Should I have one or two photographers photographing my wedding?

There's a new buzz in the wedding industry about having two photographers at your wedding. I don't mean physically hiring two, just two from the same company. There are pluses and minuses to both.

a) Two photographers means more photographs. This is true to a point, but in most cases a single experienced photographer can fully cover activities without having the extra distraction created by another person with a camera. Also, “more” doesn't necessarily mean “better”. Many times, there is one good vantage point to photograph from, so both of the photographers will need to either compromise their positions, or shoot from the same spot. End result: Photos that should have been better, or multiple shots of the same thing.

B) Two sets of eyes watching for moments to happen. I fully agree here. Four eyes are better than two. That's why I have a trained assistant with me at nearly every single wedding to help me “see” everything around me.

C) Too many cooks spoil the soup. Most times you hire a photographer for a specific “look” or “style”. It's just not possible for two photographers, no matter how close, to shoot the same photos in a given situation. In fact, there may be drastic style differences that could create inconsistency in your wedding story.

D) Get to know your photographer. Building a relationship and communication are so important in wedding photography. With the limited time spent with your photographer leading up to your wedding, it's very important to make sure who you talk to is who will actually show up on your wedding day. Adding more personalities to the mix may only create problems and that shows in the photographs.

I don't want to be posed, I want all my photos to be natural.

This one is difficult, we all want you to enjoy your wedding day and have fun spending time with family and friends, but I hate to spill the beans here. Ninety-nine out of a hundred wedding images that you absolutely love were created with some amount of posing. I'm not saying hours of exacting direction and uncomfortable positions. I'm talking about quick, natural, comfortable “scenes” in which you form the basis for the pose with a little guidance from the photographer. Think about it, what are the odds that you and your new spouse are having the most beautiful moment, in just the right lighting, at just the right time, and your photographer is set just perfectly to capture it? Now, what are the odds that that situation will occur four to six hundred times on your wedding day? Pretty slim, I'd say.

I try for the best compromise, give me some time after the ceremony to do sessions, first the family, then the entire bridal party, then the good stuff, you and your spouse. In most cases, about an hour is all that's needed. After most of these sessions, most of my customers don't even feel like they were posed much. The rest of the day is pretty much candid, unless something calls for a little friendly direction. I guess what I'm getting at is there is no such thing as true wedding photojournalism, at least not if you want guaranteed results.

Wedding Photography is expensive, can't I just use Uncle Bob or my friend? I was at a wedding recently and the photographer didn't do anything I couldn't do......

Here is the real meat and potatoes of photography. It's just like any other field, the better you are at something, the easier you make it look. A good, experienced professional Wedding Photographer makes it look so easy, but there's a lot more going on than just shutter snaps. There's people skills, without those, you're not a Wedding Photographer. Creating images is a part of the puzzle, getting everyone to cooperate and look their best at the same time helps those images to be real, not phony. Maybe Uncle Bob has a great camera, maybe even better than mine and maybe he's taken some gorgeous photographs, but did he ever do it under the pressure of a Wedding where you have ONE chance to get it right and give consistent results for an entire day? Possibly, but I doubt it, if he did, he's probably a professional photographer! That's the difference between an amateur photographer and a professional. Both can give great images, but the pro can do it under any conditions, at any time. The amateur gets lucky. Do you want your wedding photos to be someone's lucky shot or a professional's planned experienced skill at telling your story through photographs?

Wedding Photography, ummm, good and great Wedding Photography is expensive. There's no denying that fact. There are many reasons for this. Here's just a sampling:

1) Equipment is pricey and the market changes fast. A basic professional's kit with backup equipment can cost as little as $10,000. Not too bad, but that same gear will be out of date within one year! Do you want out of date cameras shooting your wedding? Also, that's fairly low, in general, I have over $30,000 worth of cameras, lenses, and assorted gear that goes with me to every wedding. When it gets old, or upgrades are available, I replace them. That's the cost of doing business, but it still adds to the cost of a good photographer.

2) Insurance. One thing that can make or break a reputation is insurance. Insurance for your equipment as a photographer, insurance in case the unforeseen happens, damages, accidents, all these things have to be considered, though they are rare. Also in today's litigious society, the photographer can be sued for any number of things going wrong, within or without their control. Basically, I carry Malpractice insurance and I suggest all professionals do. It's just one more way to make sure your customer is protected.

3) Marketing and Advertising. You found the photographer somehow, didn't you? In most cases, you found your photographer because they spent money so you would. It's not cheap and there are a lot of photographers in this area so competition for your attention is fierce.

4) Samples. Though not as large an investment as others, samples are something to consider. Think about it, without samples you probably wouldn't hire a photographer, would you? Styles evolve and the market's desires change, and so the professional photographer's samples have to be replaced and upgraded on a continuing basis.

5) Mortgages, car payments, etc. This is what I do for a living, not a hobby. I pay my bills and put food on the table by photographing weddings and portraits. I am entitled to a profit, right? That's precisely what a business is for!

6) There's more time invested in your wedding than what you see on your wedding day. In most cases, two to three times the time spent actually photographing your wedding are spent on your wedding. Keep in mind, you didn't pay for the phone calls or the one-on-one consultation, did you? How about all the e-mails to keep each other informed? Oh, then there's processing and preparing your photographs for proof books, disks, the internet, and albums. On average, one of my Platina packages which is 8 hours of coverage, with a Signature Album with 36 pages takes about 45 hours to produce when all things are considered.

After everything is considered, wedding photography isn't all that expensive, is it? If you hired a plumber or carpenter to work just for you on a custom project for 45 hours, I'm pretty sure the bill would be about the same, but you wouldn't have permanent memories of a day that cannot be repeated. A reputable photographer can guarantee results and it's all backed up with lots of insurance, experience and communication. Uncle Bob probably isn't willing to do that.