On Thu, 03 Apr 2003 17:33:24 GMT, Gary Eickmeier <geickmei@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:

>Neuman - Ruether wrote:

>> For wedding videos, I attend the rehearsal - and shoot

>> it. Some of the nicest video (and interesting people

>> interactions) happens at the rehearsal, making a nice

>> part of the finished video. One discovery, though:

>> the "action" is rarely where it was supposed to be,

>> based on observations made during the rehearsal...

>> Not sure why, but just about everyone (including

>> singers and musicians) change places from those

>> planned the night before...

>We find going to the rehearsals pointless. That is not the video they

>want, or want to pay for, and you can see how it is going to be staged

>in about two minutes of consultation on wedding day.

>Gary Eickmeier

Then you miss much of the informal "fun" in the

event... Obviously our "styles" are very different.

I get good money (for a 1-man production...)

for "telling the story as it happens", without

"set-ups", interviews, etc., and without

disturbing ANYTHING - I'm there to observe and

record only... I shoot stills also, and find that

in this field, too, coverage ranges from the "fly

on the wall" approach (mine) to the "stage and

direct everything" (basically with this, the

record of the event [which may include "faked"

parts] is more important than the event itself,

so "anything goes" to make sure the "record"

looks good...;-) I choose my clients carefully,

making clear that the differences possible in

different approaches are clear, and that the

clients do prefer my approach (this also has the

advantage that I get the "interesting" weddings

that are fun to cover, and avoid the dull "by

the book, with a drunken party afterwards"

weddings...;-)