STVS - feedback/opinions on final video??

[DVC Bride 2011]

For those of you who used STVS (or anyone who knows about videography) -- does it look like they put a fake image into the window of the WP?

Ours is the top left image. I took screenshots from two other sneak peeks on their website to compare. They told me ours looks that way because the light outside was very bright. However, I took the screen shot images from two other weddings that also had very bright sunny skies. You can't even see the castle in our screenshot, and to me, it looks like very poor attempt at photoshoping in an image.

I was told that it will be an extra cost to fix this. I don't feel I should have to pay to make my video look like it's not poorly touched up - what do you girls think? Is he using poor quality cameras, or is it really from the brightness of our wedding day?

 

[SusieQ79]

Wow! I never would have even known that the one with you guys in it is the same setting as the other ones. Even without the brightness, the tree sizes don't match up...it looks like the trees magically moved waaaaaay closer to the window in the shot with the two of you.

I squinted closely around the outlines of your faces, and it definitely looks like a jagged dark edge, like you're against a blue screen or something. I wouldn't be happy either, especially if they didn't proactively warn me they had to "fix" the shot. I'd have asked to see the original and then decided for myself!

 

[DoomBuggy0922]

Um... that's BIZARRE. Where the heck is the castle?! I agree, it does look like a poor photoshop.

BUT, you looked beautiful!

 

[Kristen Wynn Photo]

I am no expert (obviously a photographer here, but I do have a degree in film and TV), but I don't *think* it is Photoshopped at all. If they were going to Photoshop something in there, they would have Photoshopped in an excellent photo of the castle. Why would they Photoshop in trees only? No one would take the time to do that-they would just leave the outside completely white from overexposure.

Additionally, Photoshopping in on video is not easy, at all. Very time consuming.

This is called dynamic range. The camera (even pro cameras) have limits and cannot capture extremely, extremely bright with extremely dark. There is a limit to how much they can capture. So as photographers and videographers, we often have to choose between properly exposing the subject (your faces, in this case) and properly exposing the background. There is a way to do both-artificial/external lighting on the subject, but that is generally not allowed in a chapel or church setting/by many officiants, plus it is distracting to the ceremony.

If they had properly shown the castle, then you two would be silhouettes. That is okay for a few shots, but not acceptable for your entire ceremony, obviously.

Did your officiant have restrictions on video, such as no lights? Did the WP? Did you request no external lights be used?

Also, your image is zoomed in much closer than the examples (look at the top of the heads), and I can see some similar trees in both images. The castle would not show because it is light in color-whitish blue?, and white is the first detail to "blow out" or disappear when in very bright conditions.

There's a saying in photography and video about ceremony conditions-it is what it is. Generally, we don't do extensive editing to change the place where you got married or the time of day. So a bride of mine that gets married with electrical lines in the background, for example, well, I do my absolutely best to not show them. But if I must do to the way she chose to have her ceremony face, for example, then they remain and any removal will cost additional.

We often are bound by restrictions during ceremonies, especially religious ones, and therefore, the end product is what it is.

Hope that sheds some light on the situation, just my two cents' worth!

 

[Disney845]

the tree sizes don't match up...

Actually I think they do. It is just that it looks different because the angle that the video was captured is not exactly the same in all three.

***I didn't touch this up, just added the yellow/red visual reference points***

In my opinion, the video is not photoshopped. As another poster pointed out, if they went to the trouble to photoshop the video, why not put a crystal clear beautiful image in the window?

It looks to me as though the video of DVC Bride 2011 was taken with the camera positioned more to the left (looking slightly to the right) than in the stock photos. You can see this because the trees in the stock photos (which are to the far right of the clear window area - see the yellow circles) look as thought they "moved" to the left of the window opening in the bride's video picture. The trees obviously didn't move, so that means that the angle of the video is just slightly different (not unexpected in different videos). Another visual clue is the inside facing on the right window molding which you can see above the groom's head because the camera angle is slightly towards the right.

Due to this, the castle is not seen for two reasons (imo).

The first is that, as another poster mentioned, in order to focus on the bride and groom, so that they wouldn't appear only as dark silhouettes, the window scene is too bright to accurately capture items in the distance that are similar in color to the bright background. I do not believe this is due to inferior cameras, or poor video skills, it just is what it is based on the conditions of where/when the wedding took place.

The second reason you don't see the castle is that it is actually to the left of the clear window opening (behind the left white window molding and the decorative glass area - marked with the red X). You can determine this by noting the position of the point on the bride's chin. The point of the chin is just slightly higher than the dark trunk of the tree seen directly behind her out the window. When you compare the position of that tree (her chin is pointing to) with the position of the same tree in the "stock" photo, you can determine that the castle is located to the upper left of the top of the bride's hairdo.

Again, this is just my opinion (I am not a professional photog/videographer).

That being said, I am sorry DVC Bride 2011 that you don't like the video and it wasn't what you were expecting. I hope that you had a wonderful wedding regardless (you looked beautiful) and I think that if it would make you happier that you should go ahead and pay to have the video touched up.

 

[Chilly]

i've checked my video and although its a different angle so you wouldn't be able to see the castle its the same brightness as yours so I don't think it would have shown up anyway.

 

[Chilly]

and at the end when you can see the castle we are in silhouette, i'll see if I can do a screen shot.

 

[Chilly]

 

[DVC Bride 2011]

Thanks for all the feedback. I understand that it's not photo shopped - I still think it looks terrible, though. When my family watched the sneak peek, they asked where he got the background from. I think as I see the images more and more, I am not so much disappointed that you can't see the castle. I'm more disappointed that it just appears fake, touched up, or just off. I'm not saying it is, it just looks like it is.

We are happy with the other aspects of our video so far. We have only seen the sneak peek, but I am hopeful that we will love our full length video. Thank you all for the compliments, we did have a fantastic wedding day.