Hence having someone who's keen and interested.Originally Posted by cgbier
I honestly don't know what minimum wage is in England, I used it as a rough guide/example.
Hence having someone who's keen and interested.
I honestly don't know what minimum wage is in England, I used it as a rough guide/example.
I don't see the problem.
I've switched to DSLR's 2 years ago for all of my work, most of it is run & gun and when spring and summer arrives I do weddings too.
With the right setup, you barely have to switch lenses or adjust ISO.
- a 24-70 2.8 lens,
- combine the above lens with a Fader ND variable ND filter, it allows you to stick to ISO 160 for all your outdoor shots,
- a viewfinder so you can judge exposure and focus accurately,
- I also recommend installing Magic Lantern : the zebra and zoom function have helped me tremendously on my commercial work on getting great footage that can take some grading,
- I recommend using the freeware flaat picture profile/style : combined with Magic Lantern it gives great footage, not too flat and perfect to get the maximum dynamic range without any banding when grading.
When shooting weddings, a T2i with that 2.8 24-70 lens on a monopod is really all you need. And of course, some experience in focusing manually.
We carry a steadicam, slider and crane too, and more lenses (a fisheye, a 50mm 1.4 for the closeups and opening dance), but only use these when we have time to set up. On most weddings we do, there's plenty of moments where you can set up a crane and do some detail shots.
The real craft of wedding videos is to NOT document every single thing happening, but to tell the story of that day. That means visiting all locations beforehand, meeting the couple a few times, ...
Simply shooting everything out of fear of missing things will only clutter your final edit and give you headaches when editing.
Can I mention I'm not sure? Immune is a BIG word...
That's a good point. Better to capture it with deep focus rather than deep blurry.
As I usually say about working with both DSLR & Camcorders with DOF adapters: they COMPLETE each other. You can work with BOTH for the same work. One is stronger in low-light while the other performs better in bright daylight (no need of filters to work with f/1.8 lenses).
I'd suggest to get the camcorder to record 80% of what's happening and use the DSLR for close-ups and to fill some parts with interesting artistic and aesthetic shallow DOF shots as transitions. One thing that comes to my mind is: rack focus from a candle to (in the background) the bride & groom holding hands. Shots like that as b-camera would make it less boring to watch, and would be quite interesting visually.
Same. I've done some nice shots at the reception that I used as transition between the outdoor ceremony and the reception. All shots blended with the music they chosen.
Ive had clients who know nothing about video tell me there is a major difference night and day between my old and new stuff and i quote "there are two types of HD" they have determined, and these are clueless consumers.
However i agree that only a fool says you can use a dslr outdoors with nd filters, well, thats bs because what the hell you going to do when the subject decides to go inside you dont have time to unscrew the filter then readjust exposure + iso settings. Thats why the c300 was made, $5000 out of the $12 price is for the nd filter and the other $5000 for the price covers jitters correction (more nicely called "rolling shutter" nby the lalalalalalalas pushing the technology).
The technology also is terrible, there is no inhouse image sharpness whatsoever like youll find on hdv cam, so your literally hanging by a thread with focus adjustments, even on the c300.
You literally move the focus wheel by the width od a needle point the whole shot is ruined.
Last edited by blondandfun; 2012 May 4th at 04:22.
Well said blondanfun, that is why i have decided to go all 60d in the prep, then switch to camcorder in church and around the church, then cutaways in church my 100mm f2 dslr, reception all dslr as they are in one place usually... speeches, dance, mingling dslr
My hero. LOL.
Yeah, C300... interesting, I've read abou tit
Vice President, Team HVFF - http://hvfffollowfocus.webs.com/ HV Follow Focus
Proud owner CamDolly - Modular Camera Dolly and Slider System
Not everything has to be "film look". You wouldnt want to watch xfactor or american idol or whatever with no zooming and stuff. The "TV" look, imo, works best for receptions that i shoot.
Its not supposed to look like a film! Use a real camcorder.
Also, only a DJ can properly light the reception. The top DJs i know use spotlights that are 50x more powerful than any videographers light.
If the client complanes i point them out to this and explain what happens to cheapazzes who cut corners on lighting. Videographers certainly should have some lighting, but thats stupid to expect more than an onboard cam light since thats a completely different professional service.
Dont use dslr because the client is too stupid or cheap to adequately light the venue.
Ya know, kinda like those lazy ceapazz indie filmmakers who use dslr so they dont need to light the scene...everyone but them sees right through it.
You obviously have no idea what a Vari ND is ... no need to unscrew. Back at the right exposure within a second.
Same for adjusting ISO, which takes another second on my T2i.
About focus adjustments : that would be correct for someone shooting everything at 1.2 or not knowing what (s)he's doing. You do realize that you can stop down a lens ?
Finally, your disdain for your clients speaks for itself.
I actually own a variable ND filter you are referring to, and IMO It's inadequate for indoors live event with no additional lighting. Therefore, has to be unscrewed.
Not sure what the second sentence means, but it sounds aggressive. We're talking about things here, not people.
Didn't mean to sound agressive. However, you calling people "fools" doesn't help much I must say.
All I can say is that I haven't experienced the problems you mention. To me it's much more operator-related than camera-related.
I see plenty of people who have a hard time adapting to shooting with a DSLR cos they refuse to adapt and change their workflow.
Or because they have no or very limited knowledge of photography (which is essential when using DSLR's).
Shooting with a DSLR requires you to get out of your comfort zone of autofocus & automatic exposure. However, if you choose to make the effort and invest some time and energy in educating yourself, the rewards are there in terms of picture quality and the differences with lazy camerawork become very obvious.
About lighting : try shooting indoor with any camcorder without any additional lighting ...
Everyone has good points but in my experience this year it is almost immpossible in a run and gun situation to use all dslr...period... in controlled enviroments it is great, so i have decided to use the 60ds for the prep, the church arrivals and exits, the full reception and speeches and dance which only leaves the ceremony with the hv40s and hfg10s with one dslr for that bokeh cut aways loook or i just may learn how to set up a rod rig and follow focus system, if anyone could enlighten me to the rods and focus wheel and can i then put that system on a monopd/tripod ect... Krewcial do you have rods and follow focus? Then coming down the isle getting everything in focus will be dealt with which is what i am not good at.. ok if the light is good and i use the tamron 17mm end wide open it will work but to wide...maybe
I've become so used to (and skilled) at pulling focus manually that it wouldn't add that much production value to my work.
I have a follow focus but haven't used it on weddings yet, and probably won't. It adds weight to the rig, plus it means using rods (which I don't do today). I might take it along for the controlled shots of the people preparing the venue, stuff like that where you can do multiple takes and have time to set up and compose your shot.
But it shouldn't be a problem to mount it on a monopod. I use the same manfrotto quickmount (actually its from Calumet but compatible with Manfrotto) on all my gear : slider, tripod, monopod and crane. Just the transition from the quickrelease plate to rods might be a challenge if you don't have the right block on your rods.
About using DSLR's : it all depends on the kind of wedding videos you make. We don't make the 60 minute or longer version with the complete ceremony, our full version is somewhere between 20 and 30 minutes. Our clients don't expect a full recording of the church ceremony, since that is not what we do.
If you make 2 to 3 hour videos (which we find boring and noone ever watches again) you definitely need the typical camcorder-on-tripod to capture it all.
Let's see it in that way: You still have the one or the other half frame from photographer flashes, but the XF gets useable footage out of situations where I never had even taken the HV out of the bag.
Daniel, keen and interest doesn't replace experience. I rarely have assistants let shoot anything during the main gig. They were there to change film, batteries, hand me another body,... shooting only in the late phases of the receptions (when ties aren't around the neck anymore, but around the forehead) for practice.
Wedding is stress, and if you let someone shoot who has already trouble to discern green/black (Fuji) and red/black (Ilford) in the hassle, you think they'll deliver great shots? Keenness leads to nervousness and overzealousness. You want to have the cold-bloodedness of a sniper at a wedding.
"It is dark the other side. Very dark!" - "Oh, shut up and eat your toast!"
About using DSLR's : it all depends on the kind of wedding videos you make. We don't make the 60 minute or longer version with the complete ceremony, our full version is somewhere between 20 and 30 minutes. Our clients don't expect a full recording of the church ceremony, since that is not what we do.
If you make 2 to 3 hour videos (which we find boring and noone ever watches again) you definitely need the typical camcorder-on-tripod to capture it all.[/QUOTE]
I tell a story in my films of the day as it unfolds, i have tried the 20 minurte short form, you deliver they say is that it!! so i now have a good balance with the story in slight order of the day but mixed up a little, i also found jumping forward and back to the day and afternoon and different parts of the day confused the hell out of my clients. my films are roughly 50 minutes long and far from boring but i say still the camcorder is a life saver at times and will carry on mixing to cover myself.
Hahha Talking about wanting everything that happened? That's what has been my experience with some African weddings i did last year. They want everything from prep till the guests walk-out from the reception. That's like about 12 hours plus. The prep you can get around with select shots and the aesthetics but from the service with the sermons, etc till the end is full coverage. Photo shoot- select but the reception again is full coverage.
So i am having to do two versions now - record the full version and then of the full version make some sort of a mini version. i hand them both versions . needless to say i am learning to require in equivalent payment what it demands of me ad my time, and strain on my gear.
I didn't mean to say your films are boring. The only thing is (coming from a documentary background) : it is impossible to make an entertaining and good film if you're forced to include a boring and static ceremony.
My clients know what they can expect from me. I usually meet the client 2 to 3 times before the wedding, we visit the locations together, ... we get to know each other. And my website is pretty clear about how I work.
They hire me for what I do. That is a nice edit that summarizes their wedding day and can be viewed by people who don't even know them without being bored.
Whenever people contact me who expect me to give them at least an hour of film, I simply decline. That's not what I do and I wouldn't be doing them a service. There's plenty of other wedding videographers that can do that for them.
I want to make a good and entertaining film that tells their story and that can also be viewed by people who weren't there or don't even know the couple. If I would make 60 minute -or longer- wedding films with the full ceremony, I would only attract more couples like that. Which I want to avoid. Every movie I make is part of my portfolio. So it is also in my own best interest to make the best and most to-the-point movies I can. It's all about positioning yourself in the market.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote