First Wedding DONE.
 

I have been a leech on this board for a while so I thought I would share some things I learned last weekend at my first wedding shoot. Not that these bit me, but I learned more about these topics in 10 minutes than I could by ever reading a manual. For those that are planning their first wedding:

1. Attend the rehearsal
2. Auto Focus? Forget it.. It will ruin an unmanned camera.
3. Unmanned camera? Almost useless. What is your wife doing this Saturday? I asked mine to come after I attended the rehearsal.
4. Manual white balance as much as possible. Use presets only in a hurry.
5. Wireless mics? Don't skimp here. Sennheiser G2 is a minimum need.
6. If you can get a soundboard feed, this is the best situation for music, etc.
6. Stabilization? I didn't use it, but I will from now on. I do plan to build it myself. I haven't seen this site on here yet, but check out homebuiltstabilizers.com. I have seen a lot of build your own stabilizer people here on this board.
7. MOST IMPORTANT: Be nice to and follow the photographer! At least while you are trying to get shots of the bride getting ready, etc. He was very helpful in knowing when and where everything would happen. Priceless for a new person.
8. I was using a GL2. It was necessary to use a custom preset. I thought it had too much color, and it was a little red. This worked for the entire shoot.

Although I haven't edited much of it, I would really like it to be previewed here for the opinions. You guys seem to not hold back. I will let you know when.

Thanks!

"unmanned" cameras are certainly not useless.....i've seen better footage from some unmanned cameras than manned one's on these forums...it all depends on how you frame the unmanned shot, they can work quite well if done properly...although we want them all to manned by pros!

who on earth told you to use auto focus......leave that for uncle willy "the vidiot.....did you actually use auto focus...curious??? cheers- joe

Unmanned cameras are, in my opinion, useless. If you take my perspective into account, it is understandable. I have shot well over 200 weddings and practiced a lot when I was inexperienced. I've shot about 50 one-man ceremonies which REALLY puts you on the spot. You really need to be on your toes for a one-camera ceremony. I ended up using my second camera attached to a firewire getting a simultaneous duplicate of my primary camera. I expect nothing less than good (perfect is impossible) camera work for 99% of the wedding from each camera.

I understand Joe's point and don't disagree with him. Don't have a novice man your second camera. Give that person lessons first, and tell them to move the camera as little as possible. A decent medium shot with occaisional framing adjustments would be fine. Of course, the operator must understand good composition. You would be surprised how few people can compose a shot. Lots of people leave too much headroom. In a wedding, it is better to get the shot lower to see the fancy clothes than to show the back wall of the church over their heads.

Here are my comments on the numbers:

1. Yes, until you are experienced. Try to see the church in the same lighting conditions as the time of your event.
2. I use manual focus, but occaisionally push the momentary button for auto focus.
3. See above.
4. I agree.
5. I wholeheartedly agree. Audio is just as important as video and you shouldn't use a $200 camera to shoot a wedding and expect to be paid. The same goes for the audio. I spend $1200 on my wireless and don't regret my decision at all. In fact, I don't have to ever think about audio except for some level adjustments.
6. Patching into the soundboard can be a problem if the sound guy is not on the ball. It can also be a copyright issue.
7. Work with the photographer and things will be great. Don't let them push you around. Check shooting restrictions with the location coordinator. If there are no restrictions in shooting in the aisle, don't let the photographer tell you not to go there. Try not to get in their way, but don't let them restrict you. A good photographer will be shooting past you or standing right next to you. Let them peek over your shoulder and get a couple of shots during the ceremony if you are in a tight location. Don't flinch and jerk the camera if they tap you on the shoulder.
8. Always learn the ins and outs of your camera to get the best image.

Practice, practice, practice!

unmanned cameras are not useless unless u put them somewhere useless...

i find a god option is to have one fixed onto the lectern where teh readings and sermons will take place, then shoot your manned camera from the aisle'
from here, you have the best possible shot for the "static" boring bits, all the while, youre given the option to shoot family and friends, the couple which can then be used in varous locations of the edit.

Unmanned cameras are NOT useless...

hell, ive even planted a camera here in sydneys St Marys cathedral whereby the ceremony and vows take place about 30 metres from where we are "alowed" to stand, then had a second camera on teh lectern for the readings (up the front) then shot handheld from almost centre aisle.

It works if used effectively....

I also agree with the cmments made about audio, as well as manual focussing during static shots. U shoudl be able to find focus and lock it for shots like this.

well said peter....i have a partner so we always have 2 manned cams....plus 2 unmanned......and we use the 2 unmanned angle frequently in the edit.....and they look really nice.....the point of the angle may be useless may apply if you dont place the unamnned cam in a desireable location....

I say "almost useless" because it will provide a cutaway if you need it. It's just that if you cut to it very many times, it looks very unmanned to me. I think it can be used tastefully, but if you can get it manned, by all means do it. I don't plan on having mine manned always, but I will get my wife to do as often as possible even if I don't charge for two operators. BTW, would that be an womanned camera?

Oh, I didn't actually use autofocus for recording, it was just a tip for those that might not have learned that yet.

I like the idea to put the unmanned on the podium/lecturn or in a location a videographer can't go. Still, I would do this with a third camera and have the second partially manned by a friend/wife.

I agree completely. I had my first wedding about a month ago and the photographer knew exactly what was going on and what was gonna happen when. It made my job a WHOLE lot easier.

My opinion is that an unmanned camera can be invaluable . . .

I use 3 cameras to shoot ceremonies, and originally, I also had 3 operators. Aside from the cost-issue of paying 2 additional operators, it is really difficult to find 2 people that can do a good job for a nomial fee. The comment about getting better footage from an unmanned couldn't be more true.

I generally set up the unmanned camera somewhere in the back, set for a nice wide shot of the festivities. The beautiful thing about it is that it always has a shot (except during the entry of the bride when everyone stands). So, my assistant and I can try out creative shots independently and I know I always have a safety shot to go to. Granted, I don't use most of the footage from the unmanned, but it has certainly saved my butt a few times when the other two cameras got blocked temporarily or whatnot.

Exactly Travis.....and the unmanned has saved our butts too. Not only can they be use creatively, but for security reasons as you mentioned.....it affords you to blow a shot every now and then. Good deal.

"...it is really difficult to find 2 people that can do a good job for a nomial fee. The comment about getting better footage from an unmanned couldn't be more true."

It is so sad that almost nobody (not in the business) can compose a decent shot.

How much do you guys pay your extra operators (decent ones)?

Right now I pay about $20-40 for a ceremony, depending on experience (usually requires an hour of their time).

For our all-day coverage (which can literally be 10-12 hours, although not all of it is filming time), the fee is $80-100. So far, I've been having to shell out $80 to people that just can't do the job I want. I have one guy, who has been with me for 2 years, that almost hasn't even improved. It's a matter of laziness, lack of motivation and lack of a good compositional eye. It's really frustrating.

I just found a guy a week or so ago that apparently has good camera skills, including composition, so hopefully he'll be able to take over.

The tough part with weddings is that these guys are all very part time. I only need them a few days out of the year, but I need to have a few compentent people at my disposal in case someone can't work on a particular day. Also, they are not involved in the editing process, which I believe really makes a bad cameraman much better. Nothing like watching your mistakes and then realizing you have to find a solution for them, heh.

wow dude, thats cheap..

when i shoot for my competitor (who are friends of mine) i charge no less than 1100 inc GST AUD for a full day coverage with my own gear.

with their gear, i charge $750 AUD

when i charge people to choot for me, its usually anythign between $350 to $650 if theyre good.

One thing though.. when hiring someone (whether your doublebooking or jsut needing an extra hand) make sure they at least come to a couple of training sessions.

I learnt the hard way, but one thing i can say for sure is that if u ever hire anyone, ensure that you see their footage before u give them the job. by seeing their work, u can then justify how much your willing to pay them.

Yikes - sounds a bit on the cheap side to me.

I'm more in line with Peter's take on paying and charging, although I tend to charge a bit more for work for someone else.

Bear in mind the ratio of cost versus quality - you pay peanuts and you get monkeys! I've got three guys I can call on at any one time and am happy to use them all - and they are all willing!

I would suggest a few bob more might entice the better quality person wanting to do a bit more.

On to the real gist of the thread - an unmanned cam will save your butt one day - don't ever adopt the notion that unmanned cams are not needed. Having spent quite a few years in the industry (not only weddings), I have used unmanned cams on many more than one occasion and have NEVER regretted the use.

Just make sure you compose the shot before hitting the record button!

Cheers

Wow, $300-1000 for an extra shooter? How much are you guys charging for your wedding videos? We charge $1450-2350 depending on the package, and it's still dog-eat-dog here. If I was paying that much for a 2nd operator, it wouldn't be worth my time to film a wedding . . .

Also, I would pay more if my operators were more experienced or better skilled. For example, if I was paying someone like you, Peter, who actually does this sort of thing all the time. However, like I said, it's hard to find someone that's any good. I'm not going to pay Joe Blow a $1,000 if he's pretty inexperienced and has few skills.

im w/ you peter......We are a two man team(partners) but when we hire a third shooter or if we need someone to "replace" one of us because of emergency or such...we pay 300.00 to 350.00 for the day(8 to 10 hrs)....some of the low ball quotes i am hearing is crazy. we would never expect to get someone to shoot all day for such low pay. you cant justify the pay to ratio of what you charge.....if you are charging a low price for your services...and require a 2nd shooter, your rates should be higher to begin with....that is smart business. i guess if you can find a sucker to work all day for you at 100 bucks or so...go for it but that is just not fair in my opinion. here's a good way to accomodate the 2nd shooter siuation....."network" with other videography companies. we do it....and if the other video company is not booked on a date you need help.....call them first. its better to have someone who shoots weddings(and they are good at it) to help than someone off the street.....and same goes for you helping them in time of need. photographers do this stuff all the time, they help each other out. often times when we are booked on a particular date....we refer the client to a few really good wedding video companies that we respect....point is, we would rather see the client have a reputable company shoot their wedding than some "jokers".....and they have referred clients to us in the same manner. It makes sense to do this since you cant double or triple book weddings when you are a one or two man show....you can if you contract all of your shooters but thats not most companies.

you should pay your help a decent wage.....it will keep them happy to work for you and will most likely get you quality second shooters.

I don't want to offend but $20 - $40???? Good grief, you cannot expect anything for that.

The going rate around here for second cam operator is $300. More if they stay for reception.

I think the difference lies in experience and skill levels. You guys are talking about a cameraman who has experience and skill, and particularly even wedding experience. My 2nd shooters are generally hobbyists with very little experience or skill.

Also, if I charge $1450 for a wedding and then pay 1/4 to a 1/3 of that fee to my 2nd operator (who only spends an hour with the project), that doesn't leave me enough money to make a worthwhile profit (when I'm spending more than 100 hours on the project). I could raise my prices, as you suggested, but my market wouldn't bear that. I average 6 weddings a year with my packages, and for my market I'm the best quality AND the best price. I increased my rate this year so I could add new services, buy new software, possibly increase wages for my operators, etc., and my number of bookings dropped to 4.

You guys must be charging $7k for a wedding if you're paying a 2nd operator that much. My market won't have that. Not yet at least.

Hey Travis, I see what you are up against. 6 weddings per year is not much to begin with. 100 hours per wedding project at 1,450 is a bit excess in my opinion unless you are really new to editing, you should be able to complete these much faster. have you tried using craigslist.org to get cam ops? it may be helpful to you. also...even if your using "hobbyists" as 2nd cam ops....perhaps you could work with them prior to your wedding shoots, to make sure they know how to compose a shot....focus, etc....all the stuff that is expected with camera dept. also...it gives you a chance to fill them in with all the wedding protocols such as dimeanor, etc.

Weddings aren't my thing, but i totally agree with your sentiments.
20-40 dollars !? this is 2006, not 1906. 20 dollars is someone's lunch allowance.

no offence intended at all, but it's really no wonder that as you say people you pay this to are demotivated and disinterested. Total cost of a wedding these days is i hear around USD20,000 so if you need to hire 2 extra shooters then just pass on the extra money to the clients. If a shooter shots bad footage, then the clients won't be happy, word gets around very quickly and you find that people may hire someone else - thru no personal fault of your own.

Just my opinion on it.

rgds

Joe:

It takes 100 hours for our largest package ($2,350) because we edit video for rehearsal, rehearsal dinner, girls getting ready, guys getting ready, sometimes guys golfing or whatever, bride getting ready, 3-camera ceremony, 2-camera reception, personal messages, highlight video and deleted scenes (and sometimes photo montages).

I'm a pretty experienced editor, but that is just a mountain of footage to edit, especially when you're timing clips to music for multiple edits. The smaller package $1450 was just introduced this year because of the lack of brides willing to spend decent money for a quality wedding video. For that package my 2nd shooter only needs to be present for the ceremony. This generally requires 30-60 minutes of their time, and I think it would be way overkill to pay them $300 for an hour or half-hour. My goal is to be making $40 an hour or better (doesn't usually happen), so I don't think my 2nd camera operator should be making $300/hr, you know?

If I had someone shooting that was comparable to my skill and experience level, that would be a different story. That's hard to find, though.



Stu,

Most of my 2nd shooters are college-age, so $40 for an hour's worth of easy (standing behind a camera on a tripod composing shots isn't that difficult) work seems fair to me. Where else can a college kid make $40 an hour? I don't even make that on a video when it's all said and done.

Also, I don't think my 2nd shooter's are holding back their talent because they aren't getting paid enough. For example, one of my shooters I started out at $75 for a day, completely unexperienced other than what I was able to show and teach him. I've raised his salary over the past 2 years and he hasn't improved noticably at all.

I think it's a matter of finding people who are truly passionate about capturing great video, and weeding out all of the people who are in it for quick cash or an easy gig. That's easier said than done.

I mentioned earlier that I have someone who might be the most skilled and experienced 2nd operator I've met to date. I haven't had him on a project yet, but if his skills are up to the task, then I would pay him more. I wouldn't expect to make the average computer programmer's salary if I was just starting somewhere and didn't have experience and skills.

Don't forget that it takes more than a hour of someone's time to shoot a wedding. They must prepare, drive, setup an hour in advance, and drive home. Shooting a 30-minute ceremony takes the better part of someone's afternoon. $40 for an afternoon (half work day) is the equivalent of $20k US per year with no benefits. At two weddings a day giving $80 per workday and 250 wordays a year, it computes. I doubt anyone could shoot more than two weddings a day. A professional can not live on such a wage.

My 2nd shooters don't have anything to prepare, I do the setup, and what other job is going to pay you for the time you're driving? I've never had a job that paid me for getting my clothes on and brushing my teeth, or for driving there and back.

Don't get me wrong, I know where you're coming from. There's more to shooting 30 minutes of tape than just recording 30 minutes of tape. But for my 2nd shooters, there isn't much more than getting dressed and driving.

I should also point out that none of my 2nd shooters are 2nd shooters for their full-time jobs. They work other jobs, just like I did when I was starting out in the business. Since weddings are almost always on weekends, it's just extra cash in the pocket and no time off from the real job.

I totally agree that a professional with adequate experience and skill who is shooting for a living would require more than $40 for a ceremony shoot if all their work was weddings. But again, if my client is paying me $1450, and I take a 1/3 of that and give it to an assistant that helps out for 30-60 minutes, that leaves me with around $1,000 to market my business, meet with couples, shoot for them on two different days for a total of at least 5 hours of shooting (both of which require planning, preparation, setup and driving for me), transfer the footage to my computer, edit the footage, output the footage to DVD, design packaging for the DVD's and cases, and deliver the DVD's.

If I were paying myself the low-end of same wage that has been suggested here for my 2nd shooters (say $200/hr), then I would only be getting paid for my 5 hours of shooting time, nothing else. So if you look at it that way, why should a 2nd shooter expect that level of compensation? They just show up and shoot, nothing else.

Travis- perhaps you should think of it like this.....you're not just paying them for an hour of work but rather for a "job" that requires only an hour or so of time. Those second shooters for just the hour of time you are requiring should get atleast 100 bucks for the "job". you can justify it how you may but they are worth the 100.00 for what you need, not a cent less. if i were only making 700.00 on the entire shoot and needed a 2nd shooter for an hour....I'd still give the 100.00 with no hesitation. i would be willing to eat the costs and make it worth someone's time in order to make the final product look that much better. so what if they made a hundred bucks an hour and you make an "average" of much less.....that is not how you should look at the big picture here.

Joe,

That's definitely a good way to look at it. I think we're actually on roughly the same page here.

If I had a 2nd shooter with good experience and skills, I would gladly pay more than $40 for a simple ceremony shoot. My problem, as I listed earlier, was finding suitable applicants that fit that mold. It's not a problem of me advertising a working rate and only getting inexperienced and unskilled operators. I don't advertise my rates for shooters anywhere. It's just hard to find someone that is worthy of $100 for a simple ceremony shoot.

As an example, you wouldn't pay a friend $100 to run a camera for 30 minutes if your friend had virtually no experience or skill would you? Maybe you would. In that case, we would have different philosophies of compensation I guess.

travis...I hear ya- but read some of my other posts earlier, cuz they may help you find qualified help, i gave some examples on how to find such, i know its not easy......in los angeles, i can place an ad for one over the internet and receive tons of replies, but many of those replies....just by the way they speak via email I wouldnt hire them. its hard to find good help in any trade let alone wedding videography....but it can be done. good luck to you!

Thanks! I'm going to look into those options you mentioned. Hopefully this guy I discovered a week or so ago will work out as well.

Thats exactly it mate. Her ein aus, the market is relatively large for teh percentile of the market penetration, so business can get thin during the quiet times.
I dont doublebook anymore, its just too much work, and like Joe said, if u refer the couple to a respectable business, then they remember that, the couple AND the business.
In return, they will refer you. I do this with alot of Photographers and ive also had talks with afew competitor mates of mine and weve considered networking to create a "niche" group of video producers (like 6 different companies) and we all share the advertising rates, studio space, workload and bookings. Bit like a centralised Video Production centre where u have 6 different companies al working under the one roof so if they dont like one style or one of the guys, they just go to the office next door. Or if im booked, i an pass that onto one of the other guys.
Right now though, were all at different lvels of production, some shoot in HDV but know nothign about it, others are still in their ol mentality of "this is how it shoudl be done" and so clashes like that dnt help business.

Instead its easier to jsut refer the WHOLE job to a couple of reputable comapnies and let the client decide. Sure u might lose the job coz u didnt doublebook, but the risk vs profit is too thin a line to gamble

Find good people, pay tem well, and they will look after you. If u cant do that, hook up with some other companies and offer to refer bookings to them if u cant take it on.
Im lucky in the sense that being a supplier i come across ALOT fo producers and know who i can trust and who i cant. I also know that aot of these producers may even undermne the contract, so theres that fact too.
Ive hired shooters rfom other coapnies and all they did at the shoot was try to sell themselves to my clients guests, so now, everythign is under contract in writing.

In business, irressepctive of how much u think u know the person, you cant afford to risk this type of behaviour.. so make sure u have everything in writing if you plan on hiring someone to shoot a wedding for you if u are not going to be there.

If anyone needs a hand with that kind of agreement, let me know ill post up some clauses here.

Just to clarify, I don't EVER double-book. I never have, and never will. When I speak of 2nd shooters, they are there WITH ME to operate a 2nd camera.