First Wedding - Lessons Learned

sevencrossing

But, this is not really different when shooting any event with lots of people involved. }

In fact, regardless of the number of people involved, it is not really different from doing any profession shoot.
It's about being a professional. Your camera is no different from any other professional tool, it is part of you and its use must be second nature. Your skill is about being organised. With a wedding you are part of team, that includes the Vicar, The Groom, the Wedding planner, the Chauffeur, the Sommelier, the Caterers the Best man, etc but never forget it IT IS THE BRIDES DAY and you recoding the most important day of her life

ThomasHorton

But, this is not really different when shooting any event with lots of people involved.

Other than the bride ripping your heart out and feeding it to you and then the bride's mother resurrecting you, performing an on-site heart transplant and then ripping it out again and putting it into another orifice, there is no difference..... until the fathers get involved. LoL

We know no fiend in hell that can match the fury of a bride/mother not happy with the wedding pictures.

MikeGunter

Hi all,

Congratulations!

Glad you got your feet wet and it looks like it wasn't too painful.

My best,

Mike

spraynpray

In my experience you have a misunderstanding of your part in the proceedings. It is not your place to 'walk off', it is your place to cope with the restrictions imposed. I have even been told no photo's (at all!) in the church before now, but by visiting several times and building a rapport with the vicar I was able to take pictures (even with flash), all through the ceremony. Being a professional wedding photographer isn't just all about pressing buttons on a camera, in fact it is just one of many things that you have to be good at.

That is a rather flipped statement that I couldn't disagree more with - both on the photographer's side and the wedding party's side. It is a professional discourtesy for venues to not allow it and it hurts the quality of the images and that falls short of the wedding parties (the employer's) expectations.

(@tcole1983 - please note this is not criticism on your situation at all. You didn't even describe how your prepared etc. and I realize that. This is for everyone's benefit.)

Allow me to outline a few things:

1. If you are shooting a wedding, you need to contact the venue, meet with them (if you don't know them) and find out what their requirements are very soon after you are hired. Finding these out the day of or week is inexcusable. I always set an appointment and visit every location within days of accepting a job.

2. You need to clearly explain your "plan" (in broad terms) to the venue. If there are concerns about flash (or anything else), you learn what they are, and provide options to let the venue (include priest, pastor, etc.), and show them if needed, what you can do to alleviate their concerns and be able to use the lighting you need. Your employer expects the best images and you need to push hard to create the best situation. You are there on their behalf to get them.

3. Understand that weddings are about everyone making the wedding party happy. From the dress, to the church decorating (which gets unrealistic pushback as well), after party, transportation, music - everyone is in business - and yes the churches are as well. Churches operate as a businesses Monday to Saturday, and weddings brings a lot of money into them. There is not a person who works for the churches, who don't realize this. They understand everyone who is hired, are hired to do a job to pull an event off, even if an individual doesn't fully agree with it. If it goes bad, those entities gain a reputation, and they suffer for it. I have seen pastors get fired by their congregations because they started to put strict policies on weddings and events and the church's finances suffered for it.
Professional courtesy is required from everyone. A photographer just showing up the day of, that is a discourtesy to the venue. A photographer is a business - you need to act like it. It is just basic professionalism. If you don't, some will allow some spite in, and put restrictions on you. That is unprofessional as well. Point is, it easily could be avoided.

4. The hired photographer is not some bystander or standard attendee. They are hired by the people who rented the venue. (And yes, churches are rented (or given a set donation) for the ceremony. In court, it is considered a rented space.) For that time/day, the church has made itself at the disposal to the couple, agrees to their desires/wants/requirements. At the most basic level, is for the venue to allow all business they wedding party hired to do their job. As a photographer, you are in the employment of the wedding party, and given access to the venue per their wishes. It is a photographer's job to get the images they were hired to do. That means they at times you may need to stand up for their "employer" and ensure you are able to fulfill their expectations. That is one of the unspoken understandings - you will do what you can on their behalf to perform what you were hired to do.

I dunnunerstan - you are agreeing with me in all areas yet you say you don't! Something lost in the English/American translation maybe?

But, I don't see how a paid professional walking off helps in any way shape or form. When photographers become prima donnas nobody benefits least of all the photographer.

SquamishPhoto

^^^ +1

You couldn't create a more likely scenario for horrible word of mouth for your business.

autofocus

Hey folks,
I do appreciate all the comments and concerns. I will be shooting the wedding, I have no choice. Before you slay me and say I do let me explain without getting into too many personal details. The Bride (my stepdaughter) will have her Father and other Stepfather at the wedding. You can see things are a bit more unique. Her and I have shot many events together as she is a photographer as well. My part in the wedding is foremost, Photographer. I will be in a couple of posed photos but that's the extent of my participation. Money is not the issue as I did offer to pay for a photographer when this first came up. She said, and I quote, "I trust you emphatically and haven't a worry." True, I've never shot a wedding but I had never shot a portrait before the first. I'll not try to compare shooting a National AMA Pro Motocross event to weddings but, the intensity and rigorously long day must be on par. I shot her engagement photos and she was pleased. I do have something other photographers don't, a relationship with the Bride. I've been a part of the wedding planning and helped her lay out a timeline for the event. I have all the equipment anyone could ask for and no restrictions on lights, flash, or placement during the ceremony and reception. I will be at the venue all day the day before the wedding because of the location. Everyone has to start somewhere and I'm willing (with her blessing) to do this. Now, I may be crazy and you can call me that but please don't try to convince me it can't be done. I'd rather you help me with your experiences.
Apology to @tcole1983 for possibly highjacking his thread. And thank you again for posting your experience. It will definitely help me to be better prepared.

Bokeh_Hunter

I dunnunerstan - you are agreeing with me in all areas yet you say you don't! Something lost in the English/American translation maybe?

But, I don't see how a paid professional walking off helps in any way shape or form. When photographers become prima donnas nobody benefits least of all the photographer.

The problem with your statement is that you think it is the photographers problem. It is not - it is not photographer's day. It is the wedding parties day and problem for them as they hired everyone to work together to pull the day off. They are the apex of all decisions and they are the one's who will suffer for it. It is simple business hierarchy. They rent the venue, and hire people to perform certain duties. Everyone works for them - including the church and whomever is doing the service. They hire a photographer with an expectation of a level of imagery. If the professional can not perform at that level due to another hired part of the day, that needs to be made clear. People don't pay $3-5,000 (that is the going rate in my area, and we usually are on the low end in the US) for a wedding photographer to get crappy photos. If low quality is due to a ridiculous arbitrary prohibition that has absolutely nothing to do with any sort of faith, than that needs to change.

One of the main differences of being a professional is knowing the landscape of the business, and supporting the people who hired you. Amateurs may just go "oh well, guess I can't do that" and kick a rock down the road, but a professional will get the job done they were hired to do. And that doesn't mean you are the "doormat" and have your work suffer because of others - you have to push back. If you want to believe that supporting the person/s who hired you is being a prima donna, well that speaks volumes in how important you believe the employer is for the day is. Your success equals their success. If you haven't seen how really good wedding photographers manage the day, then you don't have a great base to comment from. Msmoto is correct, it is a "A very involved product set with models and requires the same type of organization and direction."

It seems you are confusing the difference in "just wanting to photograph a church" vs. a planned day where the church is rented out for a wedding. Churches who have regular visitors who come to pray usually want people to be able to do so without being disturbed. During daily/weekly mass, many will ban flash photography. That is normal and acceptable because that is "their" time and they can impose anything they want. When they are hired for a wedding (or any other service/event) the normal and acceptable changes and it becomes the wedding party's venue. They are decorated, reconfigured, stages brought in, musicians hired, and yes photographed with flash. Churches don't want bad wedding photos out there either. They want to be able to point to people's wedding photos with them as the venue. Your statements seem to stem from some idea or belief that churches are somehow above everyone else on a wedding day. I have never came accross any church or someone who is performing a service that even remotely believes that. Churches bend over backwards for everyone - especially for the other people hired.

Yes I'm putting this in fairly blunt and striped it down to the raw existence of the work. But that is sometimes what shooting for pay is and the stark contrast and difference of getting paid to shoot vs. photographing purely for the enjoyment. Sometimes it can be messy Thankfully I don't run into that type of stuff often.

Bokeh_Hunter

... I do have something other photographers don't, a relationship with the Bride. I've been a part of the wedding planning and helped her lay out a timeline for the event. I have all the equipment anyone could ask for and no restrictions on lights, flash, or placement during the ceremony and reception. I will be at the venue all day the day before the wedding because of the location. Everyone has to start somewhere and I'm willing (with her blessing) to do this. Now, I may be crazy and you can call me that but please don't try to convince me it can't be done. I'd rather you help me with your experiences. ...

It sounds like you can "separate" yourself from "fire patrol" and you are right, having the relationship with the couple is a huge advantage - as long as you are on their good side for the day

Ironheart

@autofocus I usually say follow the money, but in this case just listen to the bride :-)

Msmoto

Just for the record, I agree fully this day is for the bride, and for the groom. And that is specifically why, a team of professionals, usually the wedding director, and photographer as the ones leading is essential. I have witnessed really weak wedding photographers who can screw things up and take forever to get the job completed.

And, as with any pro shoot, redundancy is essential as weddings cannot be repeated. Should one have a problem with a piece of equipment, a substitute should be quickly at hand, in place in such a fashion so as the clients do not even know there was a problem. Again, I have seen so called pros who were simply not equipped to be doing what they should have been as a pro.

Photobug

+1 Msmoto - on everything you said.
Amazing the unprepared pro who isn't prepared and fail due to the last paragraph. Seen it more than once.

Photobug

@autofocus - I have a suggestion for you. Ask the bride if there is a get together for the out-of-town relatives the night before the wedding?

Although I was not a family member the bride's Mother asked the wife and I to attend this informal get together after the rehearsal dinner since we have known them for 20 years. The Pro photographer was not invited to this get together and I brought my camera, flash, and flash diffuser along and worked the room, about 25 people in attendance, and shot all the couples plus pictures of the brides 5 year old daughter.

After 45 minutes the wedding party showed up so I shot 2nd and 3rd generation pictures and the wedding party. Also got informal shots of the bride and groom and mother and father of the bride and mother of the groom. None of this was requested by the bride or Mother-of-the Bride - my idea to take pictures.

A week later when the parents of the bride and the newly weds saw the pictures they were very very pleased.

tcole1983

@autofocus not a problem. Just a general discussion anyway :-)

I never meant the post to be an all inclusive or how to shoot weddings. Just my thoughts after going into a wedding and what I found. We did as much prior planning and prep as possible. The restrictions of the church...well the bride knew about them so it wasn't bad to work with. Did we get the greatest shots during the ceremony...maybe not. She had already planned for some time for reshooting of the kiss and stuff. The couple was very easy going so it made it a good experience I think. They actually hired a videographer that we didn't know was going to be there. He actually helped out a decent amount when we were setting up shots as he wanted them too. My friend that I shot with definitely has more experience than I did. He shoots a D800E and also shot film (I know...just because and as an accessory to his digital). Not saying the cost of equipment makes pros and I don't think I would consider myself a "pro" but we probably had $20000 worth of photo gear. He has lots of flashes, stands. We had lots of back up equipment though...multiple flashes, multiple bodies, batteries, memory. I think he probably took more consistent pictures than I did. I don't use flash so that was something I was having to adapt with as I went. I blew some photos out, the focus wasn't the greatest on a couple. Lol as I looked through the photos some I am like wow that is such a great picture and then others I am like wow that is such a pile of donkey dung. But that is where the other person comes in and hopefully has that better shot of ones that I didn't do so great with. I know pros should get the shots probably more than I did. I showed them to my wife and she said she would be happy if they were her pictures...so I guess that counts for something.

I personally would be 100 times more comfortable just shooting portraits of someone. It isn't that once in a lifetime experience and there is much more room for setting up and getting it right. If I get the chance I will try to post some pictures. If worst came to worst I would just give the money someone paid back since I don't make a living from it. However saying oh you can have your money back at a wedding wouldn't cut it. It probably won't be something I ever do again. However it seems like everyone that does a decent amount of picture taking will be asked to do something like a wedding at one time or another...thought the post and discussion would be helpful.

Golf007sd

Great inputs by all.

As it has been very clearly stated, being a professional while "working" a wedding is key.

My part has always been a key element, hence, transportation. I can assure you, I have a very close an clear relationship with the main family members, the wedding planer and the photographer(s). For my part, I do take an authoritative position (+1 Bokeh_Hunter) by informing all attendees, once inside the buses, limos, the day's activities, not just in relation to the transportation, but how things will unfold. Their have been plenty of times when the guests have approached me, for clarification, of the days activities when things get a bit "active." In fact, both the wedding planner and photographer have appreciated my actions in "herding cats" and being able to bring things into order. After all no one want to be left behind at the church and miss out on all the fun.

Msmoto

"Herding cats"…… great summary of how to shoot a wedding Ali…...

pigeyejacksn

@tcole1983, this is great conversation. It's gotten heated because there is always so much emotion attached to weddings with photographers. I can guarantee everyone here has had significantly different experiences along the way. I can honestly say no two I've done have been the same. The locations may be similar, but the family dynamics become interesting and change everything. Even if it has slightly gone down a rabbit hole, wow what a great topic!

Herding cats is why I bring my wife :-). The analogy is perfect. OMG.

@Photobug - not in Milwaukee any more. Is that where you're at? I left about 20 years ago. I do have to say there's a lot I miss about that city. I live in South Carolina now. I like weddings here because they are very often outside. I also like the fact there's not snow. Now I do have to say outside weddings have their own risks here with afternoon showers. Besides they can be hot as hell. We had one where we did pictures after the wedding and we all had to hang out in air conditioned cars after the wedding and before the family shots. OMG it was bad. That was a second marriage, so they weren't as concerned as a 22 year old 1st time bride would be.

As for the flash photography discussion..WOW it's getting heated. Being in the South East, I have done work in a historic church and flash photography was not permitted for anyone period. Even if the Pope wanted to take a picture with flash he couldn't. That was the rule of the church due to some of the paintings and tapestries they had. Things happen and I had to respect that. I have gear designed to manage and you explain to the bride and groom what's up. They chose the church and it's my job to capture the moment for the family. The planner, the minister and I all worked together to figure out what our plan was. The organist knew the church and what has worked before. Everyone is a potential resource. We all met at the same time of day as the wedding would be so I could get a feel of the light. I took lots of test shots that day so I could go back home and get a feel for results. I had my daughter along so she could be my test subject (she hates when I do that to her). Everything turned out well for the wedding. I don't like surprises that I could have avoided. I always go to the rehearsal, I know some photographers that don't. That's their prerogative. I don't charge for it because I figure it's my best chance at mapping out the scene. I pre-plan as best I can.

I guess the way I look at it, I may be the acting General (of photography), but sometimes I don't get the luxury to pick the battlefield or the elements. Besides the "general", I am also Chief Technology Officer, Chief Marketing officer and in Chief of Customer Relations. I explain all of the above when I meet with the bride and the groom. They know what the are hiring. We all have different methods and personalities and we do what works for ourselves. I am organized, laid back but can take hold of a group when I need to. Again, take my comments with a grain of salt. I have done my fair share of weddings, but I certainly do not make a full time career out of it. I enjoy doing them because I don't.

Vipmediastar_JZ

My experience with herding cats has been good but on the last one the wedding party took over the poses for a couple of shots while I set up for the location. I let them do it only because i was setting up but they must have perceived that they could do it for a long time. After their failed attempt at a pose I took over.
In the future I will do what the party bus driver said. "HI my name is X and I will be the X for the day. I will only take requests from the bride, groom or who they have designated for today".

So that is a suggestion to inform the wedding party before you start and when they are all together if possible.

Have a backup camera lens and body with you. Once the shutter froze on my camera. Just before the Bride was about to walk the isle the camera started working again.
That my friends is why I prefer the 2nd body to be attached to my belt for easy access.

Photobug

@Photobug - not in Milwaukee any more. Is that where you're at? I left about 20 years ago. I do have to say there's a lot I miss about that city. I live in South Carolina now. I like weddings here because they are very often outside. I also like the fact there's not snow. Now I do have to say outside weddings have their own risks here with afternoon showers. Besides they can be hot as hell. We had one where we did pictures after the wedding and we all had to hang out in air conditioned cars after the wedding and before the family shots. OMG it was bad. That was a second marriage, so they weren't as concerned as a 22 year old 1st time bride would be.

I live in Sun Prairie, east side of Madison. Our son and family and grand kids live on the south side of Milwaukee. Only been here 2-1/4 years and yes Milwaukee is a great city especially for photography. Weather, well you either love the winters in Wisconsin or you learn to adapt. Same as South Carolina. I totally know what you are saying about outdoor weddings. Went to one 4 years ago in Cincinnati and it was 89 degrees and windy. It was ugly for photography and the bride and bridesmaids.

autofocus

Gleaning much from these experiences. Hoping others will join with theirs. Thanks to those that are sharing. :-)

Bokeh_Hunter

... Being in the South East, I have done work in a historic church and flash photography was not permitted for anyone period. Even if the Pope wanted to take a picture with flash he couldn't. That was the rule of the church due to some of the paintings and tapestries they had.

I know some churches who ban flash exist out there. Usually I find it always to be 1 of 2 things; 1) (the most) bad photographers who inappropriately get too close to the ceremony and become a major distraction, 2) the claim that flash will hurt "items". It is true over time, if an item is blasted with a flash, it could harm them. But we are talking about flash taking on the level of the Mona Lisa or the Declaration of Independance. Millions of flashes, every day, for decades. If you talk to most museum curators, you will learn that they use the "hurts items" as the best "excuse" to not get pushback to tell visitors not to use flash. Saying "it bothers others" tends to get hard pushback from visitors as they don't care. I have handouts/printouts from the library of congress, Christie's and the Guggenheim that speaks to flash as not being an issue and that sporadic flash photography doesn't hurt artwork and it's main evil is stray sunlight. (I'll see if I can find them on their web sites to share.)

My main point, if one runs into it, make sure to ask questions. 99% of the time it is just that the leader of the ceremony doesn't want to be startled and directly blasted by a flash. Sometimes they just need to be educated (finding out your art is at a less susceptible to harm is never a bad thing to find out.) Sometimes the wedding party/planner has to step in. It is all part of the planning for the day.

Just an FYI to help with a pastor/priest who doesn't want direct flash: The easiest way around that is to fire flashes up into the ceiling rafters and let it fall back down. If there is a loft that is even better. I have never had anyone who saw and experienced that type of flash to still "ban" it. It can raise your ISO a stop or two, or get you to F5.6-8 to get the proper DOF for good sharp images. As we all know the difference in the quality of images shooting at iso 6400 vs 800 is a huge deal. If you can get the church to raise the overall lighting just a bit, can also go a long way in adding a stop of light.

pigeyejacksn

Much agreed Bokeh_Hunter. I don't buy the damage thing either...UV is what will destroy anything. Last time I checked, no UV in a flash except maybe a....wait for it.....SUNPAK....ha ha, get it? Ok, so maybe only funny to me :-). Heck, look at any fabric that's been in the sun for a month...no color left. I totally understand your point..,for me, there are just times I'll argue and there are other times I can tell the fight won't get me anywhere. The latter is the exception. Fortunately I typically deal with outside stuff here, so nobody will tell me I can't use fill flash. Even when it's 98 and 100% humidity people want their weddings by the water. I sweat so bad at one the color ran from my tie and ruined both my shirt and tie. It was a formal wedding and it was brutal. The poor groomsman I thought were going to pass out in their tuxedos. They had big massive fans blowing on the everyone. But I have to say the location was beautiful.

Good fun. Nobody understands gets these types of conversations except other camera nerds.

Rx4Photo

Luckily, the two weddings that I shot were held outside and we were blessed by nature with excellent weather. But in terms of using flashes I wanted to add this to the conversation. One of the best and most clever things that I learned and actually did was during the reception. I placed a light stand to the left and to the right of the dance floor and on each I used a Phottix Odin receiver and a SB-910 or 900 speed light.

I was able to pop light on the floor when I wanted to. This was especially handy during the Father/Daughter dance and the first dance of the Bride and Groom without it being directly from the on camera flash. I wish I'd captured more images this way but actually used it only a few times. For the remainder of the reception I used on camera flash and bounced it off the ceiling or straight forward for longer distances.

In case it comes up...the subject of carrying two cameras ... I used a Black Rapid strap for the D800 which was my main shooter and I ordered a Spider holster for the D7000. I love the Spider holster because after some practice time you'll eventually be able to shoot and holster the camera without even looking at the clip. The groom's sister-in-law was so impressed that she asked if she could assist on my next wedding shoot just to learn from me. Little did she know ...

goatee220

I shoot weddings for one of the larger wedding photography studios in the Philly area. I just shot my 16th wedding of the season over the weekend. I've seen a lot of really good advice here with regard to gear, off-camera flash, etc and dealing with brides and grooms. The only thing I'd really want to add is make sure you have a contract, and make sure you have insurance. Even though you might be doing the job as a friend, etc - people change very quickly when a lot of money is at stake.