[monochrome]

To be fair, the $50,000, 200-plate, Colorado mountain top, crowning-of-a-princess WEDDING! shot by a crew of three with video, candid, still and studio portraits is a relatively modern expectation. A bit of modesty and humility might be good advice to give a bride in these deflationary times. Vogue is simply being smugly cynical and calculating by sneering at the expectations of today's middle class American bride.

"If an over-the-top wedding has reached the flyover part of America it can't be cool. So let's just act like we're too poor."

---

Last edited by monochrome; 03-18-2016 at 03:23 PM.

[Digitalis]

Vogue claims lots of things in that article - I'm surprised they didn't write getting married is overrated too.

I know, marriage is so 19th century.

[Rondec]

I think whether or not you "need" a wedding photographer depends on what you value. I will say that my wife has shot weddings for couples that didn't really value photography and who were trying to bargain down prices on things and it was a fairly miserable experience. Those sorts of people would do better just to collect everyone's cell phone snaps of the wedding and have Uncle Bob shoot a few formal shots and be done with it. On the other hand, there are people who really do appreciate good photography and value it. The experience of shooting their weddings is a lot better and they are generally really satisfied -- even though they spent quite a bit of money on a photographer for their wedding.

[clackers]

Can't be bothered reading the article!!

Well, you have a problem if you don't, Dan, because then you won't realise it's a less-than-serious article.

Photography doesn't get picked on any more than the concepts of wedding rings and father walking the bride down the aisle.

Sample:

"And while we’re at it, can we talk about the garter? A slutty, elasticized strip of fake lace cutting off circulation to your upper thigh? All so that the man of the hour can drunkenly remove it, then pass it on to Great-Uncle Ted in the hopes he gets laid? Let’s opt out of this one."

[monochrome]

I think whether or not you "need" a wedding photographer depends on what you value. I will say that my wife has shot weddings for couples that didn't really value photography and who were trying to bargain down prices on things and it was a fairly miserable experience. Those sorts of people would do better just to collect everyone's cell phone snaps of the wedding and have Uncle Bob shoot a few formal shots and be done with it. On the other hand, there are people who really do appreciate good photography and value it. The experience of shooting their weddings is a lot better and they are generally really satisfied -- even though they spent quite a bit of money on a photographer for their wedding.

That's part of what I was trying to say above.

A wedding is a set piece. The social intention was to emphasize for the couple that, whether or not the marriage fulfills expectations, it's damned well permanent after all this Hoo Haw. Photographing the event is a natural evolution of the rituals embedded prior to the mid 19th C. What has changed is the nature of the event, the character of the hosts and participants and the expectations of the guests.

My wife's father spent more money on the bride's studio portraits than he did on the food. Her mother and aunt made the gown. It took them six months to embroider the bodice and sew on the pearls. The cake was a big deal. No top-shelf booze - just champagne. No dinner - just petit fors'. No dancing - just a string quartet. No limos, hospitality suite, party bus, morning coats, floral drapes, centerpieces, country club, horse-drawn coach, glass slipper, garter, matchbooks, napkins - or Engagement Photos.

The bride was the subject, not the party. The photographs captured it.

One tog. 6x7. About 100 negatives and 25 8x10 prints, mounted but in an archival box, not in a book. The rest are regular 5x7 documentary prints. My wedding present was a full-length, framed studio portrait in the gown. The photos were art. That portrait hangs in my home office. My wife's grandmother's studio portrait hangs in our front hall.

When my jaw dropped at how much money the bride's father expected me to kick in for their wedding extravaganza, my son's explanation was, "Dad - our guests are buying us a present. They expect you to get them drunk."

Vogue is sneering at what the ritual has become.

[Rondec]

That's part of what I was trying to say above.

A wedding is a set piece. The social intention was to emphasize for the couple that, whether or not the marriage fulfills expectations, it's damned well permanent after all this Hoo Haw. Photographing the event is a natural evolution of the rituals embedded prior to the mid 19th C. What has changed is the nature of the event, the character of the hosts and participants and the expectations of the guests.

My wife's father spent more money on the bride's studio portraits than he did on the food. Her mother and aunt made the gown. It took them six months to embroider the bodice and sew on the pearls. No top-shelf booze - just champagne. No dinner - just petit fors'. No dancing - just a string quartet. No limos, hospitality suite, party bus, morning coats, floral drapes, centerpieces, country club, horse-drawn coach, glass slipper, garter, matchbooks, napkins - or Engagement Photos.

The bride was the subject, not the party. The photographs captured it.

One tog. 6x7. About 100 negatives and 25 8x10 prints, mounted but in an archival box, not in a book. The rest are regular 5x7 documentary prints.My wedding present was a full-length, framed studio portrait in the gown. The photos were art. That portrait hangs in my home office. My wife's great-grandmother's studio portrait hangs in our front hall.

When my jaw dropped at how much money the bride's father expected me to kick in for their wedding extravaganza, my son's explanation was, "Dad - our guests are buying us a present. They expect you to get them drunk."

Vogue is sneering at what the ritual has become.

My wife photographs Mennonite weddings, for the most part, and so there is a very different feel from your standard wedding. That probably makes a difference too.

[normhead]

My wife photographs Mennonite weddings, for the most part, and so there is a very different feel from your standard wedding. That probably makes a difference too.

Having lived more than half my life as Quaker, a sister "peace church", I'd love to do Mennonite Weddings. Just because I love hanging around with "the people." One of my favourite experiences of all time was when a Mennonite invited me to his barn raising. As a cabinetmaker, getting up high and trimming those tenons 24 feet off the ground was just a joy.

That stands out for me, more than any of the football games or basketball, or tennis or teaching. Had fun, and I was making something that was going to be around long after I'm gone, even if no one remembers I was there, which I'm sure they've already forgotten.

[gaweidert]

Having lived more than half my life as Quaker, a sister "peace church", I'd love to do Mennonite Weddings. Just because I love hanging around with "the people." One of my favourite experiences of all time was when a Mennonite invited me to his barn raising. As a cabinetmaker, getting up high and trimming those tenons 24 feet off the ground was just a joy.

That stands out for me, more than any of the football games or basketball, or tennis or teaching. Had fun, and I was making something that was going to be around long after I'm gone, even if no one remembers I was there, which I'm sure they've already forgotten.

How was the food?

[normhead]

How was the food?

I don't remember, I do remember we stopped for lunch though...

[Rupert]

I dunno.....I do know I never want to shoot another wedding. Damn near wore me out, and that was even though it went very smoothly and I had not a problem with the bride, her mom, or anyone else. It is hard work and takes a lot more skill that I have and a lot more time processing than I want to spend again. My respect to those that do it professionally.

Mrs Rupert...with a Toy Camera X10 may have snapped the bride's favorite.....


I will say that some of the best wedding shots I have seen were from a friends daughters wedding where they asked the large attending party to bring their smart phones, take lots of shots and upload them to a site the bride had set up. Many hundreds of shots, some that would have been missed by a Pro, no doubt. Many of them were just superb. Wasn't a bad idea at all!

Regards!

[robgski]

Wasn't a bad idea at all!

NOice shot by MRs R. I think a mix of formal pro shots and candid shots from everyone else will giv a great remembrance of the day.

[Rupert]

NOice shot by MRs R.

Thanks! She had no experience but the little X10 set on EXR is so easy to shoot, and she got a lot of nice shots. It was a fun day but long and tiring!
The candid shot idea from guests was amazingly good at my friends daughters wedding. Some of the shots were real jewels!

Pros earn their money......it is tough work at weddings...and then there is all that diplomacy that is required.......

Regards!

[Nicolas06]

I would say if you know 2-3 amateur that are quite ok shooting pictures of people and you don't have much money anyway, you are as good asking them all to participate if they agree and be done with it; Chances are if you take a quite cheap wedding photographer it would not do better.

I got comment from the pictures I took as amateur from some participant that some of them paid for their photos and it looked noticably worse that what I managed. And I don't think I am good. We all think photographers are nice and pro all great. But this is far from the truth. If guess I you pay enough and choose well you'll get stunning results from a pro... But this not always like that.

So really it is a matter of money. But more and more people are paying their weddings themselves (not the parents) and don't have much of that money. The one I took pictures for spended half their budget to go visit south america for one month as honeymoon... And who can say it was money badly spent and that hiring a pro photographer and invest in a better cake for dessert would have been a better choice? Them maybe... Not me. It is not my money.

As for the wedding being for the bride, I must say this is something I never found out here with my friends, or my familly. Maybe we have different habits here in France?

[clackers]

As for the wedding being for the bride, I must say this is something I never found out here with my friends, or my familly. Maybe we have different habits here in France?

I think for many in Anglo culture a wedding only happens when the man runs out of excuses.

[skierd]

I'd love to fill the niche of "informal wedding photographer." I've done a few weddings in that light, in fact I have one coming up over the 4th of July weekend, and while the pressure is still there to make the shots happen the events flow much more naturally and everybody has fun.

The one thing that constantly amazes me are the number of people who want to get in to shooting weddings like it's easy or simple to do. There's SO MuCH pressure to get the shot, time after time after time with no breaks. The bride only walks down the aisle once, the rings go on once, etc... It astounds me that people with no experience just jump in without considering that they will very likely ruin the memories of an otherwise great day if they don't get the shots.