Photographer vs. Priest What do you think?
Sep 21, 2013 16:17:22 #
Sep 21, 2013 17:30:40 #
I think that the priest was a bit abrupt...unless as most ministers would do, he had indicated what the boundaries of the photographer were. Even if he had done so, if I had been handling the service, I would have turned to the photographer and said, "excuse me, but this is the one place where photography is not permitted." The photographer, likewise, should not have been confrontational. Both of them took away from the once in a lifetime ceremony.
Sep 21, 2013 17:51:07 #
To be up front, I think the photographer was a bit out of line filming over the Priest shoulder. Those boundaries should have been determined during the rehearsal and most likely were. JM2Cents.
Sep 21, 2013 18:17:24 #
Bill Houghton wrote:
To be up front, I think the photographer was a bit out of line filming over the Priest shoulder. Those boundaries should have been determined during the rehearsal and most likely were. JM2Cents.
Anybody who has done wedding photography would know this.
Sep 22, 2013 01:52:55 #
SteveR wrote:
Anybody who has done wedding photography would know this.
I have done a couple of weddings along time ago because I was ask too. The minister told when I could shoot and when not to shoot. When the couple stepped in front of the minister I was to put the camera down. When he said ,"you may kiss the bride", I could shoot the kiss and from then on. I did not like doing weddings. To much stress and no fun.
Sep 22, 2013 08:07:28 #
I was photographing from the wing off the altar when I noticed the priest walking toward me. I had a sinking feeling expecting the worst, but to my huge surprise he actually asked me to come onto the altar so I could get a better angle to shoot from. He then continued the ceremony--the only time anything like that ever happened. I always think of him as Cecil B. DeMille in hiding.
Sep 22, 2013 09:09:20 #
I would be curious to know if the photographers were there at the bride and groom's request.
I've photographed a few weddings for friends (aka for free) and usually there are power struggles going on between clergy and family. Fun to watch, usually.
I've photographed a few weddings for friends (aka for free) and usually there are power struggles going on between clergy and family. Fun to watch, usually.
Sep 22, 2013 09:09:50 #
Pablo8
Loc: Nottingham UK.
After 40 + years of photographing Weddings, I knew most of the do's and don'ts at the local churches.If, when, there was a new vicar installed I always checked with him/her on their rulings. Never used flash during the service/ceremony. It would give 'Uncle Bob.&.Auntie Joan' carte blanche to go shutter/flash happy and so spoil the solemnity of the occasion.
Sep 22, 2013 09:12:18 #
I have seen guests photographing told to return to their seats but not a professional.
Sep 22, 2013 10:13:46 #
Bill Houghton wrote:
To be up front, I think the photographer was a bit out of line filming over the Priest shoulder. Those boundaries should have been determined during the rehearsal and most likely were. JM2Cents.
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Sep 22, 2013 10:22:32 #
SteveR wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/bestoftv/2013/09/20/newday-pereira-dnt-rude-wedding-priest.cnn.html
Priest quote "This not about photography; this is about God ". Uh... no.... This is about a marriage between two human beings. Priests are the epitome of arrogance.
Sep 22, 2013 10:36:27 #
Tommy F,
Not true! If the couple choose the church wedding,
God was, by choice and location, included.
Most Ministers & Priests I have known have had no objection to unobtrusive, non-flash photography, but flash is generally an invasive interruption! The clergy in charge of the ceremony sets the rules; follow them!
Not true! If the couple choose the church wedding,
God was, by choice and location, included.
Most Ministers & Priests I have known have had no objection to unobtrusive, non-flash photography, but flash is generally an invasive interruption! The clergy in charge of the ceremony sets the rules; follow them!
Sep 22, 2013 10:47:51 #
tommyf wrote:
Priest quote "This not about photography; this is about God ". Uh... no.... This is about a marriage between two human beings. Priests are the epitome of arrogance.
What a strange statement to make. Not the Priests statement but yours. What do you think the Priest is there for. The couple had ask him to be there because they wanted a religious Ceremony ie, to be married before God which the Priest represents. Yes, the marriage is between two people but it takes a third person to preform the Ceremony, Minister, Priest, Judge or Justice of the Peace or the Captain of a Ship. It is these people who are in-charge of the Ceremony at the request of the Bride and Groom. The Bride and Groom can make request but the person doing the Ceremony has rules also. People were getting married long before the invention of the camera so the Photographer has rules that must be followed also at the request of the Bride and the Groom and the Priest.
My 2ยข
Sep 22, 2013 16:32:26 #
tommyf wrote:
Priest quote "This not about photography; this is about God ". Uh... no.... This is about a marriage between two human beings. Priests are the epitome of arrogance.
Actually, Tommy, you're wrong there. Within the R.C. Church, marriage is one of the seven sacraments. It is not only about the marriage of two human beings but it also speaks about God. This, obviously, was a simple ceremony, but there is also a high ceremony which is very serious. So, although it was a simple ceremony, it was very serious to this priest.
Sep 22, 2013 18:53:08 #
Bill Houghton wrote:
To be up front, I think the photographer was a bit out of line filming over the Priest shoulder. Those boundaries should have been determined during the rehearsal and most likely were. JM2Cents.
Yeah! Same as with the curling iron and the eye lashes.
Mike
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.