Wedding Video or Wedding Film?

Wedding Video or Wedding Film? Which one is correct? If you ask the true students of Film anything not shot on Celluloid can't be called film. Many wedding videographers shoot with modern DV (Digital Video) cameras like the Sony PD-170 and Canon GL2.

These cameras don't shoot film, or do they? Is film the stuff inside the tape cassette or is film something that must be exposed to light? I don't know and I'm not too concerned because Take 5 now offers both Video (DV) and Film (Super 8) and can market accordingly. It is interesting to hear passionate people debate the issue. I ask my clients if they really care. Some do, some want their wedding filmed the same way Scott Wolf's wedding was captured with the use of 8mm and 16mm camera's. Others just want the look because they can't afford the cost of film.

For those who were wondering Film costs about $13 per minute of raw footage. This is the cost of the actual film, processing, and transfer. This doesn't account for labor of the camera operator's or the editors. By the time it is all said and done, that minute of finished/edited footage will cost you anywhere from $80 to $100 per minute.

Very few can afford this, however many want it. I have to admit the look is priceless and the quality is amazing. More people need to realize their wedding video, when correctly edited, is a piece of their life they will always have to share with their family and friends.

I personally don't have an issue with someone calling their product a wedding film when shot on modern DV equipment, but then again, some don't like what I do...

Keep it rolling!

-Jesse