Hi Ladies,
It's been a while since I've started a thread, and I have a question for you all
While the wedding is still over a year out, FI and I were talking about our photographer's request and how to address it. I want to be etiquette-correct on how I go about it.
The photographer has requested that there be no "paparazzi" photos going on during the ceremony. Basically, she would like that people not step out into the aisle or in her way for photos during the 10-15 minute ceremony. I have no issues with them taking pictures like that (I mean, am I really going to notice this during the ceremony? Nope, don't care), but it is the only request she has made regarding taking photos.
So, question time. How do I address this with guests? I would like to trust that the ~70 people there would know not to do this. I'm thinking the only reason she specifically put this in the contract was because it has happened to her in the past. Do I do what I think I should and trust my guests? Do I consider an "unplugged" ceremony? Do I spread it via word of mouth or on the wedding website (no way I am putting that in the invitations)?
If it matters, we're aiming for no more than a 20 minute ceremony, and we're not having a photographer for the reception. I don't think any of this last statement matters, but I'll just throw it out there.
Thanks

Re: How to address photographer's request with guests?
String ribbon, garlend, origami, keys, whatever from chair to chair on the aisle side. This helps deter people from stepping out. They could still lean over but they are going to do what they're going to do.
I understand your photographers request but you can't stop your guests form doing what they want. Maybe the photog has been shoved out of the way before, run into, stepped on, or had the camera blocked by people trying to get into the aisle to take photos.
I like this. Also put an announcement in your program if you will have one. It may not keep determined guests out of the aisle, but you'll have made the request and hopefully your photographer will understand and accept that.
I think the reason she put it in the contract is that it covers her liability for not getting 'that photo' if one of the guests does step in the way. While photographers move around a lot during the ceremony getting lots of shots most of which won't be visually ruined by a semi out of place guest, the down the aisle shots are pretty dramatic due to the clean lines pointing to you guys in the middle but (generally) completely ruined if Aunt Sally is hanging out in the middle of the aisle.
Plus, in the 30some weddings I have attended I have NEVER seen anyone step into the aisle to take a photo.
"Love is the one thing we're capable of perceiving that transcends time and space."
@amrhodes23 - I wasn't snarking you. Just your photographer's contract.
I understand her wanting to have the aisle clear. My puzzling comment had to do with writing it in the actual contract. You're signing your name to make sure people don't get in the aisle, so what if they do? It means you're violating the contract, so what happens? It's one thing to say, "Not responsible for guests stepping in the aisle while trying to take pictures," and another to have you sign a contract to keep people out of the aisles.
The ribbon idea is great!
I like the idea of using aisle ribbons and a simple line in your program to please keep the aisle clear during the ceremony for the photographer.
We're also going to let our (awesome) photographer know that she can be pretty blunt with people if they try to take photos during formals. There's nothing I hate more than people in a photo looking in 4 different directions.
I was totally thinking this...I envision little kid bouncers around the photog...body-checking cell-phone users.
Although this has much more practical implications than, say, telling guests what to wear, I'm in the camp that holds telling people what to do and how to behave is rude. There's really no way to enforce this rule unless you collect everyone's phones upon entry (in which case, I'd turn around and go home), so why even bother trying to implement it?