My conract states very clearly, and I go over this with the B&G in detail, that I am bound by whatever the house rules are. No exception. It is up to them to get the officiant to change the rules if they want something that goes beyond the norm.
Yesterday I was informed by the wedding director that no flash would be tolerated during the ceremony. No problem...
She also said that I could not move, not budge, not un-plant my feet once the ceremony started. No movement whatsoever. No moving up the center aisle...nothing.
No problem. Thats the rule. I just planted myself at the back, in the center of the aisle and proceeded.
Now, the funny part was all of the rest of the guests firing flashes and getting up, standing in the aisle, moving around and doing whatever they felt like doing.
I might suggest to the B&G that they have photo etitquette printed in their programs to caution the guests against such egregious behavior in the future. ...Show more →
Par for the course.........the coordinators throw out their "rules" to the hired vendors, then when the ceremony starts, they go back to their office, have a drink or two and don't even know whats going on in the church........and all the while the guests are making a mockery of any rules............while WE obey them as told..............
I attended a wedding in Croatia, and the photographers were literally standing over the priest's shoulder during the communion. I've never seen anything like it...
That video guy in the pic I posted kept bonking the bridesmaids with the tail-end of his camera. And, he had a large video light. The photographer had a strobe on the altar that would pop in everyone's eyes and he would periodically aim it in a different direction. The photog and the video guy were climbing all over the priests.
Now, I am no shrinking violet but these guys went beyond anything I had imagined possible. They could have used a lesson in reasonableness.
Thanks [insert deity #6381 here] that most of the weddings I've shot have not been in churches and the ones that were did not have any of these random rules applied.
This is good to know that these things might happen. Need to attach something similar to what MagicNikon mentioned about funny rules of venues.
RedWhiteandRed wrote:
That video guy in the pic I posted kept bonking the bridesmaids with the tail-end of his camera. And, he had a large video light. The photographer had a strobe on the altar that would pop in everyone's eyes and he would periodically aim it in a different direction. The photog and the video guy were climbing all over the priests.
Now, I am no shrinking violet but these guys went beyond anything I had imagined possible. They could have used a lesson in reasonableness.
It sickens me to look at that photo. While it may be true that less experienced photographers are responsible for most of these incidents, I personally could have never even held a camera before, and I would have had enough respect for the dignity of the ceremony and its participants to never do this. It has more to do - first and foremost - with upbringing, and those that are too thick to figure this out for themselves have to be "taught" by a pro.
Red - any idea (1) what the agreed-to expectations were of the minister and b&g in this case, and (2) how long the video guy and photog had been shooting professionally?
MJH1 wrote:
It sickens me to look at that photo. While it may be true that less experienced photographers are responsible for most of these incidents, I personally could have never even held a camera before, and I would have had enough respect for the dignity of the ceremony and its participants to never do this. It has more to do - first and foremost - with upbringing, and those that are too thick to figure this out for themselves have to be "taught" by a pro.
Red - any idea (1) what the agreed-to expectations were of the minister and b&g in this case, and (2) how long the video guy and photog had been shooting professionally?...Show more →
Not so much the dignity of anything but the do not be fully in the way and hit people with your stuff. And, this was Greek Orthodox and it seemed to be anything goes.
I will ignore silly rules but have yet to bonk a flower girl or bridesmaid on the head.
I don’t think it just the rudeness of the paid pro but the many flashes from the guest that also go off. I have yet to run into a Church that said NO to me. BUT back in 1987 at my older sisters wedding the clergy said “NO Cameras of any kind, this is a house of worship and if anyone has a camera that goes off they would be asked to leave.” I also think a lot of Churches are again adopting this rule because it does look like the paparazzi has just been let loose. This also relates to the involvement the B/G has with a Church… if they are Churchgoers the answer likeiest be yes from the clergy… if they are just using the Church for the day… who knows.
I just did a wedding and I asked the Clergy (just happens to be the FOG) and he said “as long as we are not on the alter”. BUT every guest with a camera was running all around the Church… Well “we” at least respected his house.
Remember… this is THEIR HOUSE, and the sacrament of marriage must be respected!!!
One of the first things I ask the B/G is to make sure it’s OK to take photos at the Church/venue… and PLEASE give the clergy my name and number if he/she has any concerns (don’t want this to happen the day of). The day of the wedding I introduce myself to the clergy (some seem to be a camera buff and understand the cameras). I also think understanding someone’s religion is important so you can relate with the clergy, but if the answer is NO… then NO it is.
hassy501 wrote:
If "good men and women" of the cloth lose their religion simply because "brides, grooms and parents put their foot down", then they probably weren't very devoted to their religion anyway to allow that to come between them and their god.
Um, it was a figure of speech. It was also used as being indicative of the attitudes of some church members. It's been like that for a while, but it seems to be getting worse as society in general coarsens. It's also about respect. There are actually well educated, intelligent pastors, rabbis and priests. My son and daughter-in-law can read and write Hebrew and Greek and my son is fluent in Spanish. They both hold graduate degrees.
This whole discussion is about perspective. A religious wedding held in a house of worship should be about the worship service, not about maximizing photo opportunities.
My sister is the wedding coordinator at our church, and she has a rule that no GUESTS can take photos during the wedding. It irritates her and esp. the pastor to have all the flashes going off constantly. I don't believe there are any rules on the pro, though -- the pro can use flash, stand where he/she wishes, etc.
Question for all about Where to stand during the ceremony --
I've only shot outdoor weddings, and it's a lot easier to move around. as a second shooter, I stand all the way in the back and shoot away. But the pro moves around a bit more - but she's never in the way. She can move sides by going behind the guests -- not in front of the guests. Where do you all stand during a church ceremony? How much do you move around? When do you think you've crossed the line from getting shots the B&G want to being rude an annoying? I'm just interested because I have a church wedding coming up in November (tons of time to plan, but I want to be REALLY on top of things by then).
Deb Brundage wrote:
When do you think you've crossed the line from getting shots the B&G want to being rude an annoying?
I think a good simple rule would be you've crossed the line when your activity detracts from the ceremony. If your movement distracts guests, then it's too much.
Open communication with the bride, groom and officiant is wise. There actually may be times when the B&G would be uncomfortable with things the officiant would allow. There are some images, such as a candle lighting that can also be staged after the ceremony. There's no magic rule. Different churches, officiants and couples have their own definition of appropriateness.
dmacmillan wrote:
I think a good simple rule would be you've crossed the line when your activity detracts from the ceremony. If your movement distracts guests, then it's too much.
There's no magic rule. Different churches, officiants and couples have their own definition of appropriateness.
Doug
Yes, there is no magic. One good thing to keep in mind is that a wrongheaded approach by the officiant is fleeting while nice pictures last forever.
dmacmillan wrote:
This whole discussion is about perspective. A religious wedding held in a house of worship should be about the worship service, not about maximizing photo opportunities.
Doug
That my friends, is called hitting the proverbial nail on the head.
One thing I would like to add, after being in the biz since the late 70s ... it isn't just the newbies that are rocking the boat with rudeness due to a lack of experience, I've witnessed many seasoned pros, that step on a lot of toes in the course of their duties as well.
butchM wrote:
That my friends, is called hitting the proverbial nail on the head.
Not necessarily. And, the maximizing of photo opportunities is a kind of non-sequitur to the notion of "journalism" - documenting an event is not the same as maximizing anything. It is also important to be non-discriminatory in the adherence to dogma.
RedWhiteandRed wrote:
It is also important to be non-discriminatory in the adherence to dogma.
I have absolutely no idea what that means. Please explain.
If a couple feels too inconvenienced by church rules, there's alternatives. I photographed many civil services.
Wedding photographers who have issues with religion may want to consider restricting their work to civil ceremonies or spend their Saturdays photographing dog shows.
I'm pretty easygoing. If I invite you over to my house, I hope you have a good time. I don't have many rules. Don't pi$$ on my rug is one. You pi$$ on my rug and you don't get invited back. If you don't have that rule, that's fine. Stay home and pi$$ on your own rug.
paulhodson wrote:
I was at a wedding (many many years ago) where the pro missed the priest making the sign of the cross (couldn't get the fresh plate in the camera ) and shouted "do that again will you" !
dmacmillan wrote:
I'm pretty easygoing. If I invite you over to my house, I hope you have a good time. I don't have many rules. Don't pi$$ on my rug is one. You pi$$ on my rug and you don't get invited back. If you don't have that rule, that's fine. Stay home and pi$$ on your own rug.
Now why would one be uncivil to the point where they would urinate upon a floor covering? Unnecessary in all but the most urgent of circumstance.
Evan Baines wrote:
Yes, ultimately its because of rudeness. I just wonder why rudeness seems to be on the rise (explaining the rising number of bans).
I try to explain to them that I have literally staked my life on my ability to be a discrete observer.... sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I had one pastor who literally wanted to hear the sound of my shutter before deciding on my shooting restrictions, but who afterward acknowledged that he was never even aware of my presence.
Regardless, of the cause, its a real shame in my mind.
Yes, it really is a shame; and the people that really suffer are the Bride and Groom. I always introduce myself to the Clergyman, and ask what their rules are as far as photography goes. In some cases, I can't use flash and have to shoot from the back of the church, but I've never been told that I can't shoot, period. A lot could have to do with region as well. In New York / New Jersey (where I've done all of my wedding photography) I guess they're a bit more "tolerant" for lack of a better word.
Evan Baines wrote:
Or am I running into more and more churches that outright forbid photos during the ceremony?
I'm not talking about LDS or other denominations that have classically banned photos during the service.... It seems like more individual churches are establishing this sort of policy than I'd previously seen. I wonder if this has anything to do with the influx of untrained individuals into the industry...
I just seem to be seeing this more and more frequently.... I just spoke with yet another church coordinator who informed me I won't be getting any ceremony pictures...
Carl Feather wrote:
It's their wedding and if getting pictures during the ceremony is important to them, then the B&G can always change the venue.
Probably the best course of action if things can't be worked out .. most churches are struggling to keep their parishioners and if couples start to avoid a particular church or officiant then their struggle to keep their flock is made more difficult.
Unfortunately in most cases any photography restrictions are not known until the rehearsal or wedding day, leaving no time to change venues.
sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I had one pastor who literally wanted to hear the sound of my shutter before deciding on my shooting restrictions, but who afterward acknowledged that he was never even aware of my presence.