Videographers Shooting & Displaying Stills

<p>My wife and I shot a wedding yesterday in Philly where the bride had 2 videographers present. All went well during the wedding, which was outdoors @ the Philly Museum of History. After the ceremony my wife directed the formals of the B&G and the rest of the wedding party. During this time one of the videographers grabbed a digital rebel, with a strobe bracket, and started taking formals of the parents. My wife directed the bride to put a stop to this and the videographer agreed to stay out of the way. However, with every set of posed shots the videographer was in the background also taking shots.</p>

<p>Once at the reception it became clear why. They had a laptop displaying all of the stills that were shot during the wedding, and also at the reception as this activity continued throughout. The quality of work was not that great and I was asked by a couple of guest if they were displaying out pictures. I made it clear they were not.</p>

<p>We approached the B&G once again and they refused to put a stop to this. They wanted those pictures immediately displayed and that we needed to "relax." </p>

<p>We have the following in our agreement:</p>

<p>12. EXCLUSIVITY / GUEST PHOTOGRAPHY: It is understood that Inna Photography will act as the sole and exclusive wedding photographer. Inna Photography reserves the right to bring one assistant at its discretion. Since flashes from guests’ cameras may ruin shots taken by Inna Photography, THE CLIENT acknowledges that they are responsible for notifying all of their guests that guest photography is not permitted at any time while the professional photographer is in session. The formal photography time is for the exclusive use of Inna Photography to capture the formal wedding portraits. Due to time constraints and the need for subjects to pay full attention to the professional photographer, guest photography is requested to be done at a separate time. </p>

<p>We continued to shoot to the end but we did talk of threatening to walk out if the activity of the videographers did not stop. What would you have done? This is our first year of shooting solo (that was our unlucky 13th wedding this season) so we are not sure how to handle something like this. Any feedback is appreciated.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Talk to the B&G (which you did), and carry on. Take the high road. <br /><br />Threatening to walk out? Don't make your first year doing this your last by going directly from Start-Up Mode to Prima Donna Mode in your first season.<br /><br />And, consider bringing your own videography services into the mix of what you're selling. Obviously the B&G wanted services that you couldn't provide. If you don't want the friction, head it off at the pass, and team up with somebody who knows how to coordinate on the whole process. <br /><br />And if nothing else, why not run your own just-shot-slideshow? If that's something the B&G liked (which it sounds as though they did), take note.</p>

<p>This was probably a service offered by the videographer that the bride wanted. The bride probably didn't realize the conflict between the contracts. While the clause in your contract is pretty common in wedding photography, it doesn't really do much.<br>

1. If you make too much of a stink about it at the wedding, you look bad.<br>

2. If you complain to the B/G after the wedding, you look bad.<br>

3. If you complain to the videographer at the wedding and he replies, "I'm doing what the B/G contracted me to do, if you don't like it, take it up with them." If you do, you look bad.</p>

<p>So what you should do: Suck it up, be a professional, work with the videographer (and other vendors) to make the best possible day for the B/G and MAKE BETTER IMAGES THAN A REBEL SET TO THE GREEN SQUARE.</p>

<p>I would not have paid any attention to any of this, I would have just gone about my business getting the shots I needed. Edit: Also I forgot to mention that you're taking yourselves too seriously, weddings are a circus and they're not going to rotate around you. So, you need to go back and adjust you're method or your going to jump off the nearest cliff.</p>

<p>Matt,</p>

<p>I don't think asking the bride to honor a contract she signed is in any way out of order. What's the point of a contract?</p>

<p>Who looks bad if you walk out on the wedding?<br>

There are a couple of problems here: First, you need to make sure that your client understands this contract clause very clearly at the time they sign the contract. The videographer is using their stills and the laptop display as part of their sales pitch and the couple may have chosen them because of this was included. We are rapidly reaching the point where the videographer will be able to pull high quality stills from the video stream and then display those at the reception. How will you put a stop to this since they were shooting video, not stills. The day of the wedding is too late to put a stop to this. Second, I think that you are going over the top with your wording about guest photography. The quests flashes are not going to ruin your shots. The biggest risk is that your subjects will look at the other flash when you take your shot. I simply ask the guests to shoot after me or allow them a few seconds to shoot before me. In the end, not allowing guests to take photographs while you are working will not endear you to your clients or their guests.<br>

I don't know if any of this helps . . .</p>

<p>Does anyone really read the contract? The only thing the B&G look at on the contract is the price & date, number of photos, type of album. The rest is trvial to them, they have so much else to worry about. If items like you being the only shooter is important to you, put it in bold and talk about it b4 they sign the contract. Put the fear of god in them b4 they sign the contact, if they agree to your terms, great go ahead.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Seems that we were both being a little too sensitive on this issue. We never enforce the guest issue. We too allow them time to click a few off, and since practically every guest has a point and click or a cell phone with a camera it would be nearly impossible to enforce any way. We did not appreciate the videographer grabbing the wedding party for still when we were shooting the formals. I guess we'll just grin and bare it the next time. </p>

<p>It was a particularly chaotic wedding from start to finish and I think that was a contributing factor in all of this angst. Thanks for your responses.</p>

<p>First, your contract clause talks about guests and their actions during the formals, particularly with flash. It does not talk about videographers or other vendors taking stills. So even if the client read the clause (unlikely unless you went over it with them), the clause is really not pertinent.</p>

<p>Some photographers have a clause about other professionals shooting stills--both other pro photographers and videographers. That might be more pertinent. However, even in cases where they have a clause and such a thing happened, I have never heard of anyone walking out. It is one of those clauses that is there kind of as a warning--more like a planning tool. As everyone points out, you look like a prima donna if you walk out. Your reputation takes a hit and you've fouled up your relationship with the client, who is in a position to refer you or trash your name.</p>

<p>Second, were the videographers selling the images? If not, I wouldn't worry about it. I've photographed a number of weddings where the videographers were shooting stills to include in a slide show to be shown during the reception. I've even seen one set up by the DJ where video cameras were set up in the reception room and the activity shown on large screen monitors as it happened.</p>

<p>If you sell your services as a whole and don't rely on print sales, and if the videographers are not looking to sell their images to the couple or to guests, I can't see getting excited about the practice. Usually their images are just plain not-so-good, and they are shot with a different purpose. The flash on a bracket, I might have stopped, and if the other photographer tried to direct things, I would have stopped that. But otherwise, if he or she does not impact my shooting, I don't care what they do.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>What's the point of a contract?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>In this context, it's mostly there to protect you when the <em>client says to you</em> that they're unhappy with the way something's going (or went). Has that come up? Do you perceive that something you were going to sell (per the contract) has been un-done because of the mediocre stills shot by the other vendor hired to be there?</p>

<p>Wow. I can't believe you actually threatened the B&G with walking out of their wedding. Words fail me... I am sure you'll be getting a lot of referrals from that couple now.</p>

<p>Buy or rent a projector and start showing the images that YOU shot during the reception. It's a fairly common request these days, it can help boost your print sales, and keeps people focused on what you (the professional photographer) have shot.</p>

<p>You said, "I don't think asking the bride to honor a contract she signed is in any way out of order." Here are two thoughts:</p>

<ol>

<li>It is absolutely out of order to do so on her wedding day. Unless there is such an egregious violation of the terms. But having your feelings hurt by another vendor doesn't come close to it.</li>

<li>The moment... the <em>precise</em> moment you have to refer a client to the signed contract, the relationship is over. Doesn't matter if it is the wedding day, the day after, the day before the... it's over. They're not going to call you for first year anniversary photos, maternity photos, family portraits, or more. They're not going to recommend you to their friends and their friends will have already heard their side of the story so they won't even need to be told not to call you. </li>

</ol>

<p>The other vendors at the wedding are not your enemy, they are not competition. Work with them. I often hang out with the videographer and we communicate to each other what we are intending to do and where we are intending to be. We work as a team for that day and we're rarely in each others way and often end up getting the same scene from different angles (one on video, one on stills).</p>

<p>But if you take nothing away from this thread but one thing, take this - never place your client in the middle of a disagreement with another vendor.</p>

<p>"We are rapidly reaching the point where the videographer will be able to pull high quality stills from the video stream" -- And on the other side, DSLRs that shoot video will make it possible for wedding still photogrpahers to offer their customers video as well, so "revenge" time is near. :) Very seriously, though, the ultimate approach is to find a good videographer you can either hire outright the same as you would an assistant, subcontract with or become partners with. Then going forward you offer both stills and video (at an added price.) If you price it at a point where you make extra money by providing video, but offer the video add-on for less than what they would pay someone else separately, you can put the whole show under your control.</p>

<p>You waited too long to exert some control of the situation. As soon as one of the video guys pulls out a still camera I would have called a halt....with him directly, then if we needed more discussion we can go to the B/G. I have a copy of the contract that I carry the day of and I would go to the B/G and explain the problem. The key is not to deal with the video-guy after he has taken a bunch of shots he had no business taking in the first place.</p>

<p>Now, if there's some confusion about what the agreement actually was and the bride didn't realize that there was a conflict (in spite of the obvious fact that their signature is on the contract and the exclusivity clause is very specific), then we can consider the high road. I also would have expected the video guy to say something about this issue much earlier when we would have met initially and reviewed our goals/expectations. With established pros you can generally expect professional behavior....with the new crop of inexperienced vendors, weddings can become a bit of a circus.</p>

Stand behind your contract. If you have to walk, be sure to let the B&G know why. Give the couple a last chance to get a hold of the problem or ask them to have someone solve this issue, such as the best man, one of the parents. I'm don't want to cause a scene with the couple and leave a bad taste.

 

This has happened to me and probably every photographer thats been in bizz for a while.

 

I don't think I've ever had to walk out, although I have been in this position a few times.

<p><strong><em>We did not appreciate the videographer grabbing the wedding party for still when we were shooting the formals. I guess we'll just grin and bare it the next time.</em></strong></p>

<p>As am ex-wedding videographer myself I think you should be miffed. I can't imagine infringing on the photographer's rights to take the stills any more than he/she picking up a Sony FX and shooting video.</p>

<p>And I agree with everyone else. If you don't want something to happen, cover it at signing.</p>

<p>Matt gave great advice!!!</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>"This is our first year of shooting solo (that was our unlucky 13th wedding this season) so we are not sure how to handle something like this. <strong>Any feedback is appreciated</strong>."</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I hope you want blunt, but constructive feedback, ‘cause IMO if you don’t change your techniques quick smart, you won’t be in the business for very long.</p>

<p>Point by Point:</p>

<p><strong><em>“My wife directed the bride to put a stop to this and the videographer agreed to stay out of the way.”</em></strong></p>

<p>You escalated it to the Bride first up – and in heavens name why would you “<strong><em>Direct</em></strong> the Bride to put a stop to it? – it is HER wedding for crikey’s sake . . . you are lucky the Bride didn’t tell you to get knotted.</p>

<p>Better to FIND OUT what is going on. ASK QUESTIONS – ask the VIDEOGRAPHER – what are you doing? WHY are you doing this? Where are the images going to? WHEN will this happen HOW LONG do you intend to do this? All this time ONE of you is holding up the Videographer getting the INFORMATION the other is shooting the formals . . . there were TWO of you, correct?</p>

<p>But this is the point where it gets confusing to me: because in your profile you state that your WIFE is the Photographer and you only assist . . . so why would the Photographer stop shooting... why didn’t you take on the job of managing this? Unless EITHER of you could handle shooting the Formals alone?</p>

<p>I agree it is likely that this service was offered by the Video Company and the Bride said: “OK”.</p>

<p>*** </p>

<p><strong><em>“However, with every set of posed shots the videographer was in the background also taking shots”</em></strong></p>

<p>So - sort it at the first instance with the Video Guy. I think that in 90% of cases that would have done it, but they could say that they were engaged for the service – but remember one of you is keeping the guy with the camera stalled all the time, so HE has to make the dummy spit,, not you.</p>

<p>*** </p>

<p><strong><em>“They had a laptop displaying all of the stills that were shot during the wedding, and also at the reception as this activity continued throughout. The quality of work was not that great and I was asked by a couple of guest if they were displaying [our] pictures. I made it clear they were not. We approached the B&G once again and they refused to put a stop to this. They wanted those pictures immediately displayed and that we needed to "relax."”</em></strong><br>

<strong><em> </em></strong><br>

Too late – it was all over at that point. No leverage whatsoever in crying over the broken vase. <br>

And you did indeed need to relax. Crying to the Bride AGAIN . . . Like I mentioned previously at this point it was really lucky the Bride didn’t tell you where to shove it.<br>

<strong><em> </em></strong><br>

<strong><em>***</em></strong><br>

<strong><em> </em></strong><br>

<strong><em>We have the following in our agreement: etc . . .</em></strong><br>

<strong><em> </em></strong><br>

I don’t care, and likely neither did the Bride and Groom at that point either.</p>

<p>SO you have the legal argy bargy – what <strong><em>leverage</em></strong> does that document give you at the reception to stop the slideshow presentation? IMO, about four fifths of five eighths of sweet .... all. So <strong><em>without Leveage</em></strong> keep a still tounge in your gob.</p>

<p>For practical applications of solving this PROBLEM on site at the Wedding Reception your Contract is useless: unless you do indeed <strong><em>threaten to walk out</em></strong>, or <strong><em>do walk out </em></strong>AND you are <strong><em>100% certain </em></strong>you will <strong><em>WIN ALL </em></strong>legal judgements apropos the threat and/ or action, should the Clients take that route, later.</p>

<p>AND . . . there's more . . . only do so if you are 100% certain that the negative advertising of the ULTIMATE DUMMY SPIT or threat of the ULTIMATE DUMMY SPIT, will be beneficial to your ONE YEAR OLD BUSINESS ? ? ?</p>

<p>IMO, one has to be absolutely sure of oneself and have all the angles covered, before contemplating, and further advertising publically, the "walk out" line . . . <br>

<strong><em> </em></strong><br>

<strong><em>***</em></strong><br>

<strong><em> </em></strong><br>

<strong><em>“We continued to shoot to the end”</em></strong><br>

<strong><em> </em></strong><br>

The only good decision you have mentioned<br>

<strong><em> </em></strong><br>

<strong><em>***</em></strong><br>

<strong><em> </em></strong><br>

<strong><em>“but we did talk of threatening to walk out if the activity of the videographers did not stop.”</em></strong></p>

<p>I suggest you do just that – learning the hard way, might be the best . . . OK that night have been a little harsh . . . but it does make my point – just think through what type of questions you (or the Clients) might be asking on this and other forums, if you did walk out.</p>

<p>In all seriousness I ask you this one question: – how long did you spend with the Clients planning this Wedding Coverage and coving all aspects of it: you knew in advance about the two Wedding Videographers and their names and their company etc . . .? </p>

<p>I suggest also you have a re-read of this and understand the meaning of the words:<br>

<strong> </strong></p>

<ul>

<li>“Eventually I decided that wedding photography is something that I would really enjoy<strong><em>. I know how important this day is to the bride and groom and I want to be there for them.</em></strong><strong><em><br /></em></strong><br />My personality is fun, humorous, creative and <strong><em>very devoted to people I work for</em></strong>. These attributes <strong><em>allow me to work well with the subjects I am photographing so that I can bring out the best in them.” </em></strong></li>

</ul>

<p><strong><em> </em></strong><br>

These words should be familiar, no?</p>

<p>WW</p>

 

<p>Very well said William, exclusivity clause is all but useless once job is under way. What are you going to do run around with that and wave it, or call the police? No, just do your job the best you can, stay focusd and on task, and discuss it after the wedding if so much of a violation of terms was committed. Document all the infractions carefully of the breech, even take pictures to prove the issue later that you felt your work was interfered with. But here's the main point in my "humble" way of thinking. Much better pre-planning needs to be established with future couples or more, bigger and even increasingly frustrating moments are on the way. The single most important detail is that for the times scheduled, you the photog carried out your job in its entirety the best you could, whatever else happens has to be settled up later or much better planned for in advance. As with other subjects we're divided on this issue among the answers, but so be it.</p>

<p><em>"Very well said William, exclusivity clause is all but useless once job is under way. What are you going to do run around with that and wave it, or call the police?"</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

No, you don't need to call the police but you may be able to "nip the behavior in the bud" by acting on the issue right away. It's important to clarify roles/expectations so that the vendors and the B/G are all on the same page. The exclusivity clause should have been discussed in the early client consultation/planning sessions with the bride and the groom. If there were some confusion on the wedding day, it's better to sort it out right away and come to some aggreement rather than let the situation spiral and worsen. Of course it has to be done, assertively, diplomatically, tactfully, and with a cool head. All such skills are of course beyond breif answers on an internet forum.</p>

<p>A friend of mine had a wedding photographer who whipped out the contract and threatened to walk off the job because his contract also contained a "sole photographer" clause.</p>

<p>Who was his competition? Family members and guests who were taking pictures.</p>

<p>His stunt did generate lots of word of mouth and publicity, though. :)</p>

<p>Eric</p>

<p>A sense of humor goes a long way to make this a more enjoyable pursuit. That, and getting all your money up front : -) </p>

<p>The winds of change are blowing briskly, and it'll wear you down fighting it. Uncle Bobs, Video teams, herds of guests with flash-o-matics ... just a sign of the times. Just do better work with a smile. </p>

<p>I ask clients if there will be a videographer, and if so what is the client's priority? If it is the stills, then I ask that the video folks be told that ... which every client so inclined has done.</p>

<p>Zero issues in the past few years, but in our area wedding video business is way down ... much more than the still business.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>now you know for the next wedding to ask if the videographer will take stills. For them to display and sell them on the spot is very unprofessional. <br>

Going forward, I would suggest to inform future clients, you have the option to leave with no refunds.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>What's the point of a contract?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>According to yours, its apparently to protect yourselves in case other people's photography negatively affects the outcome of your own photography. Since the shoot is over, the purpose has been fulfilled.</p>