What makes the best wedding pictures?

imagemaker46 · Sep 20, 2013

This can be answered by anyone, no photo skill necessary. Do the average setup, look the same from every wedding pictures look better than the spontaneous pictures?

Personally I will always go with spontaneous images that are the real moments that happen, over the stand still fake smile group shots that are the boring standard which defines most wedding shoots. I believe it takes more experience to shoot a "freestyle" wedding than a setup, catching the sudden moments, is more difficult than having people stand still, being able to shoot, check and re-shoot allows for errors to be corrected.

pixmedic · Sep 20, 2013

eh, i cant say for sure which one is more difficult, OR better. subjectivity and all that mess...
sometimes it isnt a matter of what the photographer wants, but rather what is MOST important, what the clients want. (or like/prefer)
why does shooting one style preclude you from shooting a different style as well at the same event?
why cant you have formals AND candid's? We do at every wedding we shoot.

I will point out that while you maintain that shooting a "freestyle" wedding is harder, I believe (having shot plenty of both) that "lifestyle" photography is easier. formal portraiture requires much more compositional thinking, as well as organizational skills getting everyone in the right order, in the right place, at the right time. Its much easier (for us anyway) to run around looking for "candid" moments to shoot with people just doing whatever they happen to be doing at the time, than actually having to CREATE (and re-create sometimes) those moments.

you want to know whats difficult? taking a 30 person bridal party AFTER the ceremony, that are scattered all over creation yapping with people, attention spans of gerbils, and literally WRANGLING them back together and getting them into proper positions (and KEEPING them there) for the formal portraits.....maddening. Just taking pictures as things happen and NOT having to instruct, direct, or setup anyone? yes please!

your mileage may vary though, I can only speak from my own personal wedding and portrait experience.

runnah · Sep 20, 2013

Lens flare.

Designer · Sep 20, 2013

IMO, in general, the posed pictures look better to me because of the focus, light, opportunity for re-takes, etc.

Some of the spontaneous photos are wonderful, but they won't take the place of more formal shots in 20 or 30 year's time.

kathyt · Sep 20, 2013

The only posed shots I do during weddings are the formals.

kathyt · Sep 20, 2013

runnah said:
Lens flare.

I like lens flare.

Designer · Sep 20, 2013

$2,000.

tirediron · Sep 20, 2013

The ones that the client likes well enough to refer you to all of his/her friends!

Derrel · Sep 20, 2013

A really hot bride, and multiple, cleavy, attractive bridesmaids help a whole lot...

texkam · Sep 20, 2013

A Canon.

terri · Sep 20, 2013

imagemaker46 said:
This can be answered by anyone, no photo skill necessary. Do the average setup, look the same from every wedding pictures look better than the spontaneous pictures?

Personally I will always go with spontaneous images that are the real moments that happen, over the stand still fake smile group shots that are the boring standard which defines most wedding shoots. I believe it takes more experience to shoot a "freestyle" wedding than a setup, catching the sudden moments, is more difficult than having people stand still, being able to shoot, check and re-shoot allows for errors to be corrected.

As a sports photographer, it's not surprising that you would prefer this approach. But what you refer to as "the average setup, look the same from every wedding" may also be the only way the B&G can get a good shot of dear old Aunt Sally in her Sunday best. I've been given lists of "Aunt Sallys" to deliberately round up for such shots by the B&G, and would not have been providing them what they asked for by failing to produce these shots. You also don't give due credit to the special lighting and subtle group arrangement skills needed to ensure everyone is visible and no one blinks - in other words, these shots require skill.

As Pix mentions, an album with several "freestyle" or "photo-journalistic" style shots, combined with the formal group shots, usually make for the most interesting viewing. Well-produced group shots also show the photographer was in charge of the event, and captured all the important family members. An album with nothing but "freestyle" shots might suggest the photographer was only able to charge about willy-nilly, capturing what he could in the chaos, and was unable to lasso the wedding party and important guests all together. You want to avoid giving that impression unless you've been specifically asked to do it that way.

JacaRanda · Sep 20, 2013

Derrel said:
A really hot bride, and multiple, cleavy, attractive bridesmaids help a whole lot...

Damn, I wanted to give that answer!

Derrel for Prez 9/20/13 to 10/20/13

JacaRanda · Sep 20, 2013

I think of the disposable cameras on every table as the ones used for freestyle.

imagemaker46 · Sep 20, 2013

terri said:
imagemaker46 said:

This can be answered by anyone, no photo skill necessary. Do the average setup, look the same from every wedding pictures look better than the spontaneous pictures?

Personally I will always go with spontaneous images that are the real moments that happen, over the stand still fake smile group shots that are the boring standard which defines most wedding shoots. I believe it takes more experience to shoot a "freestyle" wedding than a setup, catching the sudden moments, is more difficult than having people stand still, being able to shoot, check and re-shoot allows for errors to be corrected.

Click to expand...

As a sports photographer, it's not surprising that you would prefer this approach. But what you refer to as "the average setup, look the same from every wedding" may also be the only way the B&G can get a good shot of dear old Aunt Sally in her Sunday best. I've been given lists of "Aunt Sallys" to deliberately round up for such shots by the B&G, and would not have been providing them what they asked for by failing to produce these shots. You also don't give due credit to the special lighting and subtle group arrangement skills needed to ensure everyone is visible and no one blinks - in other words, these shots require skill.

As Pix mentions, an album with several "freestyle" or "photo-journalistic" style shots, combined with the formal group shots, usually make for the most interesting viewing. Well-produced group shots also show the photographer was in charge of the event, and captured all the important family members. An album with nothing but "freestyle" shots might suggest the photographer was only able to charge about willy-nilly, capturing what he could in the chaos, and was unable to lasso the wedding party and important guests all together. You want to avoid giving that impression unless you've been specifically asked to do it that way.

It really shouldn't make any difference that I am a sports photographer, I am an experienced photographer. I can only base my opinion on a few weddings I've shot, and I shot both the standard setups, and I shot a lot of the fun, spontaneous moments. I have also been to a lot of weddings, and as a photographer I watched how the hired photographer shot, and missed so many great moments. I drove my wife nuts, by constantly saying "he missed that one, and that one" I ended up shooting a wedding a while later and didn't miss those shots, I had a gut feeling that they would happen, based on what I had paid attention to earlier, and they were spontaneous moments, that happened during the standard setups, or part of the ceremony(I didn't miss shooting the ceremony, to get those shots)

I suppose it all comes down to the experience of the photographer and the ability to see and react to events that happen at the same time.

Setting up group shots is at the very least a basic requirement at any wedding, that doesn't take much to put together. Being able to capture the "willy-nilly" as you put it, doesn't say the photographer hasn't got a clue, or the ability to put a group together, but says they have the ability to react to moments that happen quickly, in this case I will say shooting sports would be an asset.

Setting up a group shot is no different from taking a picture of a barn or a flower, you still need the right light for it to work. It's really a point the camera, "everyone right here at me" shoot a dozen frames, best one should be around frame 4-5, everyone will be paying attention by then.