Photography

ShesSoCold · August 2013

I'm looking into photography packages for our wedding and I'd appreciate some advice. In reading other posts about photography, I've read time and time again that printing rights to every photo and 2 photographers is number one (and 2) on everyone's list. I agree with the printing rights and am only looking into photographers who will offer that. The two photographers is where I need help - I'm having a small destination wedding. 50 people are invited and I'm expecting probably 20-30 to actually come (although planning for 50!). It's just a ceremony, dinner and drinks - no dancing. Do y'all think 2 photographers is necessary? I found a photographry package that's a little pricey but automatically includes 2 photographers. I'm trying to decide if I should try to talk them down by only needing one...

TIA!

MuppetOverlord · August 2013

I'm only having one for my 65 count wedding. For my previous wedding, I had 2 and the 2nd photographer was useless.

For my friend's wedding, a second photographer would've been nice to have photos of her cocktail hour when she was having photos taken, there were some cool moments, but so many people took photos themselves and she had disposable cameras that I grabbed off a table to capture those things too.

melbelleup · August 2013

I'm not having two photographers per say. My photographer will have an assistant, but she'll also be taking some photos, but there won't be a lot from her. Honestly, you're having a small wedding, I would see if you can do one photographer with an assistant or just one photographer but back up equipment.

Jen4948 · August 2013

Well, do you have relatives who are likely to try to commandeer the photographer to take pictures only of their own families or whatever they want?

Also, some are just better at capturing certain kinds of shots than others.

But if you think it's not worth it, you can certainly try to contract for one photographer.

manjermj · August 2013

The main reason I found 2 necessary was because the guys were getting ready at the hotel and the girls and I were getting ready at my parents house. It was nice to have 1 photographer with each group before the actual ceremony. And for the ceremony, it was great to have 1 photographer up close and the other in the choir loft of the church, who happened to get some of my favorite shots of the church/ceremony.

misssunshine17 · August 2013

It all depends on how many pictures you feel you need. I'm having a second shooter, but he's basically an intern (but some of his work is great) and he's included in the already very reasonable price. If you want a gazillion pictures of you getting your makeup done and a gazillion of your FI shaving, then I guess two is what you need. I think for less than 50 people, one photog is enough.

Maggie0829 · August 2013

When we booked our photographer through a larger photography company H and I thought that she would be the only photographer on site the day of the wedding. The day of came and she brought along her assistant, which was a surprise (a good surprise) to us because while we were taking pictures on the field her photographer was getting shots of all our guests while they were enjoying cocktail hour.

In the end, it is really all about how many pictures you want and also what type of pictures you want. If you want getting ready shots then two photographers may be necessary to capture both you and your FI getting ready. It may be difficult for one photographer to get to both individuals. But in your case with a small wedding I think that one photographer will be fine. But when you meet with a potential photog I would ask them what they think in regards to your situation.

WinstonsGirl · August 2013

We had a small DW (40 people) and we had 2 photographers, a husband and wife team. It worked for us as she did photos before hand of myself and my MOH getting ready and such, and he went with DH and his BM. During family photos after, she helped by grabbing different lenses and doing lighting to help things move along quicker. She also has a good eye and set up some shots that he hadn't thought of. They work very well together and we got amazing photos because of this. Talk to your photographer and see what will work best for you. I know photos are expensive, but this was one area where I didn't mind splurging

harper0813 · August 2013

We have only one photographer for our 150-person wedding. We are getting ready in the same building, though, which helps with the logistics of photographing each of us before the wedding. Honestly, two photographers is nice but it's an unnecessary luxury unless you need LOTS AND LOTS of photos.

We're not having photographs taken of each bridesmaid coming down the aisle and we're not doing posed group photos. We've asked our photographer to focus on candids. It should help lessen his workload.

itzMS · August 2013

zobird said:

We have only one photographer for our 150-person wedding. We are getting ready in the same building, though, which helps with the logistics of photographing each of us before the wedding. Honestly, two photographers is nice but it's an unnecessary luxury unless you need LOTS AND LOTS of photos. We're not having photographs taken of each bridesmaid coming down the aisle and we're not doing posed group photos. We've asked our photographer to focus on candids. It should help lessen his workload.

This is true in most scenarios.

I am super picky about pictures and how I look in them. Therefore the second photographer was vital for us. I also love how the main photographer focused on DH & I, but the second photographer focused on the guests and using different lenses/exposures to catch different styles of images. The results were worth it.

:-)

southernredandwhite85 · August 2013

I would consider the logistics of where ya'll are getting ready before the ceremony. Can one photographer easily capture the photos of you and your fiance getting ready? Or does it make more sense for two photographers to focus on each of you separately? Depending on your ceremony location, could two photographers capture different angles or does your venue only allow photographers to stay in one place, which would only require you to have one photographer? At the reception, with a smaller guest list, I think one photographer would be fine in making sure a lot of your guests make it into photos.

silver0319 · August 2013

When I was looking into photographers, I really thought it was necessary to have a second shooter. The photographer I booked with told me otherwise. We were willing to pay for a second photog, but she said a good rule of thumb is to base it off of the number of guests you'll have. For weddings of 200+, it's good to have a second shooter. For a smaller weddings, a photographer and an assistant is enough coverage.

tammym1001 · August 2013

I just booked my photographer last night and they told me they didn't think I needed a second photographer. We are only having 30 guests and neither one of us wants pics of us getting ready so there really wasn't any need for it. With such a small guest list I can't imagine that the photographer wouldn't be able to get pictures of the guests.

ashleyep · August 2013

My very expensive photographer only uses a second shooter if she thinks it's necessary - and that largely depends on the size of the wedding. At first it was very important to me to have a second, but for the price she's charging, I trust that she's capable of getting all of the important shots alone.

It was very important to us to get pictures of FI getting ready with his dad, so we negotiated to at least have a second shooter for that (we'll be getting ready in separate places). I'm hoping she'll just decide at that point to continue on with the second shooter at least for the ceremony, which is in a church. But honestly, I have no idea if I'll have a second or not.

muenginerd · August 2013

My MOH had a destination wedding about the same size as your's and did perfectly fine with 1 photographer. They did not do pictures before hand, people in the room just took some.

For a destination wedding are you talking to a local photographer? If not remember you'll most like be responsible for photographers traveling costs too. If you are using a local photographer can you talk to your resort or location. Friend used the photographer the resort provided through their package and they were able to get some beautiful pictures for a dirt cheap rate. It worked out so well because he generally shot 1-2 weddings a day 5 days a week at the resort.

southernbelle0915 · August 2013

We had two. I'm glad we did for the getting ready photos (we were in two separate locations). It made sense efficiency wise so there would be no dreaded gap. H didn't want to see me before the ceremony so the ladies' photog did all the BM pics and me w/ my family photos and the guys' photog did all the GM pictures and him with his family.

After the ceremony, one photog went to cocktail hour with other guests while one did our combined family photos, whole wedding party photos and we had about 20 minutes for just the two of us (which was REALLY nice). The result was that we really didn't miss any moments - even ones where we weren't there. That was a nice perk.

msdds51 · August 2013

The one thing that I'm happy about with 2 photogs is that I can have someone taking pics of me and my girls getting ready AND my FI and his guys getting ready and I don't have to rush the timeline to get one photographer to get all those pics. I also agree with the comment about cocktail hour photos.

More than the number of guests, I would look into the amount of time you have with that one photographer. You're not going to want to FEEL rushed while you're getting formal pictures in because then you'll LOOK rushed.

SP29 · August 2013

We are having a ~100 guest wedding, where ceremony and reception are in the same venue. FI and I will be getting ready with our respective party members at separate locations.

We are choosing to have 2 photographers, but will have both for only 6 hours. One will take photos prior to the ceremony with FI, the other will be with me. Both will be taking photos at the ceremony (good for different angles- catching everything). Then our main photographer will be doing the family/bridal party/ B&G shots during cocktail hour, while the second photographer is taking photos of the guests at cocktail hour (and doing a neat guest book idea!). Once dinner starts, the second photographer is done, and our main photographer will cover our first dance and speeches. Once the dancing starts, our main photographer will be done for the evening.

thisismynickname2 · August 2013

itzMS said:

zobird said:

We have only one photographer for our 150-person wedding. We are getting ready in the same building, though, which helps with the logistics of photographing each of us before the wedding. Honestly, two photographers is nice but it's an unnecessary luxury unless you need LOTS AND LOTS of photos. We're not having photographs taken of each bridesmaid coming down the aisle and we're not doing posed group photos. We've asked our photographer to focus on candids. It should help lessen his workload.

This is true in most scenarios.
I am super picky about pictures and how I look in them. Therefore the second photographer was vital for us. I also love how the main photographer focused on DH & I, but the second photographer focused on the guests and using different lenses/exposures to catch different styles of images. The results were worth it.
:-)

This. We're having an 80 person wedding and I thought one photog would be fine, but when we met with the person we ended up hiring, she walked us through my favorite shots of her portfolio- and explained how she achieved it with a second photographer. In order to get the artsy stuff I want, two photographers are necessary.

SomethingBeautiful08 · August 2013

I had a 80 ish people wedding and only had one photographer. It worked well for us. We got ready mostly down the hall from each other so she got some good shots of both of us. We also weren't too pickly on having tons of photos or anything too arty so I think it just depends on your preferences, but I wouldn't always consider it a "must have".

ksblumb · August 2013

We had right about 50 guests and had two photographers. I was pretty adamant about this from the beginning for a couple of reasons. One was for reactions. One photographer getting his and one mine during the first look and walking down the isle, same for when I saw my dad, and a few other instances. When I saw my brother (which was after the first look while we were getting ready for some pics) both photographers were standing there as he hugged me, and I'm so glad we have a photo from both aspects. They are a couple of my favorites from the entire day.

We had dinner directly following the reception, as they were in the same venue. Right after the ceremony though we wanted some shots with all of our guests (all family) so it was nice that we were able to get them done twice as quickly (families got pictures without the bride and groom, pretty venue, all dressed up, it worked). It took maybe 10 minutes for a variety of 30 pictures, and I think our guests appreciated the chance at having a picture with, not only us, but the rest of the fam. Plus, for little Kodak moments at the reception, two sets of eyes are always better than one

Photography was probably our biggest splurge (costing us almost as much as our food/alcohol bill) but I am so glad we went for it.

erinlin25 · August 2013

I had one photographer and we got nearly 1,000 gorgeous photo's from it. If you pick a photographer who knows what they are doing and are familiar with the venue they will know where to go and how to get the best pictures possible. He had an assistant but she basically was the one setting the scene if needed, fixing my dress etc.

PatriceC59 · August 2013

I think it really depends on the type/quality of work that is done. When you have sat down or will sit down with photographers, when they show you albums, you should ask if the pictures they are showing you are: 1. Their work 2. If they had an assistant. Most if not all of the photographers AND videographers that my FI and I met with were open about this information when we asked them. One guy, we loved what he was showing us, but he was adamant that it would require 3 people (him and 2 assts) because of the way he uses light for his work. So that turned out to be too expensive and that made the decision for us.

Be sure you see albums of their work and you're not just hiring them work unseen. I'm thinking that if you're wedding is small, you might be ok with one. If you're having a videographer, you can also ask if they will make stills for you from the video footage! That's like bonus pictures! Good luck!

Photography

Re: Photography

Choose Another Board

Search Boards