Comments on: Bridezilla Makes Example Out of “Pro” Wedding Videographer

By: Alan Greene

Alan Greene — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 16:06:32 +0000

I wonder how the videographer maneuvered around all of those guests with cameras acting like the professional photographer? Let the pros do their job.

BTW many pros aren’t wearing black anymore so they can blend in with the guests due to limitations put on them by churches and venues, as well as poor treatment. If you look like a guest, then these people are nicer to you and you can do your job better.

If she’s such a pro, why didn’t she know she could just crop the guy out of the photo for a better composition anyway instead of crying? Get it together and let people do their job. Complaining before she even gets the video — glad she’s not my client. At the first sign of a nasty attitude, I would have been booked on her wedding date for sure!

By: Matt Finke

Matt Finke — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 05:33:58 +0000

Obviously this bride wanted to pay cheaply for a videographer and she got what she paid for is right. Brides like this want champagne and caviar on a cheese and crackers budget. The videographer in that picture above is holding a crappy camera with no monopod or tripod – what do you expect? Of course it’ll be crap.

Try prioritizing your budget to include a videographer that costs more than the limo rental next time.

By: David

David — Thu, 16 Feb 2012 04:03:42 +0000

I’m so happy that we have never had a bride like this. She sounds like an absolute nightmare. Photographers and Videographers work very closely with each other throughout the entire day. It would be an absolute miracle if we didn’t show up in the background of a single photo or the photographer didn’t end up in a second of our video. This bride obviously had unrealistic expectations. I’m sure her reception area was dark which would need a light for the toasts in order see the individual. You don’t hear her complaining about the photographers flash? Still Motion is an amazing company and produce wonderful quality wedding films, but I think she would find they would be much more involved the day off than this guy was. They shoot with 5 people! I don’t think that hiring a cheap videographer was the problem. She is the problem.

By: Marry

Marry — Wed, 20 Jul 2011 02:11:24 +0000

I am a videographer myself and I understand the process. But as the bride described it very detail it looks like the photographr is not in the way of the videographer from her say. I am not saying he should be appering in the shot but the way i see it the photographer looks like setting up the videographer as faliour. He has leg and eye to see which angle he can shoot to find out not to include the photog in the image. The videographer might spend more time than he should spend edditing out the photog from the seen as well.

I am sorry if wrote same coment as anyone else. I just wanted take it of from my chest.

By: owen

owen — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 01:13:51 +0000

you cried when you saw exhibit c? really? granted, i never film from behind the altar like that, but honestly, that is so easily fixed it’s not funny. bridezilla is correct.

By: Jesse Nash

Jesse Nash — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 04:16:12 +0000

I really wish I could see the finished product, I don’t think she knew what kind of video she wanted or understood what a good shot may require. I think this videographer should have explained this to her. I work as an assistant to a high end wedding photographer and his clients and their wedding guests often trust us and our ability, we may get in the way but they know it’s to get a good photo or clip, she simply shouldn’t have hired someone without knowing anything about them. Still Motion for instance probably makes some of the best wedding videos in North America but, I would bet they’re far more distracting considering the footage they get. I imagine two or three people, at least one of which is constantly running around with a steady-cam following all the action. It’s a compromise she failed to acknowledge, you can either get cousin Dave to stay nearly invisible off to the side with his handicam on a tripod and get a very dull documentation of the day or you can hire a cinematographer to offer a little distraction but turn your day into a piece of art.

This is a good heads up, the couple should really always have an accurate expectation of what the experience will be like. Although the final product could be amazing, this videographer didn’t take the time to communicate with the couple enough prior to the wedding to discuss boundaries and exceptions. As a result this bride hates his this guys guts because he trying to get good shots.

Anyway to try and keep things short, communication and trust are key!

By: Jim

Jim — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 18:16:02 +0000

I think this bride should have checked into this person’s references. If she really liked to have her wedding filmed professionally she should have asked around and not pick someone just on price, which she might have done. I’d love to know how she found this person and how much she paid.

It’s really funny how she actually points out the company Still Motion by name, an extremely pricy company that make amazing films. Why didn’t she simply hire them? Didn’t want to spend good money on a video guy but would shell out 3 times more for a photographer? OR is this just one huge ad for them?

By: she is nuts

she is nuts — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 16:05:05 +0000

this Bride will not be Married for very long …As she will soon find
every little fault with her Husband too ! Real or not they will be in her head getting in the way !

By: Tom Stitzer

Tom Stitzer — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 22:20:12 +0000

Heh, that last paragraph should say:

I think photogs need to be understanding of this and try to learn more about working with VIDEOGRAPHERS to make sure you BOTH capture the day in the best way possible.

My typo. My bad.

By: Tom Stitzer

Tom Stitzer — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 20:59:24 +0000

Overall a good article and helpful for newbies. However, I take a little bit of an issue with #2 under the “other offenses” section. Stick with me here.

My own style, and what I communicate to my clients, is that I try to have a steady shot throughout the day. I am on tripods always, but fold it up into a sort of monopod to get high shots and to move around from spot to spot (which gives me a handheld feel at those times if needed).

During editing, I usually choose the static shots, editing out extraneous movement (we use 2 cameras during the receptions as well and cut back and forth to minimize any shakiness or movement that doesn’t fit well).

Ultimately YOU need to figure out what you want for a video. If you want a video that is steady as opposed to frenetic and moving a lot, then you can’t have a photographer moving in front of the video camera. Now obviously, if the photog is taking shots of you and I go and stand in front of his shot, that’s just wrong. But also wrong is a photog who positions himself in such a way that the videographer is blocked from a shot, OR, positions the couple away from the video.

I have been at weddings where I am setup to capture a first dance and I have the couple in my sights, the music starts, the dance begins, and then the photographer moves away from me, DIRECTLY OPPOSITE and starts shooting pictures. First, he’s in my shot, second, the couple immediately faces the other way giving him a good shot and me with the back of heads.

Now, I can move to the other side, one camera at a time, but if he inevitably, moves again to capture a better angle, or various angles, this can create big problems for me. A photog can get a shot from anywhere and it doesn’t matter if they move around, you won’t see it int he finished photos. For a videographer, if you move, you have shaky movement and you can see it in the footage (unless they are smart enough to edit it out). Photogs have more freedom in this way.

I think photogs need to be understanding of this and try to learn more about working WITH photogs to make sure you BOTH capture the day in the best way possible.