E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

My lovely bride takes issue with me as well. We need to go to each movie twice. Once for ME to comment on the cinematography and the lighting and once for HER to actually enjoy the movie. She's, however, is used to it. We are going on our 50th anniversary this Drcember and she comes from a long line of established portrait photographets going back to the early days of the last century. She started working in a studio at the age of 13...I started at 14- she beat me out by a year!

crazydaddio Loc: Toronto Ontario Canada

I work for the couple.
In my pre-wedding QnA we review the level of "potential" obtrusiveness I may bring and I ask the question "on a scale of 1 to 10, where are you on "Get the shot no matter what" 1 to "I dont even want to know you were there"10.

Invariably its 10.....but I plan to be as close to 1 as possible. (Never had an issue)

Sorry folks. I answer to the couple and not the guests. It's the couple wedding.

The only time the guests will see me is at the alter for the wedding party arriving and at the signing of the register and lighting of the candles (if their backs are to the guests). I can even get the ring shots from a distance.

But.....think like 10 but try to plan for 1 :-)

bkyser Loc: Fly over country in Indiana

That's a good way to word it, very clear when talking to the couple. I do agree, try to be invisible, but if you HAVE to get in there to get the shot, get there, do it, and get out.

Digger1 Loc: Minneapolis, Minnesota

So bkyser, I had to take some time and get back to you. Lots of things to fess up to. 1 - hadn't been to a wedding in a long time, this was the first of all the cousins in that age group. 2 - for me, times have changed. It seems in the digital age quantity of pictures is way more important and no one gets the old traditional media anymore. 3 - the photographer does have a legit business website and the wedding photos are all nicely displayed in a gallery for purchase. 4 - Can't argue with the results because they were all close in focus and properly lit. AND YES, I have to admit it - the wedding was for them and the couple as I saw them this past weekend were quite happy. Satisfied customers are what build a business and so they have recommended her to some of their friends.

Lastly for any other photographers that followed my rant - times have changed and I have to admit it. I'm now living in fear of the next nephew getting married in November - out on the left coast! For those who chimed in, thank you.

Beercat Loc: Central Coast of California

OK .... my take

I sell myself as the photographer / cinematographer who trays as much as possible to not be a distraction to the intimacy of the ceremony. I try as much as possible to not be a distraction to anyone ....

Because I sell myself as delivering such it's normal for me never to use flash and to use longer lenses after the processional. In fact the vast majority of churches I shoot in specify no flash. I always shoot in quiet shutter mode. I kneel during the processional and if I approach the couple on the isle to capture that ring on the finger exchange I use a long lens and again I kneel so not to be in anyone's way.

I always find it interesting that so many photographers stay so close to the couple during the ceremony when you know they have longer fast lenses.

I'm in the process of switching to mirror-less using a electronic shutter, absolutely no noise. Fast long lens and the camera I've purchased can shoot easily at 50,000 ISO with acceptable noise. When you have fast glass and a camera that can perform like that you can almost be invisible or at least not hinder the enjoyment of the ceremony for family and friends.

But as I mentioned, I sell myself because of the way I shoot ... keeping the ceremony intimate with the least amount of distraction as possible. But it is also true that if you are the type that gets every shot no matter what and the couple gives their blessing .... go for it but you should have that 'talk' so everyone is on the same page.