Is this over the top!?

shaf · #1 (**permalink**) 07-15-2008, 01:11 PM

Was speaking to a mate who was invited to a wedding over the weekend. The videography team had 7 cameras (which were also mounted on balconies), a crane for overhead shots, tripods with wheels (good idea)....they charge £1500...but then he told me the minimum waiting period for the video is 8 months

..I suppose it would be worth the wait, but 8 months!!??

Marc Peters · #2 (**permalink**) 07-15-2008, 08:31 PM

Is that a minimum waiting period for the video, or their waiting list? Yes, 8 months for completion of the video is excessive and I would not condone such working practice.

Use of camera dollys, cranes, stabilisation and multiple cameras is not unusual and is a mark of a professional wedding videographer. Trained and unobtrusive use of such equipment helps produce what I would expect to see in a production and would expect nothing less.

shaf · #3 (**permalink**) 07-15-2008, 09:06 PM

Originally Posted by Marc Peters

Is that a minimum waiting period for the video, or their waiting list? Yes, 8 months for completion of the video is excessive and I would not condone such working practice.

Use of camera dollys, cranes, stabilisation and multiple cameras is not unusual and is a mark of a professional wedding videographer. Trained and unobtrusive use of such equipment helps produce what I would expect to see in a production and would expect nothing less.

Marc mate, thats the waiting period for the video to be completed..yes, 8 months

TimStannard · #4 (**permalink**) 07-16-2008, 01:29 PM

In that case they're gonna starve! £1500 for eight months work for one person is bad enough - and then he's got to pay the camera crew....

More seriously, I'm guessing the £1500 is just the cost of the shoot with editing/production on top. I'm also guessing the editing production process does not take 8 months actual time, but elapsed.

The results had better be very good if the customer is prepared to wait that long. Blimey, kids and divorce could be completed in that time.

Mark W · #5 (**permalink**) 07-16-2008, 04:07 PM

Maybe I am talking out of the back of my head but I think 7 cameras is daft. Overkill totally, and seems to me that person in charge of production is getting carried away.

Seven cams with a dolly and a crane, even if we assume all the kit is owned not hired it is hard to see where thier profit margin is here.

And 8 months!? Jeepers half the couples will be divorced when they get he videos ! Lol. Myabe it's all shot on super 8! ( you sure your mate wasnt counting security cameras?)

And think of the time in the edit suite too. I just made up a rule of editing - the time to edit increases with the square of the number of cameras used - T (total) = T(edit) X C squared. Most I do is three cameras and it takes lots longer than one, so sven must be a real pain - unless thay all use sony ex1 card cams - than that is 35 grand on cameras.

Nope - cant work this one out.

Seven cameras - mad - you could cover the fa cup with seven.

What was the name of this company? Sure it wasnt some footballers wedding

The Guru · #6 (**permalink**) 07-16-2008, 04:25 PM

I could imagine using seven cameras on a wedding but three of them would be unmanned and locked-off in strategic positions. One on the balcony, one at the front, one ...er... up high. Eight months to edit! They're having a larf!

I realise you're still trying to justify your slow, four weeks, editting time by "quoting" other firms which apparently take longer but... give us a break. A professional video company should still be able to edit this in a week. On any professional edit system you put each camera's pictures on a track, line them up so that they're in sync and... edit away, almost in real-time! Not a great deal of effort actually.

...but seven cameras for fifteen hundred quid and eight month's wait for the DVD... yeah, right

Mark W · #7 (**permalink**) 07-18-2008, 07:17 PM

I would want my seven cameras in the honey moon suite - lol.