Wedding Photographer

yourdeadwright

What are couples tending to go for these days with Photographers,

Would you have one for morning prep for Bride & Groom or just Bride, I'm leaning towards just Bride & bridesmaids

We like the idea of a photographer for the ceremony & the arrival at the venue but I'm not sure we'll bother with one once Dinner starts and on from there, I just think form there on its a bit of a waste

Just wondering what worked well for others,

Alkers

I definitely wouldn't pay for a second photographer for the groom and groomsmen prep. There's a lot less ceremony to it than for the bridesmaids although one good thing about it is you do get used to being around the cameras more quickly. We did it as we were both getting ready in the same venue, but otherwise I wouldn't do it at all. If you wanted the kind of photos you could easily stage the putting on the tie/cufflinks etc which is all that normally gets used from that shoot really in any case

Even if you ask your photographer to stay for the first dance / dancing, they will normaly take a break during the meal and won't be taking photos then.

sunnyt1234

Hi there. We both got ready at the same venue so got a few snaps getting ready and they're really nice but I wouldn't be crushed without them. We paid for the photographer to stay until 9.30pm-we got married in the Summer and we went outside with him after dinner and got some gorgeous pics of the two of us in the witching hour light! I was delighted as I was having the craic during the drinks reception and didn't want to miss anything to go get pics taken. By 8pm or whatever time it was we had done the speeches, cake etc and so we were so relaxed in the evening pics. It totally depends on you but it is something to think about!

swededmonkey

Ours will cover up to the speeches before the meal and for will stay until the first dance for a few quid more

The Nal

Got the brother in law to take them at ours. You really only need 4 or 5 good ones, you won't bother ever looking at them. He took loads mind you and it was great not having the cost or annoyance of a professional there. The prices are extortionate.

Seriously, paying someone 2 or 3k to take a few photos is absolute madness. Theres your honeymoon.

My advice would be to see if there anyone in the wedding party whos handy with a camera and can spare a few minutes at various intervals to take a few snaps. I loved that at our wedding the after ceremony photo sh1te lasted all of 10 minutes meaning we could enjoy the canapies and have a few drinks as opposed to being ordered about for 2 hours.

Congrats by the way!

woodchuck

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118581941#Comment_118581941

Can I just add something from personal experience...

My husband and I have been asked to do this. Twice!! It's impossible to say no, but there's a huge amount of pressure. We have decent cameras and consider ourselves amateur wildlife photographers, but photographing people/weddings really isn't our fortay. Both couples seemed happy with the job we did, but we knew ourselves it didn't come close to the professionals.

So if you do consider this, think about:

1. The pressure you're putting on the person. It's a big ask, as everyone knows the photos are all you have left when the day is over. It also means they're "on" for a lot of the day and can't just relax like a normal guest.

2. The quality of your photos. Nothing compares to the photos taken by a professional. You don't want to sort through an album full of duds hoping for a few lucky shots. A professional has the experience and equipment to deal with all kinds of weather and light, which is completely unpredictable.

3. The overall experience. Our photographer was our rock on the day. She was truly like a wedding coordinator and kept everything on track (but not in a pushy way). She blended well in the background to take lots of candid shots. And took all the portraits with family etc so super quickly. You don't want to waste time on the day with an amateur who is faffing about trying to position you somewhere with better light, or have a lens shoved up your Auntie's nostrils while she's trying to drink a glass of prosecco.

A good photographer is worth their weight in gold!

The Nal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118582048#Comment_118582048

Yes agree that you can't say no but in our case he was more than happy to do it because it meant he had an excuse not to talk to people! So if you can find someone like that.....I did it at a christening before.

Our photos look every bit as good as any professionals Ive seen btw. Not an aunties nostril in sight. Can filter etc as needed easily too if you want.

In fairness we weren't that bothered really. As long as we had a handful of decent ones we were happy. Didnt bother with big group photos either. I hate them. You've finally got comfy and you hear "OK SO CAN ALL THE MEN PLEASE GATHER ON THE STAIRS" or whetever. Grumbling of "ahh fer **** sake" all round.

Oh and just general advice, if you're getting married in a church (and assuming youre not that religious and care about this) tell the priest to wrap it up quickly. Nothing worse than making people sit in mass for 2 hours these days. Thats no fun for anyone and a horrible start to the day.

woodchuck

That's fair enough that it worked out well for you. But it's very hit and miss asking a non-professional to take the photos, so I just wanted to lay out some points for the OP to consider.

Oh and just to address one of your points OP about the morning prep. When we spoke to our photographer, she said it just depends on the logistics of where you're both getting ready. If you're getting ready in the same location (or not too far from each other), then they should be able to fit both in.