Yes? No? If not, what do you say when it's requested by your client?

My wedding on Saturday has requested it, along with a LOOOONG list of formal shots (twice as many as I normally do). My gut feeling is that if I'm capturing table shots, I'm missing out on candids during the reception. And guests seem to hate table shots... even avoid them.

And, as a side note, I will have a second shooter there running a photo station (think photo booth minus the booth.) So she'll be busy with that, and I'd planned on getting candids.

Thoughts?

Luckily we have never been asked to do table shots. Seems like it wouldn't be too hard to just knock them out pretty quickly if it was requested. Maybe just get through them really fast at a set point of the evening so that you can focus on candids the rest of the time...

We usually do. They make up a good portion of web orders, surprisingly enough.

Did last time it sucked getting consistent lighting

I've never done them...

A trick of the trade to make more in print sales: If someone asks you to shoot table shots, offer to go around and shoot the individual couples at a table instead. In most cases table-neighbors don't always know each other, so you're more likely to sell prints to separate couples.

Tony Hoffer wrote:
I've never done them...

A trick of the trade to make more in print sales: If someone asks you to shoot table shots, offer to go around and shoot the individual couples at a table instead. In most cases table-neighbors don't always know each other, so you're more likely to sell prints to separate couples.

Oh, to clarify. That is what we do when we call them "table shots".

Tony and Ryan... that's a good idea. I've done that to an extent before, just not to the entire (large) reception. But that definitely makes it more palatable to me... Thanks!

Whenever a client mentions "table shots" I discourage them and suggests that every time a table is called (IF buffet style), the guests go to the sweetheart table first and for pictures right before they head to the buffet table. This approach addresses a few things:

1. No Half-Eaten food on the table.
2. No need to take out the centerpiece just to get the photos taken.
3. No need to look for uncle bob or aunt jenny. Everyone is present.
4. Saves a lot of time since they don't have to go around to take pictures with every table.

Then later on my second goes around and take "couple" shots.

I personally hate table shots... its a waste of time...

yup...i do them both ways, full table & couples...good sales from those images!

We do couples as a matter of course at every wedding. But if a couple asks us to do full tables we do them. We always fullfil any resonable request from the couple.

Gordon

We haven't had anyone ask... that's so 1985

PwrRENJ wrote:
Whenever a client mentions "table shots" I discourage them and suggests that every time a table is called (IF buffet style), the guests go to the sweetheart table first and for pictures right before they head to the buffet table. This approach addresses a few things:

1. No Half-Eaten food on the table.
2. No need to take out the centerpiece just to get the photos taken.
3. No need to look for uncle bob or aunt jenny. Everyone is present.
4. Saves a lot of time since they don't have to go around to take pictures with every table.

Then later on my second goes around and take "couple" shots.

I personally hate table shots... its a waste of time...


you know that's a really nice idea. Do you set the table nicely with flowers, candles? Would perhaps stiulate people buying some 8x10's

I always tell folks we are taking the table shots so the hosts can look back in a few years and look for survivors.

I refuse to do them. I bring it up at meetings and see if they want them - many don't care. If some are adamant about having them, then I have my second shooter (or assistant/third shooter) do them. I absolutely DESPISE them with a passion... not because I'm some sort of an elite artist who is too good to do them. Rather, I find the activity mind numbingly ridiculous. I never understood why the couple would want pictures of people stuffing their faces with food. The tables always look like a mess and people aren't in their most photogenic phase. It's pointless to me as none of these pictures have EVER made it to the albums.

Saad Syed wrote:
I refuse to do them. I bring it up at meetings and see if they want them - many don't care. If some are adamant about having them, then I have my second shooter (or assistant/third shooter) do them. I absolutely DESPISE them with a passion... not because I'm some sort of an elite artist who is too good to do them. Rather, I find the activity mind numbingly ridiculous. I never understood why the couple would want pictures of people stuffing their faces with food. The tables always look like a mess and people aren't in their most photogenic phase. It's pointless to me as none of these pictures have EVER made it to the albums.


What he said!

Why do table shots??










When you can do a CRAZY BOOTH!?!?!?!?!

Table shots? .. good one, you had me going there for a minute.

When people ask during our initial meeting if I do table shots, I say no. If someone asks me while I'm at the wedding to take a picture of them or their table, I say ok.

do candids of people sitting at tables count as "table shots?"

swim_r wrote:
Why do table shots??










When you can do a CRAZY BOOTH!?!?!?!?!

Honestly, this actually sounds like a pretty good alternative. Tell the couple that you'd be happy to provide a booth, and that tables/families/couples are free to take their photo when they want, and with whom they want, if they want. Much better than being forced into awkard photos in a poor setting with people they might not know.

Regarding the Crazy Booth, I am already doing that. Well, actually my second shooter will be doing it. (See original post... except I called it a photo station. Same thing.) So yeah, I think it's a genius idea.

That's why I had a problem with the table shots: we'll already have a booth setup for this!