View Full Version : For your wedding, would you rather…
Have the day filmed, or have an album of photos?
I ask because I know of more and more people having their wedding days professionally filmed now, I took a wedding booking the other day, and he admitted his photography budget wasn’t huge because they were spending a fortune on having the day filmed, on high res, blu ray, high def DVD etc etc.
Now call me old fashioned, but I don’t think I would want a DVD of the day, the more photos I have the better, but that’s just my way of thinking. I wouldn’t say no to someone filming us, but if I had to choose, I would choose photos.
Is that old fashioned? Am I in the minority? :D
Can I be greedy and say both :p
Because I'm planning on both!
The poll needs both!
But if I had to choose one or the other it would be photographs!
We had professional photos and a friend filmed the ceremony and to tell you the truth we haven't watched the film more than once.
leowyatt
19-01-2009, 12:34
Both would be a good idea :) but I know you can't split yourself in half :p
We were filmed but it was done by my one legged Australian uncle (English really, but he was a £10 Pom and is an Aussie now) and I've only ever looked at it once.
If I were to do it again, I'd not bother with a video. It was very boring!
I would choose professional photos and get someone to video the day on their own camcorder - with me taking over in parts ;)
Wedding videos are too cheesy and when are you going to sit down for a viewing anyway :/
'Oh yes come round for dinner, we'll put the kids to bed and we can all watch our wedding video!'
Errr.. no.
BB x
Photos. I like how they capture the moment in time so well while a video just doesn't work in the same way so I'm not so keen. Plus like others, I can't see me watching the video much :p
However, if I could have both, I'd probably have both just to be on the safe side.
Photos all the way, in my experience of wedding videos they're awful, with Uncle Nobhead filming it with the lens cap on for the first 5 minutes, then him zooming in and out constantly, him refusing to use a tripod because he knows "how to hold it steady" resulting in the ceremony looking like it's happening during an earthquake. Then when people move outside, what everybody remembers as a calm day, suddenly sounds like Hurricane Katrina because the camcorder's mic seems to be able to pick up a wasp's fart, never mind a gentle breeze. Then sudden and abrupt cuts and people gurning in front of the camera during the night, crap footage of the wedding dance because the over sensitive mic is now slaughtered by the DJs sound system. "What were they dancing to, System of a Down?"
Maybe it can be done professionally but I'd never risk it. It's a day I plan to do only once, so it'd be the safe route of professional photographs. If family and friends want to record it, fine, but I won't be in any rush to watch it back. :p
"What were they dancing to, System of a Down?"
One of the songs I put on disc to make sure the DJ had so it would be played was Ace of Spades by Motorhead :D
Chuckles
19-01-2009, 13:02
I meant photos, but like an spaz I clicked on video.
Can my vote be reversed?
Photos = romantic memories
Filmed = Jordan & Peter Andre tbh
Photos first, film second.
NokkonWud
19-01-2009, 13:23
Both definitely.
I went just photo's. I was very ill on my wedding day and I'm kinda glad there wasn't someone following me about with a video camera.
Kell_ee001
19-01-2009, 13:28
I would want mainly pics, possibly a video of the first dance if it was good.
I meant photos, but like an spaz I clicked on video.
Can my vote be reversed?
Yes it can!
Bugger. I submitted the wrong vote. It should be Photograph not film. I think pictures capture them unusual moments that you don't always know were captured. Film's are very much in your face
Piggymon
19-01-2009, 13:48
I wouldn't like a video at all, I HATE seeing myself on film.
Pics all the way please :)
I wouldn't like a video at all, I HATE seeing myself on film.
Pics all the way please :)
Same here, I was on a wedding video last year, and Ive seen it twice since then, and I cringe everytime they come to me, it didnt help the bridal party thanking me for shooting the day, so all focus was on me, uuuurrrrgggghhh :D
Don't see the attraction of a video myself. When you factor in that it'll pretty much be a static image of the ceremony, lasting however long the vows etc. go on for, then a rowdy disco, it's not even compelling viewing for the couple themselves. No-one but a batty old grandma would ever watch it more than once, if at all.
The only way I'd watch one is if it was filmed in the style of Snatch.
Kell_ee001
19-01-2009, 14:03
I wouldn't like a video at all, I HATE seeing myself on film.
I don't like pics or video's of myself, but I really hope my wedding day is the one day I look good! ;D
The only way I'd watch one is if it was filmed in the style of Snatch.
That'd be awesome ;D
TinkerBell
19-01-2009, 15:14
See for me I think I would want the ceremony filmed, but photo's as the main thing, just because you can't quite capture the ceremony with photo's quite like you can with film.
I would want to watch it again and remember that special moment :)
Photo's...without a doubt.
In the fighting corner for videos, my friend had a video of the vows and then had it set up with a back drop behind and friends and family kind of jumped in front of it, told a random story about the couple, or a really poop joke and then said their best wishes and went on! Was so funny to watch! So funny!
Though one drunken guy started to confess his undying love for the bride and the next thing you see is the best man rugby tackling him off screen! A bit "whoopsy" but they luckily found it hilarious!
I thought that was an awesome idea :D
My other friend and I watched her wedding video a few times in the evening and initially cried over it (we had had a bottle or two of wine) and then laughed! By the end her husband came home and I had a moustach drawn on my face and she was wearing a napkin on her head and we were re-enacting it alongside the video!
Soooo funny! We had an awesome night doing that!!
I filmed most of Pickys sisters wedding and also took a million and one photos where I could too. We've all watched it a couple of times - luckily they didn't mind as some of it had me yabbering in the background and saying things like.. ."Oooooom nom nom nom nom nom nom" when panning over the food spread and things ;D
So videos are good! Plus you have the great opportunity of catching a youve been framed moment and making £250 :D
We had both but if I had to have just one it would be photos
The DVD at ours was done with fixed, hidden cameras in venue and off site editing suite so I didn't feel like I had a camera stuck in my face
LeperousDust
19-01-2009, 16:12
I'd definitely go for professional photos, but be a little creative with the video. I'd spend some of a video budget (a lot less than a professional filming) on cheap cams, and pay a friend to do an all roundish version. I'd leave cams on the all the tables and instead of take pictures invite the guests to use them to film there own things and think out of the box. Then end up with an interesting "youtube" style collage at the end to edit together. That way if something funny happens too one of the 20 people hopefully (probbaly the kids too :D) with cameras will capture it! Also i could sell the cams on ebay or give one or two away to the best videos to inspire interesting videos.
Photos definitely for the memories though and a nice book though, videos usually capture "too much"!
I'd chose photos if I had to have one or the other for the reason of you can't put film into a frame and see it everyday (well you could but a disc isn't worth looking at :p) I would like a film done but its not something you'd watch everyday where as an album and framed pics are.
I would get friends to take it in turns filming the wedding and the reception and I would also get loads of those disposable cameras so guests can take drunk photos so we could all have a laugh after lol
For the wedding it self it has to be a pro photographer (preferably petemc if we could afford him and he was available :p lol) I have the number for a pro somewhere that did my friends wedding and they were fantastic and took so many to chose from sadly very expensive though.
I'd want something slightly modern and different :)
Oh God, I can't think of anything worse than having a wedding video inflicted upon me. I'd much prefer photos, and natural ones rather than posed thank you.
I would want mainly pics, possibly a video of the first dance if it was good.
A la Dirty Dancing "I've had the time of my life" type affair?? ;) ;D
TinkerBell
19-01-2009, 16:58
I agree with you Kate with regards to the pics, I would want natural ones which would capture the atmosphere of the day :)
LeperousDust
19-01-2009, 17:01
Nooooooo i think lots of (well) edited together amateur video not trying to be professional from your guests point of view on the day would be amazing! Not something you can keep looking back on, but moreso than one big extravaganza expensive filming thats vomit inducing.
We tried something similar to your video idea at work once. It was hilarious to watch once or twice, but I think it would get old very quickly. It's also scary for those who don't feel comfortable with a camera in their face.
Kell_ee001
19-01-2009, 17:36
A la Dirty Dancing "I've had the time of my life" type affair?? ;) ;D
Of course ;D
Although, I think if Pheebs did the video with narration it could be highly amusing! :D
Stills for me :)
And I think my mate would agree as when it was his wedding he got caught on camera asking his missis "who the **** are all these ****ing freeloaders?" ;D
semi-pro waster
19-01-2009, 21:46
If I've got to have a record of the day then photographs all the way, I'm not overly fond of having my picture taken but it is much better than being filmed.
Photos for me too. However, there are new DSLRs out there with stunning video features because they have the optics of a DSLR. So a good photographer would be able to use this well and in theory they could make a stunning DVD of the day featuring mostly photos and some video. The new phrase that Flickr coined was the long photo. There are many times when 20 seconds, 30, 60, 90 seconds can make that moment last just a little bit longer and still be as poignant.
SidewinderINC
20-01-2009, 00:27
If I was to ever get married (I don't see any point in it personally, just causes a lot of hassle if things go tits up, with no logical gain if it doesn't) I'd go for photos.
Pictures capture moments in time, frozen. Video doesn't get that, and I hate the sound of my own voice too.
Greenlizard0
20-01-2009, 03:33
Oh God, I can't think of anything worse than having a wedding video inflicted upon me. I'd much prefer photos, and natural ones rather than posed thank you.
Snap.
If I was to ever get married (I don't see any point in it personally, just causes a lot of hassle if things go tits up, with no logical gain if it doesn't) I'd go for photos.
Pictures capture moments in time, frozen. Video doesn't get that, and I hate the sound of my own voice too.
Ref your not sure about getting married - my Uncle, he was married on his death bed to his long term partner (he was gay... in fact I believe he was the first gay person to be married in Britain actually - they made an exception for him to have it done sooner than it was being legalised as he had days to live). Anyhoo, the reason he did it was purely so his partner wouldn't have everything taken away from him and be completely ripped off by the government when he died :) It's not something he would have done otherwise but yeh... In that sense - there are quite a few benefits.
Bless him. Good man. Imagine the Four Weddings and a Funeral couple and that was them down to a tee ;D
Photographs 99% of the time.
Unless the videotographer can also edit. A long contineous video of the day is a chore, what you need is to condense the entire day into a 3 minute video with music and some creative editing. Something like this
http://www.jessicaclaire.net/index.cfm?postID=389
Bottom of the page, the video will compliment the photographs and it won't really stand up all by itself IMO.
That video is really lovely and does prove that if you got the right person you could have something good. Its not about having all the wedding filmed with your uncle drunk and stumbling around the brides maids. Its about capturing the little things that make the day in something that lasts a bit longer than a photo.
TinkerBell
20-01-2009, 12:06
Mondo that is exactly the sort of thing I would want, a video to catch parts but not people reacting to the camera. Also the photos were awesome!
Jessica Claire is in the top 10 wedding photographers in the US. Which is clearly cheating ;)
Wedding? Hell no!
We know. You've made that clear time and time again. So why post? :huh:
LeperousDust
20-01-2009, 15:21
Wedding?
Hell no!
Surely you'd want pictures of the registry office :p?
Photos, for definite, but not the traditional posed photos placed on card type affair. I got married in August and we managed to get a great photographer, we had him and an assistant from about 9 in the morning until gone midnight so we got photos of both groups getting ready (we were both in separate hotels the night before as we got married a long way from where we live).
We only had a couple of group shots as the location we had the reception we had the use of two rooms, in the smaller one the photographer set up a little studio to get good shots of everyone who went without disrupting everything else.
I think he took about 2500 photos in total that day, then he designed a book for us which got printed on thick metallic sheen pages and bound in leather.
And to top it all off we got a couple of dvds with every photo taken in highres .jpg and permission to do anything we liked with them.
He used to do fashion photography which helped getting people to do more than just stand still for the studio shots too :)
Davey_Pitch
23-01-2009, 15:04
Sounds like the guy we'll be using for our wedding Bam. His name wasn't Dave was it? :)
Sounds like the guy we'll be using for our wedding Bam. His name wasn't Dave was it? :)
Yeah it was actually, Dave Sander, an absolute star, couldn't be more pleased with him tbh.
Davey_Pitch
23-01-2009, 15:21
Ah, wrong Dave, ours is Worthington :)
Ah well, sure it'll be just as good if he's doing the same sort of stuff, good luck with it all :)
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.