(Closed) My Ever-Wandering Wedding

posted 7 years ago in Reception
Post # 3
Member
6394 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: September 2011

I think the second one is definitely rustic. I would stick with the first one. I’m not really sure how well you’d be able to blend steampunk and camping, that one would definitely be a challenge!

Post # 5
Member
6394 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: September 2011

Hmm…personally, I wouldn’t want to camp after going to a wedding if it’s even semi-formal because you would have to store your good clothes (or worse, wear them, lol) overnight while you’re at a campground. I might be biased, though, because I’m not a huge camping fan.

Is there anything you don’t like about the first one?

Post # 7
Member
124 posts
Blushing bee

I strongly prefer the second venue. Camping or not, you can make this venue non-rustic by downplaying the wood covered walls and have the eye focus more on the center of the room and tables. The outdoor view made me swoon. 

Post # 8
Member
1577 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: October 2012

The second one definitely looks nicer to me.  :o)

Post # 9
Member
2116 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: June 2011

I think venue #2 is incredibly beautiful and I would go with it if I were you! It looks much more special

Post # 10
Member
84 posts
Worker bee

The second one is prettier. The ceilings are high and it looks like there’s space for a dance floor if you want one.

Camping sounds fun!

I think it will be harder to change the look of the community hall.

Post # 11
Member
3364 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: December 2011

2nd is beautiful, but 1st is more sensible! =)

Remember to have your way, but its only 1 Day! I love your ideas! But I say majority of people will want to go to the comfort of their own hotel room and/or bedroom, kick off their dancing shoes and soak those bunyons in private ๐Ÿ˜‰ or get their groove on to continue the wedding spirit! ๐Ÿ˜‰ 

I truly love your taste and style for your wedding, so I mean all this with the most love and sincerity! xo

Post # 12
Member
140 posts
Blushing bee
  • Wedding: June 2012

I love the second venue! it is beautiful! i think the first venue looked cold, bland and boring.you also mentioned venue 1 is in the city, i would worry about hearing sirens or other city noise. the second venue looks ‘homey’ and cozy!

Post # 13
Member
5106 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: September 2011

I love that second venue with a passion. But that’s more my style, what I’m drawn to….

You have to think if it’s what you really want, and what would be best for your guests. What kind of camping? Do they also have cabins that people could stay in or is it more primitive?

I would love to camp, but that’s just me ๐Ÿ˜‰

Post # 14
Member
2459 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: November 2010

@Mrs.tobe: Agreed I love the second venue!!

Post # 15
Member
4774 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: November 1999

are you planning on getting married at the location as well?

If so then the second one seems to have a very nice place to actually get married, but if it is just for the reception the 1st place may be nicer.  It’s hard to tell by pics alone but the park at #1 seems nicer.  With decoration 1# will be pretty as well.

Post # 16
Member
6351 posts
Bee Keeper

I vote two even without the camping option. Two is just gorgeous and special.

And I would totally camp out after with some of my friends. It’d be awesome.

The topic ‘My Ever-Wandering Wedding’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors