Post # 1
We’re only having 3. Yup. Just 3. No “getting ready” shots. No Dancing reception shots. 1 hour before to get all of the formal photos out of the way, the ceremony, and a tiny bit at the reception. He says he’s done this before (tons!) and we’ll fake pictures of us “cutting” the cake and dancing. It’s all I really cared about. Us getting married.
I really wanted this photographer- I researched a TON and he’s the only one who I felt comfortable with and liked the pictures he took of me. He was way way WAY out of budget- but he worked with us and 3 hours is the perfect compromise.
Is this unheard of? Anyone else have limited professional coverage?
Edit: This isn’t a post about me worried about not having enough pictures or me thinking about adding more time. I’m happy with our choice and think it’s going to be great! I was just wondering if anyone has done this before. I don’t think I’ve read about anyone on the forums doing this- I’m just curious.
Post # 3
We have to use the photographers at Wynn Las Vegas. We are taking pics for a total of 2 & a half hours. Outside that, we’ll rely on family & friends for pictures.
Our package originally only came with 30 min of photography, but we upgraded for an extra $900. We also get a lot more prints included this way.
Post # 4
We are having 1 hour of pics…we just want a couple shots of us and a few of the guests etc…all that is important is getting married:)
Post # 5
Limited coverage with someone good will always trump more coverage with mediocre. Many of my couples this year went for my 6 hour over 8. They want quality coverage for shorter hours over a full day. They do what they can afford and whats realistic for their budget while still getting the quality they want.
Post # 6
I only had a photographer for the ceremony, and that itself was a total of 1 hour 🙂 The ceremony itself was probably 15 minutes and we spent the rest of the time taking photos with everyone.
Post # 7
@MissFireFlower: Great choice! A shorter time with a pro is a MUCH better choice than all day coverage from someone that will produce inferior quality or just “ok” results.
Honestly, I think 8 hours is very excessive when it comes to wedding photography. I have shot all important moments from ceremony to reception on 3 1/2 hours before. Just didn’t include getting ready photos.
And what would you rather have? BEAUTIFUL formals and ceremony shots….? Or a CD of the whole day with photos that look like a guest took them?
Post # 8
I’m sure it’s doable. I’ve personally never shot a wedding that was less than 6 hours. The great majority of my couples are ordering albums so 8-12 hour weddings are my norm. That covers hair/makeup through to the dance And often a sparkler exit or night shoot.
Post # 9
We are getting four hours of coverage, because I didn’t want or need 6-8 hours. Our situation is actually very similar to yours. We found a photographer who is excellent but over budget. However, she was wonderful and worked with us to meet our budget with less hours of her time.
TBH, originally, our ceremony and reception wasn’t even going to exceed four hours. It is now (because we changed the format) but I still don’t need random pictures of my family and I playing board/tabletop games and possibly dancing all night. Ceremony, formals, cake cutting…that’s all I want.