Wedding Tog Very Strange Quote

CaptainPenguin

CaptainPenguin

Messages
5,161
Name
Nigel Cliff
Edit My Images
Yes
I was reading in article in a camera mag from about 12 months ago about one of the countries top Wedding Togs and he came up with the following

"Stay out of the Vicar's way then he doesn't get the chance to tell you what you can and can't do"

Now when I was a wedding Tog I was always told to liaise with the Vicar,Car Drivers,Hotel Manager etc etc so that if you all worked together things would go a lot more smoothly.

Views from active Wedding Togs on here would be interesting
 
But he then also can't tell you that you CAN access the behind the altar bit, that you CAN use flash in his dingy church, that there IS an overhead shot potential

If you ignored him like this and annoyed him too I suspect you'd get a severe dressing down next time he saw you there

I prefer to make mates wherever I can, you never know when they may be useful

DD
 
If you've done LOTS of weddings in a particular area, you do get to know the 'ministers/vicars' and therefore there's no avoiding it..
But I do agree in part. Many are so entrenched in their views that going to a new church you are likely to get the not here/not there/can't do that spiel...
By simply not liaising before hand, there is no opportunity for them to do so....
However, any respectably wed tog would know what was appropriate or not anyway.
 
rileydoggy said:
If you've done LOTS of weddings in a particular area, you do get to know the 'ministers/vicars' and therefore there's no avoiding it..
But I do agree in part. Many are so entrenched in their views that going to a new church you are likely to get the not here/not there/can't do that spiel...
By simply not liaising before hand, there is no opportunity for them to do so....
However, any respectably wed tog would know what was appropriate or not anyway.
Click to expand...

It's not happened to me as yet - but I've heard of other togs snapping being so annoying to the vicar that he stopped the service and balled the guy out across the whole church

Would you really want to risk that? :shrug:

DD
 
Never done a wedding, probably never likely too but I would have thought that communication can be a very useful tool as DD has stated.
 
I would have thought that ministers/vicars and wedding photographers would want to work together to make the couples day as special as possible.

My Fiance's father is a minister. He is very open to photographers, all he asks is no flash during the service, and that the photgrapher stays in one place during the "speaking parts". Basically as moving around is distracting, as is flash. Perfectly reasonable i think anyway.
 
rileydoggy said:
Rob.....sadly, they aren't all like that....
Click to expand...

Sadly not Rob,when I was doing weddings I always thought I had a head start as I was Christian,Parish Warden of my local church (Anglican) and a member of the local Synod but there were still Vicars who new that and still read me the riot act before the wedding.
Interestingly as a general comment I more often found Catholic priests and Methodist Ministers a lot more obliging than the average Anglican priest and as for Pentacostal churches as long as I didn't use the Pastors shoulder as a tripod anything went.
 
When I introduced my self to one Catholic priest and asked if there were any do's or dont's in his church? he told me it was the couples wedding and do what ever they want.
That was about as free as you will ever get.
 
All very well until you shoot there again....

I always work on the assumption that I'll meet them again in the future.
 
"All very well until you shoot there again....
I always work on the assumption that I'll meet them again in the future."

Yes thats the thing with local photographers, it's not unknown to be at the same church/venue 5-10 times a year.
If your doing a one off out of area you could probably get away with dodging the vicar, but heaven help the next lucky photographer who goes there and get the riot act read to him. If your back and fro there it makes more sense to be friendly with the vicar, after all your going to see him again, besides which he may be a family friend/guest as well.
Wayne
 
The views in the OP are selfish and short-sighted. Sure you might get a shot the vicar might otherwise disallow, but it's only going to make them resent future photographers and most certainly the photographer mentioned.

I've often been in churches where I have had to try and work with a vicar whose experience of previous photographers is less than complimentary.
 
obviously a pillock.
if i havent already spoken to them prior to the wedding, the first person i talk to is the vicar.
you need to know what you can and cant take in the church.
and you almost certainly will suffer next time you meet him,if you pee him off.
ive had a couple of vicars that have been very defensive with us at first, because of inconsiderate togs in the past.
once they know they can trust you, they tend to get a little more laid back.
i do tend to agree that the anglican vicars can be a little more, erm, demanding.
did one at a pentecostal church last summer.
"Steve" the pastor was so laid back, i probably could have used his shoulder as a tripod.
we do the odd wedding at a local C OF E church, and have to sign a waver in advance saying we wont take anything during the service. realy.
we expalin VERY CAREFULLY to the b&g , ther shots they WONT GET.
amases me anyone marries there.
 
I've been saying the same thing for years.
Of course, it isn't any kind of a rule, there are many priests who are helpful and considerate and these people should never be avoided - but there are plenty of others who are known to be the opposite and avoiding them before the ceremony is the best way I know of getting the shots that the couple have paid for.

When I did weddings I generally found that RC and C of E priests tended to be the most laid back, the worst by far were the non-conformists, who often seemed to take themselves very seriously...
My worst ever was a Methodist Minister who wouldn't allow the Groom to kiss the Bride and wouldn't allow any photography whatever in the church. She reduced the Bride to tears
 
The photography question was one of the first we (my wife and I) asked when recce'ing venues for our wedding. The hotel said that there were certain areas they didn't want using to photos, we respected some of the reasonable ones (the hotel lobby on a busy Saturday morn) but told them that certain limitations were making us lean towards looking elsewhere. It astounded me how some hotels act. The hotel my best man got married at last year forced the entire party to move 500 yards down a path in the rain because it claimed photographs taken inside the (totally normal, nothing special) hotel would cause copyright issues :shrug:
 
weve had the odd stroppy hotel manager.
one of them was threatened a good hiding by the brides father if he gave any more condesending orders.:bat:
and that was a VERY expensive venue.
and a VERY VERY big dad.
the venue had managed to book two wedding parties, ceremonies 20 mins apart, in ajoining suites.
i had my camera ready.:D
they then told us we couldnt take photographs on the lawn because the first ceremony had got to it first.
i realy expected bloodshed.
fortunately we had an alternative position checked out, and we did the lawn shot later.
it always pays to check out any venue before hand , and talk to the manager,wedding organiser , vicar,whatever if possible.
 
WeddingHack said:
I've often been in churches where I have had to try and work with a vicar whose experience of previous photographers is less than complimentary.
Click to expand...

And there I suppose is the other issue: It's not just your reputation, but the reputation of your profession. If people have bad experiences of a certain group then this will effect the way they treat them in the future, whether their guilty or not. I've done (orchestra) pit work before where the theatre manager banned the band from drinking in the interval because of one musician who 2 weeks previously had got so drunk during the interval, and indeed the first half (with a slab hidden under his set) that he'd vomited in the pit and caused an awful mess. We were told that musicians can't be trusted. It only takes one person to **** someone off and it has a knock on effect for everyone of the same or similar profession.
 
"Stay out of the Vicar's way then he doesn't get the chance to tell you what you can and can't do"
Click to expand...

would be nice to know which camera mag was giving this "advice"?
 
Is it just me or does anyone not really understand why you're not allowed certain things in a church?
i.e. why the vicar might disallow a tripod?
or why he might not want you standing behind the altar to see the couple's faces?

I've never read the bible, but I'm pretty sure there was never a section in there where god nor jesus said "Thou shalt not bringeth the tripod unto thy church!"
 
I have a couple of registrars in my area who are absolutely fantastic. Yes they don't like flash and that's fine as I always aim not to use it anyway and don't move about at the important bits, again, absolutely fine, I expect that. But here's the deal. In return she likes to make sure that the ring exchange takes as long as possible so I get the best possible chance of a cracking pic. "Now make sure it's on there properly!" she will quip at the groom. Bingo, one ring exchange and about 5 shots at it.

That's a good example of how we can work together to make sure each of us has the best chance of doing the best job we can for the couple being married.

A bit of communication can go a long way :)
 
Not necessarily :)

I know one local to me who earned £12.5K for a wedding and he's not in my top three :)
 
I didn't mean top 3 in terms of quality/ability ;)

There are very, very few wedding shooters in this country who regularly command £10k+
 
We checked everything out with our vicar when we got married, paid £85 for a licence to video it (we hadn't got a professional videographer, just my uncle with a camcorder) and the vicar told us he can video all of the wedding as long as he doesn't get in the way but when it came to the vows, he told my uncle to stop. My uncle was just in his pew for the whole ceremony and didn't move from it. It seems that a professional videographer would have been allowed but not my uncle :thinking: Therefore, always clarify with the vicar as well, who can and can't.
 
While i would never suggest you dodge the vicar/priest i can understand why some do i mean they are generally a pain in the backside when it comes to wedding photography. Telling what you can nd cant do in OUR churches. The majority are "stuck in the old days" although a few have been more than accomodating for us and understand that the happy couple get a lot more varied shots if we have a bit of leaway.

Its all about letting the guys know what you want not what they tell you, you should do

Dave
 
foodpoison said:
I've never read the bible, but I'm pretty sure there was never a section in there where god nor jesus said "Thou shalt not bringeth the tripod unto thy church!"
Click to expand...

I don't believe it even mentions churches.

One other thing you can't do is photograph the official signing of the register. This is always mocked up later with a blank page so you don't record details of the previous couples.



Steve.
 
foodpoison said:
Is it just me or does anyone not really understand why you're not allowed certain things in a church?
i.e. why the vicar might disallow a tripod?
or why he might not want you standing behind the altar to see the couple's faces?

I've never read the bible, but I'm pretty sure there was never a section in there where god nor jesus said "Thou shalt not bringeth the tripod unto thy church!"
Click to expand...

At the end of the day its a religious service where 2 people are making a committment before God,however as others have said many registrars have similar rules to stop the whole ceremony turning into a circus
 
Steve Smith said:
I don't believe it even mentions churches.

One other thing you can't do is photograph the official signing of the register. This is always mocked up later with a blank page so you don't record details of the previous couples.
Click to expand...

I have loads of times, sometimes I'm asked to wait but when I do shoot it live I make sure the angle is such that the writing in the book isn't legible lest the data protection nazi's come knocking :lol:
 
Radiohead said:
It's a wedding, not a photo-shoot. We're secondary to the ceremony.
Click to expand...
I'm afraid I don't argree, in may ways a wedding is a photo-shoot.
It could be argued that the vicar is secondary in some cases, they only give a service, the legal part is often done by the registar, and their bit is only 45 minutes long, we are usually there all day. The couple also won't go back to the vicar very often to ask him to remind them of the ceremony, but they will often look at our photos or videos, so who more important then? it's a matter of opinion really. Wayne
 
It's a photo-shoot in that you're taking photos. That's it.

What it's not is a day where you, as the photographer, are able to dictate when, when and who does what. You don't get to do it at the venue and you almost certainly don't at the church. By all means risk winding the vicar/registrar up but don't expect much help next time you're there. And when you do ignore the requests made of you, ask yourself how a) the bride and groom will feel and b) your reputation suffers, when the vicar stops the ceremony to ask you to not do something you've been told not to do already. That's not somewhere you want to go. What's the memory the bride and groom have of you then? When they're asked about their wedding photographer what will they say.

We might like to think we're the centre of the day, we're not. The bride and groom are. We''re there to document it as well as we can with the obstacles that may be put in place.
 
A year or so ago I went as the 2nd photographer for a wedding, just to see what wedding photography was like, rather than any interest in it as a source of income (and the photographer was asking for a 2nd to take background and candid shots). It was made quite clear by the vicar that he didn't want photographs during the actual ceremony as this might detract from the occasion. Nevertheless the Tog proceeded to take shots (without flash I hasten to add) from the time the bride entered the church to the time the guests left and justified this on the grounds that" it's their wedding and I'm being paid to photograph it".

Now I'm not at all religious but I do believe that if you are in someone's house of God, be it Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Muslim etc, then respect should be shown to that place of worship and the requests of the vicar (or equivalent).

Personally, I would have negotiated with the vicar to take some re-enacted shots immediately after the formal service, this way he would have achieved the solemnity that he required and I would have got the shots that the B&G wanted.

I can't believe that any of us (C of E types) would behave with disregard for religious sensitivities if we'd been asked to photograph a wedding in a mosque.
 
annoy the vicar at your peril.
THEY HAVE THE MEMORY OF AN ELEPHANT.
weve ALWAYS done the register shot, with a dummy register, or theyve just turned over to a blank page.
even seen a registrar stop a signing because a video bod was filming near the signing.

phideaux, your spot on.
i have been _allowed_ to take pics from the back , through the ceremony ( long lens and tripod).
the wife is often _allowed_ to stand at one side of the alter and take UNOBTRUSIVE shots taken.
but the last thing you want to do , is pee anyone off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top