Post # 17
I 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!!
Post # 18
I 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.
Post # 19
Pretty 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.
Post # 20
My 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.