Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18
  1. Collapse Details
    #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    946
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Run&Gun View Post
    With the other thread thread that Dan started, Iím now wondering, what percentage of people getting married actually do have video done. I canít recall a wedding Iíve been to in recent memory that actually had video. Even the six figure one was only stills.
    Of the wedding photography bookings, video is less than 20%, maybe closer to 15%. Kind of like the photo booth. Companies are booking packages that can include the dj/sound, photo and video.


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    946
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by morgan_moore View Post
    Its a hard one?
    Personally agree with Eric or whoever said it that photos wise the one shot of the couple smiling down the barrel really the only shot that matters.
    She was only 20 on our wedding day. She was the most beautiful bride ever! When she came up the aisle and I got my first look, beaming with pride, the smile she wore that I saw through streaming tears, her angelic face, joyful eyes azure and blond hair peeking beneath white silk brim is an image burned into my memory that I'll never forget. This was the 80's, medium format film. All that is left of her now is in my memory, and those 40 or so medium format film shots I got. Frozen in time, forever young and beautiful; she passed away at just 30.

    Weddings are important to the couple - make it important to you or dont do it. To be half assed is not fair on the couple.
    Gawd yes! So true! Thanks for saying it.


    forget jibs and track and drones.. get in the right place using the shoulder.. get tears and smiles THIS is what matters.

    You gotta have 'chops' - to read the people and get ahead of them. Use your camera like part of your body - you gotta be super slick if using a DSLR or cinema camera to ba able to change ND or swap lense without thought while managing audio.

    You have to smoothly switch from 1.2 art to asking mum how proud she is (more important)
    This is a cry for an ENG cam but if you are slick with an FS7 you can do it.

    If you don't have 'chops' then you are not old/experienced enough for wedding a/b cam op. You cannot be the numpty trying to attach your slider to your Sony A7 while uncle jim is cleaning up on his iPhone. YOu must not get beaten by an iPhone wealder.

    Im getting close by being confident with my (simple) kit and getting ahead, even though Im 6'5 and chunky with the right chops I can get close without being noticed.
    ^^100%


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    946
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by combatentropy View Post
    Thanks. That's certainly one way to do it, and if you have just two operators, I think it puts them to good use, having them both up front.

    I'm uneasy, though, leaving the back camera static. I know it is common practice, and use the front cameras for most of a wedding video. But I've always thought the view was nicest from the back. After all the ceremony staged for that point of view. The architecture of the building, the placement of the officiant, couple, attendants, readers, musicians, flowers, candles --- they're all arranged to look nice and symmetrical from that angle. If the camera that captures that angle is static, it would suffice, but it seems to me like a bit of a waste. I would want to zoom in on the officiant for his homily, zoom in on the reader for the reading, zoom in on the musicians for the music, and even zoom in on the bride and groom for the vows. The back camera has a nice clear shot of their hands.
    However you choose to do it, you have to cycle back and forth checking each camera. This can be nearly impossible in standing room only, but you have to try. Two shooters is better and all you would ever need, 3 cameras minimum in total. Get another shooter who knows weddings, better not train on the job. A few shoots with 3 where we bring in an intern. I can shoot the ceremony by myself with 3 cameras, just a matter of moving between them so that at least one is always recording a stable shot. I always want to have the option of picking one up off the tripod if I need to get in tight for a handheld. What I can't do solo are the post ceremony family portraits, sunset photos and guest shots full and complete. I can get a little of each, but can't be everywhere at once.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #14
    Default
    From 1990 to 1999 I made various videos in school, including film school. From 2000 to 2004 I ran a video business, mainly weddings, usually two cameras and two operators. Then I burned out.

    This last point you won't like [...] don't use auto focus
    No problem, I never used it! However I've heard these days it's better.

    you do need to always plug into every house PA, the church, every dj soundboard
    I never got comfortable doing this. It seems there were so many kinds of sound boards of every age, and I always did something wrong. I guess patching into sound boards deserves its own thread, in the Audio section.


    Sorry, to be clear, I am not going back into weddings any time soon. It's just a puzzle I sometimes revisit in my head: "Hmm, how could I cover the ceremony, really well, with just one operator and one or two cameras..." When I was a member of the Wedding and Event Videographers Association, a couple of the top award winners shot the whole ceremony with just one camera. They would move around and edit it down.

    All that about dim lighting isn't a problem anymore with today's cameras. I don't know why I said that, except out of habit. (I think I repost this question every few years, because I never feel satisfied.)


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Posts
    9,575
    Default
    Of course withvthe right budget every cam should have an operator.

    But the one at the back just needs up down the aisle and is something to cut to.

    At 10 oíclock you can get right on the faces of the couple and also swing back to get aunt flossy singing.

    At the back with a long you get mainly backs of heads

    Of course Iím talking UK churches - I donít know where other posters reside.

    I shot one wedding that was all bare feet chanting and was in a field in Scandinavia - every one was in a wholistic circle. Another in Soweto where part of it involved slitting the throat of a goat
    Last edited by morgan_moore; 12-03-2019 at 10:50 PM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    946
    Default
    Final thought on NXCAM et al; You will get an extreme workout if you don't combine it with support stick(s). A monopod with sturdy feet and fluid pan head is a big asset. It fits between rows of seats, where tripod legs are clumsy and banging, no room. Don't even think about monopods without the feet for video. NXCAM (using this generically) is good OIS stabilization when handheld but on the sticks the image drifts, and in worst cases can self oscillate so switch stabilization off when on the sticks. You know that already but you must remind yourself to do it when you are in the moment. My quest for the perfect monopod never ends. I recommend skipping all the Manfrottos and looking at Benro. They have the locking foot arrangement and a pan head up top whereas Manfrotto puts the pan head at the foot, the tilt at the top and the feet don't lock, so you can't quickly plop it down without trial and error balancing which is just dangerous. On level ground, it's nice to be able to plop it down, have it stable immediately, and let go of it under watchful eye because whenever a hand is on the monopod, it is continuous small tilting back and forth, side to side, messes with your footage.


    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    946
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by combatentropy View Post
    From 1990 to 1999 I made various videos in school, including film school. From 2000 to 2004 I ran a video business, mainly weddings, usually two cameras and two operators. Then I burned out.

    No problem, I never used it! However I've heard these days it's better.
    Reminded of this every week by the one-and-dones.

    When I was a member of the Wedding and Event Videographers Association, a couple of the top award winners shot the whole ceremony with just one camera. They would move around and edit it down.
    You can always edit what you don't need but you can't recreate what you don't have.


    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Denver, Colorado
    Posts
    946
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by morgan_moore View Post
    Of course withvthe right budget every cam should have an operator.

    But the one at the back just needs up down the aisle and is something to cut to.

    At 10 oíclock you can get right on the faces of the couple and also swing back to get aunt flossy singing.

    At the back with a long you get mainly backs of heads

    Of course Iím talking UK churches - I donít know where other posters reside.

    I shot one wedding that was all bare feet chanting and was in a field in Scandinavia - every one was in a wholistic circle. Another in Soweto where part of it involved slitting the throat of a goat
    If only it were that simple. If there is a balcony it could be. If not, shot will be spoiled by the photographers who will be tracking the newlyweds up and down the aisle. They will also take up positions in the same aisle snapping away throughout the ceremony at other times. If I know my aisle shot has been spoiled by the photographers already, then I jump in there too for handheld tight shots or monopod work. If they clear the aisle, so do I. Similar problem for other camera positions as well. You have nice angle to the groom as only he and the officiant are in the frame. Then the area in front of your camera position gets filled with bridesmaids. There are special sub-events within the ceremony. Couple moves to a side altar to light a unity candle, mix sand. People shuffle around and block the lens. We try and find out from the couple in advance, in writing or they risk losing coverage.

    You got me on the goat. I would take that horror to sleep with me as I love animals.


    Reply With Quote
     

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •