35mm Wedding?

[Vincent Sweeney]

An AC friend of mine sent this to me. Seems a little over the top, but if you have money to burn:

 

35mm DP for Wedding (Beverly Hills)

Date: 2010-11-18, 10:43PM PST

Reply to: gigs-jj4db-2068468511@craigslist.org

 

We want our wedding shot in 35mm. (color and B+W) Looking for someone who has a 35mm camera (needs to be quiet) dont want to disturb guests. would like to have about 30/45min of final footage. Final product needs to be edited with music and titles (dialogue not necessary) and 35mm print for our home theater, as well as dvd's Need someone who can do it all, good minimalist, small package/ lites/equip etc. We have a descent budget, but need it to be done by one person, no crews. Wedding is in mid December 2010.

 

Please contact Jay and Laurine.

Compensation: 20/25K (more avail if needed)

[K Borowski]

Wow, this may be a first in 50+ years. . .

 

 

With the exception of snippets in documentaries, newsreels, I can't think of anything like this going back to the Czar of Russia.

 

I know a couple of people who shoot home movies on 35mm of their kids, but certainly not weddings.

[Simon Wyss]

Standard procedure would be wedding first, children afterwards.

[Brad Grimmett]

Wow, this is a rare one. I wonder how serious they actually are... 30 minutes of finished footage is quite a lot for a wedding video.

I have a friend who did steadicam on a celebrity wedding in Hawaii a few years ago. I think he told me that they had 4 35mm cameras running for the wedding. He walked them up and down the aisle.

[Vincent Sweeney]

"35mm print for our home theater"

 

That's the best part.

[Brad Grimmett]

"35mm print for our home theater"

 

That's the best part.

Nothing strange about that. If you're willing to spend the money to shoot your wedding on 35mm, then surely you have a screening room with 35mm projector in your house!

[K Borowski]

So 35mm celebrity weddings aren't uncommon on the West Coast?

 

 

 

I know several projectionists who have their own 35mm home setups. Wish I had one. . ..

[Paul Korver]

So 35mm celebrity weddings aren't uncommon on the West Coast?

I know several projectionists who have their own 35mm home setups. Wish I had one. . ..

 

35mm weddings are uncommon everywhere. And for the record it wasn't a celebrity wedding. Just a very wealthy guy who appreciated film. Lots of weddings are shot on 16mm/S16mm though.

[James Heyward]

I've thought if having my wedding shot on 35 the blocking and rehearsal would be done the night before. It would be multiple camera.

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Pfft. I'm going to make sure my wedding is on 65mm IMAX 3d..... Now.. where did I put my Tesla?

 

Seriously, though, if that were serious as a post, fantastic. I don't know what it's like to have that kinda money to burn, but it is nice to see some people still understand the "feel," of certain films. Though I wouldn't want to be invited over to screen it too much... Also, I don't think 25K would really cover the costs either? How much would a Neg cut/and or scan and print even run?

[K Borowski]

While I think this is cool, and could appreciate the difference, I really wonder how much of this has to do with them appreciating the look of 35mm as opposed to having a 35mm Panaflex walking them up and down the aisle on a Steadicam.

 

Ya know? Kind of like having a BMW and a Rolex. 35mm might be more of a status symbol here.

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Perhaps; but to have it be a status symbol is to imply a knowledge of it as such, you know? I mean, unless people know what kind of camera it is, and know about film, it wouldn't be impressive to the lay. The BMW and the Rolex are status symbols because we all know them as part of our collective culture. a 35mm camera, while a part of that culture isn't as "known," to people despite the ubiquity of it's product. And, anyone who has a 35mm theater in their home... well I mean when it comes to opulence, they could've just gone for a 2K or greater digital projector hooked up to a blu-ray player (consumers afterall.... )

[K Borowski]

Most people could identify that a Panavision is a "movie camera." Not so sure about other 35s though.

 

 

I think the 35mm screening room (real home movie theatre) is the same thing, a status symbol. What makes film more impressive is the cost, for people like that.

 

 

I don't know. It could be someone who just happens to be in the movie business and a passionate fan of film too.

 

 

 

BTW: I think the post is a scam. Who looks for a 35mm DP for their wedding less than a month out? Has anyone heard about this thing actually happening, because it is late December now. . .

Edited December 22, 2010 by K Borowski

[Adrian Sierkowski]

True true, but that's the point, if it was just a "movie camera," they might've just said "movie camera," or "camera from __________ blockbuster," ya know.

It'd still be pretty cool if it was a legit thing.

[K Borowski]

Why do they want DVDs too? I would have expected at least Bluray quality from them.

 

 

At least they are reasonable in not expecting a one-man band to be recording sync sound as well.

[Adrian Sierkowski]

probably to give to guests?

[Mitch Gross]

These things are very real. I've been on some of these. It is an event production much like any other. Generally done for people who are in the industry so they do understand the difference. You should see some of the Sweet Sixteen and Bar Mitvahs. Seriously, when you're 13 years old is it really appropriate to have a Steadicam follow you around and a remote crane swinging overhead as you give your thank you speech? Of course, when Dad is also paying for a famous recording artist to perform then I guess it's all par for the course.

[John Sprung]

What I want to see is the production still where the steadicam operator kisses the bride.... ;-)

 

 

 

 

-- J.S.

[Brian Dzyak]

For several selfish reasons, none having to do with money, I agreed to go shoot the wedding of a Warner Exec a few years back up in Napa. Not 35mm, but I had a Digibeta (the "top" format at the time). The priest/reverend/??? made a point of looking at me when he said to the guests that a marriage is not a movie, that it takes work, blah de blah de blah....

 

I agreed with his point and that's part of why I'm not an advocate of anyone paying for "professional" video/movies being taken at a wedding, muchless treating it like a movie production. I think that most people have an unrealistic "movie screen" based version of what they THINK their wedding "video" will look like when they pop the DVD in the machine at home. If someone truly wants their special event captured on a high quality professional format, perhaps they'd be better off having the actual ceremony with pro cameras doing wide shots and reactions from guests (for those genuine tears) but then having a second "fake" ceremony to capture the close ups and Steadicam shots and whatever else makes it more like a big feature film.

 

Otherwise, what's the point?

 

The real question though is which format, film or videotape, is less damaging to the environment when it's burned after the couple divorces. ;)

[K Borowski]

The real question though is which format, film or videotape, is less damaging to the environment when it's burned after the couple divorces. ;)

 

Brian, once again we are in total agreement :-D

 

 

Big A, you missed my point: If I were bankrolling a 35mm movie of my wedding, you'd think I could pony up the cash for Blu-Rays instead of DVDs, I mean, so they could actually, like, take advantage of having shot it on 35mm instead of S16. Maybe the couple getting married worked for "That '70s Show." :-\

[Adrian Sierkowski]

And you missed mine ;) Perhaps not all of the guests have Blu-Ray. Hell I'm the only one of my (non film) friends who has a Blu-Ray....

[Paul Korver]

Having shot hundreds of weddings on motion picture film (S8mm, 16mm, S16mm and yes, 35mm) in my prior life as high-end event cinematographer at Fifty Foot Films I can tell you that almost every guest at one of these events notices that something different / special is going on with the filming. Wether it's the nostalgic ticking of a S8mm camera, or the sexy look of an Arri 416 or Arricam LT people definitely take notice. Clients brag about it at their wedding "we're shooting on real film" etc. etc. In my experience they mostly choose film for it's aesthetic and archival qualities... any prestige & uniqueness associated with it seems more of a side benefit.

 

-Paul

[K Borowski]

Paul, that sounds like fun. Why'd you give it up?

 

I've heard plenty about people that make their living doing 16- and 8mm film weddings.

[Paul Korver]

Paul, that sounds like fun. Why'd you give it up?

 

I've heard plenty about people that make their living doing 16- and 8mm film weddings.

 

Hi Karl,

A few years ago I got obsessed with telecine, film scanning, color correction, tapeless workflows the DI process and post production in general. It bummed me out that it was difficult at the time to have my film transferred straight to hard drive without going to tape first so I bought some telecine equipment and started Cinelicious. Turns out I didn't have an outlet for my geeky side which Cinelicious fills nicely. I also have 3 young kids now and shooting events worldwide had me traveling most weekends. We still own a company that shoots events nationwide on S8mm (www.papertapefilms.com). And very occasionally the right client will come along to pull me off the bench and I'll shoot something.

 

-Paul

[K Borowski]

Well I am glad you still have an opportunity to do that.

 

One of the disadvantages of working on the lab end is spending too much time in the dark, sniffing the chemicals, pardon the expression.

 

 

 

Unfortunately that is a common trend. I know Rob still does some shooting, but I've talked to many lab owners that haven't shot film in years. I hope I don't go down that path as well, but it is easy to get in over your head with all of the intricacies of the job.