Wedding films are as unique as the couples they celebrate—each one telling a different story. But with so many styles out there, how do you know which type of wedding film is right for you? In today’s episode of Wedding Secrets Unveiled!, we’re joined by Larry Minick of LM Productions, who brings his passion for storytelling to the conversation. Larry dives into what makes a wedding film truly unforgettable, how the industry has evolved, and the latest trends couples are loving. Whether you’re leaning toward a cinematic feature or a short highlight reel, this episode is packed with insights to help you choose the perfect way to relive your big day!
Meet Larry.
I’m Larry with LM Productions. We’re a full-service wedding videography company. We do other stuff too—commercials, events—but weddings are definitely our bread and butter. We serve all of New England, and we’ll travel if asked. I’ve been doing this—specifically weddings—for what will be my 19th year.
So you specialize in video production?
Yeah—weddings, commercials, events. Honestly, I sort of fell into weddings by accident. I was taking film in college, and one of my professors, Dave Betancourt, was a wedding videographer. I started tagging along with him to weddings, and I thought, Okay, I guess I could do this. Never thought I’d still be doing it, but here I am. It pays the bills, and hey—it’s not the worst job I’ve had.
And when you’re good at it, you’re good at it. I really want to thank you for coming on today. Obviously, we’re going to talk a bit about wedding films and all the ins and outs of that, but I also want to dive into some current trends—especially a particular one that ties into social media. We’ll get there.
But first—let’s talk about what makes a great wedding film.
If you ask ten different videographers, you’ll get ten different answers. I know it might sound a little hipster, but this is still an art. It’s subjective. For me, the human element is what makes a great wedding film. It’s about the story behind the people at the wedding. That’s what I look for.
Sure, we’ll shoot the dress, the details—we’re not ignoring that—but what makes a wedding unique is the couple. Their story. Why are they getting married? Why are they here? What makes *them* who they are? I try to show that emotion in the film. That’s what makes a wedding film really special—telling the story of the humans involved.
Absolutely. That was kind of a loaded question, and I was curious how you’d answer it. You’re right—film adds a layer of personality and storytelling. Photography does too, of course, but video allows for a more fluid narrative. You’re really controlling the story.
Exactly. You don’t want it to feel like someone else’s wedding. And for me, I don’t want all my films to look the same. With video, you have to have a style—but I don’t want you to be able to stack Couple A’s video next to Couple B’s and have it be identical. Like, shot one is always here, shot two is always there, same audio cues—it would drive me nuts to edit like that. It’d feel like I was just a machine.
Right—and you’d lose the very thing you value most: the human element.
Exactly. I try to tailor every film to the couple.
When I talk to couples before their wedding, I explain our approach. I say, “Look, photos are going to capture a lot of the details—the dress, the suit, the rings—and we’ll get that too. I’ll make sure those shots look great. But ask yourself: would you rather watch seven minutes of your dress and your shoes… or seven minutes of your best friends, your grandmother, your moments?”
That’s what matters. That’s what people want to remember. Just like with any documentary or film—it’s the people that make it compelling.
Let me throw a little curveball out there—for our listeners, I want you to think differently about this. We’ve got both a filmmaker and a photographer in the room. Like you said, Larry, photographers are going to capture the details—the dress, the rings—and you’re doing the same with film.
When you look at a still image, it pulls memories out of you. You’re filling in the gaps. Maybe you remember the way the wind felt, how the air smelled—whatever it is, it’s coming from your memory. With film, you’re showing what’s actually happening. So again, you’re controlling the narrative. And if you’re not a good filmmaker—if you’re doing it in a cookie-cutter way—then you’re losing that personal element.
Exactly. And we’ll probably dive more into this, but when you go to the larger national companies, that’s what you’re getting. It’s all cookie-cutter. They see clients as dollar signs. They’ve figured out a formula that “works,” and every film follows that structure. Film A looks the same as Film B, as Film C—they’re just rotating couples in and out.
That’s the exact opposite of what I want to do. Personally, I do all my own editing. I don’t outsource it. Totally fine if others do—it just doesn’t work for me. I believe editing is the soul of the video. You can have amazing cinematography, but bad editing will ruin it. And vice versa—solid editing can actually elevate average footage.
So for me, it’s essential. That’s where the story comes together. And with these big companies, you lose that. You get one product for everyone. The people are interchangeable—the formula stays the same.
Let’s really talk about that—what’s the difference between hiring someone local and independent versus going through one of these bigger companies?
It’s like an assembly line. A formula that works, at least on paper. Yes, you’ll get a film from your day. But is it your film? What’s misleading is these companies often say things like, “All our shooters are local.” And technically, that might be true. If you’re getting married in Newport, for example, they’ll find someone within 40 miles of Newport. But they don’t actually know that shooter.
They might’ve posted an ad on Craigslist or Facebook two weeks earlier: “We have a wedding on X date. Need a lead shooter.” And then they hire whoever applies. You might get someone amazing. Or you might get someone who’s never shot a wedding before. I’ve seen both happen.
Yeah, and I can confirm that happens—100%. As a photographer, I often work alongside videographers, and I’ve seen this firsthand. You might get someone who’s super talented and just filling in a date.
But I’ve also had situations where someone showed up totally unprepared. One time, a videographer literally asked me to calibrate his Sony camera on-site—and I shoot Canon. I couldn’t help him even if I wanted to! I just remember thinking, What is happening right now?
Exactly. There’s a real disconnect. And it’s intentional. These companies purposely hide the shooter from the couple. You don’t get to talk to them beforehand. Someone just shows up on the wedding day. They don’t know the couple. There’s no relationship, no understanding of what makes that couple unique.
And I truly believe that when it’s your company—your name on the work—you take more pride in the product. With the big companies, it’s like, “Okay, Person A isn’t available? Then use Person B. No? Person C? Fine, Person D.”
So now someone shows up to shoot your wedding, hands off the footage, and never looks at it again. There’s no ownership, no heart in it.
And that’s why it ends up feeling cookie-cutter. Because they’re giving them a checklist: shoot this, this, this, and this. They edit based on those exact elements, with no room for emotion or storytelling.
Exactly. And look, I’ll be honest—you’re going to pay less. Probably get your film back faster too. Three to four weeks turnaround, maybe. But it won’t feel personal. It won’t be tailored. It’s going to be the same film every other client gets, just with different faces swapped in. And for some people, that’s totally fine. It works for them. But what I don’t love is how these companies pretend that’s not what they’re doing. They present it like its custom, boutique-level service, when it’s really mass-produced. It’s not a bad business model—it just isn’t one I want to be part of.
All right, let’s shift gears and talk about trends. What are you seeing right now in wedding films?
We’re actually going backwards a bit—at least in video. I started filming weddings back in 2006. I’m 41 now, so I was about 22 or 23 when I started. I tagged along with my college film professor to weddings and quickly realized I could do it, and probably do it better.
Back then, wedding videos were… not great. Lots of cheesy effects—circle wipes, awkward fades—and everything was long form. You’d get a full recording of the day, and maybe a short three-minute highlight reel if you were lucky.
When my generation came in, we wanted to change that. We started focusing on storytelling—creating actual films, not just capturing footage. Around 2013 or so, the demand for long-form videos started to fade. Couples wanted 5 to 10-minute highlight films. Clean, emotional, cinematic.
Right—like storytelling, almost like a short movie.
Exactly. But here’s the thing—now, in the last 2–3 years, I’m seeing a shift again. Couples are asking for longer edits. Not instead of the highlight film, but in addition to it. They want full ceremony edits, full speeches, raw footage—everything.
So long-form is making a comeback?
Big time. And I’ve always offered it as an add-on. People sometimes ask why it costs less than the highlight, and I explain—it’s actually easier for me. For the long-form, I’m just editing multicam coverage live. Ceremony’s an hour? Your edit’s an hour. I’m switching between cameras A, B, and C. Not a ton of creative decision-making—it’s straightforward.
The highlight film, though—that’s storytelling. That’s where the soul of the edit is.
Do you think people are actually watching these long videos? Or do they just want to have them?
Good question. I honestly tell clients—I wouldn’t buy the long video myself. But I get why people want it. Maybe 20 years from now, when you have kids, you want to show them the full ceremony. That kind of makes sense to me.
And then there’s raw footage—another trend that’s blown up. Everyone wants it now. Five years ago? No one asked. Today? Constant requests. I just throw it on a hard drive, organize it by part of the day, and hand it over.
But I warn them—it’s messy. It’s shots of my feet. It’s me muttering under my breath when someone blocks the shot with an iPad. I’m real with them. They still want it.
I’ve noticed the same thing. But I always wonder—what are they doing with it? They’re not posting these full ceremony videos. They’re not sharing an hour of raw clips. Are they even watching it? Or just storing it away like insurance?
It’s interesting. I think it’s a bit of a “just in case” mindset. They want everything saved, even if they never open it again.
Oh—and here’s another big trend: Super 8. It’s making a serious comeback.
Yes! Talk about that.
So this started for me with a friend and mentor, Dave Betancourt. He used to shoot select parts of weddings—like the bride walking down the aisle or the first dance—with a 16mm film camera. Just a few clips to blend in with the digital footage. It looked cool, had texture. When I went out on my own, I kind of stole that idea, but I used an 8mm camera because they were cheaper. I only did it for a handful of weddings, just to be creative—no one asked for it back then.
Now? Couples are requesting it specifically. They want the grainy, vintage look. It’s wild.
Do you think they’ll want it 10 years from now?
Honestly? I don’t know. That’s my issue with it. I’m not saying don’t do it—but trends fade. You’re committing part of your wedding film to a very specific aesthetic. Will you still like that look down the line? You can emulate that vibe in post now anyway. And unless you’re really into film, you probably can’t tell the difference between true Super 8 and digital with a film overlay.
It’s like photographers going through that “dark and moody” editing phase a few years ago. Super desaturated, contrasty, heavy filters. It was trendy—but it aged fast.
And now we’re seeing that 1990s direct-flash look take over. Straight-on, harsh lighting, disposable-camera style. It makes me cringe. Not because it’s wrong, but because we know it’s temporary. It will go out of style.
Yeah, I mean, some of those photos look like someone just pointed a flash and hit a button. There’s no finesse.
I know how to do that. I just don’t think it takes much skill. When you’re using flash that way, you’re not playing with light—you’re just blasting it at the subject. There’s a difference between crafting an image and just capturing one.
People might say, “Well, I like the aesthetic. I don’t care if it takes skill.” And sure—that’s fine. But that’s exactly what makes it a trend. And if we’ve been around long enough, we know these trends fade.
You don’t want to look back on your wedding photos or video and say, “Oh yeah, that was totally 2024.” The only thing that should date your wedding is your fashion. That’s it.
Photos and films should be timeless. You watch a well-made film from the 1960s, and it still holds up—because it was lit well, shot well, edited with care. The only giveaway is that it’s in black and white.
Meanwhile, look at music videos from the late ’90s—fish-eye lenses, crazy lighting, weird backdrops. It all screamed era. And those trends burned out fast.
So the takeaway? Experiment with trends on your engagement shoot or pre-wedding session—but keep the wedding day itself timeless.
Totally agree. You can still sprinkle in some style, but make sure the core product will age well.
How has the wedding filmmaking industry changed for you over the past 15 to 20 years?
Honestly, it’s changed a lot—starting with how I deliver the final product. In the early days, everything was physical. I had to burn DVDs, design the covers, print them out—it was a whole process. That’s all gone now. Everything is digital delivery. And I actually prefer it; it’s easier for me, and it’s a better experience for clients too.
We touched on this earlier, but when I started, clients wanted full-length wedding videos—just hours of footage. Then the trend shifted to short, 5–10 minute highlight films. Now, that longer-form edit is making a comeback. Not replacing the highlight but added on. Clients are asking for both.
The gear has also changed drastically. When I began, DSLRs and mirrorless cameras weren’t even options for video. We used long-form camcorders—the kind you’d rest on your shoulder. Real broadcast-style gear.
And how many times do people freeze and smile at you, thinking you’re taking a photo?
All the time! I’ll say, “It’s video!” and they’ll still stand there frozen. There’s even a cinematographer I follow who wears a sign at weddings that says, “It’s video.” Back in the day, you could easily tell who was doing video and who was shooting photo. Now, because our cameras look so similar, people mix us up all the time.
Gear itself has come a long way—especially low-light performance. It used to be nearly impossible to film in dim settings. Gimbals didn’t exist. You had to manually steady everything. Now everything’s smaller, lighter, and way more advanced. It’s made things easier and more accessible, even if it’s still expensive. I’d say gear is more affordable now compared to what we were paying for back then, especially with how competitive and widespread the market has become.
What about the filming style—how has candid versus posed evolved for you?
I’d say I shoot about 80% candid and 20% posed. It’s nearly impossible to be *completely* candid—you just wouldn’t get all the important shots.
I usually let the photographer take the lead during posed sessions, and I try to work around them. I don’t want to exhaust the couple by making them repeat everything twice—for photo and video. But video needs movement. If a couple is just staring at each other for 10 seconds, it gets awkward fast.
That said, I love the genuine, candid moments—like five minutes after the first look, when they forget we’re there. That’s the magic. But for those sunset “kiss with the sun behind you” shots? Yeah, we’re setting those up. That’s not candid. That’s why I say a blend is best.
At the start of the day, I always tell couples: relax, have fun, be yourselves. I’ll move you into good lighting, turn off those awful orange hotel lights, and just try to keep things natural. But when it comes to moments like getting into the dress—those happen fast in real life. So I’ll often say, “Unzip it again. Look at your mom and tell her she’s amazing,” just to get the reactions between the directions. That’s usually what I actually use in the final film.
Totally agree. And if you’re working with a good photographer, they’ll help create those moments for both teams.
Exactly. We’re usually chasing the same light.
Alright, here’s a random question—talk to me about licensing music.
Yeah, that’s a huge part of editing. We have to license music—no exceptions. Fifteen years ago, if you wanted to use a popular song, you’d need $15,000 or more. Now, there are subscription sites where you pay monthly or annually and get access to a library of licensed tracks.
Some of those sites offer “popular-sounding” music, but most of it isn’t mainstream stuff you’d recognize. Couples can absolutely pick their own songs—but only from the sites I provide. No Taylor Swift, sorry.
Most clients leave it up to me, which is great—but it’s still a tedious process. You spend hours listening to music that just doesn’t hit the right vibe. Lately, AI has actually helped. You can now plug in a song you like, and it’ll find similar licensed music. That’s a game changer—it’s only become reliable in the past three months or so. But yeah—music selection is one of the most time-consuming parts of editing.
We’re just starting to dip our toes into AI, and I can already tell—it’s going to change things. I’m calling it now: we’ll be doing a whole podcast episode a year from now just on AI in this industry.
That said, let’s shift to a topic I really wanted to get into—social media, the industry, and content creators. There’s a lot to unpack here. So go ahead—start us off.
Social media’s been both a blessing and a curse—definitely a cliché at this point, but it’s true. I’m 41, so I was there for the birth of Facebook. Same with Instagram. I literally watched them grow. Back when Facebook launched, there were no algorithms. You’d post a wedding film, and boom—it would naturally get 350,000 views. No boosting. No restrictions. Just pure, organic reach.
Random fun fact—I went to college in Boston, right around the time Facebook was being developed. It was wild. I remember telling my friends in Florida, “You need to get on this thing called Facebook.” And they were like, “What’s that? We’re on MySpace!”
It was a different time. The visibility back then was insane. Now, it’s way more complicated.
There was a time when social media just didn’t exist, and then when it first came around, it was this amazing, natural tool. No ads, no algorithms. It wasn’t about pushing business—it was just organic. That’s changed dramatically.
Now, social media feels like it’s shifted in a weird direction. It’s become more about the person than the product. I’m seeing more people build their brand around themselves instead of their actual work. And look—I’m not judging anyone who wants to dance and point at text in Reels. If that’s your thing, go for it. But it’s not mine. I’m focused on my product. I’m not going to spend hours figuring out how to choreograph a video just to post on social. It’s just not me.
You’re busy actually creating content, licensing music, delivering to clients. That’s real work.
Exactly. I do post content—but it’s from my weddings. I post the couples, the work we’re proud of. Not myself doing a voiceover or a trend. I’m not trying to be a personality. And I think this is a cultural shift, not a trend. This whole “put yourself front and center” model? It’s here to stay for a while.
I say this all the time—everything is a pendulum. Right now, it’s all about the self, but that’ll shift eventually. People will get tired of always seeing themselves, and the focus might swing back to meaningful storytelling.
Totally agree. Another shift I’ve seen on social media is how companies are using it for staffing. And this one’s big: A lot of companies now book weddings before they even have a shooter. They just say “yes” to a date, sign the client, then go onto Facebook groups or other platforms looking for someone to shoot it.
Now, this is not the same thing as finding a second shooter when you’re in a bind. This is companies essentially outsourcing every booking. And it’s exploded in the last 2–3 years. It’s constant now. I used to see it maybe once a week; now, I see it every single day.
What are your thoughts on content creators at weddings? It’s become a big trend recently, and some couples are hiring them instead of videographers.
Yeah, I’ve seen this firsthand. I totally understand why couples are drawn to it. First off, it matches the aesthetic they’re used to seeing—vertical video, quick clips, filmed on phones. That’s what dominates social media right now. Ten years ago, that would’ve looked weird. Now, it looks normal.
And they get it fast. Content creators often deliver 20–30 clips within a couple days. That’s very appealing. Meanwhile, video and photo teams take time to carefully edit, color grade, and mix audio. It’s a different process entirely.
Do you think this trend will replace traditional videography?
No, not fully. I think content creation is here to stay, but I see it more as an addition—not a replacement. Some couples will absolutely choose it instead of video, especially if they’re budget-conscious. But it’s not the same thing. They’re very different products.
For example, content creators aren’t capturing vows, ceremony audio, speeches—at least none that I’ve seen. There’s no professional audio, no cinematic editing. It’s mostly candid, unstructured clips. It’s valuable in its own way, but it’s not interchangeable with a full wedding film.
Do you think this becomes a “third vendor” now—photo, video, and content creation?
I do. And I think it’s splitting the industry even more. For photo and video especially, I believe we’re seeing the mid-tier market disappear. There will be budget vendors—mostly big national companies offering photo and video packages for $1,800–$2,000—and then high-end vendors offering bespoke, boutique experiences. Those big companies? They’re sales machines. They’re profiting small amounts per wedding, but doing hundreds of weddings per year. The editing’s likely outsourced overseas. It’s a volume game.
Meanwhile, high-end couples will just book everything—photo, video, and content creation. Lower-budget couples may have to choose between them. So content creation is becoming another layer in that decision-making process.
And now some of these big companies are even adding content creation to their packages.
Yep—they see the trend and they’re jumping on it. So it’s not going anywhere. But again, the difference matters. If a content creator starts miking people up and recording full ceremonies, are they still a content creator—or a filmmaker now? At some point, the lines blur.
That’s exactly where my head’s at. When do they start crossing into real cinematography—and how does that affect pricing and expectations? It’s a weird transitional moment for the industry. Right now, content creators are disrupting the dynamic.
It reminds me of when video first entered the wedding space. Photographers weren’t always thrilled to have us there, because it added complexity. Now, we work together seamlessly. I think the same thing will eventually happen with content creators—but right now, it’s still new.
And weddings are high-stakes events—you don’t get do-overs. That’s why pros get territorial. We all know we must get the shots. And when you add a third vendor who doesn’t understand the timeline, or doesn’t know when to step back for the caterer, or blocks key shots—it causes real issues. But it will level out in time.
At the end of the day, everyone involved—photo, video, content creator—we all have to play well together. But most importantly, we have to protect the couple. We can’t exhaust them.
Exactly. That’s where I’m going with this. The biggest thing I’m seeing now is the overload* on couples. They don’t even realize how much they’re putting on themselves. They’re on for photo, then on for video, and now they’re also on for the content creator.
Totally. And I’m all for couples getting everything they want—video, photos, guests with phones, even a content creator. I don’t care who’s there. It’s your wedding day. It’s the one time you have all these people together—capture it all.
But what’s happening now is some content creators aren’t just passively documenting the day—they’re directing it. And couples don’t realize what that means until it’s too late. Suddenly, the day feels more like a shoot for a reality show than a wedding.
Yeah, I’ve seen that too. They’re setting up scenes—like, “Okay, now take the robes off and walk toward the window,” or “Do this dance move.” It takes time. And I assume they’ve discussed that with the couple ahead of time, but I’m not sure. It’s not something I do, so I can’t speak to that side of it.
For anyone listening—I’m not anti–content creator. Some are amazing. I’ve worked with ones who are seamless, total professionals. But couples, listen: you’ve got to have that conversation beforehand. Because when it’s not done right, it can mess up your timeline and your experience.
This isn’t about photo or video missing a shot. This is about watching the couple burn out during the day because they’re being pulled in so many directions. Suddenly, it’s all performative. And then the day’s over, and they’re left wondering where the time went.
You want to enjoy your day. That’s the goal. And honestly, that’s why hiring experienced vendors is so important. I tell my couples all the time—my job is not to waste your time. I’m going to get the shots, but not at the expense of your experience. Your day matters more than any content we’re capturing.
Alright, Larry. Before we wrap up, I’ve got to ask—random question time. What’s your wedding hot take?
Oh, man… okay. My wedding hot take? Honestly… take that wedding budget and put it toward a mortgage.
Wrap-Up Question
What are some key points that couples should be asking their film companies when they’re inquiring to make sure that they are working with a professional company to ensure that their wedding day is absolutely perfect?
One of the most important things couples should ask is how long someone has been filming weddings. Experience really matters. Weddings have a rhythm. Sure, things go off course sometimes, but seasoned pros have seen it all—and we know how to handle the curveballs.
I also tell couples: ask about data backup policies. That’s something many don’t even think about. Like, how are they shooting? Are they using dual card slots? Where is the footage going after the wedding? For me, everything I shoot is on dual card slots. As soon as I get home—no matter if it’s 9 p.m. or 1 a.m.—the footage gets backed up. That’s my priority. I don’t go to bed until it’s on at least two drives and the cloud.
What We Discussed
Meet Larry (1:44)
Elements of a Great Wedding Film (3:45)
Trends in Wedding Videography (8:28)
Impact of Social Media on the Industry (8:44)
Licensing Music and Editing Challenges (56:19)
Wrap-Up Question (57:09
Links Mentioned in the Episode
You can find LM Productions: Website | Instagram | Facebook | Vimeo
You can subscribe to this podcast from wherever you’re listening so you never miss an episode. And, we would so appreciate it if you left a fabulous review for our show on Apple podcast! Even better, share it with a friend. It’s a great way to show your support and let us know what you think. Thank you so much for listening!
