(Closed) Was 8 hours for wedding photography enough?

posted 6 years ago in Photos/Videos
Post # 2
Member
1135 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: October 2016

well what time are you starting to get ready? And what time is your exit? You can answer your own question.

Post # 3
Member
4233 posts
Honey bee

It was definitely enough for us- we had a 4:30 ceremony, so our photographer started at 2 and  stayed until 10. It was the perfect amount of time! 

Post # 4
Member
114 posts
Blushing bee
  • Wedding: November 2014

Our photographer started at 12:30 to get the details shots, getting ready shots, and bridal party shots. Ceremony was at 3:30. They stayed until 8:30. Our wedding wasn’t over until 10. I would definitely go for the 10 hour if  you want the detail shots and sparkler exit. 

Post # 6
Member
164 posts
Blushing bee
  • Wedding: June 2015

We had one photographer for 8 hours. He arrived at 1:30 to capture getting ready photos. Our first look was around 3 and our ceremony started at 5:30. He stayed until 9:30 and our reception ended at 11. This was enough time for him to capture everything. We ended up getting over 800 photos back and we loved them. 

Post # 7
Member
589 posts
Busy bee
  • Wedding: May 2014 - Scottish Rite Cathedral (New Castle, PA)

View original reply
northshorebride:  We had eight hours but we did not have a planned exit of any kind and our photographers wouldn’t have caught it if we did (they had already left). Try to make a rough timeline for yourself and then see. Ours arrived at noon and left at eight, we had a 4:30 ceremony with a reception in the same building (so no time gap) and it wrapped up around 10 so our photographers had been gone for a couple of hours. That was plenty for us, they caught everything we wanted them to but they were long gone by the time we would’ve had an “exit” so I don’t know if that’s enough for you. 

Post # 8
Member
1128 posts
Bumble bee
  • Wedding: December 2014

View original reply
northshorebride:  We had about 8-9 hours of photography and it was enough.  Our photographers did such a good job that they got pretty much everything.  The only thing that I now think about that they missed was our grand exit.  We never really thought about it so we just walked out with all our family… We even took my grandma and aunt home.  LOL so much for planning that.

 

I think 8 hours should be fine, just make sure to let them know what you want them to capture. 

  • This reply was modified 5 years, 8 months ago by  MrsNino.
Post # 9
Member
3723 posts
Sugar bee
  • Wedding: September 2014

View original reply
northshorebride:  I think we had ours for about 9 hours or so. I think 8 would be fine.

Post # 10
Member
7530 posts
Bumble Beekeeper
  • Wedding: September 2012

View original reply
northshorebride:  It depends on your timeline. Have you talked to your potential photographer about the timeline and what they suggest? As a wedding photographer myself, I always suggest people think long and hard about their timeline. The majority of my clients put their time on the front end – when they’re still fresh and pretty rather than sweaty and tipsy.

Once the key moments (intros, first dance, cake cutting, etc) are out of the way, reception dancing is VERY repetative because it’s usually the same people dancing the majority of the time. We end up shooting the same photos over and over again. After you’ve covered about 45 min – 1 hour of reception dancing you’ve pretty much captured it all. From there you need to ask yourself if a photo of the sparkler exit (that doesn’t always work out – based on different factors) is worth paying for 2 extra hours? 

 

Post # 11
Member
18 posts
Newbee
  • Wedding: June 2015

9 hours wasn’t enough for me. I had an hour and half of getting ready pictures, a 2 hour ceremony (yes!), an hour and half break in between due to the location of the reception and my photographer left 4 hours into the reception! He missed my final dress change and the last 2 hours of the reception but it worked out ok because my videographer stayed the whole time. 

Post # 12
Member
6474 posts
Bee Keeper

View original reply
northshorebride:  it really depends on the timings of your day. For us it wouldn’t have been as our ceremony was at 1 and a UK first dance was at 8, so 8 hours wouldn’t have got us any getting ready shots (which were really important to us) or any shots of the dancing in the evening after the first dance (which are among our favourites). We had 12 hours coverage which for us was perfect. If however your day will be shorter, I imagine 8 would be fine. 

Post # 13
Member
900 posts
Busy bee

Depends how.long your wedding is. My wedding is only 4 hours long, so 8 hours would be too much!

Post # 14
Member
5 posts
Newbee

[moderated for self-promotion]

Post # 15
Member
5411 posts
Bee Keeper

For most brides, 8 hours is enough given a standard timeline. For me, no but I like photography more than the average person. I like everything documented from getting ready to the grand exit so 12 hours is ideal for me which is too much for many people. 

The topic ‘Was 8 hours for wedding photography enough?’ is closed to new replies.

Find Amazing Vendors