Video or more PICTURES????!

[MustangFan]

What do you think...

I haven''t been craxy over the idea of a videographer, but was thinking of maybe doing the photobooth instead. Do you think it would be foolish to put the money toward a photobooth and nix the video? Of course I will have a home video my uncle is willing to tape.

 

[basil]

Well, that''s what we''re going to do, so I guess I''d say go for it!

My reasoning was that I would never otherwise be able to ensure that I got a photo of everyone at the reception. I think it''s kind of a fun and unique element that most weddings don''t have (yeah, it''s getting more popular, but most people won''t have been to a wedding with one).

I''ve always hated the way I look and sound on video...Just never really been into it as an art form either. So I wasn''t too thrilled with the idea of having a video anyway. I know people say that they miss things (ceremony music, what the vows were, etc.) so hopefully I won''t regret my decision. I think a home camcorder is a pretty good compromise.

I hope some others weigh in on how much they loved their videographer, though. Cause I would hate for you to go by what I say and then end up disappointed

It''s an individual decision, I guess.

 

[Haven]

We are DEFINITELY getting a videographer, but we are sit-at-home-and-watch-old-family-movies types so it would break my heart to miss out on a video of our wedding. Even if we only pull the video out to show to our kids in twenty years, that''s something I want to be able to do.

FI''s father used to be a photographer so he grew up with incredible camera equipment, including video cameras, so I get to watch videos of FI in his embarrassing 70s kneesocks, and I certainly wouldn''t trade those videos in for pictures!

I LOVE the photobooth, though--just saw one at a bridal show this weekend and put it on the list of things to get for our wedding.