Wedding video event reception lighting, on camera or tripod mounted

I

iunknown

Well-known member
What lights would everyone recommend? Tripod has the pros of being less noticeable maybe? Cons, you'd have to have a ton of light to light up the dance floor (1000w LED?)? On camera, pro you have better light for single subject. Cons, can't really use on a stabilizer? Doesn't have to be the best light, just something that would help reduce the purple/red lights that these venues love to use.
 
Everyone would recommend what they find works best for them. What worked best for me was a simple on-camera light. Sweet and simple. No tripods and lights with extention cables, no bright tripod mounted illumination to have guests constantly tell you to either turn that bight light the other way or shut it off completely. YOU don't have to light up the entire dance floor. If you want the dance floor lit up adequately, ask the maitre D to turn up the dimmers to the reception dance area. Good luck with that option. Now you can either put up a few right tripod mounted mega watts and risk blowing fuses which may also happen to power the DJ ( happened to me several times at the worst moment) or just forget lighting up the entire dance area altogether and just concentrate on what's in front of the camera. You only have the bride to satisfy. We are our own critics when it comes down to what the final video should look like. You may consider tripod mounted battery powered LED lights. Fine, but LED lights in that brightness category are really on the pricey side of things and once you have achieved the desired brightness level you may be wondering why didn't the maitre D just match that level to begin with. In other words, either it's the reception's electricity or your battery's. What's the big deal. The maitre D's just don't get it. Anyway, what I really do recommend is an on-camera LED light that has enough brightness to have a minimum 20 foot throw. Don't even think about using a led unit that runs on AA batteries. There is no such thing that has the brightness you need. Never mind the specs, as most if not all of them are extremely overrated in the brightness level. You really need a minimum 100 watt filament equivalent with a dimmer. It must be powered either from a 7.2 volt slide on/clip on battery or by a lightweight battery belt ( 9 to 14V DC if the led light can accept those voltages). Leds are really 4 to 5 times more efficient than filaments, meaning that a battery that would run say a 50 watt filament for an hour will run the led for about 4-5 hrs. The advantages of leds is of course the longer run times and lightweight batteries s well as not having to worry about a light filament going "poof!" if you bang it around. The led light are rated in lux and not in watts. The reason is that a watt value is really meaningless as a measure of brightness, as watt denotes power consumed. We may all be familiar with a 100 watt kitchen light bulb that radiates heat and light in almost all directions. Well, that 100 watt is what it sucks out of the wall socket but it is really something like a 1700 lumens of light intensity, and if channeled through a reflector and beam-narrowed down a bit would be in the order of something like 2400 lux. But wait ! leds units, and most reputable manufacturers of such rate the lux values at a distance of 3 feet or 1 meter, as it should be. BUT some rate the lux values at 2 feet ( much higher lux value)...hmmm... Also to mention, many led lights are bluish in color output and therefore require a yellow "warming" filter to balance the light to indoor ( reception venue red ) illumination. Now we have a REDUCED output led because of that light robbing filter but that is not all. Most led units DO NOT have a wide even beam WITHOUT the hotspot in the center, so now them led units generously provided a DIFFUSER to take care of that issue. Now we have a further reduced output to about half of the rated led spec. Of course, there are leds that are powerful, even beam, well made, native 3200K (warmish) color temperature without any filters, but are not in the sub $100 category. Weddings are very demanding on equipment and videographers. I choose lightweight equipment that is of pro standards and leave tripods, dollies, cabling at home. I just carry around a spare camera with batteries as extras. I realized the need for a powerful on-camera led light that has no blue cast and greenish spike as well as no hotspot and built for pro use. After all you only have to make the bride happy and look good. Keep it simple and light and you will find that videotaping a wedding can be enjoyable.
 
Any on-camera led will have a 20 ft. throw. As a matter of fact they will all throw to over 50 ft.
The issue is how bright will it be at those distances ???
If you gain up the camera to 18 db perhaps a cheap led unit will do at 20 ft.but you will have grain the size of golfballs.
It's funny how many claim the leds go easily 20 to 30 feet (and I'm talking about a led unit that is less than 100 bucks)
Let's get real. In reality, we do video work that requires those distances and we also don't want to introduce grain, or at least to avoid it as much as possible.
We also want an even wide beam along with a dimmer. We also want the unit not to break apart under normal pro use.
We also require a unit that has a faithful color reproduction and not one that is of greenish yellow or bluish with or without color filtering.
As far as brightness required for 20 feet, in my experience, you would need AT LEAST a led unit that has an honest rating of 1600 to 2200 lux. and that would be the equivalent of a 90 to 120 watt bulb.
I know, I have done many weddings in my lifetime and I always used a 75 to 100 watt halogen with battery belts. Reception venues are dark.
Closeups ( under 10 feet )don't present a problem, a 35 watt bulb will do, or a led of 600 lux/lumens for under 50 dollars.
Now here is where it gets interesting. You can wide angle the camera to seemingly gain the distance, BUT the led lights ( most if not all of them) will not be able to cover that wide field. So now a diffuser comes into
play to widen up that beam to cover the wide angle shot and reduce the brightness. Gain-Up time. Now you understand why we wedding videographers need serious brightness?
Examples: Bridal party, parents and the newly weds make their entrance in the reception. Usually 2 time zones away. You need serious brightness at those distances.
Bride dance with father, you need a full length shot (head to toe), you're looking at least 15 feet distances and that is with your lens stretched out all the way.
The bride and father down the church aisle coming in. 3 time zones away ( in this case no on camera video light will save you, especially in a dark church on an overcast day. Gain UP time)
I could go on and on.
In response to your question. Yes, there are many units out there that can reach 20 ft. Check out Comer 1800 model at 1800 lux, The litepanels Sola ENG , they both have the ability to narrow down the beam for added brightness for distance shooting.
I personally helped design and build one for my purposes. A one off prototype that is 2400 lux and a 70 degree super wide beam and perfect 3200K all without gels or filters. Even that one will struggle at over 25 feet with 0 gain.
 
Bounce a lowel omni against a white ceiling or an umbrella on a well positioned place at the party, don't forget to sand bag it, I've always find a convenient place to locate it . And use a Led with good power on your camera with an amber filter, That will give you a clean image, actual cameras hold very well at 0-18 db gain.
However this set up usually gives me between f 2.8 and 6-10 db gain, enough for a clean 1080 Blu-ray.
Halogen on camera lighting days are over, thanks God.
 
Felipe Henao said:
Bounce a lowel omni against a white ceiling or an umbrella on a well positioned place at the party, don't forget to sand bag it, I've always find a convenient place to locate it . And use a Led with good power on your camera with an amber filter, That will give you a clean image, actual cameras hold very well at 0-18 db gain.
However this set up usually gives me between f 2.8 and 6-10 db gain, enough for a clean 1080 Blu-ray.
Halogen on camera lighting days are over, thanks God.
Click to expand...

Very often there's a conflict of interest... the bride wants a 'intimate' atmosphere... the camera people want enough light for a shot... these are conflicting requirements...

For stills the biggest problem tends to be focusing in the dark... but with flash, even flashes that are off camera and remotely triggered, one can get some 'exciting' shots.

The closest to that for the continuous light needs of digital film, would be for the camera person to setup lights temporarily around, and perhaps have an assistant control the lights so that one can get more dramatic effects... other than the 'headlights' and the attendent 'deer caught in the headlights' look.

It would be much more difficult for a onemanshow to do this, but I suppose it could be done...

So, I could see a couple of lights around pointed to the ceiling if it is a reasonable 'bounce' surface, and depending on what action is going on control one or two. I could also see lights angled to the room/floor to get more cross or side light options, again a couple of units scattered about and controlled to give a good effect...

If the light in the reception is up... well obviously less lights are needed, but for those 'dark, intimate' settings... one needs more to give a good result...
 
Every videographer has their own MO of doing things as far as the technical aspects of the shoot. I remember not too long ago when I used to schlep around tons of equipement including 2 light stands with lowell totas 750 watt halos off silvered umbrellas and a 100 watt dimmable halo on-cam light powered off a ton of brick belt batteries. The camera alone weighed in at 22 lbs. Sure the lighting was great, but that was the time that I got what I charged for the contract, and what I charged was enough to keep me happy with the amount of schlepping, sweating , set-up and break down of lights, stands, taped extentions, tripod, dolly and ladder. Sure, those were the days when I got paid what I was worth. Nowadays, things have changed. Not only am I getting less contracts (sign of the times at least here in the NE), but most of my clients wallets are tight and some don't even care about video, or video is not essential/important/desired anymore as before. Here is an example from pre 2008 era: couple comes to office, couple views quick re-cap demo, couple gets a FAIR quote, couple thinks about it and haggles just a wee bit, couple leaves deposit. Now the scenario is a little different. Couple says video is an afterthought that they only want a record or clean-up edit AT A VERY LOW PRICE as they have a very limited budget LEFT OVER FOR VIDEO. They also mention that uncle Harry can do a little free video during the day since he bought a HD camera and would prefer him to sit down and enjoy the day rather than video-ing the event. This is really saying that if the price is not too low, then uncle Harry goes into action. They mention that they love my demos but the price must be lowered to reflect the state of their wallet and recession. Well, not to veer off topic here, but when I see the limo driver gets a $200 dollar tip for driving around like a couple of hours and their 1200 dollar cake is only half eaten, and we videographers are the ones who put the longest hours on our feet, the most stressed, the most overtime at edit time, then I draw my line and decide to cut not only corners but especially weight and time as well as equipment to schlepp. So now my lighting is not the beautiful hollywood/stage/ theatrical kind at all but the unique kind of lighting that reflects nicely on their seemingly thin wallet. So his is what I did to cut the fat:
No bridal prep, no more groom's house, no follow photographer at the park, no staying late till the fat lady sings, no fancy editing while burning the midnight oil. My camera has also slimed down to only a few pounds including my only single on-cam led. Now I am affordable, everyone is happy, especially me and uncle Harry.
 
Norman99 said:
No bridal prep, no more groom's house, no follow photographer at the park, no staying late till the fat lady sings, no fancy editing while burning the midnight oil. My camera has also slimed down to only a few pounds including my only single on-cam led. Now I am affordable, everyone is happy, especially me and uncle Harry.
Click to expand...

Yes things are changing, but if we people who make a living out of video, want to remain in business, have to put some love in what we do, and just as the cameras went smaller and better, we have to do a better video, in less time, and a better price. I think is possible, creativity is the answer.
Number one we have to enjoy what we do.
 
Felipe Henao said:
Yes things are changing, but if we people who make a living out of video, want to remain in business, have to put some love in what we do, and just as the cameras went smaller and better, we have to do a better video, in less time, and a better price. I think is possible, creativity is the answer.
Number one we have to enjoy what we do.
Click to expand...

The handwriting on the wall for the Wife's business was when she did 3 successive 'bridal fairs', and the typical 'attendee' looked to be just barely 18... if that, and had mom in tow who was clutching the purse strings... Our client base had always been the pretty much independent bridal couple, who would pay for their own wedding... that sort of client started buying a house instead of a big expensive wedding... The Wife started doing 'destinations' weddings, where she would go with the couple to the location where their wedding was, and that really stripped down the equipment, and also only took on a few of those a year.
 
I was just talking recently about the lighting issue at dark receptions with a seasoned videographer who says he never had to bring any supplemental lighting ( other than the on-camera light) to any wedding he ever did over the past 15 years. His "secret " is really a simple but effective one. He does, however, bring along and keeps in the trunk of his car a Lowel Omni with stand and extension cable , just in case. He goes to explain that at the 2nd deposit time, which is usually 2-4 weeks before the event, he makes aware to the couple that depending on the darkness level of the moody theme (either by candlelight or otherwise) decided upon by the couple, he either may have to spoil that moody theme ( permission of the bride needed) with the stand mounted light or resort to having the illumination level raised at the venue with the maitre D. Either way it is a three option choice, he goes on to explain, have the light on the stand which will spoil the theme, have the Maitre D up the levels to the same intensity of the stand, or no stand at all with the resultant dark background. He stresses the point that it would be advantageous for the same lighting level if the maitre D ups the levels as there would be no possible risk of having guests trip upon the power cable and that no blinding light will annoy them. That being said the option automatically narrows down to two choices, either the room lights go up or have a darkened background video. That choice has to be made by the couple before the event date under the assumption that the venue will be on a dark theme. According to rough estimates by the videographer 60% the couple opted for the darkened background and 40% had the Maitre D up the levels to produce a pleasing but not too brightly lit, somewhere of a compromise that would make both parties happy. He never used the light in his trunk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top