Rongnongno Loc: FL

I was at a wedding yesterday and made a point of not taking my camera - with good reasons as it turned out -.

I watched the 'pros' at work.

I will not comment on the gear (other than this).

I will comment of the professionalism....

- Clothing, appearance... A bum off the street would be better dressed. I am exaggerating but not that much. (Wearing a shapeless back pack ~ for what????, unkempt hair, street clothes just to name a few things)
- Preparation? None. The guys (2) setup two tripods on each side of the altar to later remove them in a hurry when they discovered they were right where the bridal party would line up... Due to that they missed the first shots of the wedding starting...
- Knowing what was going to happen? Nope they had no clue. Opening the pamphlet freely available would have told them the order of the events and types. Lighting of the candles by the moms? Ooops, no one was there. Where did those guys went? No clue. Lighting by the couple? Missed too, these two 'pros' where too far back and shot with their cameras raised above their heads. No excuse either, there was a wide open hidden space on the left...
- Exchange of the rings? 'What is that'????

The list of goofs is much longer than these few remarks.

So, two idiots with a camera (IWAC) playing at being pros...

No wonder folks are reluctant to hire anyone anymore.

Two years ago the bride's brother was getting married and the hired crew was extremely professional and ready for any eventuality. This crew created outstanding images of the event.

I have seen nothing from yesterday's wedding but I really do not expect anything good. The reception took place in a hall with dimmed lights, no flash so very high ISO with all that applies... Cake cutting? From the rear, not the side that was fully open to catch the 'action'.

IWACs in all their splendor.

I am really glad I did not take my own camera otherwise my wife would have pushed me to shoot the event, especially that one camera, however good, does not make up for the lack of other equipment like remote flashes and backup, just in case.

ricardo7 Loc: Washington, DC - Santiago, Chile

20 years ago at my brother-in-laws wedding the photographer wore
a black suit, white shirt and a tie. His two assistants wore classy black
dresses. The photographer used a Hasselblad and two backup Nikons.
An assistant carried a clip board to make sure every shot that was
planned was made. Real pros. Today, anyone can pick up a DSLR
and using the camera's "fool proof" features claim to be able to make
competent photographs. Not so!

JR45 Loc: Montgomery County, TX

I attended a wedding last month at witch there was a "pro" with two helpers. Between the three they seemed to be where
they needed to be at the right time.
Several weeks later the pictures were posted to an online site with instructions for ordering. I have no objection to that.
What I didn't care for was that most of the photos were horridly over exposed. Whether this was intentionally done in camera
or in post I don't know.
When I asked the brides father ( also an amateur photographer ) about it he said he was told it was a fad nowadays, but didn't
like it and was going to see if he could get the raw files.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

I have to wonder how much vetting the wedding couple did before hiring the photographers. There should be references or reviews available on any legitimate wedding photographer. Maybe they just went looking for a cheap quote.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I hope you can follow-up when you see how the pictures turned out.

jr168

You get what you pay for. The wedding couple will pay a ton for the venue, flowers, cake, and food but the photographer is an afterthought. Since all that is needed is someone to push a button :(

Revet Loc: Fairview Park, Ohio

I was at a wedding recently which had 6 photographers!! They were loud, dressed in street cloths, and were more noticeable than the bride and groom. They had two lunchroom tables with all the equipment spread out on it (I counted six 810's). The cost must have been phenomenal. I hope the bride and groom got what they paid for.

team 1

Shoot hundreds of weddings, always dressed with a tie and jacket, retired in 2004, 48 that year. At that point it became a job, started in high school in 1956 with a Kodak pony 35 mm. Cleared 62.50 on 1st wedding, had to get my grandfather to drive me to 1st wedding, too young for drivers lic.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Well, many "photographers" believe in automation and having a digital camera seems to them to be the answer to a "great" professional photographer.
I have seen that many times. A photographer doing a wedding should dress properly for the event. He or she should have good manners. His or her bahaviour should be completely professional also.
No one should do wedding photography without the proper training. A wedding is a serious matter and it represents most likely the most important day of the couple. The pictures will last for a generation and they will often be shared among family members. I would say that a wedding requires the expertise of a real professional photographer.

L-Fox

#1 I'm a serious amateur, not a pro.

#2 I've done 2 weddings, my eldest granddaughter and a friend who couldn't afford a pro.

I titled those shoots 'First' & 'LAST!'. I will never, ever do a wedding again...including the next 3 grandchildren.

Everyone brings a camera (flash, flash, flash). Most of them wander the venue even during the ceremony, and their goal in life is to stand in front of you.

After turning down 4-5 requests I'm no longer asked. Yay!

Don't need the excitement... boredom is my goal in life.

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

The unfortunate thing about hiring a wedding photographer is that one cannot try them out before hiring them! Weddings only happen once and there aren't any do-overs. I've seen many people who are out to save money on the photography. Most get what they deserve - and complain loudly about that. Some hire based on it being somebody's cousin. They also get what they deserve. In this day of on-line advertising anyone can set themselves up as a "professional" and the buyer has no clue what they're really like. If shoppers would take the time and trouble to actually meet with the photographer, they would get a little better idea. The few weddings I did, I asked to attend the rehearsal so that I would know the lighting and the situation. (I hate doing weddings!) It's also unfortunate that truly good wedding photographers are priced so high that common folk cannot afford them. And those folk are left with the wanna-bes who think they can charge big bucks because they have a big camera. Sorry about the rant. This situation is one of my pet peeves! I'll get off my soapbox now. Basically it boils down to overpricing and folks looking to save a buck!

L-Fox

Indeed!

gonzo.3800

I don't shoot weddings anymore {except Clown weddings at Toby's Clown School}. When I did do weddings, I always attended the rehearsal. It tells everything you need to know except tomorrow's lighting. Always take a second shooter and a second camera. GG

CPR Loc: Nature Coast of Florida

Not too many years ago, but still quite a few, the photographs of the wedding were a big deal. The only way to capture the event. Since they were a big deal folks were willing to pay a lot of money.
Now, the cellphones will capture it all so everyone wants cheap, cheap, cheap!!
You see ads on Craigslist and the like for 2 or 3 hundred bucks to shoot a wedding. Unfortunately, you get what you pay for......

OK, OK, I know, I'm preaching to the choir.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

Shooting weddings is for pros.