• Images
  • Text
  • Find a Couple + Registry
GO
Photos and Video

Is a 2nd photographer worth the extra $$?

I am currently debating whether or not it is worth to have a 2nd photographer.  It would cost an extra $100 an hour ($600 total for 6 hours).  Anyone have experience they could share?  Thanks!
Wedding Countdown Ticker BabyFruit Ticker photo boygirl_zps7b73636b.jpg

Re: Is a 2nd photographer worth the extra $$?

  • It depends on your photographer.

    If he usually works with a second, then he probably needs it.

    I always work with a second photographer and, after being a second photographer for over a year, I realised the importance of my role!
    Two photographers will give you more guarantee to a complete coverage of your special day. During the ceremony for example, two photographers will be able to fully take pictures of you as you walk down the aisle, as well as your groom waiting for you. If your photographer was alone, he would probably have to split this time in half and, maybe, miss some important moments and details.

    Also, if your photographer works alone, he will have to run around more and be more in your way. When two photographers are organised and split their space well, you won't even see them, there will be less movement and running around, and that is better for everybody :)

    Carole
  • I'm obviously not married yet, but a second photographer is something that we consider important to budget for. Like PP said, we really want to make sure we get good pictures of me walking down the aisle and him up at the alter. We also hope it will help make family/wedding party pictures go faster.
    Wedding Countdown Ticker
  • We ended up not having a second photographer, but originally wanted one. I don't think we missed out on much, though it would have been nice to have more pictures across the reception area- one person can't be everywhere at once. If you can afford it, I'd go for it.
  • I am all for a second shooter.  I always worry about a broken camera or a bad eye.  We have hired a second just for that reason.  Insurance.
  • It depends on your wedding size too. Our photographer brought up a good point, you don't want to overwhelm your guests with too many running around. If you have less than a 100, id say you dont need a second for the reception, but I'd definately hire a second for the ceremony so one can focus on you too an one on the audience.
  • I would add it also depends on your day of schedule.  We ran into the issue where, while we were outside shooting posed shots with relatives, there was no one to photograph the guests inside at cocktail hour.  So we opted for the second photographer.  And like someone else mentioned, it'd be good to have so one can focus on you and one on the guests during certain moments (like ceremony, toasts, etc).
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards