UPDATE: Brothers Wedding (done)

They were impressed by the skintones but embarrassed to have had a photographer with a camera that wasn't 8 minutes old?
 
One of the problems with doing a close family official photographer part is are you a guest or photographer? I had to do my sons wedding due to unforseen circumstances, and it wasn't easy. Getting the shots wanted other members of the family and guests decided to basically ignore my photographic wishes and carried on as if there was no photographer at all.

My advice from this experience is never ever do a family wedding photographer duel role , it doesn't work
 
Correction ....I heard the OP shot it on a Canon...need I say more

Realspeed ..they wont ignore your wishes if you use a megaphone...
 
Last edited:
Well if you had said that on Nikonites or Nikonians you would have been banned to there is hope here !!!!
 
Waaaaayyyyyyy late coming to this one, but...

When my Brother-in-law was married (2nd time) a few years ago i got roped into covering it for them - I kicked & screamed that I wanted to be a guest and just have fun instead - but my wife won and I agreed to shoot it (she ALWAYS wins btw, no idea why I even argued lol)

So on the day there I was stuck behind a camera again and you know what... I LOVED it :)

Knowing them so well made it even more relaxed than a normal Wedding. I had a great time and the photos were pretty good too - so all were happy then ???

Errr NO !!!

My wife wasn't happy that she'd been left pretty much by herself all day chatting to family members she either didn't know or didn't like !!!

So, my suggestion given the fact they aren't going to hire a Pro, shoot it, have fun doing it, but make time for your own wife/partner too or they will feel left out

Can't bloody win can you :D

Dave
 
ianp5a said:
Actually the 450D did quite well in reviews when used in hand to hand combat.
Click to expand...

nah you want something with an alloy body for hand to hand combat - Polycarbonate doesnt cut it (unless its as Glock 17). I once hit a mugger in the face with a mamiya 645, camera was fine - mugger less so (ask me if I care ... 'well you see officer he said "give me the f*****g camera or else.".. he didnt specify he didnt want it swung on its strap like a mace first' )
 
Last edited:
I shot my brothers wedding last year (first wedding I had done) and thoroughly enjoyed the experience and presented them with a beautiful photo book as their present about a month after the wedding. I am shooting a good friends wedding next weekend (my second wedding shoot) and looking forward to it.
The first thing I explained to them is that I was not a professional wedding photographer but I am pretty good. I would also make sure you have a second body (just in case!).
I would do it again as that is what friends do for each other.
 
big soft moose said:
nah you want something with an alloy body for hand to hand combat - Polycarbonate doesnt cut it (unless its as Glock 17). I once hit a mugger in the face with a mamiya 645, camera was fine - mugger less so (ask me if I care ... 'well you see officer he said "give me the f*****g camera or else.".. he didnt specify he didnt want it swung on its strap like a mace first' )
Click to expand...

Surely it's the person using the camera as a weapon that's important? I mean put a plastic entry level DSLR in the hands of an aggressive meat head and they'll do far more damage than a wimpy weed with an alloy body? ;)
 
You want hassle mate? Here's some Hassel. Doof! A 500 cm in the face! And doof! Cop the spare back. Always carry a spare back.
 
Last edited:
Sorry for my lack of input into this but i have not had time recently to get on the forum. Our house move started to go t*ts up then my youngest got ill so have had other things taking up my time.
I am very grateful for all the input and for that i thank everyone who has contributed.

I have told my brother and his bride that i will do the photos from a guests point of view and i will be enjoying the wedding with family and friends as much as he will, but i will have my camera with me.
 
first of all hope the young one is all right now , and that the house move is smoothing out ,,,,,
i think you've gone for the best option ,,,,,im sure you'ill still get some decent images anyway ....
all the best Andy
 
I also hope everything is now fine & I also think it's a good decision.
The pressure is off, enabling you to get some good images, while still enjoying the family occasion. :cool:
 
bell... bad idea you will always be the one who would not do a proper job for them and they will still need a pro.
 
I think it is the right thing to do. Hope your nipper is ok as well.
 
Pistnbroke said:
bell... bad idea you will always be the one who would not do a proper job for them and they will still need a pro.
Click to expand...
In some respects i feel more comfortable with that than agreeing to do it and them not being satisfied with results and thinking that i might have misled them in some way.
Why do they "need" a pro?
 
>Why do they "need" a pro?
If they have specific wishes and result expectations, then hiring a pro is a way to ensure good results. (If there are no talented amateurs coming.)
Some typical expectations being:
  • Picture quality. If all the guests have smartphones and no one brings a real camera, quality could be a problem. Especially in low light. Right up to printing and presentation.
  • Specific groups. A pro arranges groups, big and small, quickly an unobtrusively, despite difficulties with old people, 4 year old crying bridesmaids and large numbers of people.
  • Posing. A pro knows all the tricks of making posed photographs look good. No awkward stances that make her look fat or clothes out of place. Repositioning hands because a nervous bride is holding them weirdly.
  • Experience. A pro is prepared for bad weather, difficult priests, problem families, camera and flash problems. and can get great pictures even if the location is a dump.
  • A pro has a backup photographer if he/she is ill. I was once injured and was in hospital for 2 weeks at no notice. The weddings went ahead with backups.
  • And many, many more...
 
Last edited:
Because if you are a guest you are not going to be standing by the celebrant taking photos .
If no one gives directions to them they will wander about like headless chickens Sorry some call it informal but most often its rubbish.
But as you say no liability on your part and no problem for me.
 
Bell said:
In some respects i feel more comfortable with that than agreeing to do it and them not being satisfied with results and thinking that i might have misled them in some way.
Why do they "need" a pro?
Click to expand...

Exactly. How would you, they, the whole family feel if something had gone wrong or they weren't satisfied in some way.

Enjoy the occasion without the added pressure. (y)
 
Well I have tried numerous times to suggest and persuade them to hire a pro but they insist that they do not want one.
I will add that they are happy with my decision to go as family/guest with camera (whether or not they have hidden expectations or not remains to be seen but I trust that they mean it).
I guess everyone is different and that in this case, the do not need or want a pro.
 
I think for what it's worth that you need to do what works for you. I just hope they aren't secretly expecting you to step up. Let us know how it goes. Who knew this thread would run and run! I think it just goes to show how often we can be put in situations which give us a dilemma. Altho I know for some it is more black and white than that. Good luck!
 
Turns out they have set up an account on some phone app where the guests can log in to an account and upload photos straight from a phone.
i might not bother with my heavy cumborsome dslr, i could just use the app! I dont remember them telling me what camera i had to use! :D
 
The "Wedding Party" app (https://www.weddingpartyapp.com/) - it's great. You can even (if you're brave) use it for the Hen & Stag do's. Also we had a gallery for "Memory Lane" for embarrassing old photos of the B&G.
One word of caution though, the quality of the photos is limited by a) the camera-phone being used and b) further compression - so don't expect to get any printables off of it.
It's essentially an wedding-specific instagram.
 
hi @Bell
I have a similar situation and a compromise (awaits the flames!!!!)
my sister in law is getting married, and they're on a tight budget, and the only reason they suggested I didn't shoot their wedding for them (I'm not a wedding pro btw, keen happy snapper) is because would like for me to be a guest.
they are really a) not that bothered, b) on a budget. but wanted me to organise the photographer.
So they wanted a cheap solution. Also as per @DG Phototraining 's post...the wife would like me there for some of the wedding
This is my solution. I take my camera, shoot the groups, etc for Gran and then I have hired a 2nd shooter on a day rate. She's experienced and shoots on similar kit to mine. Has her own wedding clients, insurance etc and has done 2nd shooting before.
So she will cover bride prep, help with the groups, get the general shots and then also help me with the couple shots; so all of the leg work will be covered but she'll do no processing which of course is time consuming. I can do that after the event and organise an album for gran.
 
Slimbert said:
It's entirely up to me as a professional what and whether I charge someone. I've done and will continue to do freebies whenever I like.

All this talk of "you're taking money away from pro's" is really boring imo.

I'm a part timer, charge more than most local to me, I do no paid advertising (no business cards, wedding fayres or even a website!), I have Duncan Kerridge and Ross Harvey living on my doorstep, and I'm already fully booked for next year. Cherry on the cake is that I'm not even that good a photographer.

In the current climate, there is plenty of wedding work available to those who are good enough. If your diary is full, you've got no need to moan and nothing to worry about. If your diary isn't full, then it's probably due to your own failings and not the odd person doing freebies.
Click to expand...

I read as far as this because I was thinking the same thing and could see the conversation going round in circles.

I get tired of people going on and on about how professionals are losing out etc. etc. and all the silly examples of not paying plumbers, doctors and the rest of it. The fact is, they do jobs for free as well and DIY stores are also in business.

It comes up time and time again on wedding threads, usually because the pros are losing a booking because the B&G's friend or relative is doing it. Are the pro's really that bothered about whether their pictures end up usable or not? I doubt it.

I have done free jobs for people and will continue to do so whenever I like and the reasons should be in my interest only.
 
Bell said:
You will have to wait till January im afraid. The wedding is December 30th.
Click to expand...

Jumping in this late conversation... Quiet some interesting point of view on here, I wouldn't expect the pro to get that upset about stealing money from the pocket of photographers when you clearly won't as they don't plan to hire one... You are not an amateur trying to steal pro job but a relative asking to bring his help which is fine.
If my brother was asking me the same I would be very happy and enjoy the day shooting although it would be a bit of added stress because I am not a pro and I am knowhere close to a pro but they know that! You will probably also spend a couple of day processing the picture which they surely appreciate your effort.

Why don't you ask them to pay for the hiring of a nice canon 5d markiii with a 24-70mm f2.8 and a monopod for a few days so you can test it out before the wedding. Making sure your equipment will cope with indoors lightning and enjoy using some pro kit for a day? You can also used your cropped sensor with something like a 85mm to take candid portraiture.

And always remember although the photography of a weeding are really important to some. To some others it's mainly the memory of having a nice time that really count. As we say the best picture are the one you take with your eyes. So your pictures will be an added bonus to them!

NB: sorry I haven't read the whole thread maybe this was already suggested!
 
connersz said:
It comes up time and time again on wedding threads, usually because the pros are losing a booking because the B&G's friend or relative is doing it. Are the pro's really that bothered about whether their pictures end up usable or not? I doubt it.
.
Click to expand...

You what ?

Any pro who isnt bothered about whether their pictures end up useable isn't worthy of the name

or did you mean (but not write) that the pro's arent bothered whether the amateur photographer covering a wedding's pictures end up useable , but only say they are because they think they are losing business ? - If so then that is rubbish as well as most pro's wouldnt take a client who has jack s*** to spend anyway.

The reasons I (and a lot of others) tend to advise amateurs not to do this (generally with no expereince and no back ups etc) are a) that its a good way to lose a friend or start a family feud unless the 'client' is really not bothered what sort of quality they recieve , b) that its difficult to get a bunch of people who see you as bob from down the pub to take you seriously as 'the pro' so it will actually be more difficult and stressful than covering a strangers wedding , and c) for the 'freind' concerned its a real bugger if their wedding photos turn out to be rubbish.

As an aside as a WW 'pro' I won't do freebies for anyone who is not very close family or best mates - the argument I usually take is " If I was coming as a guest , how much would you expect me to spend on your wedding present ? " - they usually say 50 quid or so - "so why are you expecting a £750 present from me this time then ?" - If a casual aquaintance wanrts me to shoot their wedding then if i'm feeling generous then i might give them a £50 discount or a free print or something.

Also if they invite me as a guest , i generally don't take a camera at all * , or may be just the TZ35 ... I have had the "oh wheres your camera we thought you were going to get some good shots for us ?" conversation a few times - but tough s***, if you want me to shoot for you, hire me - don't expect that i'll turn up and do it for nothing.

(*the proviso to this is that i will usually bring a basic kit and leave it in the car so if the 'pro' turns out to be rubbish , or as in one recent case has a total equipment failure and disapears just after the start of the wedding breakfast, i do have the option to go get it if i choose to step in)
 
big soft moose said:
The reasons I (and a lot of others) tend to advise amateurs not to do this (generally with no expereince and no back ups etc) are a) that its a good way to lose a friend or start a family feud unless the 'client' is really not bothered what sort of quality they recieve , b) that its difficult to get a bunch of people who see you as bob from down the pub to take you seriously as 'the pro' so it will actually be more difficult and stressful than covering a strangers wedding , and c) for the 'freind' concerned its a real bugger if their wedding photos turn out to be rubbish.
Click to expand...
It's just an amazing coincidence that wedding photographers seem to make such an effort to educate the world on why it is such a great reason to hire them, especially if it has nothing to do with monetary gain. If the client doesn't want to hire a professional or pay a lot of money then that's up to them, it's their wedding and not everyone can afford it.

A lot of people have replied to this thread saying that they took pictures for a friend or relatives wedding and everyone was happy, and that the photographer was till able to be as a guest. So it only becomes a problem when the pictures turn out bad, but that has nothing to do with it being either a wedding photographer or a friend.
 
connersz said:
It's just an amazing coincidence that wedding photographers seem to make such an effort to educate the world on why it is such a great reason to hire them, especially if it has nothing to do with monetary gain. If the client doesn't want to hire a professional or pay a lot of money then that's up to them, it's their wedding and not everyone can afford it.
Click to expand...

its a forum community thats what people do - its not like any of us are out there trying to convert random muppets in the street

It is entirely up to the individual whether they hire a pro , or indeed up to the amateur whether they want to risk doing them for a mate - but if they post asking for opinions they can't be suprised when they get honest opinions rather than having smoke blown up their arse.

Also you miss the point - its not about it being a good idea to hire a pro - its about it being a bad idea to expect your mate bob to be your pro because he has a 'fancy camera' if he isnt actually a pro - if you don't want to spend a lot to hire a pro then fine rely on guest photos , or don't have photo's at all

A
connersz said:
lot of people have replied to this thread saying that they took pictures for a friend or relatives wedding and everyone was happy, and that the photographer was till able to be as a guest.
Click to expand...

actually not - its not practical to be a guest and 'the photographer' - its perfectly practical to be a guest and take some photos like any other guest but that isnt the same thing,

connersz said:
So it only becomes a problem when the pictures turn out bad, but that has nothing to do with it being either a wedding photographer or a friend.
Click to expand...

Actually it does for two reasons

a) a good pro will have business costs (sometimes called PI) insurance , so if the photos are terible theres an opportunity to go to court and get his insurers to cough up the cost of restaging

b) even if the money isnt an issue , if a pro makes a cock of your wedding photos you can slag him down, witter about him on bitched, and generally give him grief - of course you can do this to you best mate bob as well ... but the relationship that gets buggered up might be more important than a pro you don't care about.

(b) is the principal reason i wouldnt advise any tog who's not experienced and with back ups etc to do their mates wedding - though as i said at the start I only give that advice if someone asks, i don't roam the streets with a placcard saying "togs don't do it"... and if he insists he wants to do it despite my advice i'll (like many others here) offer as much help and advice as possible to help him not cock up ... because thats what forums like this are for QED
 
connersz said:
A lot of people have replied to this thread saying that they took pictures for a friend or relatives wedding and everyone was happy, and that the photographer was till able to be as a guest. So it only becomes a problem when the pictures turn out bad, but that has nothing to do with it being either a wedding photographer or a friend.
Click to expand...

No not quite.

It becomes a problem when the images delivered fall below the expectation of the couple. It has nothing to do with absolute quality.

You could suggest that a couple paying £1500 for photography have a higher expectation of quality than someone grateful for a friend who has done them for nothing (of course there are notable exceptions to this, and sometimes couples who pay the least have the highest expectations often because they had no baseline of quality/price set by a professional).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top