(Closed) Skip recieiving line and have a photo line instead?

posted 5 years ago in Traditions
Post # 32
Member
39 posts
Newbee
  • Wedding: April 2014

MissHockey:  When I read your message, I thought it sounded like a cutre idea, but from the comments it may not be great in practice. I know when you get an idea in your head on how you see things happening, it’s hard to let it go, but if it were me I’d be inclined to follow the advice of a professional photographer and people who have been in the photo line. I didn’t do a receiving line either, we served each table the cheese course as a way to say hi and thanks for coming, much to the horror of the in-laws! 

Post # 33
Member
2523 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: July 2014

Yeah- that is going to take like 4 hours.  Just do table visits at the reception.   Our photographer did the traditional photos of every table and we tried to sneek in as many as possible.  I’ve heard of people trying to run around to take a photo with every table as fast as possible to the theme of Mission Impossible (they try to get to the whole room by the end of the song).  I think that would be fun (for the guests too) and we thought about doing it- but I scared I would trip and fall doing it because I’m a clutz.  If you really feel it is necessary to something at the ceremony you can do back into the ceremony space after and dismiss the rows with a hug- though it might be a lot with that many guests.  We just did table visits.  We wanted to do a receiving line, and only had 100 guests, but our wedding coordinator for our ceremony strongly advised us not to because it would take too long.    

Post # 34
Member
5373 posts
Bee Keeper
  • Wedding: June 2014

I went to a wedding that did this and it really didn’t work out. The bride was a family friend and mentioned a few weeks later that it was her only wedding regret.  She had about 150-175 guests and it took forever. It took a long time for the photographer to get everyone positioned, sometimes guests would see other guests across the room that they recognized and would quickly say hi and wave and stuff which would delay the photos, and everyone still wanted to talk with the bride and groom once the picture was taken or even before the picture was taken (which further delayed the pictures). It didn’t really affect me, because I just skipped seeing the bride and groom – I didn’t want to wait to see them and thought it was kind of OTT and wasted a lot of people’s time. I just think it’s something that isn’t easy to execute. If you want it done quickly then you have to sacrifice quality (both picture quality and quality of time with your guests) and if you do it right then you sacrifice time and can leave guests very bored/annoyed.

I know that it sounds like a nice idea in theory, but now that I’ve had the experience of working with a photographer to do formal photos and family pictures at my wedding this past summer, I definitely don’t think it’s the best idea. It takes a long time to get people positioned and make sure everyone is smiling, looking at the camera, not distracted, etc.  Keep in mind that “Aunt Betty” may want to talk a lot after waiting around for a long time to see you and isn’t thinking about your timeline or that her 5 minutes of post-wedding chat will affect the rest of the wedding day. Obviously a few extra minutes of talking isn’t going to break your timeline, but trust me, there will be a bunch of “Aunt Bettys” and all those quick chats will add up.

This summer I went to a wedding where the photographer took a picture of the bride and groom with each table in between courses of food and I think that was a great idea. They were going to visit the tables anyways and it didn’t inconvenience anyone or force us to wait in line to see them and get a picture with them. It was quicker too, because it made sure people were getting their pictures taken in larger groups. Once she got the pictures back, the bride put them on Facebook so that we could all see our pictures. I like having a picture from the wedding with our table, because we kind of ‘bonded’ over the course of the reception aha.

Post # 35
Member
1471 posts
Bumble bee

MissHockey:  I disagree.  You’ve made up your mind because you are very defensive about this choice, when almost everyone in the thread has responded NOT to do it.  You’re not saying, “Thanks for the info!” etc.  

At least admit you’re doing it for yourself and your “wedding album”, not for your guests.  When I go to a wedding, I’m thinking about celebrating their union and then having a good time – not “OH MY GOD WHEN DO I GET A PIC W/ THE BRIDE AND GROOM!?!?”

Post # 36
Member
8919 posts
Buzzing Beekeeper

So, we’re on page 3 of responses and out of all of those, 1 maybe 2 people have said “yeah, that might work.” Everyone else has said “sounds awful, don’t do it” or “been there, hated it, don’t do it.” But you’re still going to do it. So… ok, have fun. Don’t say nobody tried to warn you.

Post # 37
Member
1624 posts
Bumble bee

Standing in line waiting to take a picture reminds me of renewing my driver’s license at the DMV, not a feeling I’d like to reproduce at a wedding. You, of course, can do whatever you like, and maybe your guests will enjoy it. 

Post # 40
Member
1403 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: September 2014

I think you’re not getting a lot of feedback from people who have experienced it because most people can figure out that it’s a bad idea when it’s still in the idea stage, for all the reasons contained in this thread.

Post # 41
Member
66 posts
Worker bee
  • Wedding: August 2017

MissHockey:  I think it is a good idea in theory but would probably take a long time. Mainly because people will still want to give you a hug, say congratulations and such like they would in a regular recieving line, so you’d be adding the photo on to that time. I’d be very shocked if all of your guests just came up, posed for a picture and walked away. 

The topic ‘Skip recieiving line and have a photo line instead?’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors