- 5 years ago
- Wedding: December 2013
Looking for some opinions to help me make the decision between two photographers…
First is a husband-wife duo shout shot a destination wedding for a friend of mine in Savannah. I loved their work at that wedding (even have a photo of Fiance and I in the faux-to-booth in my office) and they are the sort of photographer who is featured on Style Me Pretty and other wedding blogs from time to time. I contacted them about pricing, and for $5000, they’d offer 12 hours coverage by two photographers, plus 2 hours at the rehearsal dinner, and a faux-to-booth at the reception. The downside is that I’d have to also pay for travel costs for them from Florida to Texas – airfare, baggage, hotel, and rental car. Based on their estimates from similar weddings, that’s going to tack on an extra $1000. And, I don’t think we’d be able to meet in person before the wedding, though they will come in to town 2 days before the wedding to meet us and check out the location.
My other choice is highly rated team local to where our wedding will be. They’ve shot a good amount of weddings at our venue (both ceremony and reception locations) and seem fairly knowledgable about the working of the venues. They have very high internet ratings, but I feel like I rarely see negative reviews on many wedding sites. They have a package for $5500, which gets 8 hours coverage from two photographers, engagement shoot, $1400 credit towards an album. No travel costs incurred and we’d be able to meet them before the wedding (and have an engagement shoot!)
I love both their photographs equally – the destination team probably has better outdoor portait shots which look like they could have been ripped from a magazine, but as my Fiance points out – is that the photographer, or the fact that the bride and groom are drop dead gorgeous and any photo would be magazine worthy? (You never see an ugly bride or groom on Style Me Pretty… not that I’m calling us ugly, but I’m no supermodel!) However, both our ceremony and reception will be indoors, and the full wedding photos from both photographers are pretty comparable on indoor shots, in my mind. And, given our January date, we’re going to have a sunset by 6, so outdoor natural light shots are going to be somewhat limited in scope regardless.
So, my (very long-winded) question boils down to: is a destination wedding photographer at a disadvantage because they are unfamiliar with the location? Or is it better to have someone who knows the locations inside and out? And, are there any real differences between 12 hours or 8 hours of coverage? Any opinions or thoughts would be greatly appreciated!!