A Rant from the Clergy... Photos During Ceremony

Let me say this up-front... I LOVE photography. When travelling, if I can't preserve scenes on film or a sensor, I'm

not happy. As it happens, I am also a minister, with 25 years experience, including 100's and 100's of weddings.

I've done everything from extremely small private ceremonies in the forest, to a few on live network TV with audiences

of 15 million. Before answering the call to ministry, I was in broadcasting. I understand and enjoy media.

 

I personally allow flash during the processional, and all photography, without flash, once the formal service begins...

 

I must say however that (even with specifically consistent instructions to the contrary) in the last few years I've

noticed a significant upturn in wedding guests using flash during the heart of the ceremony, without the least bit of

class or concern that perhaps they might be disturbing the event they are trying to capture. My sense is that people

simply don't know how to operate their equipment.

 

Or is it that they don't care? Last year, after one guest kept at it, standing in the center aisle, with a purple glare

imprinted on my retina, I literally had to pause the ceremony because I couldn't read any text!

 

And now, not 10 days ago, the assistant to the contracted pro shot 15 or so, in my direct line of sight, from the vows

onward, later claiming she didn't know her flash was on... Incredible.

 

On the other side, I did a ceremony FOR a photographer (with 15 world-class shooters, with cameras, in

attendence), and not a single problem.

 

Still, I am losing patience with people who can't or won't control their technology. It cheapens the moment, and for

most, the pictures probably aren't that good anyway.

 

Sorry for the rant.

Any chance you could talk to the wedding photographer and the bride and groom prior to the ceremony, maybe at the rehersal and relate your concerns? Maybe if you bring it up, it will be fresh in everyone's mind. Maybe if you involve the whole wedding party, everyone will be more careful. Just a thought.

At our wedding our minister told everyone to please refrain from using flash until after the ceremony was complete. He told the congregation this before we made our entrance so we never noticed.

 

I understand where you are coming from as I would not want flashes going off in my face when I am trying to say my vows....takes away from the romance of the ceremony. IMO.

1. It's easier to ask forgiveness than permission

 

2. If they're using direct flash, you're right. They're probably not that good, anyway! (the photog, OR the pics)

 

3. How dark is your church? Add some lights. I'm begging brides to keep the lights up, so they're pics will look better

 

4. No, the guests w/ their little point n shoots do NOT know any better

I like the idea of churches being brighter...and I completely respect a house of worship and the clergy's preferences wrt photography. I think that couples need to be realistic about photography in a potentially dark venue, and guests need to turn off their flashes. I don't think that there is a right answer or an all encompassing answer, just personal preference and accommodation.

People are getting more rude and ignorant every day. They will say anything and do anything to get what THEY want which is all that is important.

 

The solution is the one in charge has to more agressive and "in your face" to maintain order.

 

Solution is announce before the sevice, announce no pics because it takes away from the occasion. When the first flash goes off, say your sorry as you can`t read. Wait 10 sec. Second flash, announce if they would like to leave. It is the ONLY way to deal with the rude ones. That or suck it up.

 

In the end, it is not your problem the guests are not civilized. You did not invite them.

I have re-examined this a lot. Believe me I mean no disrespect toward you, marriage or any ceremony. My wife & I hav

e been married for 31 years.

 

The holy sacrament is the marriage not just the ceremony. I have never caused any alarm at any wedding ceremony but

I have been restricted so as I couldn't catch the moment Dad gives his daughter away. Everyone in tears. I was in the

back because the presider thought I would take away from his charm.

Bill, I can sympathize with your situation but let me add this; prior to the ceremony I ask the officiant for a blessing and consider my coverage to be an extension of my ministry. If the officiant allows me to shoot with flash then I pledge to be discrete. If the officiant does not want flash during the ceremony, that's OK too, but I expect him/her to also inform the guests so that I'm not the only one in the building refraining from using flash.

 

A professional photographer shooting off several exposures and stating that they didn't know the flash was on is either not being honest or is so incredibly stupid that it is beyond belief.

I agree that guests with their P&S (or even DSLR) cameras don't know how to control them. I would do as many have suggested--announce the no photography/no flash/no getting in the aisle rule--whatever it takes to keep guests from flashing your retinas. Accept the fact, though, that they will not know how to control their flashes. At the very least, restrict them to their seats so that they can't get close to you. I would, however, still give the same allowances to the professional photographer(s) that you do now. However, be specific about what annoys you. Tell the photographer that if he or she stands close enough to you with flashes going, to cause you to be unable to read, you will stop the ceremony and ask them to leave. Unfortunately, you have to have some consequence(s) or you will be ignored. I have had several officiators who have specifically asked me not to flash 'in their faces'.

 

I have dealt with some officiators who have banned guests from photography during the ceremony, but allowed the professional to use flash and move around, IF they are discreet, don't stand in front of everyone for long periods of time flashing nonstop, or call attention to themselves or bob around behind the couple and officator. I appreciate these officiators very much, and pay them back by being extra careful and courteous, and follow their requests to the letter. Clear communication, and an extension of good will usually brings positive results.

bill - guests are always tough.

 

too bad you had unprofessional photographers working that wedding. I, too, would never believe anyone who took 15 shots and didn't know their flash is on.

The purpose of the ceremony is what the couple decides it is, not the photographer

 

Simply address this stuff before wedding day. No flash allowed? Then explain to the couple what that means for their pictures. If they want to address the issue with the minister then they can.

 

Don't assume everyone feels the way a photographer does about the event. If people choose to get married in a church, they have their own reasons.

 

As far as the guests....unfortunately you need to treat them like children and remind them...no cell phones, no camera flashes....like at a movie theater!

You know . . . this post touches on a few my own personal pet peeves . . .

 

Clergy that tell me not to use flash but, do not make the same instructions clear to the guests. I usually don't mind working by available light. In fact, I almost always prefer it. However, we do have a few churches my area where it really presents a problem. Very little lighting. Very dark paneling and no, they will not allow you to recreate any of the ceremony after they are done. One place schedules a wedding every 90 minutes during the busy season! However, when I am there trying to shoot with my 80-200f2.8 wide open at 1/15 and ISO 800 there are guest popping flashes all over the place. It gets tiring explaining to clients that I could be back at that church the next weekend so, I have to adher to the rules . . .

 

The other point about this, and I have discussed this with several members of the clergy: If I can't take quality pictures of the ceremony (sto-fen diffuser on an SB-800 pointed directly up from 25 feet or up the center aisle) the bride and groom will select other images for their album. Basically, this means that in 10 years when they are showing their wedding album to their children, the pictures will be from the party, not from the religious portion of the day. What kind of message does this send?

 

BTW: I have a cousin who is a methodist minister . . . we have this little battle (good naturedly!) every year around Christmas when the family gets together.

 

Ed

I generally would not have commented on this post, however, I must chime in because I received a letter today

from the Executive Minister of the Church that I photographed a beautiful wedding this weekend. The letter was

to inform me of the Church rules, and the fact that many of my actions during the wedding went against the rules.

 

I contracted this wedding 9 months ago with the Mother of the Bride. When she stated the location of the

ceremony, I proceed to explain the rules of the church (based on what I heard from others) and let her know that

I will be limited to the type and amount of photos I will be able to take during the ceremony. See, this

particular Church restricts the photographer to the balcony and prohibits flash photography. The Mother of the

Bride stated that her daughter is getting married and I can do what ever I need to do to get great photos. She

stated that she will handle everything and if anyone says anything to me, to stare them her way. Of course I

know better and decided to consult with the Church's Wedding Coordinator. The Church Wedding Coordinator

expressed her concerns, however she stated that if the Mother of the Bride said that I could do what I wanted,

then that would be ok. Of course I know better and decided to consult with the officiating Minister. The

Officiating Minister stated that it would be ok for me to get the photos that the Mother of the Bride ask me too.

Neither the Church Coordinator nor the Officiating Minister state that I had to photograph from the balcony or

that I could not use flash photography. Therefore, I followed the direction of my clients. I photographed from

the front of the church and used flash photography. The wedding was Saturday and by Monday, I had already posted

the entire wedding to my Collages galleries. The Mother of the Bride was very very very pleased and praised me

for my actions. The Church Wedding Coordinator praised me and said I did a great job. The Officiating Minister

stated that I did a great job and posed in many photos after the ceremony. Everyone was happy, the Bride and

Groom had a lovely ceremony and the photographs and memories were captured and preserved for the happy couple and

their family members. This is nothing different from the hundreds of ceremonies that I have photographed at

Churches around the country.

 

Back to the letter. The letter depicted the event very vividly and the Executive Minister did not miss a beat.

He quoted the policy and even stated that Mom of the Bride, Coordinator, and Minister should have informed me of

the rules (enforced). He stated that if he was officiating the ceremony that he would have stopped the wedding a

threw me out.

 

Now, what good would that had done. This wedding was not for him. He was a guest (invited guest). The wedding

was for the Bride, Groom and their families. If he had done what he stated in his letter, he would not only have

disrupted the ceremony, he would have ruined the wedding and the chances of the couple from getting their once in

a life time event captured by a profession. Don't get me wrong, if anyone had told me that I had to photograph

the wedding from the balcony and I could not use flash photography, I would have done it. I still would have

been able to capture the entire event and provided my clients with their precious memory.

 

Yes, I respect the Church and the sanctity of marriage. I have been married for 25 years and I still peer

through my wedding album. My wedding album is very precious to me and I adore it. When I miss my mother,

father, grandparents on both sides, I open my wedding album (they are deceased). It is the one album that has my

entire family. It is one of the happiest moments of my life and the thoughts of not having these photos would be

devastating. This is the sole reason I love being a wedding photographer and the primary reason why I am so

passionate.

 

I am not making a point for one side or the other. Most photographer just do what they are contracted to do. We

can advise and if our clients insist, then we must either decline the event or take on the challenge. I had the

green light from every one involved except the invited guest, that happened to be the Executive Minister. If he

would have had it his way, my clients would be on the losing end of the stick. Oh by the way, my clients are the

Bride, Groom and the Bride's mom.

 

My question to you is whose wedding is it anyway? Who do you listen too? Who is right?

 

George

"This wedding was not for him." But you are a guest in his house. House rules take the hand, if you were in a poker game.

 

 

 

You need to find a way to shoot sans the flash if the church has a 'no-flash' rule. Tripod or monopod will allow you to get some good images with a f1.8 or f1.4 lens.

George--in your particular situation, I would say you were not at fault. If the officiating minister gives me the ground rules, that would be good enough for me. In fact, that is the only person I take seriously. I'd say the Executive Minister should take things up with the officiating minister and the wedding coordinator. I would say so in a letter, too.

 

As usual, this topic is growing wings and flying off in many directions. Before people get too hot, re-read the original post. Bill is actually pretty lenient, allowing photographers to use flash and move around. His rant is with people (guests and photographers) who don't bother to know how to control their gear and who are insensitive (nevermind the sanctity of the situation or not). His rant is NOT about being allowed to photograph with or without flash, during the ceremony.

"Any chance you could talk to the wedding photographer and the bride and groom prior to the ceremony, maybe at the rehersal and relate your concerns?"

 

Thanks David for your thoughts. Actually, with the couples' understanding and desire, not only were the professional photographers talked to directly, prior to, but a clear announcement was made prior to the service to the congregation -- encouraging them to go for it during the processional, refraining after the couple was on th altar. This has always worked in the past, but in the last few years people seem less in control of either themselves, or their gear (cell-phones, beepers, cameras).

Earlier this year I had a nice discussion with a priest who used to be against flash use in a ceremony as you

described.

 

This priest went on to relate to me that he had "seen the light" and now allows flash at all times during a ceremony.

 

His reasoning: wedding photography is Important in giving families a feel and a thread of the importance of

marriage which points directly to the connection to God.

 

He said that he's seen the photography, regardless of it being done by a pro or by family, have incredible

meaning in a Families Life over extended periods of time. Visual evidence of this sacred day is not just

interesting: it's Important!

 

The stories that can be told and the time spent sitting with grandchildren and telling the story of the wedding

day was witnessed and deemed to be invaluable to strengthening the fabric of "family".

 

The photos of the religious elements and the gathering of relatives of two different families is a pivotal moment

in familial life; a wedding is one of the rare moments where all else is suspended and people gather in one

location to celebrate. Maybe God would approve of photography!

 

Churches sure do seem to accept money from the families to use "their" church ... Possibly the church officials

may venture into dangerous territory and figure out how to meet the families half way on the celebration of their

marriage with the circle of family and friends and allow them to record the ceremony.

 

Change is definitely possible and it may just be a God Oriented change that benefits Families over generations to

come.

 

I always like to envision all the blessed entities of all religions over the ages and around the world as they

are shown bathed in "The Light". Maybe Light is a Good Thing.

 

Can I have an Amen brother!

I have turn down Catholic weddings because of their rules (I am Catholic). I have also had to set expectations for a bride because she wanted me to use flash and move around (the Catholic church had other ideas). The bride to be was in tears when I told her I would not break the churches rules.

 

Living in Florida, 80% of my weddings are outside so luckily I don't have to deal with restrictive rules as much. I will say there is a great Greek Orthodox church I have worked at that allowed my to get up on the alter (I was hidden). They knew how important the images were to the couple.

Amen William!

"This wedding was not for him. He was a guest (invited guest). The wedding was for the Bride, Groom and their families."

 

A presiding minister is not an invited guest. And certainly, while the wedding is not for the clergy, it is even less for the photographer. If they have done their job, presiding clergy will likely have counseled with a couple for several hours, including time spent in going over what the couple really wants their service to be like.

 

Bright flashing lights are not usually high on the list for most couples.

 

The event is two people essentially giving ther lives to one another. It is not a photo-op, with a wedding motif tacked on...

 

Good photographers have long known how to record an event without imposing their equipment on it. It is sad that with the incredible capability of modern gear, many of the users of that gear don't seem to have a clue.

Reading some of these posts, it looks like that to some, a wedding is about an important event to the bride and groom and the wishes of the minister should be respected. To some others, it's about a "who cares if it's your church, I want to take all the photos I can." I could sure tell which ones were the pro wedding photogs and had money at stake!

Excellent point Jack.

 

Another way to look at it... What if a couple hired a pro to photograph the birth of their 1st child? Does the photographer capture the essence while not fundamentally changing the atmosphere? Or do they turn a beautiful moment in a paparazzi circus?

 

Pros, like good reporters, seem to be able to capture the moment without injecting themselves into the moment.

Even more sad Bill is the fear and silence that I've seen many officiants place upon entire groups of family who

are celebrating the joining of two souls.

 

I've seen entire groups of 50 to 100 and more people shocked and shamed into somber silence at moments of shear

joy ... some of the officiants are more shocking than any flash that might "illuminate" the wedding for

generations of family to come who may love to see the ceremony. A small cost for such great benefits.

 

Why not join the joy and the celebration? It's only about 30 or 40 minutes.

 

But, the bottom line is it's "your" church so I guess he who owns the location makes the rules; we won't even

wonder out loud about whether the church is really owned for and by the people or not. I think most exalted ones

would be ashamed at how families are treated in their names.

 

Jack: the church belongs to The People; strange concept but worthy of some thought.

I repeat--Bill isn't against using flash or photographing the ceremony--just the insensitive people, whether guest or photographer, who can't control their gear and who can't exercise common courtesy.

Sorry William, it's not my church, nor even my wedding... I'm just the one who has the moral and legal responsibility to help a couple (who has freely come for counsel) to knowingly and joyfully join their lives together in perhaps the most important day of their lives. I have the same prohibition of flash whether inside a sanctuary or not.

 

This may be hard to get, but it's not about the building, the decor, the money to be made... It's about a precious moment that is best enjoyed and remembered when it has not had smothering media imposed on it.

 

The weddings I do are always a celebration. Photographers toting batteries and strobes have never contributed to this. In fact, they look silly.

 

Photographers need to stay in the background. Record the event, not BE the event. Have as much class as film or flash-cards. They're just not that important to the realization of the event. Couples I work with always want a memorable and joyful service that has integrity. They NEVER ask, "Can we please have lights flashing in our faces when we're reciting our vows?"