Harsh?

[Peter Rush]

Email from a photographer for an upcoming wedding

"Can I please just let you know that all 'Personal Time' photography that we have arranged with XXX & XXX is private and filming/video is strictly not allowed. (All these details have already been discussed in detail at our final meeting).

There will be two parts of the day for these personal shots:

1. Firstly returning into Church after the guests have left for the venue
2. Secondly for around 45-60 mins at the venue (also evening shots after dinner)

The weather will dictate at what point we will take them away at the venue, as I believe that rain is forecast for Saturday, so it may have to work around the showers."

So basically no time for me then :/

[Noa Put]

Is that a joke? :) I always let the photog do their thing during the photoshoot and if I would take some time with the couple it might be a quick walking shot but I would not accept the photog telling me I cannot join, who does he think he is? In such a case I would call the client telling them I would join but that I would stay out of the way, I would also tell them what they would be missing and how much money they would be wasting by not letting me shoot and then send a mail back to the photog that the rules have changed, as discussed in detail at our final meeting.
What a douchebag.

[Peter Rush]

The bride has already told me that the photographer says that 'i am not allowed to film their photoshoot' and seems ok with it - even though i explained that it will be missing out on a large part of their day - she's agreed to let me have 15 minutes with them but i'll beleive that when i see it!

[Steve Burkett]

To be honest I get some requests from couples asking I not film their photo shoot and focus on the guests and I can see their point. It can be frustrating filming the couples photo shoot with the whole exercise designed for great photos and not necessarily great video. I usually grab some sweeping shots of the couple and a few intimate kisses, but rarely stay for all of it. Depends on the shoot really; some are more lively and offer more for video.

In your case Peter, I'd just arrange some time with the couple myself, though see you've agreed 15 mins but are not optimistic. Speaking to some Photographers they have had bad experiences with Videographers getting in the way of the photo shoot, and whilst they can get in the way of us, it is primarily a photo shoot we're getting footage of, not vice versa. So I can see some preferring to avoid the inconvenience; still I think the message was a little hostile and not a good basis for great Photographer/Videographer cooperation on the day.

I don't think the couple photo shoot is a large part of the day and as I've not filmed it on a number of occasions, I can't say its loss has damaged the video in such cases.

[Roger Gunkel]

I would simply say to the couple that it is their wedding not his and that they can have anything filmed that they want including the photo shoot. However if they are happy to have half their day missing from the wedding, then you have no problem with that.

Get it confirmed in writing or email though and enjoy the fact that you will have a very easy day with far less editing, all for the same money:-)

Roger

[Craig McKenna]

I've had the same, Pete. I was told by a photographer, "Personal photos are photographer time, as couples already feel awkward around one photographer taking pictures. I hope you understand." I just went with it, as it was on the day. I really don't believe in this though, as we're there to document the day in its entirety. From that wedding in particular, the bride did a screen grab of a group shot taken from my film via Facebook, which shows that we have our place during these moments. I would have had other moments such as this for the couple had I been present for their portraits.

At least this photographer has informed you. It may be something you wish to consult from this point onwards with couples - that you wish to be present during the couple's portraits. Once the couple knows this upon your first meeting, then I am sure they will express this to a photographer during any 'final meeting' that they may have. Otherwise, it is what it is once it's been agreed by the couple, and we can't really express our feelings without making the situation awkward.

You can be a hero by capturing what they won't see by taking photographs for an hour though.

[Noa Put]

It's just a matter of being professional and learn to work together and help eachother out where possible, most likely the photog has had bad experiences with some amateur videographer and then decides to make up his own rules making it very difficult for professional videographers to do their job as well. For me that client could stick their 15 minutes of availability where the sun doesn't shine :)

[Clive McLaughlin]

In fairness, I can sort of see their point. When our video or photos get's used by a hotel or other vendor without permission or credit we take offence. Is it not similar if a photographer creates a scene and sets up a pose, and then sits back and watches everyone praise your intimate wedding video?

It's been my realisation of this which has spurred me into taking more of a role. You really ought to build a relationship with the photographer, and suggest locations, or poses etc...

I'm not suggesting you don't by the way Peter!

In this case, where a photographer rights you off as a scene/pose/mood scavanger before the day even begins... just accept it. As long as the B&G are in agreement. Make your case for getting time yourself. And, think of the pressure that comes from directing the couple by yourself to try and understand the photographers workload.

[Craig McKenna]

Originally Posted by Clive McLaughlin

In fairness, I can sort of see their point. When our video or photos get's used by a hotel or other vendor without permission or credit we take offence. Is it not similar if a photographer creates a scene and sets up a pose, and then sits back and watches everyone praise your intimate wedding video?

It's been my realisation of this which has spurred me into taking more of a role. You really ought to build a relationship with the photographer, and suggest locations, or poses etc...

I'm not suggesting you don't by the way Peter!

In this case, where a photographer rights you off as a scene/pose/mood scavanger before the day even begins... just accept it. As long as the B&G are in agreement. Make your case for getting time yourself. And, think of the pressure that comes from directing the couple by yourself to try and understand the photographers workload.

In fairness to your viewpoint though, I really don't think we take much credit for the photographer's part.

If anything, it's sometimes cringe-worthy what some photographers set up (and it certainly doesn't transfer well to film). Noa's way of shooting is definitely the approach that is right from my perspective - i.e. including the photographer in the film and showing off their skill set as much as documenting the family members and ensuring that all can make the film.

In most of our cases, we're doc filmmakers and so this part of the day is notoriously against our styles. If we do some nice off-cut shots that aren't on the shoulder of the photographer, then I think that's us making that happen and doesn't detract from the photographer's efforts. I really think we are a part of the day as much as the photog and if the photog takes away the couple for an hour at every wedding, we certainly shouldn't add to the amount of time a bride and groom have away from their families after that period of time (in my opinion).

Therefore, we should be a part of it.

Photographers and videographers should learn to get along better than they already do. We need our shots as much as photographers need theirs. I need to be as professional as the photographer needs to be. And our jobs are certainly just as challenging as the photographers - but in different ways - i.e. securing audio.

We don't say to the photographer, the speeches are our moment, so buzz off. The same should be said for the photographers during the portrait sessions. I really think it is common courtesy on both halves to ensure that the bride and groom don't miss any parts from the photos or videos.

[Noa Put]

and suggest locations, or poses etc...

I never do that and some might find it offensive, photogs know how to pose a shot and what location they are going to shoot, that's why I let them do their job at the photoshoot because that is the most important part of the day for them. I don't get in the way and take them into my frame as well as they are part of the weddingday. I even will use their poses to grab some quick beauty shots.

When our video or photos get's used by a hotel or other vendor without permission or credit we take offence. Is it not similar if a photographer creates a scene and sets up a pose, and then sits back and watches everyone praise your intimate wedding video?

It's not, we don't steal their photos and they don't have a copyright on poses and locations, I have all the right to shoot docu style and cover that part of the day, they actually have to thank me for not interfering meaning they have all the time they need to do their job. I also can give them free advertisement by mentioning them on my blog as photographer at that wedding.

If I would have a photog that took offense of me "stealing" their poses, then I would demand time for myself and make it difficult for them to do their job because of time constraints.

try and understand the photographers workload.

After more then 10 years doing weddings I exactly know what their workload is and what moments matter to them, you just need to work together and not against eachother. I just feel they don't have the right to demand when I am not allowed to shoot the couple.

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Craig McKenna

We don't say to the photographer, the speeches are our moment, so buzz off. The same should be said for the photographers during the portrait sessions.

Exactly, and I think you should say that to a photog that tells you when you are not allowed to shoot, it would even be fair to say "speeches are videographer time, I hope you do understand :) (actually I would say that because it would seriously piss me off to be treated like that)

[Steve Burkett]

One of those comments often mentioned on this forum is that the video we produce are for the couple's benefit rather than ourselves. In this case, the Bride is quite happy for the photo session not to be seen in the video, so what's the problem? Is it just our ego here that's been bruised? Is the photo session so important that its lack of it leaves the video empty and lifeless?

As I said before, I am often had requests not to film the photo shoot. In such cases I give extra emphasis on the guests. Whilst the footage may not be as delightful to show off to other Videographers as some lovely shots of the couple, its what they, the couple will like watching, seeing their friends and family enjoying the day. I've got some great footage of the guests whilst the couple were away having their photos taken. Its a part of the day they sometimes don't get to see, especially if time is short.

I know one Wedding where the couple hired a couple of buses to transfer the Guests from the church to the Reception, which they never saw as they were off straight after the service to have their special photo shoot. The only way they saw this and one of the reasons why they hired me, was to see this moment on the video.

Another Wedding I got some great footage of the couple's kids playing on a piano, which would have otherwise not been seen by the couple had I gone along with them for their photo session. In such cases, their decision not to have the photo session filmed was correct.

I appreciate in this case, the request comes from the Photographer and it certainly could have been worded better. Its debatable whether they have the right to exclude us or not; from their perspective they may see the photo shoot as a private session between them and the couple rather than an integral part of the Wedding Day to be recorded like anything else. Thankfully most are happy for us to tag along and I would say from my perspective, such difficult Photographers are the exception rather than the rule.

At the end of the day, I'd just accept it. You can't win them all and there's always the next Wedding. As long as you're paid and the couple are happy, life's too short to get cheesed off over it.

[Clive McLaughlin]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

Exactly, and I think you should say that to a photog that tells you when you are not allowed to shoot, it would even be fair to say "speeches are videographer time, I hope you do understand :) (actually I would say that because it would seriously piss me off to be treated like that)

I don't often disagree on this forum, but this hypothetical situation is in no way comparable. How are the speeches more our thing than the photographers? What do we put in? From what I can see its perfectly neutral, and both are equally entitled to document it.

The couple portraits involves location decisions, mood setting and pose setups (whether good or bad), and involves dialogue with the couple and making them feel comfortable.

All I'm saying is... I used to perhaps 'tag along', contribute very little and yet get great intimate shots in lovely backdrops.

It all comes down to the style of shooting I guess.

If you are documentary style, and include the groom picking his nose, or the bride swatting a fly, or the best man sneezing... then fine. But if you are trying to portray a piece of creative moody cinema, I can see why some photographers might get annoyed if you showcase great scenes that you weren't a part of creating.

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Clive McLaughlin

The couple portraits involves location decisions, mood setting and pose setups (whether good or bad), and involves dialogue with the couple and making them feel comfortable.

Exactly, the comparable thing is when I do Marryokes and I'm choreographing something with the Guests. In such cases I would see it my entitlement to not have the Photographer there getting in shot and disrupting footage with flash if I decided it was necessary and some Photographers do ask permission from me to take photos. As it happens I'm happy for the Photographer to be there, but will ask for him/her not to use flash or get in the way of the shot if I feel such requests are needed.

In the same way the Photographer has planned this photo shoot in advance, spoken to the couple before the day about their needs and arranged a time in the day for it - usually not enough. Therefore it is a private moment between the couple and the Photographer which we are allowed to film. Of course the rest of the day is open to all.

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Steve Burkett

In this case, the Bride is quite happy for the photo session not to be seen in the video, so what's the problem? Is it just our ego here that's been bruised? Is the photo session so important that its lack of it leaves the video empty and lifeless?

It's not the bride that chooses not to have the photoshoot filmed, it's the photographer most likely scaring her by saying the videographer will only create a distraction and cause them to not finish all photo's in time.
If the photog can demand that then I feel I can demand him to only shoot from the sides of the venue without a flash during the speeches because I too will scare the bride about blocked shots, distracting flashes and whatnot, that's exactly the same.

This has nothing to do with a bruised ego but a photog with a too big ego.