Wedding videography has collected a lot of vocabulary, most of it doing marketing work rather than describing anything. Here's what the words mean when I use them, and what you should expect to receive.
The two approaches
Documentary
The day, as it happened, in order. The camera watches rather than arranges. Nobody gets asked to do anything twice.
The strength is truth - it's what actually occurred, including the parts nobody planned, which are usually the parts you'll want back. The cost is that it looks like a real day rather than a magazine.
Cinematic
Shot and cut with the grammar of film: shallow depth of field, deliberate movement, a score, a structure that builds. Often includes some set-up shots - the couple walking, the rings, the dress on the door.
The strength is that it's beautiful and it moves people. The cost is that too much of it starts to feel like a perfume advert about somebody else's wedding.
What I actually do
Both, in different measures, depending on the moment.
The ceremony and the speeches are documentary - you don't stage those, and trying to would be grotesque. The couple portraits and the details have more of a cinematic hand. The edit is where they're reconciled.
Anyone selling you purely one or the other is describing a preference, not a rule. Be slightly wary of "100% documentary, we never direct anything" - half an hour of couple shots is directed by definition, and pretending otherwise is a stylistic claim, not an honest one.
The films you actually receive
This is the part that matters practically, and the part quotes are vaguest about.
The full-length film
Typically 45 to 90 minutes. The ceremony in full, the speeches in full, the first dance, and the day in sequence around them.
This is the one nobody watches in the first month and everybody is grateful for in year five. It's where the complete speech lives - not the best forty seconds of it. It's what you'll show your children.
Check your quote includes it. Many don't, and this is where couples get caught out.
The cinematic film
Three to eight minutes. The best of the day, cut to music, structured to build.
This is the one you'll actually watch, and watch repeatedly, and send to people. It's also the hardest to make - condensing ten hours into five minutes means throwing away almost everything, and deciding what survives is the whole job.
Raw footage
Everything, uncut, unedited, ungraded. Hundreds of gigabytes of it.
Some couples ask for this and I understand the instinct - you paid for the day, you want the day. Be realistic about what it is: unstabilised, unbalanced, with long stretches of nothing and false starts. It's an archive, not something you'll watch. Ask if it's available, but don't choose a supplier on it.
Length: shorter is usually better
The commonest mistake couples make is asking for the cinematic film to be longer.
A five-minute film that people watch all the way through beats a twelve-minute film they stop at minute six. Every extra minute has to justify itself, and past a point they stop being able to. Trust the edit.
The full-length film is where "everything" belongs. That's precisely what it's for.
What to ask for
For most weddings, this is the right set:
- One full-length film - the archive
- One cinematic film - the one you'll watch
Two films, two jobs. It's what every one of my collections includes, from the three-hour Emerald upward, because I don't think either is optional.
If you're still deciding between film and photographs, there's a guide for that too. And if you want the numbers, here's what it costs.