That is great news, and thanks for letting us know, now the fun and frustrations begin

Can I suggest if you have not tried it, Sony Vegas 8, I found it so easy when I learnt or the cut down version Movie Studio.
Sony Creative Software - Vegas Pro, Vegas Movie Studio, and Vegas Movie Studio Platinum Edition

I've just come in on this one. My take is somewhat more brutal.

Firstly, if the quality of the video isn't up to "professional" standards then he shouldn't be paid. End of story.

Not understanding the speeches is certainly not professional quality. Him giving you the original footage, in the hope that you can do a better job is the least he should do. If he argues, then for £50 you can take him to the small claims court (part of your County Court).
Since he cocked-up your wedding video, any judge would award damages. The report of this would appear in the local paper and would (hopefully) put off any potential customers.

If he belongs to any professional trade organisation (such as the IOV) then make sure that they know that one of their members isn't doing a satisfactory job.

Be ruthless, he's depriving someone competant of a living and is taking your money without delivering what he promissed.

There unfortunately many variables in your "Brutal" take, Guru

First what is "Professional Standards"? by definition anyone who is paid to perform a service is professional, but here is no standard as to what that is or what price that is.

Being on the border of art, what is right and what is wrong. The person makes no point of the Speeches being unable to be heard but the speech during certain parts and that can again be a matter of opinion, also we do not know what the contract states, we also have not seen or heard the clips that are referred to so are unable to make a focused argument only general statements as to what you can do or try. We also do not know what costs are involved and so are guessing what we think the price would have been.

It is positive that the original footage has been available an given free of charge, which again the operator does not have to do.

If the operator is a member of an organisation then he will be displaying a logo in his paperwork and the client is at liberty to certainly contact that organization and lodge his dissatisfaction, the IOV has an arbitration service and he can request that if the operator is an IOV member ( I think they will do it as well if he is not a member but there is a charge)

He could go to court and go through due process and the judge may not give you what you think you are entitled to. They may say that the disruptions only 10- minutes of a 2 hour video and so a proportion should be paid back, not really solving the problem in the long run.

I don't think with the information we have, that the operator is not professional and that he may or may not be taking work away from a competent person.

Being an operator for many years I know some clients will want more then your pound of flesh fro the small amount they have paid and as client I expect nothing but the best for as little as I can pay and in reality the two opposite just do work well together.

I'm intrigued. This now makes me want to see the finished film. I cannot judge on something I cannot see. I take that what BMW8 is saying is true, but I would still have to see the work to make any definate judgement.

Weddings are really hard work. He may have many reasons as to why he omitted the sound..I just do not know, again would love to see the final product.

Even the most creative professional person can/will make mistakes, especially in a situation like a wedding where its a one time live event, no re takes. Should he have omitted the footage in the final edit!!!!

I see both sides, and reserve judgement until I see the work myself.

BMW8, please send me a copy of your wedding! p.m. me if you want. Like I said, I am intrigued.

GDR

Hi All

Thank you for all your support. I really do not know what to say. In all honesty, its not within my nature to get anyone in trouble nor do I want to hassle anyone. I guess it was my fault for not having a proper contract in place. Hope you don't my me closing this subject? However, I would appreciate if you can assist me on the editing side of things if I ever get stuck etc.

P.S Do forgive me for not sending a copy of the wedding video....I'm not at all confortable with doing this as I only normaly send out copies to people I really know. Hope you understand.

Unfortunately you have to be a bit pushy in situations like this, as this was your wedding it was a very important event for both of you. It is unfortunate that contracts have to be brought into the equation but that is the way things are progressing and if they are not done, it can lead to problems such as this in the future. At least you have the footage now and can work on it yourself, I bet you never thought you'd end up one day editing your own wedding video! It's a lesson to us all and especially to anyone else who is planning on getting married and are looking to get someone to video the event. It's better to get it done on paper first before the cameras start rolling, that way it might save you a lot of hassle after the event.

__________________
Better than a poke in the eye with a pointy stick any day...

WHOA!!!! Before ya'll agree to lynch that cheatin' video guy let's all take a step back and those of us that have had to actually deal with one chance to shoot it video events like weddings - not the controlled environment of the church - but the wild and crazy venue of the reception can speak up.

During the late 80s into the 90s I was a very successful Wedding video guy using multi broadcast quality cameras (using 3/4in tape) to capture consumer events like weddings. I did about 340 weddings in all kinds of places.

I was blessed to never have a dissatisfied client and even got some raves and analog A/B roll tape editing was much more difficult - imo - than current work with digital files.

You may know and, if not, that shooting unrehearsed live stuff is not terribly easy to do well. All ceremony/'alter stuff or behind-the-scene stuff I had principals wearing wireless mics. In big reception crowds which sounds like what you are describing getting a good capture of people talking in a crowd with all of the surrounding ambient sound is almost impossible.

I used hand held mics doing reception interviews but with general "speech" capture it was and always is catch as catch can.

Your wedding (no wedding) is scripted and shot on a controlled sound stage. It's candid camera most always.

Also if you truly haven't done much post production don't set yourself up for disappointment with an assumption that you can just get the raw video and create a great wedding video. If it was that easy then truly everyone would just have their Uncle Charlie do it all with his trusty camcorder.

Without seeing your edited video and then talking to the videographer I and no one else can make a judgement.

If you are "crying" about low volume of talking that is hard to hear due to a bunch of ambient venue background music and crowd noise then you just may have expected too much without understand the limitations of technology applied.

Remember that when I specifically was recording talking head wedding guests around the reception venue I either darn well had them in a controlled situation wherein my camera top mic would capture their voices or I had them hold a hand held microphone but that was just me.

So, maybe you have a gripe if your video guy didn't really know how to capture good image and sound of pre-ceremony, ceremony and reception scenes - can't say without seeing it all.
Hope it works out and, again, try to understand whatever environment obstacles your video guy had to deal with.

This is good news, but your work has just begun.

Of course the first thing to check is whether the music was actually really there in the first place, or if your videographer had simply added it after the fact (as was suggested earlier).

If you are just getting into video editing now, you will need some help.

Do you have a computer? Is it smokin hot (performance-wise)?

I have my own favorite software for video editing, but it is probably not the best bet for a beginner (I use Abobe Premiere Pro).

I have taken a look at the consumer-grade video editing software and my favorite is something called Final Cut Express. This is your best bet if you are a Mac person.

If you are a PC person, I would suggest Adobe Premiere Elements.

That's my two cents.

Zam
my blog: Digital Video and Film

Zamiotana asks a good question. Is the conflicting music part of the natural sound of the event or over-dubbed music added by the guy doing the editing?

If the music was dubbed in then, of course, it wouldn't be heard on the raw scenes and I can tell you from my own personal experience there are ways to enhance - at least somewhat - the audio from a video track.

So far as getting all of the "raw" scenes from the video services provider I would want to have it personally no matter what but they I would ask what are you really going to get?

What format was used for image aquisition/capture? A prosumer standard like miniDV or a step up to newer HD or what? How many cameras were used?

Multicamera video digital editing using a PC or MAC can be a bit difficult to self-teach.

How would the raw stuff be delivered to you? Actual original tapes (if shot on tape) or large files like .avi and maybe on a hard drive or would it be unedited but compressed to something easier to deliver on data discs but of less quality due to the compression.

Finally, everyone has a personal opinion based on their personal experience which makes each opinion equally valid as expressed.

If you decide to part with a lot of treasure to buy a professional application like Adobe Premiere and learn the user interface yourself then pack a lunch and dinner or two as you try to wade through the almost 2 inch thick manual.

IMO and I admit I am not the sharpest tool in this shed Adobe Premiere is a very powerful and feature rich application but the user interface ain't the easiest to master.

You can easily edit and add effects and transitions and add multiple audio channels and have a very professional looking wedding video whether shot with one camera or six cameras using consumer software that are easier to learn.

My preference happens to be ULead Video Studio - reasonably priced with good online tech support and does most anything you could ask for it to do.
GoodLuck

Imjay brought up some good points.

First of all, Adobe Premiere Pro (the tool I am using) takes about a week to learn, assuming you are already familiar with video editing. Hence it is not a good choice if you are starting out. It is also not cheap.

The Ulead offering is an excellent choice -- you can be up and running and making some simple edits within a few hours. If I was a beginner, I would choose Final Cut Express or Adobe Premiere Elements but these products are all in the same league (powerful yet easy to use). I have also taken a close look at Pinnacle Studio but it doesn't seem to like my PC (frequent crashes), so I can't really say much about it. I understand that Sony Vegas is good also, but I have not used it so I can't say either way.

I think we need to find out what format you receive the files in. If you get miniDV tapes, for example, then you will need a camcorder to import the footage to your PC or Mac. If you get a DVD, then you will need to convert the VOB files to MPEG2 so you can start editing (unless your editor recognizes files with a .VOB extension). We can all try to lend a hand, but the first step is to find out "what you've got". It could even be HD.

Zam
my blog: Digital Video and Film