FI and I have an appointment with a photographer whose work we really like, but only the associate photographer (whose work we also really like) is available on our wedding day. The main photographer, however, has told us that the associate photographer does not "do meetings" and that we will only be able to meet her at the engagement session. FI and I are both a little uncomfortable hiring a photographer we haven't met. Is it normal not to be able to meet with the photographer who will actually be shooting our wedding or should we keep looking for someone who will allow us to meet the person who will actually be doing our wedding?
Any guidance is greatly appreciated!
Re: Normal not to meet with the photographer who will be shooting?
There are tons of photographers out there and I bet you will find another one that you really like if this one doesn't work out. Go with your gut, and if you are not totally comfortable, then find someone else.
This is a good article about looking for a photographer. HTH!
http://www.soulfulengagements.com/1/post/2009/11/your-photographer.html
But in the real world, yes, I think hiring a non world class photog without meeting him is a little odd. On the other hand, I just shot a wedding here in Nashville two weeks ago for a bride and groom who live in Ohio. They wanted to get married here in Nashville. I never met them until the wedding day. They hired me and payed me online, with only a few phone calls added in. They liked my work, I fit their budget, and the wedding photos are a huge success, and she's totally thrilled with her photos so far.
So I guess it goes either way really. Even as a photographer, I prefer to meet potential clients first.