- Blog
- Bios
- Boards
- Classifieds
- DIY
- Gallery
- Vendor Reviews
- Shop Weddingbee
Weddingbee boards
I think it's only a problem if people don't recognize the main photographer. I went to a wedding once where two different 'main' photographers were there, and it was a mess because no one knew where to look. Your photog sounds like she has everything under control and specific jobs for each person, so it shouldn't be an issue at all!
Hmm I don't know how many additional pictures you will get. I had a second shooter but most of the pictures from him weren't as good and didn't end up in our book or the edited CD.
Are you going to have to feed this extra person too?
Seems a bit excessive, but if you think its a good call, trust her!
I think it's a great idea. I'd ask if the 3rd shooter could provide a different perspective than the first two, i.e., while the first two are taking main photos, maybe the 3rd is taking detail shots or helping with lighting. I know we struggled with lighting even with two of them!
why not! seems like the more the merrier on this one - and they can cover all angles and get great shots... my pet peeve is always when i see one photographer running around like a chicken with their head cut off trying to get all the shots . It can be distracting
I don't think that should be a problem. If the photographers are all professionals and they know who's in charge, it should be fine :) And you'll get tons more angles! It's nice to have all the different perspectives.
It should be awesome. they almost never take shots right next to each other, so there shouldn't be confusion. Other than another vendor meal, and possibly a lot more shots to have to choose from if you're limited in number... it's a win :)
I almost had a 3rd shooter for our day. My photographer had another bride who was interested in getting her feet wet in wedding photography that he was going to bring along. She ended up not being able to make it, but I was excited to have 3!
I agree about getting a different perspective on the day from the 3rd photographer. Also make sure they don't overcrowd the ceremony. Went to a wedding with two shooters and a videographer. One photographer was in front of the BMs and the videographer was in front of the GM the WHOLE time. They basically blocked the view for anyone.
Go for it. It would be great to have an additional prespective. As long as the tasks are delegated properly it should make the picture taking run even smoother. It will work out great if you want a lot of candid shots because while the other 2 may be dedicated to focusing on you and your husband the other photographer can be capturing shots that otherwise might be missed.
I think 3 is going to appear to be intrusive to your guests, and honestly, I think you are at the point of diminishing returns with 2. Throw in the fact that it's not costing you anything (and probably not your pro either), and it sounds like a freebie add on, maybe someone learning and wanting to follow your pro around. I wouldn't do it..
How large is your wedding? We're having 3 and I'm super excited, but we're having 300 guests too...
I agree with PP - that can be very crowded, especially during the ceremony and it might confuse the guests as to who is the pro photog.
Do you have any videographer(s)? If so, Yes... it will be SUPER crowded and I would highly advise against this. 190 isn't that "large" and really, you only need 2 for more than 200. 1 is more than capable of handling an under 200 reception, unless held in multiple rooms. Is 190 a confirmed count or expected? Because if you wind up with 150 it will be way-way too many shooters.
Honestly, receptions are so super easy. People talking and being candid at tables look the same in EVERY shot you could possible take of them... Dancing shots also start to look the same as it's always the same people dancing... and other than the "special events" that take place (in which everyone stops talking and what they're doing and are just looking at you) it's very straightforward.
More than likely, if she's bringing on a 3rd at no cost to you it's probably someone who wanted to come along, is new, and isn't really going to provide much of benefit to you. She wouldn't pay money from her small profit margin for a 190 person wedding. If there are ANY videographers at all, I would say no. I've done some events with 3 videographers and let me just say, it was crowded, obvious, and annoying to guests without me even a part of the situation.
Also look at this from your guests perspective. They know YOU are being photographed, no one ELSE wants to be photographed ALL night. One or two while they're sitting talking is fine... one, two, and three photographers always swinging by every 3-5 min. taking a picture is annoying. Also, a lot of table talkers are low key people who don't want to be photographed.... Your wedding is an event, not a production and the more photographers/videographers there are the more it becomes a production with everyone clamoring for the best shot... all the while distracting your guests and blocking their views. 1-2 photographers are PLENTY for an under 200 person reception... unless again, it's a venue with multiple rooms and people spread out over a large area where you can't see the whole room at once. I would personally want to know why she feels the need for a 3rd because unless your lazy there is no reason 2 photographers can't work an under 200 reception in one ballroom/tent/area. So, that leads me to believe it's just some newbie who wants to see what its like, isn't going to know what they're doing, and your not going to benefit in any way from... i.e. not worth it.
I think it could be good. Our second shooter got some great pics from different angles and close-ups, while our main photog was shooting "necessary" pictures. Our second shooter also got shots of the guys getting ready while our first shooter was with me. If your photographer has worked with these people before and feels confident that the third shooter will contribute positively to the day, then I say go for it. Also, our vendor meals were only 1/3 the price of our guest meals, so it shouldn't really add much to your costs.
I think it would be AWESOME. I really wish I had a 3rd shooter at our wedding. I really liked the style of our posed/formal pictures. I loved the candid pictures the 2nd shooter captured... but I really wanted MORE (hence, the 3rd). GO FOR IT! You will never have too few pictures, IMO.
I'm thinking too many cooks in the kitchen is a bad thing. I worked with a videographer for the first time in awhile and it was difficult.
I think this is getting into the tricky area of having too much of a good thing. At least they are all associated with the main photographer so there will be a director of them all. Good luck and hope it turns out great!
Thanks for all of your comments! They were really helpful. We do think 3 is a bit much, but the vendor meal only costs us $25/vendor and our photographer mentioned that she wanted one photographer to be there solely for the details. I'll mention my concerns about overcrowding our guests, etc. and hopefully it will all work out! We aren't having a videographer if that makes any difference (though I wish we invested the money in one).
I think the third photographer should be responsible for the smaller details such as decor. Or one can follow the boys, one in the church waiting for the entrance and the other with the girls. I think that for those jobs it would be nice. Once you get to the reception I think 3 will be too many like PP have said, no one wants to be photographed the entire time they are there. But like I said, if that 3rd person really wants to tag along, get them shooting non-human shots to capture all those small details that the other photographers don't really have time to get.
As a photographer myself, I can tell you that she's probably just giving a rookie the chance to work a wedding. Otherwise, she wouldn't be willing to offer the 3rd shooter up at no additional cost.
With that being said, you should certainly talk to her about any concerns you may have. If you're worried about having too many photogs afoot, tell her that. If you don't feel comfortable with the idea, don't hesitate to speak up. If she's a good business person, she will happily oblige.
Now if you like the idea of having a third shooter but don't want your guests to feel too crowded... maybe you could allow this 3rd shooter in for a limited amount of time (an hour or two). They'll be getting their practice and you'll be getting your space. It's a win-win!
we had three photographers at our wedding and i am so glad. each had just a slightly different perspective or style of shooting...so we got a huge variety of photos. i would so go for it...i was so happy with my pics
edit: i am also going to add that we had a videographer as well as two assistants (one to the photographer, one to the videographer) and it still didnt feel super crowded or like there was too many people running around. each person focused on their own thing and it turned out perfectly.
We're having 150 guests, and hired a pair of photographers that do weddings together, and similarly to your situation, they want to bring their young intern along as a 3rd photographer at no extra cost to me. Seems like a fine deal...
You must log in to post.
| Visit our sister sites | eHarmony Online Dating |
eHarmony Advice Dating Advice |
Project Wedding Wedding Songs |
JustMommies Pregnancy Calendar |
Create the honeymoon of your dreams.
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| ellisrobertson | 23 |
| fishbone | 15 |
| MsPanda | 14 |
| aduarte3201 | 14 |
| pengoala | 11 |
| ShellVee | 10 |
| ladyartichoke | 10 |
| ndreighton | 10 |
| mypinkshoes | 9 |
 sylvia.riggle |
9 |
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| PandasWifey | 1 |
| ellabee | 1 |
| pengoala | 1 |
| ElbieKay | 1 |
| kaylaf09 | 1 |
| auggiefrog | 1 |
| MamaMegs721 | 1 |
| mkim | 1 |
| Zouave | 1 |
| koi424 | 1 |
I know it sounds a bit much, but my photographer (who I absolutely adore) said she was thinking about bringing a third shooter to the wedding (at no extra cost to me). She mentioned that she thinks a 3rd shooter would really help in thoroughly covering the day and will aid in things running smoother because I'm "having a big wedding with a lot of guests and table shots and candids are really important."
My wedding isn't very big (about 190 guests), but I like the idea of knowing we're going to have more shots and love her pictures already that I don't see any downfall to the situation.
What are your thoughts?