(Closed) Two Photographers, neccesary?

posted 6 years ago in Photos/Videos
Post # 3
Member
853 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: December 2012

Maybe not necessary, but then again what is?

Two photographers is good because you have the opportunity to get shots that you wouldn’t normally.  While one photographer is getting the cake cutting or the first dance, a second photographer is able to get different shots, angles, and groupings of people.

Our photographer brought a second person to shoot the day of the wedding and while everyone was outside getting sparklers lit and our photographer was setting up, her second snapped some pictures of Darling Husband and I dancing by ourselves by the door- we didn’t even know she was there, but it’s something I was glad they got!

Post # 4
Member
946 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: November 2012

It’s not necessary but nice to have. It helps to tell a complete story. While on photographer is shooting you walk down the aisle, the other is getting the grooms reaction. Or during your kiss, one is da hooting you nd the other is shooting the guests. 

Post # 5
Member
344 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: September 2012

I’m a photographer who works alone and I’ve never had a client feel the coverage was incomplete. I also dislike having another photographer making people too camera aware. I do a lot of candid work and I’m very stealthy. People pretty much forget I’m there.

Post # 6
Member
7901 posts
Bumble Beekeeper
  • Wedding: March 2012 - Pelican Grand Beach Resort

It’s certainly not necessary, but it is definitely nice. We hired one and he brought an assistant without charging us, which ended up being awesome. About 1/3 of our favorite pictures were taken by the assistant. Having two also lets the photographers be in two places at once… with the girls and with the boys while getting ready, for example, which means more pictures. But, if it’s not in the budget, it’s not a big deal. A good photographer will get the most important photos no matter what.

Post # 7
Member
4047 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: January 2014

I am wondering this too. I am not having a huge wedding (75 guests or less it seems), so I don’t know if it’s absolutely necessary to have one. I see the benefits no matter what, but I’m not sure that I will have a requirement that there be two photographers. Interested to see what others say!

Post # 8
Member
327 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: May 2012

I had two photographers. I loved it because we had one shooting the more formal photos and the other taking the candids of those photos! Also I really wanted a photo of my face and his face while we were walking down the aisle.  Only way to do that is with a 2nd shooter! 

 

Post # 9
Member
9548 posts
Buzzing Beekeeper
  • Wedding: August 2013

Honestly, it’s like everyone has said, nice but not necessary. Everyone who had 2 will be able to tell you about a particular shot that they like that they got because they had 2. But nobody with 1 will tell you that they reall missed it. There are plenty of great photos, so you won’t be lacking with 1 photog. So no real right or wrong.

Post # 10
Member
394 posts
Helper bee

Depends on the size of your wedding really. If you are having under 100-150 guests you can usually get along fine without one if you are using an experienced professional photographer. If you are having a larger wedding 150+ I would definitely consider it to ensure that all of the things that YOU want photographed are captured properly. 

I recommend one to my clients that have weddings with over 100 guests. It is never a requirement, but it definitely makes the day go easier for everyone involved. Plus it gives you multiple angles and the abilty to have a photographer in two places at once… 
example :
One at cocktail hour, other doing family portraits.

One with Bride getting ready, one with groom getting ready.

I also highly recommend one if you are not doing a first look, it helps all of the post ceremony photos go a lot quicker! 

Post # 11
Member
4192 posts
Honey bee
  • Wedding: July 2012 - Baltimore Museum of Industry

Depends. Our photographer’s second shooter/assistant was able to help him with flash- we had some *phenomenal* night time harbor view shots that would have been a bi-atch for hi to shoot alone. While our photographer was taking photos of the groomsmen, the 2nd was able to get photos of my when Dad first saw me- priceless shots. While he was taking family photos, she was inside during cocktail hour, getting a lot of detail shots. During the ceremony, however, he was the only one taking photos, so the photography wasn’t obtrusive.

So if it’s in the budget, I think it’s well worth it. If not, you’ll be fine with one.

Post # 12
Member
10453 posts
Sugar Beekeeper
  • Wedding: February 2014

It’s an nice to have, but not necessary. I actually switched from two people to one more talented photographer.

Post # 13
Member
430 posts
Helper bee
  • Wedding: August 2013

Our photographer told us it dpends on the size of our wedding.  She generally suggests two phographers if you are going to have 150+ guests.  However, you can have how ever many you want and are willing to pay for.  If you have a lot of family or a large bridal party or just want to make sure every aspect is covered two photographers may be a good idea.  My wedding is only about 100 people, if I could afford a second photographer I probably would just to make sure everything is covered without rushing them.

 

Post # 14
Member
8041 posts
Bumble Beekeeper
  • Wedding: December 2013

@Purplelicious:   I would say it’s unnecessary. Between candid photos guests are bound to take, and one pro photographer, I think enough pics will be taken. Unless you have lots of money to burn and really, really care about photos then I wouldn’t bother. How often do most people look at their wedding albums, anyway?

Post # 15
Member
1663 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: September 2013

I’d say nice to have but not necessary.  We picked one photog, whose work we love, with all-day coverage.  We couldn’t afford all day for two, and I feel like we will have LOTS of pics with the all-day factor.

Post # 16
Member
2107 posts
Buzzing bee
  • Wedding: April 2012

It’s not necessary, but it’s nice to have.  We had two, and the second photographer was just taking candid shots.  Those turned out to be some of my favourite shots from the wedding.  She captured moments I didn’t even know were going on. 

The topic ‘Two Photographers, neccesary?’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors