Upstaging a photographer at wedding...the NERVE OF SOME PEOPLE!

aweir · 07-19-2009, 11:32 AM

I was shooting a wedding yesterday for a family friend, when a guest arrived with and thought she was somehow entitled to get up and take pictures of the ceremony with her SLR. It was bad enough that she was getting in my way but on top of it she was using a flash and moving around the place like she was in charge!!! It turns out the mother of the groom invited her to go, but who knows if they knew she was bringing the camera.

How could someone be so rude, especially when there's already a photographer there. She was really getting on my nerves, and you could just see the look on many people's faces at the audacity of this woman to use a flash at a wedding ceremony, trying to upstage the photographer.

I was about to tell her to sit down and stop taking pictures because she was getting in my way of the shots that *I* was asked to take, not her.

krypticide · 07-19-2009, 12:56 PM

Why didn't you?

blotzphoto · 07-19-2009, 01:31 PM

This is why I never do weddings for friends. Unless yer getting paid, its hard to get up the gumption to tell someone (probably someone older than you) to please sit down.

*Ash* · 07-19-2009, 01:43 PM

Courtesy eludes some people, although ignorance may also be prevalent.

It's worthwhile politely taking a stance early in the gig when the non-paid budding photographer starts becoming obstructive, then at least ignorance can't be claimed.

Thereafter you'd have the right to instruct them to step away and use their long telephoto from a good distance away...

*woof* · 07-19-2009, 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by aweir

I was shooting a wedding yesterday for a family friend

Most contracts for wedding work specify that quests are specifically disallowed from shooting when the photographer is working. Here's a sample:

EXCLUSIVITY / GUEST PHOTOGRAPHY: It is understood that PHOTOGRAPHER
will act as the sole and exclusive wedding photographer. PHOTOGRAPHER reserves the right to bring one assistant at his discretion. Since flashes from guests’ cameras may ruin shots taken by PHOTOGRAPHER, THE CLIENT acknowledges that they are responsible for notifying all of their guests that guest photography is not permitted at any time while the professional photographer is in session. The formal photography time is for the exclusive use of PHOTOGRAPHER to capture the formal wedding portraits. Due to time constraints and the need for subjects to pay full attention to the professional photographer, guest photography is requested to be done at a separate time.

If you were the main photographer, paid or not, this should have been the house rule.

woof!

stewart_photo · 07-19-2009, 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by aweir

(snip) a guest arrived with and thought she was somehow entitled to get up and take pictures of the ceremony with her SLR. (snip)

Realistically, as long as this is a free country (with no rules against photography by the property owner), she probably was entitled to get up and take pictures. In fact, she might say "the nerve of some people" regarding you thinking otherwise. Ultimately, there's not that much you can do when others (a wedding guest, etc) decide to use their cameras. They pose no real threat if your photography is good, so just ignore them.

stewart

*X Man* · 07-19-2009, 03:15 PM

Originally Posted by stewart_photo

...They pose no real threat if your photography is good, so just ignore them.

stewart

I agree with Stewart, surprisingly.

Such folks are annoying but the best course of action is to ignore them. Let somebody else clue them in, if it's even a possibility.

Regards,
Mike

MRRiley · 07-20-2009, 10:42 AM

I've had people do this at weddings I've shot and as long as they are not getting in MY way I don't say anything.

However, I DO NOT agree that there is nothing you can do in this situation or that you should just suck it up. The first time you have to wait for a shot or miss a shot due to the FAUXTOGRAPHER, let the bride and groom (or Best Man or designated "Sgt at Arms") know that if THEY do not control the disruptive guest that you will not be held responsible for any missed or damaged shots (say over exposure due to multiple flashes).

If they are resistant, remind them that they PAID you to shoot the photos and that the fauxtographer is endangering the record of their special day. If they continue to resist you inform them that due to circumstances beyond your control you will be unable to continue and that they are not entitled to any type of refund on any deposits paid (this clause should be in your contract and should be clearly understood by the couple from the outset). Extreme, YES! But I've never had it go that far. Normally the Best Man and the closest relative are effective and getting the fauxtographer to behave or at least stay out of your way.

Finally, true, it is a free country. However, the B&G are free to have disruptive guests removed. In reality, the best way to handle these situations is to have the Best Man pre-emptively tell anyone with a camera to hold all shots until you have taken yours. Also, make it clear beforehand that NO ONE else is allowed to shoot during the posed couple and group photos.

Of course, this stuff is one of the reasons that I only shoot weddings very rarely these days.

Mike

Is this extreme? Yes, and

philbaum · 07-20-2009, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by woof

Most contracts for wedding work specify that quests are specifically disallowed from shooting when the photographer is working. Here's a sample:

EXCLUSIVITY / GUEST PHOTOGRAPHY: It is understood that PHOTOGRAPHER
will act as the sole and exclusive wedding photographer. PHOTOGRAPHER reserves the right to bring one assistant at his discretion. Since flashes from guests’ cameras may ruin shots taken by PHOTOGRAPHER, THE CLIENT acknowledges that they are responsible for notifying all of their guests that guest photography is not permitted at any time while the professional photographer is in session. The formal photography time is for the exclusive use of PHOTOGRAPHER to capture the formal wedding portraits. Due to time constraints and the need for subjects to pay full attention to the professional photographer, guest photography is requested to be done at a separate time.

If you were the main photographer, paid or not, this should have been the house rule.

woof!

Well, there are two sides to this story. At my brother's wedding 25 years ago, all the relatives were told NO PHOTOGRAPHY EXCEPT BY THE PRO. Hurt feelings all around but they all obeyed the dictates.

THE PRO took very poor pictures, washed out, special effects that didn't work, etc. No relatives had snapshots of the crowd and other relatives. Nice wedding, the happy couple refused to buy the poor pictures, and so no photos of the wedding or attendees exist. Isn't that a great outcome.

I just went to a grand nephew's wedding, i stayed out of the way of the professional photographer and her assistant. I didn;t use any flash nor did anyone else. I didn't attempt or dream of directing any photographs, just candid snapshots. And the couple just loves the 29 pictures i gave them on CD to augment the ones they got from the professionals.

The warning above is too draconian in my mind. I think one that says not to use flashes in the church, not to get in the way of the professional photographer, not to direct the shots, etc. is fine.

What happened in the OP's case was the mother making separate arrangements. thats outrageous. I'm beginning to understand why many don't want to do weddings :-)

MRRiley · 07-20-2009, 11:42 AM

Phil,

I don't mind if guests take photos of the festivities. I just ask that they don't interfere or prevent me from getting the shots the B&G paid for. As I said above, and as Woof pointed out, the "formals" session should, by necessity, be restricted to the pro. There is a very good reason for this. Depending on the size of the wedding party and the families it can take a considerable time to get thru these in any case. Add Aunt Jane, Uncle Bob & the bride's BFF asking every group to "hold it while I get MY shot" and the shoot stretches into eternity. The worst thing about this is that it adds even more stress to the day and it can severely delay the wedding party's arrival at the reception.

Mike

*Nowhere Matt* · 07-20-2009, 12:16 PM

The original poster did not state whether he/she was paid as a "professional photographer" but it does sound like there was some miscommunications between the bride's side and the groom's side. Perhaps one did not realize that either the ceremony was being well documented or the other did not realize there was to be two seperate photographers.
I am sure your pride and abilities were questioned by you yourself once a second photographer entered to take pictures as well but the event is a celebration of togetherness; not who is there to take the best photos. Unless the two of you were working in contridiction or interferring with one another.
The other photog using a flash is something that someone else could have handled as well, I think if it was expressly not allowed.
I would say there was some miscommunications and perhaps next time some of us can use this experience as preparation and part of our list of questions.

GeneV · 07-20-2009, 12:34 PM

I think there are two sides to this as well. I've now been to four weddings in the last six weeks, and taken "Fauxtographer" photos in each one. In only one, was there ever an issue, and it was interesting because the photographer only objected to photos with an SLR. (It was not a case of upstaging or flash) He and I made peace, though and had several pleasant conversations throughout the evening.

However, as a guest at these weddings, I have another beef. Does the wedding exist now only by and for the photographer? At the first wedding, a single photographer shot the entire evening, and seemed to double as wedding planner. Nice guy, and not disruptive. However in the last two weddings, there were 3 and 4 photographers and videographers crowded around every aspect of the wedding. Another guest said to me that weddings were starting to become like sporting events--you can't see anything while you are there, and you should just mail in a present and ask for a video.

The one this weekend (where I made friends with the photographer after an initial discussion), was the worst. I was tempted to take photos of the cluster around the cake, the garter, the bouquet, etc. just to record how ridiculous this has gotten. The entire wedding is "upstaged" by flashes, video lights and four photographers' butts. Forget taking amateur photos--or even seeing what is going on.

MRRiley · 07-20-2009, 12:58 PM

Gene,

4 photographers and videographers sounds like a mess that the B&G and/or their families caused. However if all were hired, then that's what the B&G asked for. it's their show, so suck it up. However, you really are right. There should not be that many needed for a typical wedding. When I shoot with an assistant we are rarely, if ever, in the same room other than at the reception. One of us will take the bride and the other the groom. I will shoot inside the service, the assistant will shoot outside as the couple exits the hall. The assistant either helps me set up the formals or is off shooting the guests arriving and preparing for the reception.

All photographers and videographers should be as unobtrusive as possible and frankly the only time they should be seen is for the obvious stock photo ops. Even then they should get in and out and should only direct the action if asked (which often happens). The formals on the other hand, ARE the photographer's show. During those, you have to be in unquestioned control. Otherwise, as I said before it will take forever and everyone will be pissed off, tired and late.

Also, the wedding is for the B&G, not the photographer, BUT the couple has invested a lot of trust and expectations in their photographer. It's his job to capture the day and if that means bumping Aunt Martha or asking Uncle Joe to get out of the isle then so be it.

btw, "fauxtographer" does not encompass anyone at the ceremony with a camera other than the pro. That is just my word for the wannabe's that try to take over the shots. I'm sure that doesn't describe you does it Gene?

Mike

sebberry · 07-20-2009, 01:08 PM

Earlier this year I was taking photos at a friend's wedding. They had an official photographer and I made every attempt to not get in her way (in fact, she was in many of my photos...) I never once used the flash either. I wasn't the only guest with a DSLR either. The pro also did a photo session before the wedding without any guests around.

The bride and groom were very happy that I got the photos that I did, the photographer got paid for her work and everyone was happy.

If the pro photographer is worried that another dog is in his territory, then I think that says more about how skilled the pro thinks he is than anything. Guests might enjoy taking photos for their own collection and with the exploding popularity of DSLR cameras, I don't think it is unreasonable for guests to be taking photos as long as they don't get in the way.

seacapt · 07-20-2009, 01:21 PM

A few things to remember if you shoot weddings for a living;
1)Those nervy guests are there because they are important to the family and must be treated with respect. Taking a minute to compliment their equiptment and politely explain the problems that they could cause ,goes a long way.
2) In most cases you were hired to document an occasion not to be a moody artist. Have fun and make it fun for the guests.
3) You never know who that person with the camera is . I have a friend who has a shot Bob Dylan on an album jacket who was given grief by a pro at another friend's wedding.
4) Weddings are not scripted (regardless of what the wedding planner says) so be ready to adapt and overcome obsticals.
5) The only people at a wedding who have the right to be primadonnas are those who are paying for the wedding .
6) That guest might know things of importance that you don't. For example the last wedding I brought a camera to as a guest was catered by the father of the groom's catering business , The pro didn't get a single shot of him working the grill in his tux.

It's been a long time since I shot a wedding (for pay) but let me assure you of one thing , if you get a reputation for pissing off guests you will have a hard time finding work.

BTW Mike Riley 's advice is very sound!