View Full Version : Photographer setup for my wedding
14th of March 2008 (Fri), 13:58
I'm getting married on Oct this year (Chicago) and I've been really torn on how I should book and setup my photographer(s).
I've been fortunate enough to meet some very talented photographers that shoot as hobbiests but not full time. One of them have been doing secondary shooting for a while for weddings. Another friend has a connection to a secondary shooter for someone out in California that has shot several celebrity weddings and would possbily shoot mine. Another shooter will be the cousin of my friend.
They have all the gear of pros since they make enough money with their day jobs. But a huge belief of mine is that no matter what equipment you have, a bad photo is a bad photo.
So in Brief Can I bet on this setup to work for my wedding?
I'll have 3-5 Shooters
2 have wedding experience
They are all local and I know them so we know locations and they'll know lighting situations of the wedding and reception.
They're doing it for FREE (but of course I'll compensate them somehow)
Does everyone here think this is a good idea? Pretty much I'm banking on multiple shots, angles, talent to compile 10K+ photos that I get the enjoyment of sifting through. They know where I can do the print work and I will do most of the PP.
This is more important to my fiance since photos are everything. But since we're still young I can't afford some of the better talents out there. This seems to be the best budget solution for something that I know will be good, but not sure if it'll be breathtaking.
Any ideas or suggestions are much appreciated!
14th of March 2008 (Fri), 14:04
Nikon's are great cameras too...forget that brand crap....
it's nice to have that many shooters but you should appoint 1 as the main shooter and have the others work around him/her. Too many will just get in each others way and blow the entire shoot......it's not about the volume they shoot...it's about the quality they produce......shooter
14th of March 2008 (Fri), 14:17
Yea I know it's about the quantity.
I'm just wondering if having that many shooters = something safer than highering 1 pro to do the shoot.
I don't know how to arrange multiple shooters etc. and I want these pictures to be stellar. I've noticed many wedding photographers that have been working for a long time have a eye for shots / angles that others might not have. I just want to make sure banking of many shooters that are good but don't do it for a living would be a good idea or not.
I just keep mentioning the Nikon deal because I used to shoot Nikon and these guys give me crap all the time for switching. I love my 40D though :)
14th of March 2008 (Fri), 15:03
Off the top of my head..
1) designate 1 photog as the top dog and directs the others.
2) Make sure they are not getting into each others way or you'll have lots of photos with other photographers in them.
3) If each photographer shoots about 1000 frames, you'll have 5000 photos to go through.
More isn't always better.
14th of March 2008 (Fri), 15:07
Personally I think 3-5 photographers is overkill. Sorry, no offense, but there's only so many shots you can take. :) I say narrow it down to 2 and discuss with each of them what exactly you want in the way of photos. For instance, 1 can stick with the bride and groom and get all those pertinent shots. The other could concentrate on the guests and wedding party. Wading thru 10k+ wedding photographs would make any couple go bonkers. Do you really want to do that to yourselves? lol There's a reason wedding photographers take about 500-750 images and then narrow it down from there to the best of the best. Lots of images are nice, but there can be such a thing as too many images. JMHO
14th of March 2008 (Fri), 15:27
I'm just worried about them possibly missing the moment. And keep in mind only two have a wedding background toget those key shots.
I would want 3-5 because it's free of charge :) I can never turn down free, but I can see why filtering through so many photos can be a chore.
I guess I should have a sit down with everyone and discuss what would be best. Plus having a photo of others taking photos of us is kinda of cool. I look overed Mike Colons, "the colon experience" and know one photographer that was there to take photos of the class and the attendees taking photos. It was pretty cool!
14th of March 2008 (Fri), 15:30
I would make sure that there is someone taking the posed photos and let the others do what they do. That is what I did at my wedding and I actually liked the non posed, non professional photos better!
14th of March 2008 (Fri), 15:57
So you actually want 10,000 + wedding photos ??? - I hope they get a good one between them...
How did we ever manage with 35mm film coming in rolls of 36 frames all those years ago (even less from 120/220 rolls) :rolleyes:
I'd be hiring one good wedding photog personally, regardless of whether he has a Nikon or whatever.
I hope all goes well for the big day :)
14th of March 2008 (Fri), 16:05
Make sure all the photographers sync their cameras to the same clock/time. This way when you're going through all the pics, you don't have shots scattered all over the place. Make sure they're set to the right time of day..i.e. AM/PM also.
17th of March 2008 (Mon), 16:44
I'd go with one pro for the wedding, and the ritual parts of the reception. Then turn him/her loose, and let the 3-5 amateurs have a field day shooting the reception, the pre ceremony, the pro shooting the ceremony, the flower kids tossing their pillows into the pond, gramma falling asleep during the ceremony.
Too many cooks........................
17th of March 2008 (Mon), 16:54
I agree... 3-5 is too much.
I had 2 excellent photographers (main one, and his assistant also shoots weddings but did not get in the way). I have just over 600pics which is ALOT to sort through when making an album. Trust me, 2 will get all the precious moments you can handle (as long as they are good and work in sync with each other). Keep in mind that even 1 photographer can piss off people if he/she is hovering around too much and getting in the way. 3-5 would be nuts! I can see a maximum of 3 being okay though- having one extra person to just take pictures of guests, church, decorations.. etc, while the 2 main photogs take care of the main business.
You might want to go into the wedding section of the forum and ask when real wedding photographers think about it as well.
17th of March 2008 (Mon), 20:55
3-5 photographer is just asking for a disaster. 10k photos, that's like 20 photos per minute for an 8 hour wedding. You don't need more than 2 photographers. Quality not quantity. Even 2 can be a problem if they aren't working with each other. All fighting to get the same shot. You're bound to get A LOT of repeats.
Anyways, you really have to think about the logistics of this. It CAN work, but you will have a lot of micro managing to do. Hope it all goes well.
vBulletin® v3.6.12, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.