is Wedding Photography necessary ?

Terrywoodenpic

Terrywoodenpic

Messages
7,918
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
Yes
Although I once derived a very nice living from Wedding Photography, I am coming to the conclusion that the whole wedding shoot performance is unnecessary.

There are two clues to this... Apart from a framed shot of the Bride and groom how many other shots do you see in peoples homes.

Ask any couple two or three years down the line, as to how often they look at their wedding album, and in most cases you will be met with a blank stare.

I would rather see the return of the early victorian way, of having a studio (or Location) shoot with the Bride and Groom and then a family shoot including the first borne some time later.

As for the other shots that might be taken on the day. Those provided by Guests are more than sufficient and are usually more personal.

Perhaps the provision of a personal webpage where guests and others could download their efforts would, in todays "facebook" age be more appropriate.

I of course do not expect wedding photographers to agree. :bonk:
 
Try telling most brides you're not intending to hire a photographer............. you'd be a brave man :LOL:
 
Then there is the survery that said nearly 20% of brides one year after their wedding wished they had spent more on the photography.

Take your pick :) Personally, I prefer to supply it all, portraits, newborns, I'll shoot it all :)
 
.......... and probably a few of them asking themselves why they got married in the first place :LOL: :LOL::LOL::LOL:
 
Well, at least they have something to throw at each other ;)
 
I didn't have a wedding photographer at my wedding for 4 reasons
1 - the exact reason you state.... we would only ever have put one picture up then never looked at them again
2 - we had a tiny wedding budget
3 - I hate being that side of the lens
4 - Having always been interested in photography I knew I could never afford the class and style of photographer that I would really have wanted.

Do I regret it? YES YES YES.... we gave out disposable cameras on the day... those that had never heard of this idea before took the blooming things home and it was a nightmare getting them back. They took awful grainy pictures (even though they were not cheap ones!) and the flashes didn't work. I wish I had at least that one special picture!!!!
 
Well i got married Aug 2008 and spent £1000 in total on my album and tog for day.
we were well impressed with the results and happy with the money we spend.
I got 40 odd pages, metal front cover, and paid the extra for metallic paper ( more like plastic to touch ) for more durability when getting well fingered after.

i could have gone furthur with breif case etc but this was far enough for me lol.

I must say it has been out about once every 6 months, so in answer to your post I slightly agree that guests shots, especially with todays ever more powerful spec of compacts, may be a new way.
and pro togs could do a few good large prints for house maybe.

BUT I DOUBT ANY BRIDE WILL DO IT, hence the art will probably never fade away

Intertesting post. i like a person who see from the other perspective.
 
anniephoto said:
I didn't have a wedding photographer at my wedding for 4 reasons
1 - the exact reason you state.... we would only ever have put one picture up then never looked at them again
2 - we had a tiny wedding budget
3 - I hate being that side of the lens
4 - Having always been interested in photography I knew I could never afford the class and style of photographer that I would really have wanted.

Do I regret it? YES YES YES.... we gave out disposable cameras on the day... those that had never heard of this idea before took the blooming things home and it was a nightmare getting them back. They took awful grainy pictures (even though they were not cheap ones!) and the flashes didn't work. I wish I had at least that one special picture!!!!
Click to expand...

In that case get your dress back on Annie and get it done!

Sure there are a few of us on here who would oblige.
 
is feeding 200 guests necessary? are 3 rollers necessary? is an open bar necessary? Are table diamonds necessary? is a £4000 dress necessary? is a wedding planner, band, OTDC, MUA MC necessary? you can sling this comment in about any of the many expenses at a wedding...

... however, out of all the expenses, 1 year, 10 years, 50 years after the wedding, the photographs are the only one of the "un needed expensive things" that remain
 
If you are anywhere near Annie, I'd happily offer to do it for you :)
 
I had just been made redundant,so shot my own pics,but hired a video bloke from the papers.
Happy with my pics ,but bloody hell,The video chap shot into the light........kept fidgeting getting on the Vicars nerves,but worse thing was He must have had his hand near the mike ,as all the bloody time while playing the tape you can here rustling .............:eek:
 
Ricky T said:
LOL thats what the wifes just said. tell her to get the dress back on and get a tog in.:love:
Click to expand...

Well I would if the father-in-law hadn't spilt red wine down it on the day :LOL: ... mind you nothing a bit of clever pp couldn't fix ;) I wish I had a photographer but I would never get it done retrospectively... it wouldn't be the same!
 
Richard King said:
is feeding 200 guests necessary? are 3 rollers necessary? is an open bar necessary? Are table diamonds necessary? is a £4000 dress necessary? is a wedding planner, band, OTDC, MUA MC necessary? you can sling this comment in about any of the many expenses at a wedding...

... however, out of all the expenses, 1 year, 10 years, 50 years after the wedding, the photographs are the only one of the "un needed expensive things" that remain
Click to expand...

But, for some, the food/bar/table diamonds/dress ARE more necessary - especially if they look back on the pic taken by Aunty Mable or the photo by Uncle Bill or whatever and love them because of the memories they provide that no professional could (playing devil's advocate) - what they want to ensure is that the people attending the wedding have a good time, which means that the priority is the day as opposed to the posed reminder of the day. However, £4k on the dress kind of makes me think they may splash out just a little for the photos! :)

The OP also provides an arguement for the unpaid tog doing a wedding for experience really, doesn't he? Give out the cameras and have someone building a portfolio at the same time?
 
My sister had a friend ex pro tog at hers, but also an external drive of sorts that people could load their memory cards to (and she got people to afterwards). He got the drive, and made them album out of his and any other shots that were good (as in having 10 second shooters).

I wanted mine for ours, we'd set aside £1k for it, but couldn't find anyone we were happy with or who would give us what we wanted in our price range. In the end we went with a friend of a friend doing their second wedding, and a combo of shots from friends and family. We're happy with the results and I would still do it that way with hindsight as I would not have been happy paying £1k not being sure I'd like the end result, ot gettnig the package I wanted.

That said, had I been on TP before, and having seen some of the people on here and a better idea about things nowdays, I would get a pro tog.

The most important thing is to enjoy that day. Having pictures to remind you of it is important, but not as important, clearly.
 
Im sure A LOT of couples get the album out on the anniversary or watch the DVD to remember their special day.

Recently, I looked at my grandparents album on their golden wedding anniversary, and asked if she was happy with the album as the record of their day. her response was that it was sad their were so few pictures (around 40, obviously the limitation of film). "many of the people who were at the wedding are now passed, its a shame I have no images of them on the day"

i think it will be around for quite a while to come.
 
As someone much wiser than me once said, some folks are more interested in a wedding than a marriage. If people want to splash the cash on an impressive set of photographs who are we to counsel against.

I totally agree with the OP though of the ~ 50% of marriages that survive nowadays the only photo displayed and perhaps the only one ever viewed is of the B&G on their special day.
 
Why get married at all?? I have been married for 26 years and I have never once looked at my wedding certificate :D:D

Why bother getting the school photographs of the children, shooting holiday snaps etc etc, how often do we look at any of them?

We are preserving our life on image, for the future.

One of the girls who works for us brought in a disc of images she had taken by a photographer before she joined us. The so called pro photographer was supplied by the hotel as part of a package. The images are so bad I thought they had been copied from prints. I looked at the data and it said they had been taken on a fuji s2000!!!

She is so sad she has not got a beautiful set of photographs of her beautiful day

stew
 
Yes it's worth while. We got married 53years ago. Had the then almost standard black and white twenty whole plate photos in an album. The quality of the shots is amazing and we often look at it, all of the parents are now gone and in many cases this is the only record we have of them.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
I of course do not expect wedding photographers to agree. :bonk:
Click to expand...

I guess not, as you would probably not agree with me if i said there was no point taking pictures of a hedgehog, because hedgehogs all look the same! At least something is happening in wedding pictures, a memory is linked to them.

I am in no way saying animal photography is pointless, Im suggesting however that you are wrong in your (bold) statement!

Perhaps the way in which the images are presented will change in the future. But there is definitely a difference between images captured by a pro and by uncle bob. :)
 
A friend of mine got married recently. A lot of his friends are photographers or people studying photography degrees etc. Rather than ask one of them to do it, he asked them all. Some of them were with the bride getting ready, some with the groom, some with other guests and they all captured it from different viewpoints.
The all did a small stint and a small section of the day which means that when they weren't shooting, they could be guests too.

They have a really fabulous album. The shots and album were the wedding presents from the photographer friends.
 
definately needed!!

We couldn't afford a wedding tog but we had the brother in law (who used to be pro, has shot many magazine articles with spice girls etc etc) so we didn't worry about it at all. Wish we could have afforded someone now :( I am as like many of us very critical of pics, and the ones we got back are ok but only that. The cardinal sin of cutting feet etc is abundant and a year on i have yet to get the enthusiasm together to get an album sorted. I just know that when I look through them again I will get down and spend the entire day getting angry at having to edit them all /

In a nutshell it is one thing that if I had the day again (which as I'm happily married I hope I don't!) I would definately not scrimp and would find the money from somewhere!

Oh well we learn by our mistakes!
 
Richard King said:
is feeding 200 guests necessary? are 3 rollers necessary? is an open bar necessary? Are table diamonds necessary? is a £4000 dress necessary? is a wedding planner, band, OTDC, MUA MC necessary? you can sling this comment in about any of the many expenses at a wedding...
Click to expand...

It is wrong to assume that everyone wants a wedding like that.

None of those things are necessary. Nor is a tog. Put me firmly in the "a marriage is about two people, not two hundred. So is a wedding" camp. Loads (by which I mean "more than two dozen total") of people would just ruin the whole thing for me and I simply wouldn't turn up.

Reading wedding tog topics and descriptions of weddings on here makes the idea of eloping if I ever meet someone sound more and more attractive :naughty:.
 
as much as its unpopular to agree.... I agree!

having said that, and just having enjoyed our 9th anniversary, we dug out the wedding album for the kids to look at.

Would have been better if we sent them it in Facebook! :D
 
If your point is to hold up, we might aswell ask is any photography necessary? How often we look back at past pictures taken? How many people print off the digital photos? Why do people need 100+ pictures of the same species of bird, or of someone kicking a football?
 
swordjo said:
If your point is to hold up, we might aswell ask is any photography necessary? How often we look back at past pictures taken? How many people print off the digital photos? Why do people need 100+ pictures of the same species of bird, or of someone kicking a football?
Click to expand...

I'm divorced and still get the wedding album out every couple of years !!!

I also print about 200 of my digital images a year and have loads of my kids playing rugby/football/hockey etc.
 
onomatopoeia said:
It is wrong to assume that everyone wants a wedding like that.

None of those things are necessary. Nor is a tog. Put me firmly in the "a marriage is about two people, not two hundred. So is a wedding" camp. Loads (by which I mean "more than two dozen total") of people would just ruin the whole thing for me and I simply wouldn't turn up.

Reading wedding tog topics and descriptions of weddings on here makes the idea of eloping if I ever meet someone sound more and more attractive :naughty:.
Click to expand...

We dont make any assumptions, we deliver weddings that the clients really really want. Paraphernalia or not
 
I try never to tell my clients they don't need me. It's bad for business.

Within certain limits I also don't advise them how to spend their money. Bottle of Chivas on each table? Sweet. Ice sculpture? Knock yourselves out. Videographer? Nah, he'll only get in the way ;) Ultra expensive metal cover for your wedding album? Essential.

There are precisely 36 pictures of my wedding. That includes all of the professional pictures and all the guest shots. 4 are blinks, 3 are framed (our house and one each for our mothers) they rest are sitting in a press to remove the curl from the machine print ready for putting in an album we got as a wedding gift. They have been there for 10 years.......

But different people value different things. I'm glad some of them value photography.

Last weekend's wedding was all over Facebook before I even got up on the Sunday. But the bride still stopped shopping and went home to see them as soon as she heard the "pro" pictures were online. http://peoplebyryan.com/weddings/victoria-and-ashley-wedding-at-westenhanger-castle
 
AliB said:
Then there is the survery that said nearly 20% of brides one year after their wedding wished they had spent more on the photography.

Take your pick :) Personally, I prefer to supply it all, portraits, newborns, I'll shoot it all :)
Click to expand...

and what did the other 80% want ? :LOL:
 
bigrob said:
I'm divorced and still get the wedding album out every couple of years !!!

I also print about 200 of my digital images a year and have loads of my kids playing rugby/football/hockey etc.
Click to expand...


I agree, I was just making the point of if you rule out the need for one genre of photograhy, the same could apply to the rest. I don't feel the need to question anyones reasons for taking photographs, or wanting them take. If it wasn't for people wanting to take them, or asking us to take them, none of us would be on here!

I'm getting married in 2012 and will be happy to pay to get pictures of the day. I'd imagine it's one of those days that just seems to pass in a daze, and would be nice to reflect back on with some nice photos.
 
I have done 8 weddings so far:

1. Couldn't even remember where her album was when I spoke to her 6 months after the wedding.
2. Admitted to only looking through the album twice before lending it to her Mum and never getting it back again.
3. Paid for an album as part of the package, insisted on chosing herself which photos were to fill the album but 9 months on I am still waiting for her to tell me which photos they want so they've not got the album they've paid for.
4. 5. & 6. Said they'd order an album after the wedding but haven't. Probably because they realise they'll never look at it now that they have low res copies of the photos on a disk.
7. Made it clear from day 1 they won't want an album.
8. Got back off honeymoon 24 hours ago and she's already printed her honeymoon photos and sorted them in to an album. She's getting her CD of images tonight and I reckon she'll be back to me by the weekend wanting to get her album ordered.

I fully agree with the OP that wedding photography seems far less important these days. When a bride is planning her wedding she'll want everything, including great photography but after the event they soon come to realise that a wedding is just a big party with your mates. It's something you'll remember forever but the photos aren't going to be looked at as often as you'd imagined.

When I get married again I certainly won't be spending a fortune on a photographer, I'll get my mates from my camera club to come along and take some very professional looking snaps. My new wife will love the photos for a few weeks then never look at them again.
 
DUNKS said:
all of the parents are now gone and in many cases this is the only record we have of them.
Click to expand...

They'll be the most looked at, most people only have snaps of their parents as they remember them, they have wedding photos from when their parents got married but a formal shot with them dressed up, when else would that happen but at a wedding.

I do agree they never get looked at though, we paid a fortune for a wedding video in 1995, looked at it when it came lent it to relatives then it's back in the box until this year when my wife's father died.

Wedding photos are most valuable 20 years after the event
 
we had photos , and it was the biggest expense of the wedding , but was well worth it.
and yes i agree you should get a profeesional its a record of a special day in most poeples lives

cheers Steve
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top