Wedding Behavior

[Durnik20]

So I had an opportunity to attend a wedding recently and went to it with the specific intent of seeing how their photographer operated. I have done this at a few weddings and this one stuck out the most cause the dude was right up in the bride and grooms business DURING the ceremony... Like exchanging the vows and hes on one knee right next to them using what I'm guessing was a pretty wide prime lens... it was like that all the time, he was right up next to the people during the ceremony and I am thinking oh my god...

Now as a guest it was annoying, I could not get almost any shots of worth cause everytime I moved to take a picture this guy was either in the frame or somehow in the way. Now I brushed it off as maybe this guys is just bad or something but when the brides mother asked me what I thought I told her and she said "Well yeah, but arent they all like that?"

That made me think, this was the first time I had actively been watching the photography so I couldn't really remember other weddings...is that actually how its done most of the time? I know the guy at my wedding was like a Ninja, we almost never saw him but man did he get some good shots so I thought everyone was like that but perhaps I was mistaken.

So here is the question for you guys, which way is the proper, and we will define proper as most likely to get you more business, way to take pictures at a wedding during the ceremony?

Forgive the shoddy composition, I decided to grab the pick while I had the chance and just snapped it to get the photog in it so I could ask this when I got back.

[Niresangwa]

I think as far as considerations go, I put them in this order:

1) Officiant's wishes
2) Couple's wishes (including the inherent expectation of good shots
3) Congregation's wishes

I get what I can from a distance, but ultimately you have to get in there as tight as your equipment allows. Aside from a 200mm prime I use, the usual focal length is 135mm... so really, I can usually stay a good 5m away and still get the tight shots I need.

The truly difficult thing is having obstructions in the way, such as the bridal party, but more often, especially in churches, the couple do not face the congregation.. they either have their backs to them, or face each other.

As far as the shot above, I guess you have to give the context of it. I would consider getting that close very briefly, but not for an extended period of time, nor would I do it more than once. I haven't ever gotten closer than the first row of seating or pews so far.

I do not use flash during the ceremony... that would be distracting.

I think most people understand the need for someone buzzing around.. again, it depends on the frequency and time spent in a prominent location. I think people will tolerate and understand it to a point... the more pervasive and invasive you are, the more likely you're oing to get dirty looks and clicks of the tongue.

[BigFuzzy]

Interesting question actually.
I think, in the end what's "proper" as per your definition is what gets the good results your clients are hoping for. So, if this guy's 'style' calls for him being that close as part of his 'style' and the couple ends up being pleased with him, then he was completely 'proper' because the next couple that may hire him are going to make that decision based either on the samples he shows, or because a happy bride shows them his work that he did for them.

Having said that, I rarely work that close. I do use flash, but I find that every couple I've ever photographed (and I've done enough to trust my limited findings) has said the flash never bothered them most didn't even notice. I, like Steve, tend to work in the 70-150 mm range depending on conditions and blend into the background as much as possible(though difficult being so big.. and handsome ).

I recently shot a wedding in Mexico where I was literally standing over the shoulders of the official (who was seated) about 1.5 meters from the couple because that's the ONLY place I could be to see the couple and I used flash, and they really didn't notice.

So it really depends on the conditions so I'd argue there can't be a 'proper' way seeing as there are never exactly the same (or ideal) conditions.

Also, the photographer is there to get good images of the wedding, and though I believe he should try to blend in as much as possible with the background, if the conditions call for him having to be in the way of every other person there in order to get the job done properly, who gives a sh!t if he's in all the guest shots. The couple's not going to care about that if they get awesome shots from the guy they hired to do so.

my two eurocents.

[BigFuzzy]

Following up on my post. Here's what I mean from the mexican wedding.
This is the view from behind. I had to wedge myself between the wall, the table, the official , the flowers and the f'ing candles! I made that man move seeing as he served no purpose (he was there with official)


This is the view I had from there. You can see why I was limited to my 24-70mm lens and had to use flash right in their faces! I also picked this to show the tough conditions (candle, ambient, my position) which might have caused otherwise "improper" position by me.



It's why I soooo prefer and relish the planned/staged/well lit opportunities!!

[Durnik20]

Short of the grooms hair (kidding) those look great and I can see how working in that location would have required you to get close.

What bothered me about this guy was he was as close as he was in the picture at least a dozen times, and was so noticable as to be a distraction. The flash was fine, it was softened quite a lot and you could barely notice it, for me the real issue was that guy just bring in the way.

I appreciate the input though on how getting that close is sometimes needed but to be fast about it, and do it as little as possible.

Someone did raise an interesting point though

Also, the photographer is there to get good images of the wedding, and though I believe he should try to blend in as much as possible with the background, if the conditions call for him having to be in the way of every other person there in order to get the job done properly, who gives a sh!t if he's in all the guest shots.

This actually got me thinking if most photoraphers agree with that or not, I know as a guest I was really annoyed that I couldn't get the pictures I wanted. I wasn't taken them for the coupe I wanted pictures for me, for my memories, and because I was annoyed at that guy for his complete lack of consideration to anyone else shooting, I doubt I would have been in the mind to offer him business if I had a wedding coming up and A LOT of business is drummed up by word of mouth from the guests at weddings.

Now I am not saying dont be in the way, cause he is being paid, and so he needs to get his good shots, but I am saying that consideration for the guests is important to I think, after all its not ALL about the money, some people want to remember this day, and when they look at the picture dont want to see the bride, groom and Jose the wedding photog.

[Brian Mullins]

With it being outside, and not on sacred ground (like a church), the officiant has zero say (with me) on how to do my job. When at the church, it is their rules. Moving outside the church, they are just another vendor and I will do my best to honor their wishes as long as it does not affect my coverage for my clients. With that being said.

1 - It could be a style issue. I personally would never get that close. I'm 6'5" and if im in front of anyone, I am blocking their view. My personal opinion is being that close is intrusive - but there is no right or wrong answer and culture plays a huge role in this (Indian weddings are like working in a mosh pit)
2 - I would never wear that type of clothing to a wedding. To me, that shows he is probably a newer photographer.
3 - Using a fong dome outside, in the full sun, tells me he is definitely new.

Apparently this is what the couple, and parents, expected. With it being outside, I think it is far more acceptable (which is not saying much) to get closer to the couple then inside a church.

[BigFuzzy]

Originally Posted by Durnik20

This actually got me thinking if most photoraphers agree with that or not, I know as a guest I was really annoyed that I couldn't get the pictures I wanted. I wasn't taken them for the coupe I wanted pictures for me, for my memories, and because I was annoyed at that guy for his complete lack of consideration to anyone else shooting, I doubt I would have been in the mind to offer him business if I had a wedding coming up and A LOT of business is drummed up by word of mouth from the guests at weddings.

Now I am not saying dont be in the way, cause he is being paid, and so he needs to get his good shots, but I am saying that consideration for the guests is important to I think, after all its not ALL about the money, some people want to remember this day, and when they look at the picture dont want to see the bride, groom and Jose the wedding photog.

Yeah, I raised that point. And though I fully agree the shooter should do everything in his power (maybe I should have made that clearer in my first post) to stay out of the way and not interfere with anything.. in the end his main goal (getting new clients being secondary at best) is to get as good photos as possible and if that means being in the way at times (or more often) then, in my opinion, so be it.

In the end, your end product, more than your behaviour during the ceremony is what'll get you more clients (unless you're a total shi!tbag to everyone during the wedding of course!).

So, yes, as a pro it's my opinion you do your best to fade into the background noise.. but you should never sacrifice getting the job done like you're supposed to (ie kick ass images) just to be nice to the guests.
It's also why I'm always uber prepared and know where I can/can't stand, what the conditions are, what are the best views are, where the parents/family will be (to avoid getting in their way), etc etc.. that way you're minimizing damage as much as possible.

[BigFuzzy]

Originally Posted by Brian Mullins

With it being outside, and not on sacred ground (like a church), the officiant has zero say (with me) on how to do my job. When at the church, it is their rules. Moving outside the church, they are just another vendor and I will do my best to honor their wishes as long as it does not affect my coverage for my clients. With that being said.

1 - It could be a style issue. I personally would never get that close. I'm 6'5" and if im in front of anyone, I am blocking their view. My personal opinion is being that close is intrusive - but there is no right or wrong answer and culture plays a huge role in this (Indian weddings are like working in a mosh pit)
2 - I would never wear that type of clothing to a wedding. To me, that shows he is probably a newer photographer.
3 - Using a fong dome outside, in the full sun, tells me he is definitely new.

Apparently this is what the couple, and parents, expected. With it being outside, I think it is far more acceptable (which is not saying much) to get closer to the couple then inside a church.

All good points Brian.. yeah, the image says a lot about the photog. In his defense, it looks like this was a 'down' moment as the people in the background aren't even paying attention and they appear to be off to the side... though I could be wrong?

[zona5101]

I know as a guest I was really annoyed that I couldn't get the pictures I wanted.

THIS is YOUR issue - you couldn't get the shots YOU wanted?? They guy's there to do a job, stay out of his way.

annoyed at that guy for his complete lack of consideration to anyone else shooting,

He's not there to ensure you get your shots.

I doubt I would have been in the mind to offer him business if I had a wedding coming up and A LOT of business is drummed up by word of mouth from the guests at weddings..

His images will get him more business than your word of mouth. If they suck he'll be short term - if they are great then nobody will care if he was in the way of your camera.

Cut the guy some slack, he's trying to do his job the best he knows how.

[Brian Mullins]

Originally Posted by BigFuzzy

All good points Brian.. yeah, the image says a lot about the photog. In his defense, it looks like this was a 'down' moment as the people in the background aren't even paying attention and they appear to be off to the side... though I could be wrong?

Quite possibly.. I was trying to give a personal opinion without questioning his actions. I probably failed. Either way, if it wasn't a "surprise" to the couple then he did right by them which is what is important.