Can anyone say "uncomfortable?"

[Mike Hammond]

something would happen - YouTube

What are your thoughts about this?

First, I can't tell you how many times I've looked at the photographers running around all over the place and I think "that's just obnoxious." Not all photogs - it's not fair to generalize just like you shouldn't generalize any group. But some are like a swarm and I often wonder how they get away with it. And if it's OK with the couple and the minster then it is OK I guess.

Second, the B&G paid for the photogs to get shots. So....can the photogs do whatever they want, or be anywhere they want during the ceremony?

It's a reminder to always check with the officiant for their rules before the ceremony.

[Robert Benda]

Ha, came here to share the same video. I wonder just how close that videographer was. It doesn't feel like a zoom lens, so was he really right behind them? In everyone's sight line as a background to the B&G?

The pastor is right, of course, and of course the B&G's choice of this pastor reflects this - otherwise they could have chosen someone less religious.

I dealt with the before of this the past few weeks and worked within the rules, of course: 1) "I don't mind during the processional and recessional, but during the ceremony, your cameras can be up front, but you can't.' and at wedding #2, the photographer wasn't allowed in the front half of the church at all because the pastor didn't want the shutter noise being a distraction. We were not allowed to move during the ceremony and were to stay back far enough we weren't in people's sight lines.

[Clive McLaughlin]

Ha! I was JUST about to post this.

I generally chat with the priest before hand. If I find his instructions too restrictive, I remind him that the bride is paying me and that I will have to tell her that my filming capability was limited at his instruction.

Tempted sometime to tell them to go and tell the bride why i couldnt get a shot of both their faces from the best angle. It hasnt come to that though.

i have to say though, the shot it the video is one that I would only do with an unmanned static camera.

Most photogs and videographer know that the middle of the front should only be three people. Nobody wants to be looking at a video guy standing alongside the priest.

[Nigel Barker]

I was shooting video at a wedding last year when the vicar stopped the ceremony & banished the photographer to the back of the church. She had been walking up & down the aisle bobbing around in his line of sight clicking away & it clearly put him off. I included the exchange in the edit but the couple requested that I remove it so now I only bring it out to show other videographers what dickheads some photographers can be.:-)

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Clive McLaughlin

Most photogs and videographer know that the middle of the front should only be three people. Nobody wants to be looking at a video guy standing alongside the priest.

In Belgium it's common practise to stand right behind the priest when they do the vows and ring exchange, only during the rest of the ceremony the priests prefer if we (photog and videoguy) don't move around too much. If it's a ceremony at a venue it's a different case, these priests are getting paid more then enough for a 1 hour service and they are very easy to work with, if I want the sound to be good and mic the priest, they are always ok with that but not if it's in a church.

[Dave Partington]

Yeah, I can say uncomfortable.

About 4 years ago we did a 12 noon catholic ceremony (and all day through to first dance). We went to the rehearsal a couple of days before, as we always do, and agreed the camera positions with the couple and the priest and all seemed well. We even walked to the agreed positions, sat a camera down there to make sure and everything was OK'd.

One of the camera positions was just inside the church door, right at the back of the isle, looking towards the couple and the priest. All UK shooters will be familiar with this. It's a pretty standard place to be, and often the place a grumpy vicar will tell you is the "only" place you can even be in a relatively small church.

We'd been severely restricted on the placement of other cameras, ether because the Priest declined the position or there simply were no suitable places to go given the size of the church and the number of guest, so this was going to be our "main camera" for the entire ceremony. All agreed, all happy.

So, on the day the bride arrives, walks down the isle and the camera takes up position after the bride has passed. The bride arrives at the front, exchanges glances with the groom etc, then, before the ceremony gets under way the priest steps to the lectern microphone and announces that the ceremony cannot start until the camera has been removed from the isle for "health and safety reasons" and that the position was 'not' what agreed at the rehearsal!

At that point 120 people turned around and are now glaring at the camera as if we're now spoiling the B+G's special day by even being there.

The Bride did not speak to us all day. In fact she totally blanked us. So, can I say uncomfortable? Yup, sure can!

[Rob Cantwell]

did a ceremony (a blessing not a marriage) last week and the priest requested that he not be filmed or photographed at all (apparently there were religious reasons) so as soon as the ceremony got under way, we had to put our cameras down, it felt weird but anyway what i ended up with was photographs/video of outside the church, the march up the aisle then a blank, after which photographs of the happy couple and their friends an relations (with the splendid church alter/apse in the background) and the recessional out to the waiting car! no priest in sight!

I've been a guest at my neice's wedding where the priest stopped the ceremony and read the 'Riot Act' to this misfortunate woman who stood out in the centre to take a photograph, there was no photographs after that!

I would agree with other posters here, you do need to consult as much as you can with the celebrant/officiant I always ask the couple to check with their priest etc. if theres any rules on photography/video

i've been training my partner to walk like a ninja, so as not to attract attention! :-)

[Dave Blackhurst]

Looks to me like there was the "video guy", directly behind the officiant, probably with the big (but silent) camera, and a guy with a loud SLR off to the left - who also was a bit verbal with the priest...

You hear a burst of mirror flapping/shutter going on while the priest is trying to do HIS job... I'd be irked too, shooting with a SLR shooter with a flapping mirror can definitely be VERY annoying, Yes, there is some shutter noise, but a "big" SLR can create quite a racket.

I'm thinking the priest was annoyed by being in a "photo studio", clickety clackety, clickety, click... the video guy just happened to have the "big camera", so he got "the look". The priest first turned to the left, likely as that was the source of his annoyance, then gave the "big camera" (he probably didn't even know was there) the glare TOO...

It's one thing to discretely either move to or stay in one position with a noiseless camera, it's an entirely different thing to move into position and unleash a burst of NOISE - most people are VERY annoyed by noise that "isn't supposed to be there".

The problem is that after ONE incident like this, the truly discrete and professional shooter will be relegated to "the doghouse"... Having been specifically complemented for how "nearly invisible" we were while shooting both photos and video, I'm quite sure there were prior "less than discrete" situations with OTHER photogs/videogs...

There is a vast difference between a professional and some guy with a camera... part of "professional respect" is respect for all the other participants/vendors and for the nature of the occasion...

[Roger Gunkel]

I am happy to say that in 30 years I have never had cross words or disapproving looks from an officiant during a ceremony, butt have experienced a number of occasions where a photographer has. Usually through moving about or being too close to the officiant with a noisy camera.

The most embarrassing situation I have seen was at a very expensive wedding about 8 years ago in a private chapel on a private estate. The officiant was a Canon someone or other, who made it absolutely clear that myself and the photographer could take shots of the Bride entering the chapel and walking down the aisle, then we must wait outside the building. he would accept no compromise whatsoever. The photographer, clothed in dress suit and tails said to me quietly 'Just watch me'. He crept back into the chapel with a large telephoto lens to sneak some shots from the back. I waited outside as instructed and about 30 seconds later the first hymn suddenly stopped, followed after about another 15 seconds by the photographer being bodily guided out of the chapel door by the canon, who had a firm grasp on the collar of the photographer's jacket and the seat of his pants. He was deposited unceremoniously on the ground, with the words 'My service my rules'.

Roger

[Steve Bleasdale]

All UK shooters will be familiar with this. It's a pretty standard place to be, and often the place a grumpy vicar will tell you is the "only" place you can even be in a relatively small church.

We'd been severely restricted on the placement of other cameras, ether because the Priest declined the position or there simply were no suitable places to go given the size of the church and the number of guest, so this was going to be our "main camera" for the entire ceremony. All agreed, all happy.

At that point 120 people turned around and are now glaring at the camera as if we're now spoiling the B+G's special day by even being there.

The Bride did not speak to us all day. In fact she totally blanked us. So, can I say uncomfortable? Yup, sure can![/QUOTE]
Yep just sums UK up Dave hahaha. been there lad...

[Tim Bakland]

C'mon everyone.

If it were truly a "solemn assembly", the wedding would not be on the verdant lawns of whatever country club that is -- it would be in a church.

In my opinion, the Priest is "all about himself" -- not G-d in this case.

Granted, I would not have a camera on a tripod or monopod so close/directly behind them either, but, on the other hand, given the setting of the ceremony (a *relatively* secular setting for a Priest), he must understand that the B&G have something slightly different in mind than he's officiating here.

Or maybe I've completely misread the scene.

[Chris Harding]

We have an Anglican Cathedral here with a Canon (a lady) affectionately known for her tough rules!
One position only, no flash in the Church ..no-one allowed in the aisle at any time and also NO guests are allowed any cameras or video whatsoever.

One poor photog (his own fault) flaunted the rules and she stopped the service, evicted him from the Church (physically! he had to stand outside and wait for the bride to exit) She is one tough cookie but very sweet as long as you stick to her rules!

I haven't yet had the embarrassment of being thrown out of any Church as yet but when I was filming the register signing she did once motion to me to move back and to the side.

I have had two photogs at an outdoor ceremony that were intent on taking about 500 frames a minute each and getting as close to the couple as they possibly can. One even stuck his head in between the priest and couple so he could do a ring closeup with the lens only inches from her hand. At that stage the priest had had enough and moved them away with some stern words. They reminded me of the flies we get here in Summer they get in everywhere and just keep coming back!!

Chris

[James Manford]

Well tell the bride & groom that. They're the ones that have paid me!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Did the bride make that face like the photog did something bad ... or the fact her photos will now potentially be ruined?

[Tim Bakland]

I will reiterate my comment (maybe you both posted before seeing?):

This isn't a church. It's outdoors on some verdant lawn. And there's a spectator in the back with sunglasses on! (Do you wear sunglasses to a solemn assembly?)

Here in America, this does not spell out as "solemn" a ceremony as that Priest describes. To me, this is a Priest not only thinking he's in the sanctity of his own church, but going far beyond any Godly intentions and making the ceremony be about his own misappropriated power.

[James Manford]

Ah, I see ... I just rushed in to commenting!

That priest is an absolute IDIOT then and i'm not surprised the bride made the WTF face ...