3 Camera Ceremony / Reception Shoots Make Faster Workflow

[HankCastello]

Yes, you read that right - 3 Camera Ceremony / Reception Shoots Make Faster Workflow.

As Sly Ry noted in an earlier post, having multiple cameras and multiple angles to cut to, makes for easier editing.  Since the amount of time we spend in the editing bay is about ten times more than the time we spend shooting a wedding, anything you can do to help on the editing end will pay off handsomely.

Capture time can be an issue, but instead of tossing those old parts when you upgrade your editing computer, just build a new one.  Use your old one for capturing tape.  My wife does all the capturing onto an external harddrive and even snags stills from the video for DVD covers, etc.  When I'm ready for my next project, I merely copy the project files from her external drive (which I connect to my computer) onto my project harddrive and I'm ready to edit.

So how does having three or four video tracks make editing go faster?  The trick is that one or two of the cameras must be setup where they will always have a good, wide shot.  If you have a jib, you can set your camera high enough so that even the tallest photographer can't stand in front and block its view.

OK, now you're editing, let's say a dance (so you have to keep your video in synch with your audio).  You're handheld and a wait person cuts across the dance floor, right in front of your camera.  At that exact moment, your assistant, on sticks, was pulling focus.  The music is fast, so slo-mo won't really work.  What now?

Easy!  Just cut to camera #3.    Much more professional than doing a lot of swich-pans.  Time spent fixing the "problem" while editing?  The time it takes to click your mouse.

Editing a ceremony, let's say you're repositioning your camera at the exact same instant your assistant is doing the same.  Sure you could grab some b-roll, one of the shot of guests staring straight ahead that you shot earlier.  Or perhaps do a time-rate-stretch on a few clips if no moving lips were in the frames.  But won't that take a bit longer than a single mouse-click?  And isn't it nicer to have that third view anyway?

Side benefits are that you get to deliver a better product and your third camera can be fitted with a shotgun to get better ambient sound, guests cheering, clapping, etc. that you can blend in at the proper moments.  An even bigger benefit is that by advertising three-camera coverage, you one-up your competitors - especially the amateurs who can't afford a second or third camera.

Admittedly, it is more work to transport, setup and operate extra cameras.  But that will pay off with easier editing and a better end product.

[Sly Ry]

I absolutely agree.  Especially for the ceremony, 3 cameras can do wonders.

When filming a ceremony, my cameras play all the way through and I use 80 min tapes. No pauses during filming.  When I'm editing, I just layer the 3 tracks on top of each other and find a section/word where they will all be aligned or in sync.  Then it's just a matter of choosing which track to use at which time.  Everything extra I don't use from the ceremony (like shots of the guests, the choir, etc..) , I put in a blank sequence so I can always grab that stuff as 'fillers' when needed.

If you've been considering using 3 cameras, it's definitely worth it.  You could even use a smaller camera to start out with and throw it on a tripod in the back of the church or on the balcony. Just remember to start recording before the ceremony starts (I'm guilty of forgetting to hit record once  :oops: and I had to turn it on later in the ceremony).  They've got decent HD cameras nowadays that can do the job for around a $1000.  And they don't take so much room.  Trust me, a 3rd camera can really add an extra dimension to your videos or in some cases, save your butt.

[kwshaw1]

I've decided to make three cameras standard for wedding ceremonies, both because I like the results and because it makes me look good compared to competitors who only advertise two cameras. Beyond three sounds unwieldy but I could see using four at some events.

[HankCastello]

Here's where six cameras come in handy -

Cams 1 & 2 manned in each corner, Cam #3 wide at rear - covers entire wedding party + most guests, elevated if possible.  Cam #4 less wide at rear, from moh to best man, basically a full-length view of couple.  Cam #5 set static on quartet or other entertainment.  Cam #6 set wide, (usually requires wide-angle lens) facing rear to shoot guests faces.

Now you've really got a choice to cut to.  Both wide and closer views of couple's backs; two angles of couple's faces, one favoring bride, the other favoring groom; shot of the entertainment; wide shot of guests (nice to cut to this during prayers, applause, laughter - at least until you can frame a shot of parents, etc.)

[kwshaw1]

Here's where six cameras come in handy...

Ah, sounds like fun. If/when you're using six cameras, which two would you most likely have manned?

[HankCastello]

Six Camera Coverage of Wedding Ceremony
Camera's 1 & 2 (the ones with best view of bride and groom's faces) would be manned.  These are sometimes forward of the stage area, (where c5 & c6 are shown), depending on the venue and the way the service is conducted.  These are the only cameras really needing to be manned.  They also get shots of each set of parents and what they can of the wedding party.

I'm quite happy that the others are unmanned since "Mr. Static" is often our best cameraman!   :lol:

Camera 4 would be in a balcony or on a jib, if possible.  In this case, camera 6 is on a podium where there would be someone doing reading. It could just as well be trained on a singer, etc.  If nothing like this is happening up front, I'd move the camera forward and turn it around to shoot the guests.

PP edits four cameras nicely.  Then I lay video tracks from C5 & C6 over and cut away all but the few short parts I'll need.

As for the audio coverage - there'd be lavs on officiant, groom and fob.  A mic on the podium or on a mic stand if there's a singer; two mics (Shures) for the quartet (getting that stereo sound!); and a shotgun on the guests for clearer applause, laughter, etc.  We would also have a digital recorder on the soundboard and probably drop a lav in front of a house speaker.

Needless to say, if there were more instruments, persons speaking or singing, etc. they would all have mics.

By the way, one of the biggest potential problems in this configuration (whether three cameras or a dozen) is that the bridesmaids and/or groomsmen can block cameras 1 or 2.  This is one of the reasons for going to the rehearsal.  But I can probably come up with dozens of reasons and I think I'll do an entire article on the subject, basing everything on actual weddings we've done this year.  (We've had a couple of really odd ones where if you hadn't been to the rehearsal you might be really surprised and dumbfounded!)  Unfortunately, the counter-arguments regarding time and money are well-founded.

[Sly Ry]

Nice diagram and a good explanation of your setup.  I can totally see why you would need to be there for the rehearsal. This looks like an ideal setup I'd one day like to use but I think I'd need a bit more hired help to prepare it this way.  

If using 6 cameras was a common thing for me, I could see it cutting into my time with the bridal prep.  And I need that time for footage for my Same Day Highlights (...now I understand why this might not be something you'd like to do at your weddings, Hank).  A lot of weddings I go to,  the bride is a good distance away from the church/venue. I stay there until she's completely dressed and then I race to the the ceremony.  That normally only leaves enough time for final arrangements with the hired help.  If I'm going to have to use 2 or 3 hired guns, that would also eat into my costs so I definitely would have to raise my prices a sufficient amount.  

You probably have some good people who really know how you work because setup and takedown of this many cameras seems time consuming.  If I could do it this way I would.  If I could get people to pay more for it, even better.  That would be ideal for me.

[HankCastello]

No hired help.  My wife and I work alone. My wife covers bridal preps, though thankfully these are almost always at the same venue as the ceremony.  Still, I am sometimes anxious she'll miss the start of the ceremony.  I can't tell you how many times our Motorolas have transmitted conversations like this:

Me:  "You'd better hurry and get up here, they're about to start things!"
Jean: "I doubt they'll start without the bride and she's with me, so relax!"

I handle all the setup and break-down.  Jean is only responsible for her bag, camera and tripod. I'm breaking things down and loading the car for the dash to receptions while Jean covers the after-ceremony photo sessions.  She has to have her wireless rigs and bag packed, ready-to-go when I give the signal, then we race to the reception to shoot the decorations, setup tripods, mics and digital recorder before the arrival of the wedding party.

What lets me setup and break-down so quickly is our bags and how we pack them.

[kwshaw1]

So you commonly have two manned cameras on the altar area in full view of all the guests? Do you ever get hassled about this by church representatives, and if so how do you handle that? If you were prevented from shooting on the altar would you simply move to positions C5 and C6?

[HankCastello]

Good question.  Other than some Catholic weddings, we haven't had a problem with not being allowed in that position.  The stage area needs to be rather deep and wide for us to want this position (which it usually is) for two reasons - first, it gives better shooting angles; second, we can be less obtrusive by being further back and out of the way.  

Also, the bridesmaids and groomsmen generally block the guests view of us.

When the rear positions are not appropriate, we do use the positions marked for c5 and c6.

We constantly have to balance our desire to get the best coverage with the need to be as unobtrusive as possible.  This gets to be trickier as we move to the reception and must often compete with the photogs for positions.

[HankCastello]

A little more info on this setup -

By having the main (manned) cams rearward of the couple, you get faces during the times the officiant has the couple facing him, backs to the guests.

This is so important as the father is giving his daughter away!  Who wants shots of the backs of their heads?  The only way to get face shots at this time is to be rearward of the participants.

Also, even when the couple are facing each other, since they're interacting with the officiant, they usually have their faces slightly turned in his direction - again making the rearward positions the "choice" positions.

As for concerns from officiants - the ones I've dealt with are usually more concerned with movement than position. They are against any movement by videographers and I often have to negotiate some compromises in order to get the best coverage of the entrance and exits.

On shallow stages, I have occasionally been successful in getting the officiant to turn his and the couple's usual positions 180 degrees so that the officiant has his back to the guests and the couple faces him and the guests.

[kwshaw1]

This is so important as the father is giving his daughter away!  Who wants shots of the backs of their heads?  The only way to get face shots at this time is to be rearward of the participants.

Given potential obstructions by the officiant and the wedding party, I would think being directly to either side at this point would be at least as effective - and that's usually where I end up after getting a shot of the bride coming up the aisle. I used to hesitate to get the aisle shot out of concern for being inobtrusive, but changed my attitude when I realized that guests and the photographer are usually getting this shot - so why shouldn't I?

As far as both of you being behind the altar is concerned, doesn't that require you to go running at the end of the ceremony to get the recessional and after shots? Have you considered using something like Grizzly Pro to control your altar cams from another location?

[HankCastello]

I would think being directly to either side at this point would be at least as effective

In my experience, that position wouldn't leave you a good "kiss" shot, you'd miss the close-up of the ring shot and you'd have the wedding party blocking you for most unity candle and communion shots.  Until the couple are facing each other, you wouldn't see their faces from the side. It would also be difficult to get shots of parents reactions.  It would, however give you a good position to shoot singers and extra persons speaking.

doesn't that require you to go running at the end of the ceremony to get the recessional and after shots?

First of all, we would never "go running" or do anything to call attention to ourselves.  Much of the time I just can't get there because it would call attention to me.  But with having two static cams in the rear, one very wide and the other a lot narrower, I am covered, but have to trust the auto-focus of the narrow cam.

Some churches have a side door at the rear of the stage where I can slip out and through a hallway outside the sanctuary, make my way to catch the recessional.  You have to study each locale and make the most of what you're dealt.  I would consider a remote control aparatus if and when I found a situation where I felt it could help us do a better job, but the advantage would have to outweigh my reluctance to add an additional layer of gear that is susceptible to failure.  "Failure" is not acceptable to a wedding videographer.

[kwshaw1]

I would think being directly to either side at this point would be at least as effective

In my experience, that position wouldn't leave you a good "kiss" shot, you'd miss the close-up of the ring shot and you'd have the wedding party blocking you for most unity candle and communion shots.  

No, I meant just to get the shot of dad handing over his daughter to the groom. When I'm at the front of the aisle to get the bride coming in I just step to the side and get a shot of the hand-off, then retreat to a more useful location for the rest of the ceremony. Of course if you're in one of those churches where they won't let you move that wouldn't work, but I've found this approach to be useful on several occasions.