No photos in the church

<p>Hi,<br>

anyone ever had a priest say "no photos at all in the church"? Ive been told before no flash or only photograph the actual vows, ringechange and kiss but never nothing at all. He said i can do set up photos at the end but that takes all the character out the photos. The expresions and emotions that make the moment so special are gone. I actually find it a bit selfish on the priests part. A couples wedding day is one of the most important days of their lives and they spend a lot of time and money getting it just right. They obviously want to remember the day forever.We are hired to help them remember through are photography. How many times do you get the couple saying to you when they look at the photos "oh i really dont remember that" or "so much was happening i didnt take it all in"? Because of the priest the bride and groom arent going to be able to relive the most important part of the day. Is one photographer without flash and with a telephoto really going to ruin the service? Surely it should be the bride and groom that decides . Its their day and their photos. Sorry for the rant but it really angers me.Cheers.Mark</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Explain it to the B&G. If they can't reason with the Priest, or rent a different venue, or hire a different Priest, then you will have to respect his wishes.</p>

<p>I was married in a location that is considered sacred and no cameras are allowed on the premises. This is something I understood before getting married, and out of respect there was no photographer at the ceremony. I'll never have photographs as a memory from my wedding ceremony, but that's a religious decision. You can't mess with this, and certainly can't start getting your feathers rumpled and get offended. This fight is for the B&G to resolve, not you.</p>

<p>Many years ago when I used to do weddings part time, I was told no photos in the church. So I sat out in the entranceway and waited until they came out after the ceremony. </p>

<p>At another wedding, the bride told me beforehand that I was the only one allowed to take photos during the ceremony. When the minister was addressing those in attendance before the ceremony began, he said photos were not allowed. I took some at discreet distances, all without flash. After the ceremony I passed by the minister who did not look very pleased at me, he said "noisy camera you've got". I had turned off the motor drive and it was only the noise of the shutter tripping. No louder than someone coughing, but he obviously did not like it. It did not seem that what the bride told me was what the minister wanted. Got the shots anyway!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Are you sure the priest didn't mean flash? Sometimes they think the flash and shutter can't function independently. :) But I'm guessing he's seen plenty of weddings to know better.<br>

And I wouldn't throw this all into the B&G's lap. They can help but they hired you to deal with some of this as well. Talk with that priest... ask if you can at least park to the rear with long telephoto. Also remind him... (and this is my favorite), that you expect to see all guest cameras checked at the door.</p>

<p>It may be a shame that the cleints can't have all the photography they want at the church they want. It really shouldn't 'anger' you though. It not some personal affront to you. You can tell the client(s) what impact the rule has on the photography then, as you say, "urely it should be the bride and groom that decides". If the B&G want to get married there, nevertheless, then they are favoring priorities other than photography. If the number of weddings at the church plummeted because of couples decided to go elsewhere due to the rule or members of the church made a sufficient effort to change the rule, then it would likely change. Is there a rant based on 'anger' directed at clients, other couples and church memebrship who share in all the blame as well?</p>

<p>Hi Hal, yes i will obviously respect his decision and wouldnt dream of taking photos in the church if he doesnt want it. I will contact the B&G and explain what the preist said. I wouldnt put my opinions on them either, its not my place. It is like you said up to them to resolve it if they want to. Cheers.Mark</p>

<p>In my contract, I have a section which states that I am bound by the rules of the venue where the wedding is taking place. It's basically a confirmation of "their sandbox, their rules".</p>

<p>I also always ask for the minister's contact information well before the wedding so that I can get a hold of him/her and ask about the house rules. I've found that by being proactive and asking what they allow instead of making any assumptions, I'm often granted greater latitude.</p>

<p>Clergy are concerned that the photographer is going to be pushy and not heed the sanctity of the event. It's one more reason I attend the rehearsal - I get to meet the officiant face-to-face, talk to them about their rules, and get to seee the venue prior to the wedding day.</p>

<p>Wedding photographers have the worst reputation of all wedding vendors and, often, deservedly so. The more we can do to let the officiants know that we'll respect their space the better time we typically will have.</p>

<p>Seems likely the bride and groom are well aware of this fact or they wouldn't have chosen this venue. Doesn't seem like a huge deal at all to me.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>anyone ever had a priest say "no photos at all in the church"?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes. There was no photography allowed during the ceremony at my wedding. We were allowed staged shots at the end which we were perfectly happy with.</p>

<p>Hi ,i did ask the preist if he meant no flash but he said no photography at all. I feel angry but only because i feel the B&G are missing out on something i think they deserve. As i said though ill inform them what the priest said because they need to know about it then its up to them.Mark</p>

<p>Hi Rob, i did exactly what you said and i did get the priests contact info. i emailed with him asking for a time to phone then spoke to him. i didnt make any assumptions.ive already visited the church but in England we dont have rehersals<br>

Ryan the B&G didnt know about the churches rules about no photography.but that doesnt change the situation.Cheers.Mark</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I feel angry but only because i feel the B&G are missing out on something i think they deserve.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If the B&G agree to have their wedding be at a place that won't allow their wedding ceremony to be photographed, its difficult to see how the deserve to have their wedding photographed. Its their choice.</p>

<p>I'm sorry their choice makes you angry.</p>

<p>Mark - <br>

You need to let it go. You took your shot and the priest said "no, means NO". They all have their own rules and we have to live by them or we don't do the wedding. Yes, it does get frustrating at times, since you think that there would / should be some consistency, but my experience has taught me that the only consistency is their inconsistency. I've been in the same church with different officiants and the rules change. Ironically the older priest was more lenient then the younger one!</p>

<p>Bride and groom can now decide how they want to proceed. If they want the photos of the ceremony, they will a) change location; b) change officiant's or c) agree / work out a deal to stage them. I'm sure that they will still want formals, plus candids before / after and reception shots.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

<p>I actually live in Utah and because of the heavy population of LDS faith, I photograph a lot (like 80%) of couples who are married in the temple. Latter Day Saints feel that their temples and marriage is very sacred so they do not allow any photography in the building. I wait until the bride and groom come out of the temple and photograph the emotions exchanged with them and their family when they come out as a new married couple. It actually allows for some amazing candid moments, just a different approach. It does leave you with a lot less content, but usually the couple is so madly in love you can still feed off of that chemistry. Best of Luck!</p>

<p>The key think here is that this is not your problem! You just have to make sure that your clients know (and remember) that it was not you who decided this. They chose the location for their wedding and this is one of the negatives to their location. <br>

Shoot the reenactments and in the end, I doubt that anyone will notice that it was done.</p>

<p>I should have mentioned in my previous post that I always asked the bride before the wedding to check with the minister what his wishes for photography during the wedding. Most times they reported correctly and I acted accordingly.</p>

<p>Hi, thanks for your replys.The B&G have been informed of the situation. Theyve got a meeting with the priest soon so theyre gonna bring the subject up.Cheers.Mark</p>

 

<p>Yes. At a Baptist Church among others. <br>

REMEMBER: You're in a House of Worship and a guest, your not in a photo studio or in the outdoors. So obey the rules of that particular denomination or minister. </p>

<p><em>"I actually find it a bit selfish on the priests part........Because of the priest the bride and groom arent going to be able to relive the most important part of the day. .... Surely it should be the bride and groom that decides . Its their day and their photos." </em><br>

<em></em><br>

Doesn't matter one way or the other if you agree with the priest or not. It's a sacrament and not a photo-op. They chose the church and the preist, it's not up to the B/G or to you to pass judgement on how the priest performs his calling/duties.</p>

<p>I shot an entire ceremony through the window once.......what fun :( but it worked out anyway.</p>

<p>One wedding I did was: <em>No photography with a camera during the ceremony</em> . The video lady set up a tripod and left her camera on. I sat and waited for the kiss (that was OK to photograph) and made the video lady <em>bonker-out</em> as I stepped in front of her video rig to take the photo.</p>

<p>As noted above, the rules are for a reason...it is a wedding ceremony.</p>

<p>[unless you pass out lemon juice afterwards, you should be good to take the photos needed once the ceremony is completed by the priest.]</p>

<p> </p>

<p><em>"The video lady set up a tripod and left her camera on. I sat and waited for the kiss (that was OK to photograph) and made the video lady bonker-out as I stepped in front of her video rig to take the photo...." -Jerry</em><br>

<em></em><br>

Feel good about that do you? Was the video not for your clients, the B/G?</p>

<p><em>made the video lady <em>bonker-out</em> as I stepped in front of her video rig to take the photo.</em></p>

<p>what an ass<em><br /> </em></p>

<p >I won't get into how it is the Bride and Groom's choice . . . to choose what Church they use.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >And as to you being angry: I agree with JH on that point also - and I too am sorry that you are angry - I add, I think it is silly and possibly detrimental to your business to get angry over this issue.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >On the main point of your question: </p>

<p > </p>

<p >An English Photographer mentioned on a thread sometime last week that there, (in England), the Wedding Service is a Public Event - by law – anyone can enter the place of Worship. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >That is so where I reside too, and I think this stems from the old English Common Law which has it roots in an hybrid mix of Church Canon and State Law – and all the turmoil and fights contained therein.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I am a big fan of “Rapport” and I do that best face to face, so, yes to answer your question we do have Churches here who have signs on the Church Steps stating “No Photography inside the Church” – and that means at Weddings – the Church Wardens enforce it during a service, by asking people who take Photos, to leave the Premises.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I have photographed three Weddings at a particular Church which has this rule and prior to the first; I made a formal appointment with the Priest to introduce myself. I was not angry. I stated my experience and my intent and politely put a case that I was not wishing to disobey any local rule, nor to disturb the Service nor to demean the Religious Rite or reduce the Solemnity of the Occasion. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >My purpose was to simply document the Public Service of the Rites of Marriage, which I understood, if push came to shove – I was entitled so to do, even as a member of the Public, notwithstanding the fact that I had been contracted so to do.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >It was not a fiery exchange. The Priest took a considered approach: but I stuck to my opinion that it was my right to be allowed to document the event.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >And so it was agreed - we had a trial run to prove that he could not hear my shutter. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >On the day, I stuck to my end of the “deal” to the absolute letter: I worn soft shoes – I did not approach the Sanctuary or the Altar; I did not use Flash;. I did not move during any parts of the service which were Prayer – but only made one station change, during an Hymn – and that was from the side Aisle to the rear of the Church – where I remained until the final Blessing.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >At the end of the Service I ensured I thanked the Priest personally, and that evening a thank you note way sent in the mail, to him.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >The two subsequent Weddings in that Church required telephone call to his Office and I was “OK to go”</p>

<p >. </p>

<p >I have no idea what your laws are over there regarding the Public nature of the event. But really it doesn’t matter – because the key element is “Rapport”.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >You have two (realistic) choices:</p>

<p > </p>

<p >a) Ensure the Bride and Groom understand what is going to happen and what the outcome will be and DO NOT take any Photographs in the Church - or let them work it out – i.e. do not take it on as your problem.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >b) Take it on as part of your job and be prepared to negotiate the terms of Photography professionally and cordially with the Head Guy. (not some Middle-manager)</p>

<p > </p>

<p >And . . . </p>

<p > </p>

<p >You have one unrealistic option: </p>

<p > </p>

<p >c) Say to hell with it and take the photos anyway.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Options (a) and (b) require you not to be angry at all for them to succeed. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I suggest you choose either (a) or (b) dependent upon what exactly your business is and what extent of services, you provide to your Client.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Option © – I DO NOT advise – but if you are going to do it, then a bit of anger will probably assist you – but I would cut it short if the cops are called in.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >WW </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

 

<p><em>"On the day, I stuck to my end of the “deal” to the absolute letter: I worn soft shoes – I did not approach the Sanctuary or the Altar; I did not use Flash;. I did not move during any parts of the service which were Prayer – but only made one station change, during an Hymn – and that was from the side Aisle to the rear of the Church – where I remained until the final Blessing......At the end of the Service I ensured I thanked the Priest personally, and that evening a thank you note way sent in the mail, to him." -WW</em><br>

<em></em><br>

Now that's class.........good on ya' mate!</p>