Post # 1
In an attempt to be cost-effective, I’ve been considering a 6-hour package of photography instead of the regular 8-hours.
Are there any brides out there that purchased only 6 hours? Was it enough?
Any brides-to-be who purchased 6 hours? Are you happy with your choice?
Post # 3
I am in the same boat. To cut back on costs we are only having a photographer for 3-4 hours.
We are doing a pre-wedding shoot for about two hours. Then we are having the photog stay and photograph our ceremony and then some after pics.
For the reception I am posting a message on my wedding website about this. I am simply asking guests if they have any pics from the wedding and reception they would like to share, to send them to us.
I will have to let you know how it turns out, but I have a good feeling that we will get a ton of pics from our pre-wedding shoot and from what family and friends take – i think we will be set.
Post # 4
My photographer actually suggested only four hours, so we’re gonna go with that. I’m friends with another photographer (who hates shooting weddings, which is why he’s not shooting mine), and he offered to take my pre-wedding shots like when I’m getting my hair and makeup done and all that. I think it’ll be great with her for just four hours.
Post # 5
I’ll only have my photographer for 6 hours, but I think we will be fine. (Plus, my sister and her boyfriend are also professional photographers, so they can fill in the gaps!) 🙂 Our photographer told us that the most important time to have a photographer is early rather than later. Why? Because reception photos can get repetitive (the same people dancing all night) and you will have plenty of guests with their cameras out who can capture the moments for you. I wish we could have her for 8, but I’m sure we’ll be just fine. 🙂
Post # 6
I haven’t had my wedding yet, but we’re contracted for 4 hours of photography. I think we’ll use some time for getting ready, then the cereomony will be short, we’ll take some portraits and then everyone will just sit around and eat and visit. There’s no need for more time. You should just consider everything you want to get captured and see how much time you’ll need!
I do like the idea of having guests contribute snapshots and should probably set up a way to make that easy.
Post # 7
We’re only having 2 hours of photoraphy and paying $200 for the actual photography time and an additional $50 for a CD of all the raw pics. But my Maid/Matron of Honor does photo editing so she can edit the pics after the wedding. We are meeting for 1/2 hour before the ceremony for shots of the two of us, then of course during the ceremony (very short, no more than 15 minutes long), then a few formal shots afterwards. We are only having punch and cake afterwards so we don’t really need too much there. Instead of the traditional reception, we are having a pig roast the next day.
Post # 8
We are doing 5 hours. I’m having my BMs snap the ‘getting ready’ photos. We’re having 1.5 hours of pre-ceremony, then the rest for ceremony & reception. I’m trusting guests for additional reception pics, and I’m even trying out one-time use digital video cameras from CVS. $30 for 1 hour camera. I think 6 hours will be fine!
Post # 9
we were doing 6 hours but my photogs are giving us 8 hours for not much more! i’d rather have my BMs be int he photo and they’re going to give us a slideshow video type thing too.
their email is [email protected]
Post # 10
6 hours is plenty! Most people don’t need 3 hours of people dancing the night away. One or two will do. The bulk of wedding photography takes place at the beginning such as getting ready, portraits, ceremony, wedding dances, etc. I think you should be just fine!
Post # 11
I plan on having our photographer leave once all the "traditional" stuff is over at the reception. I hate pics of people dancing, and I don’t need hours’ worth of them! Everyone has a camera these days anyhow, so family and friends can share! So I am just going to work backwards from that, once we get our timeline sorted out, to figure out how many hours we’ll need.
Post # 12
As a photographer, I think it depends on what you want. If you are looking for a photojournalistic approach to tell the story with pictures, and you want to create an album, I don’t think 6 hours is enough. Keep in mind that a story has a begining, middle, and end. So do weddings. If you want the whole story told, get your photographer for the whole time.
Now if photography is not as important to you, then don’t worry about it. I have heard from many brides that they didn’t really put a value on photography until they saw the images and were floored. Some brides get so wrapped up in the dress, invitations, flowers or reception that they forget the only thing they have to remind them of that night later in life are the pictures.
There’s no right or wrong way. It just depends on what you want from your images. GOOD LUCK!!!