Last year I was asked if I would document the wedding of a couple in Bedfordshire. I say document as I describe my wedding video style as being documentary in nature, that is, not a stylised interpretation in soft focus surrounded by rose petal images, but a wedding video which reflects the events of the day in more realistic rather than virtual production values...

The alternative style, other than documentary proving popular, lends itself from the cinematic genre; a style often emanating from the technology in use whereby the subject is in a narrow depth of field of focus; that is, images in background and in front of the principal subject are out of focus. The technology therefore dictates the production outcome as the camera used to produce what looks like a creative innovation is in fact a limitation, introducing other restrictions which the user of this type of camera has to overcome.

Those from a more traditional wedding photography background and often the younger video maker (embracing "cool" like the latest iphone) have tended to move into this area of video production as there are some initial cost advantages to be had. I say initially, as by the time said youth has bolted on all the other bits and pieces, corrected the ability of said camera to record sound at a better quality level, and made what is essentially a photographic stills camera perform as a camcorder, they have probably doubled their initial startup cost.

The images produced do have a nice look, I must admit, but unfortunately the story often does seem to get lost in all the imagery and effects in the final edited product. Probably due to the fact that these cameras cannot record more than 12 minutes of HD video in one burst - the user has to restart the recording at the end of this period - every time. As a result the flow of the story is often distracted.

Another aside here is also the price at which the client pays for what is after all a short-coming. Like all trends there is a supply and demand element attached, as well as the supposed "added value" or what is perceived to be added value. In other words, wanting to charge more for it - and likely the client is prepared to do exactly that. Not bad for selling a short-coming and making a profit on it.

But where was I? Bedfordshire - right. Now I don't often get into Bedfordshire as a significant amount of my work often comes from areas around Leicestershire and Northamptonshire, but in our English countryside, one county is almost the same as the other, especially in the East Midlands and most points south.

My Bedfordshire couple wanted to use the video in place of hiring a stills wedding photographer in an effort to save money. Having explained that my style (and here that word pops up for the last time) was to record in documentary fashion - unobtrusive, almost like the proverbial fly-on-the-wall. But, as I continued, what a seasoned wedding photographer does exceedingly well is to organise the wedding group, the family and the friends, which I use to my advantage by observing the gathering and the organisation. No, I was told, that's okay we don't want that - we just want our day to look like it wasn't organised or staged.

Now that's my type of client. It almost closes the circle: photographers who want to make video, with that of video makers who want to shoot stills. The day was complete; the wedding video well received. We were all happy with the outcome.