Be Kind to the Videographer, please

[suzyq]

Because I do both still photography and video, I may be more aware of the difficulties of shooting video that I

would be. I offer a few suggestions.

Consider your location when you are shooting in the same area as the videographer. If you move in and out of

the shot, you will make it unusable.Try to be aware of where the camera is in relation to you. And if you want to

go in front of the video camera and duck, get low enough so you will not be seen. Better yet, walk behind the

camera.

Video is not a series of images, but a flow and cropping cannot not remove the distraction at the edge of

the frame.

At our last wedding shoot, an assistant photographer made the footage of the wedding processional unusable as she popped in and out of the frame, sometimes from the side and sometimes from the bottom, her Gary Fong diffuser

leading the way. Certainly she did not intend to ruin my footage and I could not inform her during the

processional. Moving the camera was not an option as I was already right in the aisle.

This is not meant to be a rant. I know that I have stepped in front a video camera many times as well,

It is just something for all of us to consider.

Thanks.

[green_photog]

<p>If the video camera is stationary on a tripod, that's OK. But if the videotog is handholding the camera, there's no way the photog will know where the video camera is because the photog is usually in front of the videotog.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Susan - </p>

<p>Sounds like a rant to me...</p>

<p>Whenever there is a video camera present at a wedding - I make it a point to talk to the video people and find out and if at all possible coordinate locations, so we can both get the shots that we need and are hired to provide. </p>

<p>Most often couples don't realize that our choices for location are limited and if one gets the "shot" the other probably won't be able to since both can't be in the same physical space. The solution of course is to have one person do both and use a video camera mounted on top of the DSLR - on a bracket (kidding - although I did see a rig like this once) </p>

<p>The worst for me was the time the couple had 3 video cameras positioned all around the alter. They were covered from every angle - which left me very few spots that I could shoot from and not be in the video. Then the client had the audacity to accuse me of "taking it easy" because they had video of me a) not shooting every second, b) shooting from the same location (since i wasn't in any of the video) and c) taking a breather between the formals and the ceremony and then again after the ceremony before more formals. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Consideration goes both ways. I almost never have any problems with experienced, professional video people, and I'd venture to say, professional video people usually don't have problems with experienced, professional still photographers. The reason for this is consideration on both sides, and experience from having discussed these logistics with each other beforehand.</p>

<p>For instance, I'd love to stay out of video shots by going behind the videographer, but many times, there is no room to go behind, since the videographer didn't consider that someone would be considerate enough not to walk in the frame. :^)</p>

<p>Expectations have become bad enough that I find some videographers have adopted a very offensive position where before, they were much more relaxed. Perhaps it is because we now have 2-3 still photographers running around, along with 2-3 videographers running around, all competing for the same perfect angles (along with a herd of non-professionals). IMHO, there is no need for multiple media people running around. My opinion is not popular, but there it is.</p>

<p>About the worst experience (among quite a few) I've had with video people was the inexperienced beginner who was glued 3 feet in front of the couple at all times, including during the processional and recessional. I finally had to not only talk to him about staying back, but physically restrain him from creeping forward during the toasts. I don't even know why he'd need to be that close, unless he was photographing the subjects' nose hairs.</p>

<p>The other crazy making situation is the first dance, where 2-3 videographers and 2-3 photographers swirling around the couple would be comical if it weren't for all the hard feelings generated.</p>

<p>One pro videographer I've worked with a lot tells clients to pay attention to the still photographer, because he can always edit and for certain things, still photographers can't. Videographers also have the larger zoom range, normally, so again--no need to be 3 feet from the subjects unless you are going for a particular arty effect. If so, it is better to discuss having your own time with couple with the pro photographer so you aren't even competing with each other.</p>

[richardsnow]

<p>Susan -</p>

<p>I've been to several weddings where I'm unfortunately in the wedding video...usually during the reception. This happens when lazy videographers slap their camera(s) on a tripod(s) in a corner and zoom it out to get the whole dance floor/reception hall. It happens more than you think it would... <br>

Sorry, but I'm likely going to be on the dance floor and roaming around the reception, so expect me to be in every frame of the video if that's the way you're videoing the reception.</p>

<p>I do my best to not stand directly in front of the video camera or move directly in front of it, but lazy videography is lazy videography. If you're holding the camera and moving around...keeping tight framing than I do my best to stay out of the frame...but there will inevitable be a time when I'm somewhere in the frame.</p>

<p>The easiest time to stay out of the video is during the ceremony...as long as the videographer and I coordinate and work at staying out of each others way...it can be harder than it sounds, but it can be done.</p>

<p>(now I'm ranting, but alas that's what this thread started as...)</p>

<p>RS</p>

[savagesax]

I like messing with the video guys! Whenever their light is on I get in the way! It's fun!

 

Seriously, I know most of the guys in town and we get along very well, to the point of getting together for lunch with some of them. Same with the DJ's.

 

If the video person is in la la land, I will kindly offer some advice. Not every person is a pro. Just a friend of the family. Good or bad it's part of the job.

[mariosforsos]

<p>My experience is pretty much on par with Nadine's - what I'm seeing more and more frequently is "professional" videographers ("with XX years in the business" - somehow that seems to ALWAYS be the case) grab a good angle, switch on their blasting on-camera light (turning every complexion and shade to pasty white wax!) and then slowly creep forward until you literally have no access to any shot whatsoever apart from some very tight portraits shot with a 70-200.</p>

<p>The times I've literally had to drag the "professional" away and have a serious talk with him (it's usually a him!) have been increasing in both frequency and intensity lately and I'm not ashamed to admit that, in those circumstances where I could find no communication channels with the videographer, I went out of my way to ruin his work as completely as possible. I realise this makes me a horrible person, but if he's refusing to work with me, then, I'm sorry, he's working against me and I can't have that...</p>

[steve m smith]

<p>Does anyone actually ever watch their wedding videos? I have never watched mine (and I'm fairly sure I accidently recorded over it may years ago!).</p>

[cliff_nj]

<p>It goes both ways, but Karma often arrives early.<br>

I just worked with a video guy from a large company who told me he'd be in the back of the aisle with a tripod, and then planted himself right up front and center, 4 feet from the couple. I worked around him, crawled through bushes, and made it work. I snarled at him after ceremony and he just laughed. He then proceeded to eat hors d'euvres and drink! The couple was so pissed at Mr. Video they sent him home early and paid me extra to stay late.</p>

[Marcus Ian]

<p>Susan - Proper communication could have prevented this. -- Unless you had a direct, and cohesive conversation w/ both the client and the photographers ahead of time about where your camera was placed and pointed -- Ahead of time(!), <em>this failure was yours</em>. YOU know the difficulties of filming, YOU know about flow, and interruptions, YOU know about filming far more than a photographer, and part of your responsibilities is to ensure that ALL the relevant vendors are aware of your requirements (which are very real, and valid, don't get me wrong) -- the rehearsal would be an appropriate place to discuss this with the photog(s).</p>

<p>Personally, I attend the rehearsal, find my shooting locations - where/when I'll be there, and walk through them w/ the client <strong>during</strong> the rehearsals. This way, the client knows (and OKs) where I'll be, as well as the officiant, as well as anybody else who could be bothered to attend. If, <em>the next day</em>, I get in your way -- Too bad.</p>

[green_photog]

<blockquote>

<p>The other crazy making situation is the first dance, where 2-3 videographers and 2-3 photographers swirling around the couple would be comical</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Are people so self absorb that they need to have 5-6 guys chasing them on their wedding day? It would be comical to have 6 guys chasing even Will and Kate. So for us commoners, having more than 3 videotog/photog at one time would be too much already.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>I've photographed more than a few weddings where there were 2-3 videographers all videotaping the couple's first dance, with the main videographer trying to do circles around the couple. I understand the desire to provide exciting angles and shots, and to have multiple viewpoints, but if I had one or two second and third shooters in addition (I don't use them) you'd have your 6 media people swarming around.</p>

<p>In these situations, I really have a difficult time avoiding video lights or gear or bodies in the backgrounds of my images, and it eats into my time--some first dances are so short you hardly have time to get more than just one or two really good shots.</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>Aside from the weddings I've shot myself, when my wife and I got married we hired a studio that did both stills and video. I know other weddings photographers who do the same. This way, there is one boss in charge of the photo/video crew and they have to work together. It also means that the photo studio (it's usuallyl the photo studio adding video to their business rather than the other way around) has the added revenue stream of video. If I were still doing weddings, I would certainly make this part of my business plan, very possibly to the point of declining to accept contracts for weddings where there will be third-party videographer.</p>

[simon_crofts]

<blockquote>

<p>very possibly to the point of declining to accept contracts for weddings where there will be third-party videographer</p>

</blockquote>

<p>There is definitely a danger of the whole thing becoming a media circus especially with perhaps three videographers, and then you're faced with a choice of being part of that media circus, or stepping back and giving the B&G space - but then the bride and groom risk not getting proper photo coverage. But I think some B&G's must enjoy the whole paparazzi experience, and one has to assume that if they've hired three videographers then they have done the maths and know there are going to be a lot of people with cameras around.</p>

<p>I find some videographers are extremely considerate, but a couple of them have been seriously unpleasant and pushy. After those two bad experiences, we considered generally not taking on any weddings with videographers at all. It is definitely harder work trying to get the photos you want, even with just one cooperative videographer. You keep seeing nice photos, then someone with a video camera pops up in the middle of it. Or the place you want to stand, you would be blocking his view. Three uncooperative videographers is a recipe for a serious headache. And when you have videographers who follow you round and start videoing everything you photograph, that can become irritating too.</p>

<p>On our last two weddings with videographers we had videographers who were lovely and accommodating, and we did our best to be the same in return, but even they still made the photography more difficult.</p>

<p>When I have time, I'm planning to update our FAQ's to include a section on videographers, and also including wording in the contract to cover concerns about them. And for the future, possibly identifying ones that we're happy to work with and making it a condition of booking us that the ones we've found difficult aren't involved (which is tricky without naming them), or developing a cooperation with a particular videographer who does good work and is cooperative - or alternatively just not taking on weddings that have them. Haven't decided which yet.</p>

[green_photog]

<blockquote>

<p>or alternatively just not taking on weddings that have them. Haven't decided which yet.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>From a purely business stand point, it doesn't make sense not to make money just because the videotog is there.</p>

<p>I've booked one wedding with 6 photogs next year, yes, I'm 1 of the 6. The bride was clearly out to lunch when she said 1 photog can do the posing and the other 5 can take it from 5 different angels for different looks. She actually thought this was necessary or even desirable.</p>

<p>I felt that the attention from us is probably more important than the photos. I thought about not booking her but then I think I'm just doing part of the job for full pay, why not. And the pressure is off because I'm sure she'll be too annoyed to go through the thousands of redundant pictures she'll get from the 6 of us to care about quality at the end.</p>

<p> </p>

[simon_crofts]

<blockquote>

<p>From a purely business stand point, it doesn't make sense not to make money just because the videotog is there.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>In one sense, yes. But arguing against that, from a business perspective, unless it's an out of season wedding, the date will probably get booked up anyway, and the chances are the non-videographer wedding will allow more scope for fun and less headaches. Logically it may make sense to charge more for a wedding with a videographer if it's likely to be harder, but in practise that would be difficult to do. <em><strong>If</strong></em> having the videographer means the photos might not be as good, from a purely business standpoint might make it harder to delight the customer or, all other things being equal, less pics for your portfolio etc. So you might argue it makes business sense to keep the date for a wedding where you're more free just to get on with taking the photos without interference and without having to fight through a media scrum.</p>

<p>And then again, there's the argument that we photographers make a living from photography not usually because it's the most profitable possible career but because we enjoy it, and that it makes a certain sense to avoid anything that makes it less enjoyable.</p>

<p>Then again, I was very happy with the actual pictures that came from the videographer weddings, they turned out very well. I don't know if that was just luck, or through trying extra hard to overcome the obstacles. Either way, at least with the two grumpy videographers, it felt like blood, sweat and tears.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I've booked one wedding with 6 photogs next year</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ouch! I don't envy you that. I have the feeling that people with too much money sometimes have mistaken idea that the more money that they throw at a situation, the better the results will be.</p>

[frolickingbits]

<p>I don't shoot many weddings with videographers-just 2 out of the dozen or so I did this year, and I've never really had a problem with them. I do try to keep in mind where the videographer is, and if I'm going to be in his frame while I grab a shot, I try to minimize my time there. I sometimes feel bad when I'm using flash, because I know it's going to mess up his video, but I've gotta get my shots too.<br>

As far as the guests with cameras go, it sounds rude, but I really don't worry about walking in front of them, sticking cameras over their shoulders, or any of that. One of the recent weddings I photographed, almost every guest had a camera, so trying to stay out of everyone's way would have been impossible. So I focused on getting my shots, and let the chips fall where it would be.</p>

 

[chetn]

<p>Years ago I had a videographer whom set up a fence of tripods (3 tripods but the camera was only on 1) to block the asile and only 3 metres from the bride. I still got my shots but from less advantagous positions. After the wedding the bride asked me to give the video man all these ceremony shots as he had somehow lost all that footage. Of course I did.<br /> Just smile and wave.... smile and wave.</p>

[savagesax]

Perhaps we worry a bit too much here. I have no issues taking pics on the dance floor and the video guy gets a few images of me. I'm part of the party in a sense. So if I'm on video, the video guy can edit me out or keep me in as part of the party.

 

A trick I learned many years ago is follow the video guy and stay to his left. He will always be able to see you and you will see him. If he moves give him some space, but try not to get in his way. If you stay to his right you guys will be bumping heads all night. Be sure to tell the video guy you want to be on his left for these reasons. You will be amazed how simple it is to work together.