MemberI would go with the videographer! If you have hired a good photographer they will know how to get all the shots you need – most of the worlds best wedding photographers nowadays that i know work solo. You may not want to look at the video now but in 20 years time your kids might!!
MemberI think that we tend to think video is better becasue it’s live action and you can hear and see everything like a movie, HOWEVER who ever watches that stuff?? I have tons of videos that collect dust. It’s the pictures that get poured over year after year. A second photographer makes it possible to get shots like FIs face when you make your entrance as well as a shot of you making that entrance. Pics of mom crying without missing Dad lifting your veil.These are just examples not everyone has the same set up etc.
I wanted a second photographer so that I could have ground level close ups as well as some epic shots from the choir loft. My second photographer will also be going to the reception to be a human photo booth while we are out getting our pictures with my main photographer. So the second photographer is also doubling as some cocktail hour entertainment 😉
ETA that your second shooter or a family member with a decent digital camera can take video of the vows. That’s what I’m doing.
MemberPretty dependent on what the quality of the video is. I like wedding video that has a cinema feel to it, not just someone following you around with a camcorder all day. What I consider worthwhile costs as much as primary photography, or more.
Also the benefits of a second photographer have nothing to do with your guest count.
MemberMy best friend has a professional wedding video. So does my counsin, and countless other people I know. Guess how often they watch it. I’d splurge on more pictures that you can put around the house and keep as momentos.
The topic ‘2nd Photographer or a videographer?!?’ is closed to new replies.