Wedding Paparazzi- put your guns away, please...

[timages]

<p>I just did a wedding Job yesterday (Sunday 30th Aug) I dont make a F/T living from it, but I have done quite a few over the years, It is very annoying when you just set up a good B/G pose then everyone takes out their compacts, justling for position amongst each other to grab a shot, I walked backwards into one guy nearly knocked him over, but what can you do, its part of the job I think, like someone said, they are all family and freinds of the couple and its only understandable, if annoying at times! I do think its a bit extreme to specify in any contract that the B/G must ensure no one impedes on you while your doing your thing! Its their big day which they want to enjoy, they are not there to act as policemen for the official Photographer!!!!</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Free Rider--did I not say that I don't use the clause that way? Most pros don't either. My point is, if a pro does not have that clause, they have no way of controlling wedding day photo sessions if other methods fail.</p>

<p>You are certainly entitled to your opinion about pro photographers images vs. guests, but I don't see anyone above claiming to be more important than the bride and groom. I believe Nicole was objecting to people who photograph all the set ups by the pro photographer. I can't see how this is unreasonable and supporting a claim that they are more important than the bride and groom.</p>

[f_r2]

<p>Nadine, many of the posts in this thread hint at the importance of the pro photographer and are somewhat condescending to the bride and groom and the couples' guest.</p>

<p>I found two sentences in particular interesting. Both hint at this importance of the photographer.</p>

<p>Marc in reference to guests who should be staying out of his way: " It's a wedding, not a photo op designed for your creative outlet. "</p>

<p>OP about guests who shoot her formal setups: "All of our creativity was being leeched."</p>

<p>The wedding is not a photo op designed for the photogs' creative outlet either. The wedding day is a celebration, not a theatrical performance. As I've mentioned, the best wedding photog I've seen doesn't do the formal poses on the wedding day. The wedding day is handled in a photojournalistic way and the formal photographs in the studio. </p>

<p>I don't see how it's reasonable that the photog should prevent others from shooting the poses. It's not like the photog had anything to do with the elements such as dress, makeup, etc. One could say that the photog is leeching the creativity of the dressmaker, the baker, the makeup artist.</p>

[david_amberson1]

<p>I agree with Marc and Nadine 100%. Marc, I cant beleive that happened to you. I would have went directly to him and then brought the Bride to him as well and asked, "Are you a hotdog vendor man. Take photographs if you want, but dont come pedaling your little business right under me while I am working. Its the same thing as a wholesale car dealer going to a Dealership and walking around talking to potential buyers about not buying their car and buying mine. Its not the wholesalers customers, its the dealers if the customer is on their lot. Just down right rude and ballsy of that guy. I thought I had seen it all, WOW!</p>

<p>Free Rider- The B&G pay a wedding photographer to be there casue they feel its important enough to do so. So to them, the photog is important. From your comment, you sound just like one of these wedding paparazzi's and get upset when a pro asked you to stop trying to build a portfolio at there expense.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Personally, I think the guests' photographs, especially if they know a little about exposure, come out better than the pros.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Are you kidding? Get real. That sounds just like a wannabe photographer that feels competition froma working pro.<br>

New DSLR's have become a real problem...in that they are so good and affordable, that these people think shooting green mode or P makes them a photographer. So they feel the need to try and take your position during photo ops. I had a girl shooting over my shoulder about 2 weddings ago and I was constantly fighting with the formal shots trying to keep the B&G from looking at their friends and look at me. Finally, I did what Jen Lambert did. I had a strobe for hair/key light, I set it to fire optically, so when she shot, that strobe fired directly down the barre of her lens. She had the nerve to ask me to turn of the optical trigger cause it was blowing out her photos. I told her, "No, I am using these to try to give the B&G what they paid 'ME' for, not you"</p>

<p>Turns out, the girls was the video guys wife and she was trying to build a portfolio for herself so they could rap up both side...video and still....all the while piggy backing me.</p>

<p>So my new plan has been, let everyone photograph groups they want...without any of my lighting setup/on, then when they are done, I position/turn on my lights and this way, they get what they get, I get what I get.</p>

<p>I agree, that it may be time to raise prices and just do base DVD packages andlet the clients deal with the printing. I made good money off prints, and my packages were priced as such, but its much harder these days with all the paparazzi out there. The guests that went to Wolf and bought a D40 kit that think they are professionals.</p>

<p>I shot a wedding this weekend at a Civic Center. It had 2 wedding venues. I was shooting one, and another was scheduled to start as ours was ending. The photog that was going to shoot the late wedding, took shots at my bride. Then followed me out to my car and asked what settings I was shooting, how to set WB on her cameras, should she motor drive or regular, and should she set her ISO at f5.6 or f6.3....yes all this is true!<br>

But this is the norm these days. I have it happen to me at prom sittings....you name it. But she bought 2 used D70's one big lens and thinks she's a photographer... I let her burry herself. I used to love to help people, but these days, I'm sick of having to deal with these leaches and will let them dry out. That may not have been one of my customers, but it could have been a real pro's that works at this to feed their family and lost that job to someone who barely knows how to turn the camera on. Chances are, the B&G didnt care, and thats why they used her, but she sure was in a panic when I didnt offer help, so who knows, maybe she didnt tell the B&G.<br>

All we can do is work around it. Its not gonna change, so we have to adapt ways of dealing with it and make sure our work separates us from the Free Riders.</p>

<p>Marc....seriously....you didnt punch him or anything......MAN!</p>

[picturesque]

<p the wedding day isn't designed for photo ops. However, the couple has willingly hired a professional photographer, so I assume they want the photos and will make the necessary time to have them taken. That time is precious--not in the somewhat sarcastic way you used the word--the original meaning. So if a guest or friend photographer is taking up a lot of that time, I will control him or her, because the couple is paying me to take the photos. Same if that person is distracting enough that my subjects' eyes are wandering all over the place, or become uncomfortable with too many photographers giving directions, etc. Again--I assume this will be OK with the couple because they want the photos, and they want the pro to be able to accomplish what they are paying him or her to do.</p>

<p>Not everyone is going to want to do formals separately, and anyway, family and friends will be difficult to get on another day, all dressed up as if at the actual wedding.</p>

<p>I don't find it unreasonable to object to others photographing set ups by the hired pro. Same reason as I just outlined--but, again--that is your opinion. I have mine.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>I go over the contract, usually in person, with the couple before anyone signs anything, including my exclusivity clause. No one has every objected, and I've done this many, many times over the years. As I said, this is because they want the photos. In no way are professional photographers imposing their wishes on the couple. They come to us, remember? No one is forcing them to hire professionals. And if they didn't want to comply with the contract terms, they can certainly decline to sign the contract, thereby declining to do business with that photographer. They are free to go find someone that will let anyone photograph anything at the wedding or become one of the many couples who don't hire a professional. It's a free country.</p>

[bobcossar]

<p><strong>"Photo.net asks for enough information to sustain itself as a "real name community" of accountable, identified individuals helping each other improve as photographers"</strong></p>

<p>That is a quote from the sign-up info. So.....I'd like to see a ruling on the "free rider" anonymity issue.....Thanks, Bob<strong><br /> </strong></p>

[stephen_asprey2]

<p>It all just proves Nicole's point, and mine. It also proves that the fee should be paid in advance including 4-6 fine art prints. Then if cousin mickey does get in the way, the B&G have a stake in it.</p>

<p>My grandfather would have turned in his grave if he read some of this.</p>

<p> </p>

[vihao]

<p>I'm going to share two very different stories as one of those wedding guests who brings his DSLR along with him.<br>

Story 1...<br>

Two of my friends who got married back in May hired Ben Chrisman (www.benchrisman.com) as their wedding photographer. During the reception he noticed me walking around with my D300. He pulled me aside and told me that the mother-of-the-bride wanted a picture of him playing with a guest's guide dog and asked me if I would take the picture for him (even though his assistant/GF was the second shooter). I was about to use my camera but he stopped me and handed his camera to me to use instead. Later on after dinner I was walking around taking pictures of my friends with an SB-800 attached to my camera. He walked over and told me that there was a better way to use the flash.<br>

"Turn it backwards," he says. When I tell him I don't know what he's talking about he asks me to give him my camera. I hand it over to him and he turns the flash head counter-clockwise so that it's pointing up at a 45 degree angle over my left shoulder. He then tells me that orienting the flash this way will produce a more pleasant look and hands me back my camera. I thank the guy he he goes back to doing what he does without saying another word.<br>

Story 2...<br>

Another friend of mine got married in July and hired a local wedding the photographer. As usual, I'm walking around taking pictures of my friends during the reception, but this time with my SB-800 turned around. I stop for a bit to chat with with my friends. Out of nowhere the photographer stops three feet in front of me. Without saying a word he brings his camera up to his chest and pulls off five or six shots in rapid succession with his flash firing directly in my face (I'm assuming it was in Commander Mode and therefore had a quick recharge rate). After that he turned around and walked away without saying a word.<br>

The Verdict...<br>

My friends and I have not seen any of the second photographer's photos yet so we cannot judge him by the merit of his work, but all 16 of my friends at the wedding saw what happened. Needless to say, none of us would ever consider hiring him or recommending him to our other friends or family. I still don't know what I did specifically to earn his hostility, but his actions made him look petty and unprofessional and that's the reputation he's gained from that wedding.<br>

As for Ben Chrisman, I was gushing about him and his work so much that my friends are convinced that I have a man crush on him... not that there's anything wrong with that.<br>

My advice is this, if you absolutely need to put a stop to a wedding guest, don't be a passive-aggressive a** about it. You're going to put your reputation on the line.</p>

[flietyer]

<p>Okay maybe I'll be out of line here but here goes anyway. As I stated before I try to stay outta the way. I'm not there to be paid and I don't make my living with my camera. I've sold a few (never of a wedding, that's just tacky) and would like to think I do okay.<br>

I make my living twisting wrenches, and I am <a href="mailto:D@*%$">D@*%$</a> good at it. And you know what I hate? Peaple getting in my way, having me do the diagnostic work then "fixing" it with inferior parts. What I don't mind is some young kid coming in and being respectful, asking questions, such as why, and how. Really trying to learn a thing or two. Actually I like people willing to learn, what ever I'm doing. But they can't get in my way while I'm working on another customer's vehicle, only their own.<br>

So I guess if you've hired a photographer to do your wedding, or anything else, and want to get in thier way, knock yourself out. However if someone else is paying the bill stay outta their way. Because what you are doing is making it diffacult for your friends (the B&G) to get their money's worth, because their hired photographer is distracted, I won't even answer the phone when I'm working. Just think if they had hired me to fix their car and you distracted me while I was putting their brakes together. While wedding photos might not be a life and death matter, tell some brides that.<br>

It's just common courtisy. You wouldn't try to walk over the minister and do your own vows for them. You wouldn't try to sit on the limo drivers lap and stear. You might tell the caterer how to cook the roast beef I supose but would you bring your own? well unless it was a potluck affair.<br>

And if I hire someone to do something please let them do their work. wlt<br>

p.s. the guy pedling pictures at a wedding, was he there with the brides family, the grooms family or was he some outsider? I guess I never thought of doing something like that, its just wrong on so many levels</p>

 

[george_peng1]

<p>I don't know if we're arguing about the guy who was peddling his prints during somebody else's wedding, which does pretty much seem like pure jackassery, or whether guests have the right to shoot their own pictures during a wedding/reception.</p>

<p>As I said, I shoot my friends at weddings, many of whom I don't see terribly frequently, and lets just say that in that matter, I really couldn't care less if the photographer feels his prerogative is being violated. That said, as I said, I stay out of his/her way and shoot pictures he/she clearly wouldn't and couldn't get because he simply doesn't have the background to know who's important to the B&G, other than the wedding party and family.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>George, some people 'arguing' are confused about what has been said. I don't think anyone who posted on this thread said anything about stopping guest or family photographers who aren't interfering with the pro photographer's work. Interfering means anything from distracting subjects during the formals session all the way to 'being' the pro photographer by shooting what the pro shoots or shadowing him or her. What you describe--taking pictures of your friends and the things the pro doesn't usually shoot, does not fit the definition of interfering, IMHO.</p>

[missy_kay]

<p>I actually had an opposite experience with a rude photographer as a guest. I always know never to get in the way of a photographer because I want them to get the best pictures possible because its my friends wedding. So about 3 weeks ago, I go to my friends high-end wedding and bring my one camera and one lens. I sat all the way in the back of the aisle in a seat to not disturb anyone to get in anyone's way.<br>

Then while the whole ceremony was going on, the photographer noticed I carried some good gear and came over and put his butt in my lens and started taking pictures. Pretty much the whole time! Now I know I didn't have the best location because I was way in the back and to the left. So why wouldnt he just have stayed in the center? I thought it was very rude and he should have been more concerned with the actual ceremony. Not to mention, that and the first dance is the only time I had my camera at all.</p>

[DickArnold]

<p>When I retired as an executive about twelve years ago I had a job where I was aggressive, led people and organized them to produce results. How is this relavent to weddings. Almost immediately after I retired I was unexpectedly thrust by odd chance (voluntarily) into setting up my own wedding business. I quickly learned that I had to undergo a metamorphisis in that I had to step into the background, get along with everybody I dealt with and serve the people who were hiring me. I learned and understood that the wedding was not about me and that I was there to document the good time and not interfere with it. The wedding was, in my mind, about the paricipants and the celebration. My motto was "bite your tongue, Dick". I actually began to enjoy pleasing my customers but it was a far different role than I played for many years. This mind set then, IMO, had a lot to do about how I treated those helpers that tagged along taking their own pictures. My first large wedding, one that was booked for 30 people but turned into well over two hundred out of doors in the blazing noonday sun. half the party did not show up for the pre-ceremony formals. I believe that situational flexibility is an important attribute and just went plan B. The groom's mother fancied herself as a photographer and duplicated almost every shot that I took doing the formals including the B&G. There was no real diplomatic way to stop her. She, however, had to be in a few of mine. She lived not far from me and helped me without my asking to sort my pictures and although she had money she considered herself a station above and treated me as hired help (bite your tongue, Dick was a new role for me then). We actually got along OK and she picked most of my pictures over hers. At the time, I was a very active stringer for the local paper and elbowing my way into pictures with competing photographers was part of the work. So I never thought much about those at the weddings who liked to step in front of me, take pictures of my set ups and spoil one of my shots on rare occasions. I just took it as part of the deal and my obligation to treat all customers right including those who wanted to take pictures. I wound up getting lots of referral busines. One other key part of getting along with the customer was the interview, not so much becasue of contracts, but if I could and did really establish a friendly supportive atmosphere with the bride, groom and mothers then when problems(like unexpected rain, pushy photo helpers) came along the communication was easy, supportive and friendly. I was a Drill Instructor in the military but I never had to resort to my darker side in any of my weddings except that I am damn good at organizing groups. I think a relaxed demeanor at the actual wedding helps a great deal. Bob I certainly agree with you about establishing a recognizable identity here in PN and even more so about establishing a friendly and supportive atmosphere. Nadine you are at the top of the list of the most helpful contibutors as far as I am concerned.</p>

[Member69643]

<p>In America, the principle of free market economics means that you as a business will be subject to competition. People are free to choose which product they buy. People are free to copy what you do and sell it unless they violate a copyright. Ultimately, your product must be better or cheaper or both, to get people to buy it. If you compare photographs and you can't tell a difference between your work and that of a guest, and say definitively that yours is better, you will not sell your image - especially since you are probably competing with free images. Digital imaging has made photographers out of everybody. The competition level today is 100 times what it was in the days of film but in the film days you could see the difference. A pro shooting a medium format SLR versus a p&s 35mm or even a 35mm SLR was no contest. All the pro had to do was get halfway decent composition and proper exposure and his pictures were leaps and bounds above the guest competition.. As a professional your work must still be definitively better than the competition, which in some cases, nowadays, is nearly impossible. Nearly.</p>

<p>The fault lies not in our stars (competition) but in ourselves.</p>

[fotografz]

<p>Nadine summed it up. No one is saying guests shouldn't shoot photos at a wedding. As I said ... that's a fact of life these days. </p>

 

The concern is about those who feel compelled to fulfill some personal photo mission, to the point they interfere with the job the wedding photographer is being paid to do. It's that simple, and nothing more.

<p>Are there rude wedding photographers? Evidently there are judging by those having witnessed it. But there are rude people in every profession, so it's likely there are some in wedding photography.</p>

<p>I have witnessed on a number of occasions rude wedding guests, or at least thoughtless ones. At one wedding, so many people were taking photos of the Grand Entrance, including stuffing cameras right in the bridal party's face, that the very angry Best Man stopped with his hands over his eyes, and complained loudly that he felt he had been a victim of a lighting strike! </p>

<p>In the end we do what we can, and try our best to control the situation enough to do our job.</p>

<p>Self proclaimed judges that don't do this for a living may not realize the sense of responsibility most wedding shooters feel to their clients ... and the stress of trying to get the important shots, both posed and candid, that the B&G expect ... all while trying to not upset the often hectic wedding time-line.</p>

<p> </p>

[Dave Gardner]

<p>Marc,</p>

<p>I never said that 'you' get enraged....but it is clearly that some do. I also didn't threat that wedding photography was going the way as the Dodo bird....it was not a threat....just an observation on high paying wedding photography.</p>

<p>I'm also glad that your not worried about the "untalented" as you referred to them....though i've seen some of these images on this forum....and to me their not bad at all. And i'm glad your business is up....even though you had stated on a recent thread that your business was down...like most of the elite wedding photographers that now have to give a '<strong>let me show you how course</strong> ' or <strong>sell PS actions</strong> to supplement their income....because of all the new found time on their hands. </p>

<p>You say that you don't mind others shooting....yet your words say otherwise. <strong>Untalented, all the fun and none of the responsibility. </strong> </p>

<p>There is alot of talent on this forum.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

[hansm]

<p>As long as it are reltatives of the couple I don't do that much agains it.<br>

Only during the ceremonies I ask them to enjoy the ceremony instead if clicking around with their DSLR's or mobiles.<br>

Anyway during the location shoot no guests are with us so there is no worrie for me on that point.<br>

But ofcource when shooting gruops people are taking the oppotutnity to shoot the groups also. I don't care on that point. As long as they are opperating on the background.</p>

<p>Luckely I never have seen a paparazzi showing up and shooting + selling his pics to the people. I really would not accept that.<br>

What botherewx me more is when there is also a videoguy to register the wedding. Some of them are really a pain.<br>

Somehow I can't work together with them. You ask them not to show opposite of me but they don't care. Some times I had the couple to redo THE kiss because a big lens is showing up from the other side.</p>

<p> </p>

[fotografz]

<p>Dave, it's not clear here that anyone gets "enraged" ... which is an inflammatory exaggeration of people "irritated by" or concerned about over zealous guests interfering with the "official" paid photography.</p>

<p>BTW, yes my business was down for a while ... some time ago (which you failed to mention) , but I changed my marketing approach, and it's way up.</p>

<p>"Untalented" the way you state it is out of context and did not refer to anyone on this forum as you stated .... it referenced the over zealous amateur who has no responsibility attached to their actions. If their photos don't turn out, they just shrug their shoulders. The paid photographer doesn't have that luxury.</p>

<p>I also wouldn't confuse what's written here, and how it can get twisted or misunderstood ... with what people actually do and how they treat people on the job. I personally spend enormous amounts of time helping people with their photography in my spare time. I go way out of my way to provide not only quality product to my clients, but go beyond their expectations every time ... for every client no matter what level of package they buy ... even if I do it for free to help some friend out. My clients ALL comment on how easy we are to work with and how accommodating we are.</p>

<p>Also, for clarification, Jonathan ... no one is talking about people like you, that may have been asked by the B&G to take photos, and are respectful of the person being paid to do the job. Not all camera toting guest are like you, and some really aren't respectful of anyone while on their personal mission, including their hosts ... that is who we are discussing.</p>

<p> </p>

[timages]

<p>Has anyone come across people who have no relation to the Wedding, i.e. not family or freinds, but just like watching weddings for some bizzare reason. I had a funny incident at a church wedding once, I dont know about the states but here in the U.K. the Vicars are obsessive about no one taking shots during the service, especialy with flash, (I usually sneak a few with a fast Lens) I noticed these two old woman, both with compacts hanging around outside during the arrivals, it became obvious they had nothing to do with the wedding at all, just some kind of Wedding watchers. The Vicar made a big thing about asking people not to take photos during the service saying I could pose them after the actual service. During which, one of these old woman came in as bold as brass walked right up the aisle and with flash on took one of the B/G stood at the alter, the vicar has his head down in a book or bible at the time, but soon as the flash went of he looked straight at me, giving me the evil eye, I just pointed to this old woman walking out. I thought it was funny.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>In San Francisco, there is a church--St. Peter and Paul--that attracts tourists. When I've photographed weddings there, there have been a number of occasions where tourists stand at the back of the church and snap pictures. Perhaps those women were toursits.</p>

<p>I have also heard of people wanting to build portfolios, crashing weddings this way to get images.</p>

[melissa_arcuri1]

<p>I have had people ask me to move out of THEIR way as I was shooting a posed shot of the bride and her nieces and nephews, I have had someone REST their lens ON MY SHOULDER as I was shooting, I have had countless friends and relatives ask me annoying questions as I was in the middle of shooting and I have had to ask people to stop telling the bridal party to look at them while I am shooting. I have been so infuriated that I have literally wanted to punch people in their faces and stomp on their cameras. Of course I did not actually maim people or equipment, but I did play out the scene in my head and it always made me feel a little better. I wish I could remember all the crazy scenarios but I think I have blocked most of it out.<br>

This is what I say. "Please let us get the shots we need. The bride and groom are paying us to take pictures. As soon as we are done feel free to shoot." And we always made sure we said to the group being photographed, "OK everyone look at us first than stay where you are so everyone else has a chance." As our style is photojournalistic we tried to keep posed shots to half an hour. By reminding everyone that they could start the party as soon as the photos were done it kept it moving nicely.<br>

It is frustrating, annoying, anger inducing and rude but it happens. Be nice but firm. I have an incredible sarcastic streak which allows me to tell people off and they aren't offended. Dont involve the bride and groom if you dont have to. But, more times than not they knew what was happening and almost always reprimanded their unruly friends and relatives.</p>

[cjogo]

<p>Most guest have better gear them me --- and I believe I have no right to hinder anyones shooting. If there is a problem ...I simply tell the B&G that many of their photos will have xxx 's head in clear view/ ...and leave up to them to<em> iron</em> things out . Many guests think my hand-meter is a camera and whilst walking up to meter > figure I am finished with my shot :: </p>

[regas chefas]

<p>I love it when the guests are taking photos. I know they aren't going to be close to mine. Trust me on this. Of all the guests there may be one or two great photos...but they will not be well-exposed or with good white balance. Plus they will suffer in post. <br>

I love to work with the guests with cameras and chat with them and joke around. They seem to love it too. I recently shot a wedding where the FOB, Bride, Brother of Groom and an uncle were all wedding photographers. But they hired me. I loved it. I worked with those other photogs, they loved me and we all had a little love fest. I love to show them how to bounce their flash if they don't know. I love to chat with them for a second while I'm waiting for the bride to come in the room. I don't mind a bit. When something happens and I need to cover it I say "Oops! Gotta get back to work" with a smile and then I get back to work. Not that hard really.<br>

What was great was when they all saw my photos on facebook and they loved them. It means more when to me when it's coming from people who know the job and were there.<br>

Having this relationship with the paparazzi helps me say later on "Okay, you guys wait for a second and then I'll give you a chance to shoot this picture." They are usually happy to comply. Or "Okay, don't set up behind me because I move fast for a big guy and my catlike reflexes might not be enough to keep us from falling!" They usually laugh and stay out of my way.<br>

Everybody having a camera means that more people are trying to take photos. If everybody's doing it, well, that's a lot of people doing it, but only one can, ah, be the best. (Color of Money) <br>

Seriously though, the more they try to take pictures, the more they appreciate what we do. The more we are humble and show them how much work it is - the more they want to leave it to the pros.<br>

Photographing a wedding for money is work. You might enjoy it or you might not. Landscaping a yard is work that most of us can do. Shovels are good now. They are even made out of metal. You can go to Wal-Mart and buy the same shovel that your landscaper uses and probably do a better job digging the hole than he will. But you hire him to do it. Because it's not what you have chosen to do with your life. Because you don't want to spend your whole weekend digging holes.<br>

Shooting a wedding as a guest is one thing. Being there for 10+ hours without so much as sitting down for a proper break and keeping track of all the details AND keeping your cool with everyone AND getting the best possible pictures all day is a totally different kettle of fish. <br>

If people want to try it. I say go ahead. If they don't love doing it, they won't last. If they don't last, they'll be looking for someone to refer when their friends/family get married. If they remember that you helped them, kept your cool, made them laugh and took great pictures...who do you think they'll refer?<br>

~rc</p>

<p> </p>