Add to Your Quarantine Reading List: My Article Featuring fellow DVXUser Abe Halpert

puredrifting

puredrifting

Major Contributor
Hi all:

"Cinematic" is a hard to define buzzword that we hear a lot in our business. A few months ago I interviewed cinematographer, wedding filmmaker and fellow DVXUser Abe Halpert about how he creates cinematic wedding videos.
You can read the article here, it was interesting to explore this subject as it relates to wedding films. https://www.hdvideopro.com/technique/hd-dslr-filmmaking/what-makes-a-cinematic-wedding-video/

The article also interviews and explores the same subject with filmmaker Doug Block who compiled years of his wedding films into an
HBO Film called "112 Weddings", the trailer can be viewed here www.dogwoof.com/112weddings If you like documentary films, I suggest
checking out the trailer, I really liked Doug's idea and approach.

Enjoy!
 
puredrifting said:
Hi all:

"Cinematic" is a hard to define buzzword that we hear a lot in our business. A few months ago I interviewed cinematographer, wedding filmmaker and fellow DVXUser Abe Halpert about how he creates cinematic wedding videos.
You can read the article here, it was interesting to explore this subject as it relates to wedding films. https://www.hdvideopro.com/technique/hd-dslr-filmmaking/what-makes-a-cinematic-wedding-video/

The article also interviews and explores the same subject with filmmaker Doug Block who compiled years of his wedding films into an
HBO Film called "112 Weddings", the trailer can be viewed here www.dogwoof.com/112weddings If you like documentary films, I suggest
checking out the trailer, I really liked Doug's idea and approach.

Enjoy!
Click to expand...

Woah, loved that! thanks for sharing! I'll try to check out his doc at some point!
 
Weddings are brutal. I found it so hard to do them well. The reception wasn't so hard, but the ceremony --- how do you cover it while remaining discreet? How do you make a profit without pricing yourself out of all but the 1%? How do you edit it? It's seems each moment has the potential to be sentimental if not sacred.

If you think I'm making a big deal out of it and I should relax, it's just a wedding, that's my perfectionism talking. Also when I run up against a challenge that is like a brick wall (like trying to shoot a wedding well) it gets its hooks me, perhaps because of some psychological malfunction ;)

Weddings are one of the least prestigious jobs in the moviemaking industry, which just adds insult to injury. But I have great respect for anyone who makes a go of it, especially those who can keep going.

---

Cinematic meant something in the early 2000s, when the status quo was still the TV look. That was when I was working, and I had a colleague who used picture-in-picture for the ceremony. I had another mention this "new style" called "cinematic", where they don't use any fancy transitions like fly-ins or wipes, just fade to black or fade to white or dissolve.

But nowadays when I peruse Vimeo or Youtube for what the cool kids are up to, they all look cinematic: shallow focus, slow motion, steadicam, drones, black-and-white, cinematic music. I mean I do come across the occasional uncinematic wedding video, but I wouldn't think it is a deliberate style, just someone who has been doing them for years, has always been mediocre, and is just grinding them out, in the business not because he likes moviemaking of any sort but mainly because it was a way to own his own business and be independent and maybe he likes parties.

Doug Block's unobtrusive style sounded like mine. I found it odd that I could not find a demo reel on his site. The only video is his 112 Weddings documentary, which is an interesting concept but awkward to be the sole video on his weddings section. And it spans such a long time, that you can tell his current videos don't look like a lot of the clips in it. So I can't satisfy my curiosity as to what his weddings really look like now. And then Abe Halpert on his site has everything but weddings as a sample. Oh well.

---

Thanks for the write-up nonetheless. It is a "genre" that continues to haunt me, because I have yet to achieve resolution on a satisfying way to make them (for myself).
 
Last edited:
combatentropy said:
Weddings are brutal. I found it so hard to do them well. The reception wasn't so hard, but the ceremony --- how do you cover it while remaining discreet? How do you make a profit without pricing yourself out of all but the 1%? How do you edit it? It's seems each moment has the potential to be sentimental if not sacred.
Click to expand...

Abe Halpert here - weddings are indeed a bit brutal, but I've gotten used to the flow and what to expect, what moments and angles are considered crucial, etc.

I honestly feel pretty indiscreet covering the ceremony and buzzing between multiple cameras + standing at the altar shooting down the aisle with a gimbal at the beginning + following the couple down the aisle with a gimbal at the end. The odd thing is that everyone else seems to think I'm discreet and I've had so many priests tell me they didn't even notice me afterwards. Using long lenses and not standing right at the front of the aisle possibly helps, as well as using small cameras. Oh, and not using lights - bright lighting is automatically disruptive.

I get the same reaction from the couples about the entire day. One couple said "we were so relieved to see all your footage because we didn't even noticing you filming." And I'm like - how did you not notice the guy with the big beard circling around you with a gimbal as you did your first dance?

I'm pretty sure the couples I shoot for are in the top 10-20%, not just the 1%. People spend a lot of money on weddings. 98% of the weddings I shoot, though, are as a freelance cameraman for other companies and I only know what my rate is. They do the editing. There are 5 or so companies of varying sizes that I currently book weddings with.

Yes, wedding videography is not that prestigious - that's part of the reason it's not on my website/reel although I've shot about 120 by now. I don't think they would help me land commercial/corporate/doc/narrative work. When I apply to shoot for a company or a couple, I just send them links. The nice thing about shooting weddings is that they book months or a year in advance, and I only shoot locally so I always get to come home to the wife and kids at night.

As for editing - the only ones I've edited are the 3-5 minute music video highlight recaps. (Some of my companies also offer instagram 1-minute recaps as well as longer 15-30 minute documentary edits, but the vast majority of the edits that are done from my shooting are the 3-5 minute.) It's basically a music video. I edit in rhythm to the music and intersperse the best sound bites from the vows and/or toasts. I typically edit the day in chronological order although many of my companies mix up the timeline. There are a series of formalities that are basically always included (1st look, 1st dance, cake cutting, kiss...), and then beyond that I try to include the best beauty shots and the most emotional moments.

Most of the stuff is edited to slow, romantic songs. But I filled in twice for a Florida-based wedding videographer who does all hip-hop edits. (I think his clientele is mostly African-American.) He wanted all 4K slow motion and his edit was very fast cuts on the beat, like a rap video.

Here are 2 videos I shot and edited for my own company:
Solo-shooter: https://vimeo.com/374827169/d84ce12406
2-shooter: https://vimeo.com/352287753/fdbbeb1bb8

Here's an edit from a 2-shooter I shot for another company and didn't edit: https://mediazilla.com/hq1mzc5q1

And from a different company: https://vimeo.com/386329408
 
Last edited:
Here are 2 videos I shot and edited for my own company:
Solo-shooter: https://vimeo.com/374827169/d84ce12406
2-shooter: https://vimeo.com/352287753/fdbbeb1bb8
Click to expand...

I enjoyed them. Obviously you keep the pace up, with each shot just a second or two, but also there is consideration of which shot follows which, and how it lines up with the music.

The odd thing is that everyone else seems to think I'm discreet and I've had so many priests tell me they didn't even notice me afterwards.[...] I get the same reaction from the couples about the entire day.
Click to expand...

I used to get the same feedback. Then I learned that most couples are in some kind of dream state and have a hard time remembering most details about the day, it seems to go by for them so quickly. I suppose the officiant likewise is having tunnel vision, focused on such a large responsibility.

Now a true test would be to ask the guests. As a guest, I would always notice the photographer and videographer. I'm ambivalent: sometimes they seemed to fit in, and sometimes they seemed to be a pimple on the face of an otherwise beautiful ceremony. It wasn't even the ones that moved around more. One was just on a tripod in the corner, nevertheless annoying me. Maybe I notice them more because I'm looking, because I used to do it. Maybe most guests don't mind. And with the antics of modern photographers, doing some kind of interpretive dance all over the church, maybe it's a lost cause trying to be the discreet videographer. Still that doesn't stop me from every once in while returning to the Sudoku puzzle in my head: how to film the ceremony thoroughly while doing it in a way that would not annoy even me, if I were one of the guests.

Some of my companies also offer instagram 1-minute recaps as well as longer 15-30 minute documentary edits, but the vast majority of the edits that are done from my shooting are the 3-5 minute.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that sometimes the only video delivered to the client is a 5-minute one? Because that would sure make things a lot easier.

Back when I was working, companies would offer a highlight version like that, but they would always also give some kind of full-length edit, around an hour long (or more!)

As for me, mine were 30-45. I cut the reception down to smithereens. Three hours of reception became 10-15 minutes of video. So the reception flowed well. But I had a hard time cutting out any part of the ceremony except dead space, or maybe I would keep just one verse of a three-verse hymn.

If the whole video is less than 30 minutes, that means you have cut chunks out of the ceremony, which makes it a lot easier to cover in a well-paced way with just one camera. Otherwise, with the live-coverage style that I shot the ceremony, I always felt I needed 7 cameras.
 
Last edited:
combatentropy said:
Now a true test would be to ask the guests. As a guest, I would always notice the photographer and videographer. I'm ambivalent: sometimes they seemed to fit in, and sometimes they seemed to be a pimple on the face of an otherwise beautiful ceremony. It wasn't even the ones that moved around more. One was just on a tripod in the corner, nevertheless annoying me. Maybe I notice them more because I'm looking, because I used to do it. Maybe most guests don't mind. And with the antics of modern photographers, doing some kind of interpretive dance all over the church, maybe it's a lost cause trying to be the discreet videographer. Still that doesn't stop me from every once in while returning to the Sudoku puzzle in my head: how to film the ceremony thoroughly while doing it in a way that would not annoy even me, if I were one of the guests.
Click to expand...

I always inconvenience the guests in some way, either blocking someone's view of the toasts or nearly backing into them. They usually don't mind because everyone appreciates the significance of recording the event. If I don't need to operate the camera during a toast, I will crouch and monitor from below so I'm blocking less of the view.

I did have one guest tell me she was pleased by how little the cameramen were obstructing the event. She showed me a photo on her phone of another wedding she had been to recently. There was a wall of videographers and photographers and lights in front of the main table at the reception. They were blocking everyone's view of the couple and the toasts. So, shooting telephoto from a distance and not lighting whenever possible make a big difference. (I have found that lighting the toast makes the speaker even more nervous, too. So I try to find a good angle to shoot them in the ambient light.)

Are you saying that sometimes the only video delivered to the client is a 5-minute one? Because that would sure make things a lot easier.

If the whole video is less than 30 minutes, that means you have cut chunks out of the ceremony, which makes it a lot easier to cover in a well-paced way with just one camera. Otherwise, with the live-coverage style that I shot the ceremony, I always felt I needed 7 cameras.
Click to expand...

I have only delivered the 5-minute edit, although I offer longer and shorter options. One of my client companies only does a 5-minute edit. The others offer other options. My most high-end company always delivers a short edit for Instagram quickly, followed by a 5-minute and usually a long edit.

The 5-minute edit hits a sweet spot of containing some detail but short enough that your friends will sit through it in Facebook. I think most couples would get other edits as well, but they don't to save money. So, the 5-minute edit seems most popular now (in my market, anyway) which is just as well from my POV.

And usually, all the raw footage is delivered. But no editing done there, obviously.

That being said, I always felt that I should have as many cameras as i could manage during the ceremony. It would be awesome to cut the whole thing together like a movie - with close-ups of both sets of parents rolling simultaneously as all the other angles. But I usually max out at 3 or 4. The companies I shoot for require me to roll 2 cameras during the ceremony, and if I have a 2nd shooter there will be a 3rd angle.
 
It sounds like you're doing the best you can.

I can hardly believe such short videos are now the norm, that sounds so much easier! I guess it makes sense if you're also handing over the raw footage. A couple years ago I went on Youtube and Vimeo to see what wedding videos looked like these days. I was frustrated that they were only posting highlights videos. Doesn't anyone ever post the corresponding full edit, I wondered. Now I know. There was no other edit :)
 
Many companies provide full edits, but they are mostly only for the couple, family.

And usually the highlights are for the public [because not many people are going to sit through 30 minutes, 1 hour+ of the entire day(s)].
 
For what I shoot, there is always a 5-minute highlight video. There is sometimes a longer edit as well.

Here's a half hour edit of one of the first weddings I shot, in 2015: https://vimeo.com/151982003

More recent - if you look on this page and click on Scene Selection, they have a longer edit of each stage of the day presented:

https://mediazilla.com/hq1mzc5q1

I didn't actually look through that until now. They use a lot of my shots where I'm reframing and it makes the shooting look much worse. (Usually I'm trying to reframe as quickly as possible to get many different shots and not caring as much about what happens between usable shots since the editing is fast.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top