my nephew and his fiancé present. I told her where I had planned on having my camera locked off and would it be a problem with her. She said no problem, I won't get in the way of it and we both agreed on it. When the wedding started everything seemed to be going fine until I noticed that everywhere I went with my r&g camera, she would follow me and then get her arm in some of my shots. Keep in mind I was getting tight close up shots. toward the end of the wedding she decided to walk down the middle of the isle and get in the shot of my locked of camera. I told my nephew about it and he was wanting to take a look at the footage so that they could talk to her about it. do anyone know of a way to get around this in a polite way?

Re: Did it really need two?
 

I'm reminded of a wedding I videod a few weeks ago in which a lot of effort had gone into choreographing the 1st dance and several tracks which were to follow. Yep it involved all the bridesmaids etc. To be several minutes long, probably the most important part of the day for these particular clients (it was the 1st thing they mentioned when they first enquired), and of course destined for Youtube.

I had 5 video cams running. All carefully positioned to anticipate the best angles with minimal chance of blocking. I asked the toastmaster (the chap in a red jacket who announces everything at some UK weddings) to ask the guests to stay clear of the cams when he announced the dance. He was great all day. What could possibly go wrong :- )

Time came, he forgot to ask the guests to stay clear, then he promptly stepped off the floor and managed to block not 1 but 2 cams. The groom broke off from the 1st dance early and blocked a 3rd cam. I was shooting handheld with the main video cam and couldn't break off to signal to them to scram. In the footage in post you can see where both the toastmaster and the groom gradually realise they "may" be in the way, do a double take on the cam, and swiftly move away. Then there were the guests :- (

The end product was OK but not nearly as good as it could have been.

Anyway, my point is that no matter how eager they are to please (the toastmaster) and how much of a vested interest they have in me getting great footage (the groom), and in the complete absence of any malice what so ever this stuff still happens. Maybe sometimes we are too quick to attach guilt / incompetence / selfishness / etc to the offenders.

Pete

Re: Did it really need two?
 

these guys are from craiglist