Post # 1
SO and I have been watching the GREAT and AWESOME wedding cinema’s that other bee’s have posted. He told me that we could only splurge on either photography or cinema. I will tell you one thing, I have never cried looking at photos or recaps of photos. This weekend I have bawled like a baby watching wedding cinema’s!
So what is more important to you? Watching your whole day in a creative cinema or seeing the images?
*We would still get photography, but wouldn’t be spending as much if we splurge on cinema*
Post # 3
sorry it’s really is a personal choice. I’m more for photographer since it’s easier to just take out and look at whereas you have to sit through a whole video which you may not do as often. But I totally hear you about wanting the video. I didn’t get one but watching everyone’s video on WB makes me wish I splurge on it REAL bad.
Post # 4
i would choose photography. you can hang up pictures and look at them everyday, but how often will you watch your wedding video?
Post # 5
Ahh so hard!! I LOVE our wedding highlights clip…it brought tears to my eyes and moved me in a more intense way than our photos. Buuuut you can flip through photos and do so much more with them than you can with a video. I say splurge on both–pick up some odd jobs or something! 🙂 But seriously, I don’t know which I would choose…what would your budget be for video?
Post # 6
Hmmm…totally a personal decision.
But if I recall, you’re considering going with a non-pro for photography? Maybe you want to put your money into videography. (Bearing in mind of course that no matter how pretty it turns out, it will STILL be something that your children guffaw at 15 years from now)
Then again, so will your photos. (“Mom, why was everyone taking pictures of their SHOES? And what’s with the big pink balloon??”)
Post # 7
I say go for both. I think I got lucky because I found a very decently priced, quality photographer who’s building her portfolio and signed with Wellspun Weddings for an affordable price. (Their prices are really good, surprisingly, and I can’t say enough good things about working with them so far.) All in all, I will have spent less than it would have cost if I had gone with a high-end photographer only!
I think if you do your homework and aren’t attached to the idea of having the hottest wedding photographer and/or an Oscar-worthy videographer, you can have it all. Cut back on flowers! They die anyway and no one ever says, “Oh man, did you see those amazing ranunculuses and alstromeria she had?? To DIE for!” years after the wedding.
Post # 8
There are definitley ways to fit them both into a budget. You just need to search until you find the right ones. We went diy for video and I would never recommend that after seeing what my sister got from her videogrpaher. It is a beautiful, cinematic style video compared to my shaky video with bad sound.
They watch their video a lot and even got a file of their hightlights they could carry on their phone to watch it wherever and whenever. She said that she was watching it like crazy on her phone at work. Video is totally worth it, but not at the cost of skimping on photos. Look for a photographer and videographer in the same price range with equal quality in their work. It took my sister a while, but she found it where I didn’t. I should have spent more time researching for my wedding before just jumping in. Oh, well.
Post # 9
Personally – I’d go for the photography. Cinema of weddings has just never done as much for me. Plus, you can admire awesome wedding photos way more often than you are ever going the watch a video of your wedding. If you’re going to have both either way, I’d definitely splurge on the photography and budget more on cinema.
Post # 10
We splurged on photography. We will be able to look at the pictures more often than the video. Plus, my photographer offers a graffi album which will be sent to Italy. I have yet to book a videographer (mainly because the people I liked at first were not as good as I thought). I just want a good quality video.