jprezant wrote:
man. if you were a videographer, you wouldn't want to use a 135 all the time. I would have a 24/35/50 glued to my camera like at all times.
Well i hope you have a pretty ass because that's what the bride would be seeing in most of her photos.
I hear you on this. It's funny though, I was recently on an event videographers forum and they have the EXACT same complaints and gripes about still photographers. I mean, exactly.
I guess it all comes down to whether the person is a "real" photographer or a fauxtographer. Real professionals will have the appropriate equipment that allows them to do the job properly, whereas kit lens shooters.....well, they won't. And vice versa for videographers.
Besides, we all know who takes priority in the wedding world.
brett maxwell wrote:
I figured it has a lot to do with it being much easier to get a steady shot using the 15-50mm range. On-camera audio makes a lot of sense also.
This.
Video guys have a harder time getting steady shots when using longer lenses and no tripod or monopod. Also many of them depend on the on-camera mic for audio (which is not the way to go) But it is what it is.
Bitching and complaining isn't going to help. Next time you see a video guy at your wedding, try to go out of yor way to work with him on your angles and coverage. They also have a job to do. Approach the situation as peer to peer and more than likely, you can both get the shots you need.
Video guys have a harder time getting steady shots when using longer lenses and no tripod or monopod. Also many of them depend on the on-camera mic for audio (which is not the way to go) But it is what it is.
Bitching and complaining isn't going to help. Next time you see a video guy at your wedding, try to go out of yor way to work with him on your angles and coverage. They also have a job to do. Approach the situation as peer to peer and more than likely, you can both get the shots you need....Show more →
Actually, being the professionals that we are, it's assumed that we all do that. And i for one to tend to believe that. WE have the proper gear. WE buy the high end gear because this is our profession.
Wannabe's who use cheap low end dslr's to shoot video are not "professionals' in my opinion. They're out there just trying to make a fast buck. They don't care about US, no matter what we say to them to try to "work" together. They will get what they want to get regardless of the photographer or guests who they are interfering with.
I don't like it when others try to make out like it's our fault because we don't "work" with the videographers. Don't lay blame in the wrong direction. .
marti.g3 wrote:
Actually, being the professionals that we are, it's assumed that we all do that. And i for one to tend to believe that. WE have the proper gear. WE buy the high end gear because this is our profession.
Wannabe's who use cheap low end dslr's to shoot video are not "professionals' in my opinion. They're out there just trying to make a fast buck. They don't care about US, no matter what we say to them to try to "work" together. They will get what they want to get regardless of the photographer or guests who they are interfering with.
I don't like it when others try to make out like it's our fault because we don't "work" with the videographers. Don't lay blame in the wrong direction. . ...Show more →
Don't assume that someone shooting video with a 5D and a "nifty fifty" isn't a pro. It may give them the look they're going for.
But I am not saying that it's "our" fault or laying blame. I'm simply saying that if you don't make the effort to work together then don't be surprised when things don't go the way you'd like.
I'm also sure that there are many video pros who are bitching about the number of cheap photographers who are sporting Rebels and kit lenses who are constantly getting in their shots.
I always talk to the video people and setup a plan of how we will work together. Sadly, over 50% of the time they seem to totally disregard what we talked about. I, though, and usually a stickler for sticking by my word, so I rarely supersede what we talked about. What this means is they get their ideal shots and I (or, usually my wife) do not. I guess I should be more ballsy and just do what I have to do regardless of them, but that's just not how I roll.
Honestly, I can tell the skill level and professionalism of a video person moreso by how they move in and out from the subject to get their shots than anything else. The best people we have ever worked with (in terms of the product they delivered) never got in our way once...they were a breeze to work with, and it was like all four of us were on the exact same team. They moved in to get their shot and moved out. They watched out for us, and we watched out for them.
As for not wanting to shoot all day with a 135, I understand that...but if you are wanting to do a 3-4 minute closeup up makeup, getting dressed, whatever, then get the hell back and don't contaminate nearly every single one of my wide shots...
While I can understand your frustrations, (and I know you just posted you wouldn't want to shoot the entire day with a 135 which is what I was going to ask) you have to understand that cinema people are there to do the same job as you. If you look at the top wedding cinematographers out there, do you think they would have gotten there by using long lenses? Take a look at stillmotion's work, or Michael Y Wong's work. They use wide lenses and get in close. I've shot cinema with both of these companies (and also shot photo for outside companies while they were doing cinema) and you just have to muscle your way in. When I shoot cinema (Just got back from one) I co-ordinate as much as I can with the photographers, and since I understand what it's like to be on both sides I get my close-up shots and move out of the way.
That being said, there isn't anything you're going to be able to do to make sure the cinematographer/videographer isn't in your shots. Many of my shots had the photographer in them. In the end, as unfortunate as it may be, it's every professional for themselves. Yes, people should have more respect, but more or less they're concerned with their end product and bettering their business instead of "did the photographer get their shot"
I'm not saying it's right, but photographers have it easier than cinema folks in the sense that they can step in close, get a shot, and step out. Cinema has to step in, get 3-5 seconds of useable footage, get a complimentary angle to cut to (which may be wide or close) and repeat. It's a completely different ballgame that many photographers don't understand because they haven't had to edit together a 3-5 minute piece during a wedding and show during the reception. Different strokes.
I understand wanting to shoot wide for steadier shots (and "creative" camera movements like circling the couple lol). I used to work in video. But with IS, videographers should be able to get amazing handheld footage with telephoto lenses (perhaps with monopod)
Lauren Carson wrote:
While I can understand your frustrations, (and I know you just posted you wouldn't want to shoot the entire day with a 135 which is what I was going to ask) you have to understand that cinema people are there to do the same job as you. If you look at the top wedding cinematographers out there, do you think they would have gotten there by using long lenses? Take a look at stillmotion's work, or Michael Y Wong's work. They use wide lenses and get in close. I've shot cinema with both of these companies (and also shot photo for outside companies while they were doing cinema) and you just have to muscle your way in. When I shoot cinema (Just got back from one) I co-ordinate as much as I can with the photographers, and since I understand what it's like to be on both sides I get my close-up shots and move out of the way.
That being said, there isn't anything you're going to be able to do to make sure the cinematographer/videographer isn't in your shots. Many of my shots had the photographer in them. In the end, as unfortunate as it may be, it's every professional for themselves. Yes, people should have more respect, but more or less they're concerned with their end product and bettering their business instead of "did the photographer get their shot"
I'm not saying it's right, but photographers have it easier than cinema folks in the sense that they can step in close, get a shot, and step out. Cinema has to step in, get 3-5 seconds of useable footage, get a complimentary angle to cut to (which may be wide or close) and repeat. It's a completely different ballgame that many photographers don't understand because they haven't had to edit together a 3-5 minute piece during a wedding and show during the reception. Different strokes. ...Show more →
Excuses. I have worked with some of the top industry videographers (John Goolsby, Godfather Films and Vantage Point Films and they never shoot with DSLR's or get in face to butt as what you described. Why is that ? They're award winning businesses that have been around for a while. So how come they can work with photographers in unisom while other's can't ?
I personally am always aware of the videographer and try not to get in his shots. It's usually the DSLR shooters who get in the way.
Why don't they buy the more expensive video cams ?
Tsk, I have complained about this before...pretty sure I got shot down before I even took off. I have had the same issue, dSLR videogs always come in pairs (or more), and they always shoot from like 16-35 through 85mm, usually like 24-50....and it's a PITA to work around them. Most recently, a pair of videogs used 4 cameras during the ceremony - one center aisle about 15 feet from b&g (so I couldn't get wide angle shots of the whole area), one on both side aisles at the very frontmost pew, and one mobile. I honestly think that's not only OVERKILL but completely annoying...
marti.g3 wrote:
Excuses. I have worked with some of the top industry videographers (John Goolsby, Godfather Films and Vantage Point Films and they never shoot with DSLR's or get in face to butt as what you described. Why is that ? They're award winning businesses that have been around for a while. So how come they can work with photographers in unisom while other's can't ?
I personally am always aware of the videographer and try not to get in his shots. It's usually the DSLR shooters who get in the way.
Why don't they buy the more expensive video cams ?
We have a clause in our contract to prevent 3rd party videographers during weddings. The reason being that they interfere with documenting the event and there's a conflict of interest when there are others in a wedding trying to get shots/video when you're trying to create a complete experience. No client has ever questioned the clause yet but they normally understand why having a separate videographer can muck up the works. It's easier and better my way where I can direct photogs and videographers on-site so the experience can be seamless.
Jim Heine wrote:
I understand wanting to shoot wide for steadier shots (and "creative" camera movements like circling the couple lol). I used to work in video. But with IS, videographers should be able to get amazing handheld footage with telephoto lenses (perhaps with monopod)
Please give me your talent.
I have yet to see anyone pull off "amazing handheld footage" with a telephoto regardless of IS
Lauren Carson wrote:
While I can understand your frustrations, (and I know you just posted you wouldn't want to shoot the entire day with a 135 which is what I was going to ask) you have to understand that cinema people are there to do the same job as you. If you look at the top wedding cinematographers out there, do you think they would have gotten there by using long lenses? Take a look at stillmotion's work, or Michael Y Wong's work. They use wide lenses and get in close. I've shot cinema with both of these companies (and also shot photo for outside companies while they were doing cinema) and you just have to muscle your way in. When I shoot cinema (Just got back from one) I co-ordinate as much as I can with the photographers, and since I understand what it's like to be on both sides I get my close-up shots and move out of the way.
That being said, there isn't anything you're going to be able to do to make sure the cinematographer/videographer isn't in your shots. Many of my shots had the photographer in them. In the end, as unfortunate as it may be, it's every professional for themselves. Yes, people should have more respect, but more or less they're concerned with their end product and bettering their business instead of "did the photographer get their shot"
I'm not saying it's right, but photographers have it easier than cinema folks in the sense that they can step in close, get a shot, and step out. Cinema has to step in, get 3-5 seconds of useable footage, get a complimentary angle to cut to (which may be wide or close) and repeat. It's a completely different ballgame that many photographers don't understand because they haven't had to edit together a 3-5 minute piece during a wedding and show during the reception. Different strokes. ...Show more →
+1
marti.g3 wrote:
Excuses. I have worked with some of the top industry videographers (John Goolsby, Godfather Films and Vantage Point Films and they never shoot with DSLR's or get in face to butt as what you described. Why is that ? They're award winning businesses that have been around for a while. So how come they can work with photographers in unisom while other's can't ?
I personally am always aware of the videographer and try not to get in his shots. It's usually the DSLR shooters who get in the way.
Why don't they buy the more expensive video cams ?
Actually shooting with DSLR is a LOT more expensive considering all the lenses and all the accessories, it's also a lot more complicated and that is why they are more in your way but in my opinion definitely worth it.
