assistant photographers?

[enbcfsobe]

We have looked at a number of photographers that include a second person who assists the main photographer and also takes their own pictures. One of the photographers we are looking at (and the only one who has actually shot inside a planetarium before) works alone or with an assistant that does not take additional photos. The pricing (significantly less than those offering assistant photographers) and experience (my biggest fear is that no pictures will come out because of the weird lighting) makes her an attractive choice. Will the absence of a second photographer will be a big deal? Do most people use an assistant who also shoots? Thoughts?

 

[UCLABelle]

How many people are you having?! I only ask because when looking at photographers, I was told that there are two types of assistants. Most seemed to take pictures though....and you really only needed one if you are having an average-large wedding.

I went with the cheaper route (already going with a pricey photographer) and just having her take photos of us, and our 35 guests

 

[crystalheart1]

Hi

I work for a large Corporation and found out that our Event Photographer does weddings as well.
We had out last conference at Caesars, AC with all kinds of wierd lighting.

I believe you are in the Philly area... so am I...I can give you his name if interested. I checked out his website and was really impressed with his work.

 

[enbcfsobe]

Belle -- we are having a max of 150. The solo photographer has said that she only does parties under 200. I still don''t want to miss out on anything, especially since we aren''t doing videography. At the same time, it would be worse if the pictures were bad because the photographer didn''t know how to deal with the lighting situation. Hmmm...

 

[Octavia]

Ooh, if anyone has recommendations for good and reasonably priced photographers in the Philly area, I''m listening!!

Also, Enbcfsobe, I haven''t forgotten about florist tips...unfortunately, this weekend is the biggest event of the year for the people I know so I can''t get any answers from them right now because they''re working 25 hours a day

So it might be too late to be of help to you.

 

[jcrow]

i think a big plus for having 2 photographers for us was that one could be in the bridal room with me shooting and one in the groom suite with the boys shooting.

 

[enbcfsobe]

jcrow -- that was one of the things I was thinking of. That said, my dress isn''t very glamorous to put on (it goes on awkwardly over my head and requires a bit of maneuvering and doesn''t have the teensy buttons up the back or anything like that), so I''m not sure how long it will really take to finish up my "getting ready" pics. Plus, we will probably get ready in a room next door to the boys. FI, of course, in addition to trying to insist that they have to get ready in a hotel (rather than in the building where the ceremony and reception will be so we don''t have to worry about our transportation, rain, etc.), insists that there is no need to take pictures while he is getting ready.

Octavia -- I think I''m set for florists. By Sunday I will have seen 4, and I think thats enough. Choosing will be difficult. Your wedding is a ways off -- I will let you know what happens with photographers and who I would recommend.

 

[jcrow]

Date: 1/24/2008 2:45:39 PM
Author: enbcfsobe
jcrow -- that was one of the things I was thinking of. That said, my dress isn''t very glamorous to put on (it goes on awkwardly over my head and requires a bit of maneuvering and doesn''t have the teensy buttons up the back or anything like that), so I''m not sure how long it will really take to finish up my ''getting ready'' pics. Plus, we will probably get ready in a room next door to the boys. FI, of course, in addition to trying to insist that they have to get ready in a hotel (rather than in the building where the ceremony and reception will be so we don''t have to worry about our transportation, rain, etc.), insists that there is no need to take pictures while he is getting ready.

Octavia -- I think I''m set for florists. By Sunday I will have seen 4, and I think thats enough. Choosing will be difficult. Your wedding is a ways off -- I will let you know what happens with photographers and who I would recommend.

one of my FAVORITE things was the anticipation of looking at dh''s getting ready pics. we spent all morning separated and it was wonderful looking at images of how he spent his morning while we were both getting ready to be wed. we were in separate hotels though. so if you are in near by rooms, i don''t see that it would be a problem for your photographer to sneak back and forth taking shots.

 

[bee*]

We are only having the one photographer. We are both travelling down to the castle the night before so our photographer said that he would go to D''s room first and take some pics of him and then go up to me and take pics of me getting into my dress and then leaving with my dad. I just love his work so I don''t mind it only being him.

 

[strmrdr]

Iv second shot at more than a few weddings years ago.
For the ceremony it doesn't matter as long as the officiant allows the photog too move around.
Very rarely will the seconds photos even be presented to bride and groom of that portion.
It can make a difference if they are getting ready in different locations.
Where it does make a difference is the reception, the main photog will concentrate on the b&g while the second shoots the guests.
With one you get less shots of the guests at the reception is the biggest difference.
If your doing formals that's not a huge issue because you should have at least one shot of every family member.
It really depends are you have a huge elaborate reception with a ton going on that you want a ton of pictures of?
Then a second would come into play if not then its not really an issue.

In bad lighting experence is golden!
If I was having a wedding in a location with bad lighting I'd go with a photog that could show me shots where they nailed it under those conditions!!!!!!!
Look for proper exposure combined with proper colors in the sample images.

 

[gtn]

Date: 1/24/2008 3:25:35 PM
Author: strmrdr
Iv second shot at more than a few weddings years ago.

For the ceremony it doesn''t matter as long as the officiant allows the photog too move around.

Very rarely will the seconds photos even be presented to bride and groom of that portion.

It can make a difference if they are getting ready in different locations.

Where it does make a difference is the reception, the main photog will concentrate on the b&g while the second shoots the guests.

With one you get less shots of the guests at the reception is the biggest difference.

If your doing formals that''s not a huge issue because you should have at least one shot of every family member.

It really depends are you have a huge elaborate reception with a ton going on that you want a ton of pictures of?

Then a second would come into play if not then its not really an issue.


In bad lighting experence is golden!

If I was having a wedding in a location with bad lighting I''d go with a photog that could show me shots where they nailed it under those conditions!!!!!!!

Look for proper exposure combined with proper colors in the sample images.

I couldn''t have said it better. I would rather pay for a single photographer with experience rather than a team of photographers with no experience, unless they can show you proofs with a similar environment.

 

[enbcfsobe]

wow, strmrdr. thank you very much for your insider''s insight. that is really really helpful.
i think we will be OK for the ceremony -- we may actually end up doing some reenactment poses for photos b/c the rabbi is adamant that the photog not be too close during the ceremony. and we will probably do some ''posed'' shots in the afternoon/early evening before things get started. i could also ask my cousin who is a photographer to bring her camera. she is notorious for taking forever to give family members their pics, but at least it would give me some additonal pictures.
i''m not really sure how to evaluate exposure. oy.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 1/24/2008 3:45:55 PM
Author: enbcfsobe
wow, strmrdr. thank you very much for your insider''s insight. that is really really helpful.
i think we will be OK for the ceremony -- we may actually end up doing some reenactment poses for photos b/c the rabbi is adamant that the photog not be too close during the ceremony. and we will probably do some ''posed'' shots in the afternoon/early evening before things get started. i could also ask my cousin who is a photographer to bring her camera. she is notorious for taking forever to give family members their pics, but at least it would give me some additonal pictures.
i''m not really sure how to evaluate exposure. oy.

For the reception having family photograph is fine but they should not shoot the formals or posed shots or during the ceremony without the photogs and the officiants permission.
The formals will take 3x as long with another photog distracting the people in them.
This needs to be discussed and clearly spelled out in writing.

look at the skin tones and flowers, are they natural looking and not too dark or bright?
Is there texture and details in the white clothes and black clothes or are they blobs?
Keeping the white clothes from being white blobs and some texture in the black suits is sometimes impossible, a photog should shoot for what the bride has on under those conditions.


Beyond that and getting into advanced areas... nice separation between the subjects and the background? No or little hard shadows over peoples faces?
Do the photos tell the story of the day or are they snapshots with no flow?

The 5 most common areas where inexperienced or poor shooters fail are:
1: blow white (looks like blobs)
2: focus issues - looks fuzzy
3: lighting/exposure issues - bad skin tones, bad shadows, colors off, flare (looks like diamond fire and orbs)
4: too many tilted shots
5: the pictures don''t flow or important parts are missed.