Did you get permission/rights to use the music?

Actually, we have a blanet policy we purchased with our DJ service. I use to work at a cable company and that is how I found out about this policy.

I think it's really well done overall. The black and white to color effect after he puts the ring on her finger has a big impact, as does the blur/glow.

If it were me, I'd probably consider changing a couple of things. There's a transition towards the end of the video that flashes and spins back and forth extremely quickly between two different shots that will probably cause heck if you encode it to MPEG-2 and onto a DVD. Expect major pixelation if you leave it as-is. The other is that the music should also be slowed down a bit; i.e. using the original Cindy Lauper version of Time After Time instead of that turbo dance version. I only mention the latter because it is a wedding video. I guess it really depends on what your client wants, but the older version of the song might make it look a bit classier. Also on that related note, the colored shirt of the guy standing next to the tree could probably be done either consistently or not at all. I don't think it adds much value to the video.

Again, overall a great job, and heaps better than I could do. Then again, it's not my job to edit video but to provide technical project management to those who do. :P

Bit too long.

Like the idea of going into to colour from black 'n white. But then why did you go back to BnW after this point? It appeared to me that you either ran out of ideas of what to do next and/or you forgot about the narrative - yeah?

The upbeat section was great .. .but really made me focus on how long the rest was . .It's really hard this stuff . .

Comments are meant as "assists" - not just smart arse jibes at a colleague trying to get "it" done . . what ever IT means - yeah?

Regards,

Graham Bernard

>>...The black and white to color effect after he puts the ring on her
>>finger has a big impact

Definitely.

It would also be good perhaps, as someone else suggested, to *stay* in color after that...but maybe I'm overlogic-ing.

Looks terrific!

You did a great job of shooting and editing the video. It does seem a bit long and I also would not go back to B&W after you introduce full color. The feeling I got as you went to color when he gave her the ring was that everything in their lives would be different from that moment forward. Then you went back to B&W and lost that feeling. Just my impression. (your mileage may vary) ;-)

> Actually, we have a blanet policy we purchased with our DJ service.

Not to belabor the point but I doubt that any policy which covers a DJ service would also cover “sync” rights. The right to synchronize music to images is a separate right that is not covered by any other right to play music in a public place. You are making a derivative work. I would check with a lawyer just to be safe.

~jr

Nicely done, but I have to second Johnny's comment. I doubt very seriously that your DJ license includes the right to use copyrighted music in a wedding music video (synchronization) that you're getting paid for. That's not DJing.

Best of luck to you!

J--

The blanket policy does cover both because we show video sometimes when we DJ as well. The policy was rather expensive, but it's better safe than sorry.

Not trying to be argumentative, but isn't showing and selling two different things? Does the contract say you're allowed to produce videos, using the copyrighted music, and sell them?

If so, I'd honestly like to know more about this contractual arrangement!

J--

I’m not lawyer, but my understanding is that if the “policy” does not have the specific term “Synchronization Rights” in it then you don’t have the rights to do what you are doing. Showing a video and playing music along with it live, is a “performance” and is different from synching music to video and selling it as a “derivate work”.

Let’s forget about the video for a moment. The video contains copyrighted music that you are selling to people. Do you have the right to create CD’s with the music on it and sell them? I can’t imagine your policy allows you to do this; for that you need a sound recording license. So as VideoCurmudgeon said, showing and selling are two different things.

Here is the definition of Synchronization Rights from the ASCAP site:

A synchronization or "synch" right involves the use of a recording of musical work in audio-visual form: for example as part of a motion picture, television program, commercial announcement, music video or other videotape. Often, the music is "synchronized" or recorded in timed relation with the visual images. Synchronization rights are licensed by the music publisher to the producer of the movie or program.

Just have your lawyer contact the music publisher of the music you are using and ask if your current contract covers what you are doing (i.e., synch rights with the intent to sell copies of your derivative work). Better safe than sued. ;-)

You can read more at: http://www.optimalegal.com/sys-tmpl/musicrights/

~jr

Great job. I'll agree with the others on the b/w to color and back thing. Stay in color once you change over. This may be a bit off - but I like the way the video was embedded into the html page. I've not seen video like that online - ie no controls etc. Interesting. Any online documentation as to how that's done?