Hi,

he said SD DVD is standard and $500 more for bluray. I am not an expert in this area, however I think he is a little off with his pricing. He said it involves alot more work for bluray, but I am not really sure what he meant. He always shoots HD and would need to convert the content for SD DVD which would take more time?

I want to be sure that I am not getting ripped off.

Thanks.

He's doing the same video shooting and is asking for $500 more to give you a burned BD-R that has been authored on a Blu-ray capable software program?

Sounds like he is testing the market and you are a test subject.

Even a pretty advanced Blu-ray authoring suite and BD-R drive for a small business would not justify a $500 surcharge per customer. He may be trying to justify it by saying he's shooting in high definition instead of standard definition , but that seems to be an excessive premium.

I'd ask him to lower that price, and he'd probably back down, or at least there is a chance he would to something more reasonable. I'm assuming its a basic wdeding and not a three day event in the Hamptons.

I'd check around. If you are in a major market you be able to find someone to do the Blu-ray upgrade for less for delivery of a BD-R. The quote for shooting in real HD and everything else though is negotiable.

You might try posting this in the Blu-ray software forum to get more responses.

It depends

Whats the price is for DVD. (The difference in %)

It may be that he has to rent a HD camera, and the extra expenses comes from that rout.

But if he already is shooting and edit in HD. The extra cost wouldnt be so much.

Ask him what camera he will shoot with if

1. You want SD?
2. If you want HD?

What value do you place on having your wedding on Blu-ray? Perhaps you should communicate with the camera man and come to a price that is closer to what you see the value being.

If he is already shooting in HD ask him to transfer the raw data to a HDD that you provide. To me it sounds like a money grab, from a cost estimating point of view (my proffesion)here are the cost differences, he has no increase in camera costs, lets put a $10 charge for a high grade BD-R, lets say the authoring takes 15% longer for dealing with larger file sizes at $100/hr and maybe 2 hours of authoring thats $30, and finally there is the software suite costs lets say its $300/year in license, if he does 10 jobs with it he needs to recover $30/job. Total cost about $70 add a health proffit margin and you are still under $100.
Likely as someone pointed out he is trying to set a price point for a new offering. Blurays, High Def, etc. are considered high end so he is hoping that consumers will accept that the price is high. Much like when digital cameras first came out wedding photogs wanted to charge high prices for the data discs, now since competition has driven the market, data discs are almost a standard offering.

My bet is he is trying to pay for a new HD camcorder. One he just bought or is planning on buying.

Also, he may not have a burner and still be looking at older prices. A burner could cost over $200 and a handful of DL BDs would be another $100.

You could ask for the HD footage on a hard drive(which you provide) and then shop around for someone to author the wedding disc for you.

It sounds like a total money grab. Or his amortization schedule for whatever equipment he's trying to accomodate is yourself and maybe 2 or 3 others?

I would shop around. That seems ridiculously high.

As other have suggested see if he will transfer the HD video file to an external USB hard drive that you would provide (which you can find online for under $60). If he tells you that it would cost more than $100 to do that than you might want to look for someone more reasonable.

For 500$ I could shoot the entire wedding, including a BD. ;)

To bad all the other expenses come into play.

Don't even mess with the external HDD - too much hassle and little appeal.

Have him export his final edit in HD (.m2t file unless he's using Final Cut Pro, then a .mov file) and burn said file to a DATA DVD-R disc. His edit will likely fit on a single layer DVD-R (dual layer if necessary) and then you can take the file and burn it when you want on a BD-R.

Chances are though he's going to tell you that it's more work to edit in HD, which isn't the case. Editing is editing. Otherwise he wouldn't be shooting in HD, and he's not shooting SD on an HD camera (if he is, find a new videographer).

Sorry, but the $500 extra is fairly standard for high definition. At least he's burning it to a BD-R, most of the ones I've seen that do high definition give you a AVC HD. (I was tempted to ask for a 3x DVD just to see the looks on their faces.)

I'm in the same boat. I want my wedding to be captured in high def as well. I figure we'll go and get lacquered w/ high def makeup at Sephora (for free) before the ceremony. :p

My experience of shooting in churches is that the lowlight situation didnt really make the HD video shine.

If you dont are in a place with good light, you may very well be better of shooting in SD.

(Because if everything is equal, the SD cam behaves better in lowlight)

My experience of shooting in churches is that the lowlight situation didnt really make the HD video shine.

If you dont are in a place with good light, you may very well be better of shooting in SD.

(Because if everything is equal, the SD cam behaves better in lowlight)

And I would agree with this. I have a Canon HF100 HD camcorder and I used it for a wedding last August. I've never seen a blue column in the church 'move' so much with my old SD Sony Mini DV.

If it's well lit, then HD it, if not SD it.

And if someone had shot my wedding (I did my own, with 3 seperate units running) and offered me a BD for $500, I would have taken if only to break it up his @ss........... $500 is a rip off. between 50 and 100 would do.

Seggers

Like $1000 for a dress to be worn once...
$3000 for a meal which will be eaten and forgotton in 1 hour...
$2000 for booze the effects of which will wear off in 4 hours...
$300 for invitations that will wind up in the recycle bin...

....is not a rip off.

There's more expenses but you get the drift...

$500 seems like pocket change when you add it all up.

Like $1000 for a dress to be worn once...
$3000 for a meal which will be eaten and forgotton in 1 hour...
$2000 for booze the effects of which will wear off in 4 hours...
$300 for invitations that will wind up in the recycle bin...

....is not a rip off.

There's more expenses but you get the drift...

$500 seems like pocket change when you add it all up.

I was thinking the exact same thing. People are often trapped into spending so much on other aspects so that "perfect day" can be achieved. Just make sure the marriage works out, or else you will really feel sore about the whole thing.

The problem is that there will be many pocket money expenses on a wedding.

So every extra 500$ will not be so funny in the end. (Unless you have unlimited money that some on this forum seem to have ;) )


PS

On my wedding I calculated that it was cheaper to send every guest a invitation DVD then it was to send a card, plus I got the bonus of adding some visual demonstration of what would happend to the guest if they failed to send their reply in time. :D

Like $1000 for a dress to be worn once...
$3000 for a meal which will be eaten and forgotton in 1 hour...
$2000 for booze the effects of which will wear off in 4 hours...
$300 for invitations that will wind up in the recycle bin...

....is not a rip off.

There's more expenses but you get the drift...

$500 seems like pocket change when you add it all up.

Wow, it is really expensive.
But if I have a lot of money $500 for a bd is not a problem.
Just look on the brighter side. :)

Wow, it is really expensive.
But if I have a lot of money $500 for a bd is not a problem.
Just look on the brighter side. :)

Like I said... it really depends on how much value the original poster sees in having his wedding on Blu-ray. Is it worth $500? $200? $50? $3.50?

Blu-ray in general is value priced. Pay what you think it is worth.

Ask him if he has shot any weddings in HD.
If he has, ask for a sample of his HD work authored onto a BD.
You do not want to be his first experiment in BD.
I would rather have an excellent quality video in SD than a bad looking BD.
Put that extra 500 toward a professional video production company that specializies in weddings.

Good luck

My bet is he is trying to pay for a new HD camcorder. One he just bought or is planning on buying.

Also, he may not have a burner and still be looking at older prices. A burner could cost over $200 and a handful of DL BDs would be another $100.
Oh, I forgot, you need a pretty powerful PC and recent editing software that supports BD. That alone might cost a pretty penny. If the guy uses a Mac, he made need a new PC to burn BDs.

Blu-Ray authoring software costs $500. My $700 Canon HV20 shoots HD video quite well and most current day movie shooters will have at least entry level prosumer cameras capable of HD. A Blu-Ray burner is $300.

I think he's trying to rip you off. $At the most... I'd say $200. Only because he does need to cover the cost of the Blu-Ray burner and BD-Rs.

Blu-Ray authoring software costs $500. My $700 Canon HV20 shoots HD video quite well and most current day movie shooters will have at least entry level prosumer cameras capable of HD. A Blu-Ray burner is $300.

It depends on what camera he is using.

If he gonna shoot the wedding with a Sony F950 camera, the 500$ is very cheap.

If he just gonna use a camera like HV20, 500$ is pushing it.

So its important to know whats included in the 500$

seems kinda costly... You say he is shooting in HD already, so editing the video would not be any more work at all. The only way it would be more work is if he is using a real-time editing system that only does SD (Matrox or pinnacle system that is a little older) and can only do HD editing in non-real time. Still the difference in the amount of work is negligible and most NLE systems have a system for editing using a low res version of the video, and then batching it all together at a higher quality. I don't see how it could be $500 more work though, $250 I could understand... but no more...

Try and negotiate a better price, but if he is the man, you're gonna pay.

My wedding video is SD DVD and even on my 10' screen, it looks just fine.. Perhaps all that resolution is not that necessary.. Your wife to be may not appreciate the extra resolution on close up... most women hate it! (especially if she wakes up the day of your wedding with a stress related pimple)!!!:D

yeah, seriously, do you really want to see all your friends and family in high resolution? or would it be better for the guy to make extensive use of the soften filter?:D

I'm getting married in 2 months and we looked at multiple videographers before interviewing a couple of them. I found that most of them shoot and master solely in HD with "pro" cameras, and all who did also included at least a single copy of the final product on BD - the rest of the included copies were DVDs, but you could purchase extra BDs at $50 or so a pop. The only price differential we found was based on the experience of the videographers, how many cameras they had, and the "extras" that they offered in addition to the standard wedding video (i.e. "slide shows" put together from the wedding material and shown at the reception, staying longer into the reception, interviews of family and friends, etc).

I'm sure pricing differs based on where you're at and who you're dealing with, but in my personal opinion asking for $500 extra to get the final product in HD is absurd. You should shop around and see who else is out there.

Hi,

he said SD DVD is standard and $500 more for bluray. I am not an expert in this area, however I think he is a little off with his pricing. He said it involves alot more work for bluray, but I am not really sure what he meant. He always shoots HD and would need to convert the content for SD DVD which would take more time?

I want to be sure that I am not getting ripped off.

Thanks.

Buy yourself an HD camera and you can shoot your own honeymoon footage ;)

I agree with the person who said you should check the guy's credentials and ask to see examples of his other work in HD before committing.

I also agree with MovieSwede. If the camera he is using is top of the range then $500 is nothing. You need more information to make your choice and should ask to see the guy's portfolio of work.

If the guy cannot show you any HD footage of his work then find someone else.

You don't get a second chance to capture your wedding so you want it done right so make sure you hire the best you can afford.

I'd ask for the raw files, then create your own Blu-ray. You can get the LG or the new Pioneer burner for about $200 and a decent BD-R for $5. Use the freeware multiAVCHD (http://multiavchd.deanbg.com/) to create your Blu-ray. The tool can create AVCHD DVDs or Blu-ray on BD-R. Doing it yourself also gives you control over the content & menu.

The cost of the man and his performance is one thing, the incremental cost to go from that to shoot edit or give you high definition copies are another.

For $500 you could buy your own AVCHD camcorder and shoot it yourself. Plus you'd have an awesome AVCHD camcorder after you were done with the wedding for your honeymoon video.

For $500 you could buy your own AVCHD camcorder and shoot it yourself. Plus you'd have an awesome AVCHD camcorder after you were done with the wedding for your honeymoon video.

1. Who is gonna film?

2. A consumer camera is not as good as a pro camera.

3. It takes time and equipment to edit the material.


Sure its a cheaper option, but not preferable.

They should have a Bridezillas episode about this...

;)

The other things is what is your wedding budget? If it is $50K plus, what's an extra $500 to get the high resolution copy. IF your wedding budget is under $20K, spend the dough elsewhere or save it.

I have a 480i copy of mine and it looks fine on my 10' screen. HD is nice but won't ruin your future playback enjoyment.

"HD is nice but won't ruin your future playback enjoyment."

No, only your spouse can do that.:eek:

1. Who is gonna film?

2. A consumer camera is not as good as a pro camera.

3. It takes time and equipment to edit the material.


Sure its a cheaper option, but not preferable.

I filmed my own wedding and good portions of the reception. For the wedding I put the camcorder on a tripod and left it running (not perfect but I got some good shots). In the reception, either was using it, or I chain ganged one of the family.

I was fortunate in that my father in law also used his, once he had 'given' the bride away and someone else got some film of the aisle walking.

That said, with only my own camera, I had enough to do a fair job of it. And I didn't pay no stinking $500 for the DVD....

I also did all the editing, which was much preferable IMHO as I had full control of the time line and which camera to use. The only thing I didn't work out was the whole 'angle' icon thing.... :D

Seggers

You don't get a second chance to capture your wedding

Some guys do..
;)

Another tip, never let the camera rule the wedding. Its better if it just records the wedding and not becomes part of the wedding.

Sure we all would want a hollywood shoot wedding with cranes and perfect lighting.

But while it looks good on disc, it doesnt look very nice in the church with all that equipment.

$500 is probably less than you are spending on flowers. But before forking it over ask to see a sample of his HD work at other weddings or events. Just because it's HD doesn't mean it will look any better or more professional if the camera work and editing are second rate.

I don't know that it is entirely unreasonable. It depends on what he does in editing.

He may have a seperate HD and SD camera and he only breaks out the HD camera when HD is paid for. You pay more because the HD camera is more expensive per use. An SD camera would save him authoring time too, for non-HD projects.

Even if you assume he uses an HD camera for everything, he will go through and make a rough edit. Then he will encode it to SD. Then he will do the fine edits, transitions, special effects, etc. in SD because it is faster to do them that way. My experience with editing HD material is that it takes way longer to edit than SD material.

Then you have to look at how he edits. Is he using a constant bit rate and letting the chips fall where they may? Or does he do the edits, do a first encode at a constant bit rate, review the finish product and find areas that are choking, and can back and increase/decrease bitrates in certain areas, then do another encode. Tweaking like this and needing to do multiple encodes adds to user and machine time in the editing bay.

A camera guy or editor can easily fetch $100-$150/hr, so start adding hours to their workload and you can get to $500 easily.

As someone else pointed out, HD doesn't always look better than SD in low light situations (wedding location, reception location, etc.), depending on equipment. The camera man may know this and be planning to bring in extra lighting for one or more locations. He may have to rent that equipment.

I mean it really all depends. Just ask him why it is $500, and how his process differs for HD vs SD. If he tells you to kiss off, then he is probably trying to rip you off. If he starts saying more lighting, special camera, more time in the editing bay, etc. Then $500 might not be so much of a premium.

He also would be very unlikely to just give you the raw footage, without charging you signifigantly more. Just like wedding photographers, you do not own the originals. The photographer/videographer will own the copyright to the original material and you technically can't reproduce it without their permission. This may be another part of why BD is more expensive. They may employee AACS or BD+ to attempt to protect their original copyrighted material, either of which would require the videographer to pay a licensing fee.

I don't know that it is entirely unreasonable. It depends on what he does in editing.

He may have a seperate HD and SD camera and he only breaks out the HD camera when HD is paid for. You pay more because the HD camera is more expensive per use. An SD camera would save him authoring time too, for non-HD projects.

Even if you assume he uses an HD camera for everything, he will go through and make a rough edit. Then he will encode it to SD. Then he will do the fine edits, transitions, special effects, etc. in SD because it is faster to do them that way. My experience with editing HD material is that it takes way longer to edit than SD material.

Then you have to look at how he edits. Is he using a constant bit rate and letting the chips fall where they may? Or does he do the edits, do a first encode at a constant bit rate, review the finish product and find areas that are choking, and can back and increase/decrease bitrates in certain areas, then do another encode. Tweaking like this and needing to do multiple encodes adds to user and machine time in the editing bay.

A camera guy or editor can easily fetch $100-$150/hr, so start adding hours to their workload and you can get to $500 easily.

As someone else pointed out, HD doesn't always look better than SD in low light situations (wedding location, reception location, etc.), depending on equipment. The camera man may know this and be planning to bring in extra lighting for one or more locations. He may have to rent that equipment.

I mean it really all depends. Just ask him why it is $500, and how his process differs for HD vs SD. If he tells you to kiss off, then he is probably trying to rip you off. If he starts saying more lighting, special camera, more time in the editing bay, etc. Then $500 might not be so much of a premium.

He also would be very unlikely to just give you the raw footage, without charging you signifigantly more. Just like wedding photographers, you do not own the originals. The photographer/videographer will own the copyright to the original material and you technically can't reproduce it without their permission. This may be another part of why BD is more expensive. They may employee AACS or BD+ to attempt to protect their original copyrighted material, either of which would require the videographer to pay a licensing fee.

Actually, if you go to the right photographer, you can get the negatives for *all* the pictures. You may/will have to wait a year or so (we did).

So actually asking for the raw footage is something you should consider. Although I'm not a pro, I always supply the all the shots, good or bad, and any video footage.

Seggers

It seems a bit much to me, but again that depends on what he's planning on doing. And what equipment he has.

On a side note, my wife's aunt filmed our wedding, and apparently the mic was not working, so there is no sound at all. Oh well.

I just got told by another videographer here in Austin (where wedding vendors charge San Diego prices) that HD is a $500 premium. I'm not as annoyed when the videographers have professional or prosumer grade cameras. When they have consumer grade cameras and Final Cut Pro/Premiere (better than Ulead or Nero but still) and act as if they are justified in charging a premium, I tend to laugh.