Hello,
Lovelies!
Today, I shot
another amazing test drive—even with the threat of snow! As I’m battening down the hatches for
snowmagedon 2015, I’m editing a few of these cuties! Darn, they are stinking cute!
On our test
drive, we discussed the pros and cons of having a second shooter. The only cons are price, but with a ton of
pros, I think it is important to discuss with your photographer whether or not
you need a second shooter.
For me, I tend
to shoot alone. I recommend a second
shooter under a few circumstances, however.
- A compressed timeline. When the timeline is compressed, the second shooter can “create” time by doubling my ability to get photos. This is especially important when the bride and groom are getting ready in separate locations and have to travel to the ceremony location.
- Large weddings. I’ve shot weddings as large as 350… alone. Yikes! It was too much. For better coverage, for large weddings, I recommend two or more photographers.
- Multiple events. Weddings where events occur are two locations at the same time. Some weddings incorporating non-American traditions have events for the bride and events for the groom. For this, you need a second photographer.
- Ceremony restrictions. Oh, the Archdiocese of Arlington. I’m Catholic, and so I have a leg up on non-Catholic photographers shooting in the Archdiocese. My mom likes to say it’s because I know the passwords. Passwords or not, the Archdiocese of Arlington is known as having tough photography rules. I’ve been limited to the back of the church, been told not to move an inch once the ceremony starts, and of course, flash is a no-no. The restrictions vary by church. In the strictest churches… let’s get a second shooter.
So, how about
you? Did you have a second shooter, or are you considering one? Find it improved your wedding
photography? Let me know your thoughts
about a second shooter in the comments below.
And, because
every post deserves from pretty pictures, here are some of this adorable
couple!
0 Haute Comments Posted:
Post a Comment