- Blog
- Bios
- Boards
- Classifieds
- DIY
- Gallery
- Vendor Reviews
- Shop Weddingbee
Weddingbee boards
I went with the venue and skimped on the photographer. I figure I would rather be in a beautiful venue and have the experience that I want rather than be in an ugly one with extra nice pictures IN the ugly venue.
I would go for the better photographer. The pictures are what will last, and although a good photographer can make even the ugliest place look interesting and beautiful, a bad photographer could make a wedding in the Sistine Chapel look awful.
Hmm I think this depends on how important the photography is to you. 45 mins drive time between venues will also eat up a huge amount of your photography time, so that's something to consider. photography was my #1 priority, so my personal opinion would be to go with the cheaper venue. But it really depends on what you want, you know?
I wouldn't recommend skimping on photography. A year later, I still love looking through our beautiful photos. And I know several brides who want to cry when they look at their pics because they skimped and the photos are disappointing.
Is the church hall ugly? Or just plain? If it's just plain, then you can decorate it exactly how you want it and it will look beautiful in photos if you have a great photographer.
But...that monastery is GORGEOUS!! So that would be a tough call for me.
The commute from your church would also be a concern for your guests as well as photography time. Could you do both the ceremony & reception at the monastery?
@Theresa90405: thanks! The church hall is plain and not full on ugly but definitly plain. We can't do both the ceremony and reception there b/c we are having a Catholic Mass and have to have it in a church.
I personally would have it at the church reception hall. While the monastery is beautiful, a 45 minute drive is a lot of time, and $2500 is a big increase. In a few years if you think you would be upset that you didnt have it there, then spend the extra and take the drive, but remember, you're not the only one driving. That long of a drive could mean that some people go either to the church or to the reception. I know that could happen regardless, but is less likely if it is all at the same place. I'm fighting with photo budget too, and as much as it is insanely stressful, what I've found is the closer to the wedding you book the photographer, the more likely they are to give you deals. I didnt choose to wait to book, but 4 months out, the better photographers without booked jobs are cutting costs. So if you do choose the more expensive venue- maybe just postpone finding the photographer. Its risky, but it could help.
I'd not skimp on the photography. Over the years to come, when looking back at your photos, the ones you will treasure will be the photos of PEOPLE, not the venue. I have never, ever heard any bride say "gee, I wish I hadn't spent so much on photos" but plenty of brides have lamented cutting corners on photography at the expense of something more fleeting.
@Aubergold: I vote cheaper venue. the pictures are forever and most of them honestly do not get the venue but capture your faces and reactions.
and UHHH WELCOME BACK :)
@panterapeach: thank you. haha, you saw I snuck back in here all stealthy. I missed you guys!
Definitely pay for a better photographer. I've heard too many horror stories about not hiring a top notch photographer. Today I just heard about the photographer that ran out of battery during the ceremony. For Reals! Really!!!
The majority of my budget is going to photographer and our wedding dinner. Since I'm about capturing the moment and we love to eat, I spending accordingly. BTW, I've been too a ton of weddings and the ones I had the most fun @ weren't always the most stylish. It was about celebrating by dancing the night away. Only twice did I want to take the centerpieces home. I rarely have eaten the wedding cake since its too sweet for me. I rarely eat dinner cause I'm socializing and dancing the night away. My suggestion is to plan a great party in a decent venue w/ a top notch photographer to capture the event.
Yea, seems the only negative to the church hall is that it's plain. Positives are cheaper, closer, easier set up/clean up, and overall logistically more practical. I personally couldn't justify the difference.
I say go with a less expensive venue, you cant re-do your photography, and a photographer's job is supposed to capture the best! =)
Hard to say, because as some others have mentioned, the logistics of the church are also better.
Talking JUST about cost though, I would say a less expensive photographer is not always a bad thing. There's a HUGE range of photograhers..from brand new to middle of the road to crazy expensive and experienced.
We went with a younger photographer vs. some of the more established ones in our area...saved a significant amount of money...and could not be more thrilled with her work. AND we got our pictures back while we were on our honeymoon. I love every single picture and am so so so so happy with our decision.
Even as someone who is usually very "you get what you pay for" in other areas of life....I disagree when it comes to this. Lower price does not always mean lower quality.
We decided to get the nicer venue. I wanted to treat my guests and they don't care about how beautiful my pictures are. I also agree with musthavedietcoke (excellent name) that if you do your homework you can find a photographer that does beautiful work and won't blow your budget.
Thanks guys. My FI has been pushing me to look at other venues as well. He has a big concern that I didn't mention before. We are having a mass in a Catholic church, and outside of the church they have a grassy knoll that has thousands of small crosses in it and a sign that basically says: this a symbolic burial ground for the millions of unborn children that were taken from this world throught abortion. I mean personally, it is what it is. We are Catholic and that's what the church stands for. But my FI was saying this might make people uncomfortable. I think I just threadjacked my own thread, but what do you guys think? Would you even give that a second thought if you saw it?
I would get a cheaper photog to have a nice venue, because the guests arent going to stay blindfolded until the master photographer will makes everything nice. Photos can be edited one way or another but you can edit peoples 1st impression of when they walk into your venue
I'd prob be a little disturbed and move right along with my life. I went to a catholic wedding where the priest thought it was appropriate to talk about gay marriage, I rolled my eyes and enjoyed the rest of my day. As long as you're not asking your guests to have a picnic in the fetus graveyard then you're prob ok.
Tough question. I'm Catholic, so I'm not a good person to ask ...but it probably depends on your guests? Thinking about my own guestlist [probably ~20% Catholic], I don't think anyone would have been too shocked or angered by it...most people know that its the Church's position. That said, I understand your FI's feelings. I didn't want any readings talking about divorce so as to be sensitive to some of the guests [plus I just like our readings better..:)]
OMG you guys! The manager at the Expensive venue emailed me back and they are offering a special this month where they include CHILVARI CHAIRS for free if you sign a contract! It must be fate...right ....right??!
Oh man........ok Im overreacting, ha!
I personally think that the photographer is the one thing that you don't skimp on. It is the only large budget item that we have.
I'd say never skimp on the photography. I know a good photographer can work miracles. But you want to treat your guests as well. It just depends on what your priorities are.
That said, if a client came to me and said look, I've got this amazing venue, but I can't afford both - and I agreed that yes, this is an amazing venue and a great opportunity for amazing photos - I would SO give a discount! I make decor discounts from time to time and venues tend to inspire me.
Photography is the one thing I wouldn't skimp on! The pictures are sooo important. Bad pictures = unhappy bride. I don't love our venue, but I figure with the lights dimmed and some uplighting it will look great!
You've probably already made a decision, but I have seen plain parish halls transformed into wonderful things! We splurged a bit on our photographer, with a parish hall reception.
I was just wondering what you chose to do? I voted for a more expensive photog. You said there wasn't anything really wrong with the church and you can get creative about how you decorate. Plus, I don't think treating your guests right means picking the prettiest venue. I think they will care more about great food, music and the party! (Which you will want to capture with a photog whose work you are in love with!)
I did the more expensive venue and mid-price photographer. In the end, I think it actually evened out though I didn't expect it to. Don't forget that often a beautiful venue requires very little decoration ($$$) whereas an inexpensive plain venue need much more decoration ($$$). So they can often cost similar amounts in the end, though it depends how steep the price difference is. :) Personally, I chose the beauty - my venue came with chiavari chairs, chargers, nice linens, etc standard. it's filled with chandeliers and features free uplighting in a variety of colors. So it looks like I've put a lot of money into it already yet I've done nothing but rent the place with the standard options! All I needed to get is a bit of floral - no uplighting, no draping, decor/chain/linen rental etc etc. It depends on what comes with the expensive venue and what each will require you to put into it. Try to do the math on that before deciding to see the actual price difference after decorated.
Yup yup! Glad you chose the way you did. A mid level vs. high level photog is not the same cut as a mid level to a just starting photog.
A mid level photog can still do great work.
And... I agree with not having to decorated being a HUGE benefit of a nice venue. :)
PLEASE DO NOT SKIMP ON THE PHOTOGRAPHER!
Our Reception venue had UGLY green tin wall BUT... looking at our pictures I hardly notice them at all and even the ones you can see them in you still don't focus on that part. A good photographer can make all the difference!
You can see here in my Recaps check the Recpetion Recaps for specifics.
Not just that BUT I talked to my grandmother (who is high etiquette.. wedding goer) pre-wedding about it when I thought about changing venues b/c of the walls and she told that she really never noticed the walls of the weddings she went to.
EDIT:: Oh I just realized you probably already chose... oh well. lol
I guess I'm not too sure about what the price ranges are for low, mid, and high...I do know when I checked the prices of the photogs whose blogs I LOVED, they started around $4000-6000 and that's before prints and albums!!! Ours starts at $2000 and includes $500 album credit, and 2 photographers for 6 hrs. Is that mid as I guessed? I don't think I found any lows...but I'd expect it's lower than that? I'm sure it depends on location too...
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 |
|---|---|
| Brielle | 44 |
 vorpalette |
29 |
| caseyleigh10 | 26 |
| les105 | 24 |
| ellisrobertson | 24 |
| mypinkshoes | 23 |
| fishbone | 23 |
| ndreighton | 22 |
| lionskitty | 22 |
| SouthernGirl | 21 |
| User | Posts Today |
|---|---|
| Saria213 | 4 |
| Steph18 | 3 |
| armychica06 | 2 |
| sylvia.riggle |
2 |
| nerdysarah | 2 |
| pinkshoes | 1 |
| crayfish | 1 |
| o0olibelulao0o | 1 |
| SFrunner | 1 |
| kate02121 | 1 |
Hi Bees I need your expert opinions.
We were originally slated to have our wedding at the church's reception hall. My FMIL is a member of the church and suggested we should have it there; she thinks it is nice. I, however do not, but I wasn't gonna fight about it cause I *thought* I didn't really care about it that much.
But then I found this BEAUTIFUL reception hall that is farther away from our church and in the city. Here are some pics:
http://www.weddingwire.com/biz/st-francis-hall-washington/portfolio/47f67a8319e2766d.html
I LOVE!!!
I wont even bother showing your pics of the church reception hall, cause well it's plain and just ok. It would need some serious decoration to look nice.
ANyway the church reception hall will run us about 1500 for 8 hours (we can come set up the day before) and the monastery would run us 4000 for 8 hours (must do all set up and clean up in this time frame) and will be about 45 minutes from the church. Each venue allows you to being you own caterer and alcohol.
Since our budget is pretty bare bones in all categories, photography would have to take a big hit in order to accomodate this venue. So I ask: would you rather have a cheaper uglier venue that would need a ton of decoration, but be able to hire a top notch photographer........OR a nice, pretty venue but have to skimp on the photography?
If any photographers can chime in, would it matter to you at all?
Thanks guys!