Do i really need a photographer for the entire wedding!

That’s what I thought! I’m having my photographer for 2 1/2 hours which will take me through the cake cutting and it’s costing me 1/2 as much.. No need for a million pics of people partying...

I hired mine for just 5 hours. She will take pictures of bride and bridesmaids getting ready, ceremony, cake cutting, first dance, and bride and groom pic. She starts at 2 which is an hour before we leave for wedding and is done before dinner at reception.

Ours is only doing the ceremony. We hired she and her husband on a site called Thumbtack. My FH's niece will take pictures of our reception. Photography is a hobby of hers an she is very good. Maybe someone you know who takes good pictures could just take pictures of the reception.

I think it depends on timing. My ceremony and reception are hours apart from each other. I’m going to end up paying for some down time for photographer. I wanted to own my photos afterwards and to do that, I had to have them longer.

I didn’t feel the need for photos of me getting ready. I wasn’t sure i was going to use half dressed photos of me getting eyelashes applied.


We had a first look which our photographer captured along with our ceremony. During cocktail hour, we got more photos and they stuck around for the beginning of our reception for the ‘important things’
In total, we had them for 3-4 hours.

I’m cutting costs by not having the photographer there for getting ready pictures. I just didn’t see the need for professional pics of me getting my makeup/hair done, or getting dressed. I’m just going to have the girls getting ready with me take informal pics with their phones- that way I still have memories to look back on later, without wasting time/money on professional photos of it.

No, it’s not necessary for a photographer to stay until the night ends. Once you get through those events during the reception, they can stay and take a few photos of people dancing. But after that, there isn’t much else to photograph. However, make sure your timeline is adjusted to fit the time you’ll have the photographer.

My photographer is only staying about 30-45 minutes into the dancing. That way I can get a few pictures of it, but I don't think we need more than that.

My photographer says 2 hours of a reception is plenty to photograph and the only reason we'd need him to stay till the end is if we want grand exit photos

No, you don't need your photographer the whole day. Typically, they will stay for 30-45 minutes of open dancing, which is when you also do the bouquet and garter toss (if you're having that). That's plenty of time to get all of the dancing shots you need.

I booked mine for 5 hours instead of her typical 8 hour package and saved $600 but you do whatever you feel is right. She will be covering the ceremony through the cake cutting and leaving around 8:30pm, our reception ends at 10pm so I feel like we won't be missing out on much.

No. Technically, you don’t NEED a photographer at all, but it’s all about what you want. If you want great pro-quality photos of course you need a photographer to accomplish that , but when you really get down to the photos that are actually important to you, you can manipulate the timeline. We wanted good photos, but aren’t big enough into pictures of us to have wanted to blow the budget on it. So, we came up with a list of the pictures that we DID want— everything ceremony related, a few nice portraits of us, bridal party, and family. And came up with what we really didn’t care about — dancing pics, cake cutting pics (we skipped cake all together!) and things of the like. With that information, we negotiated with a photographer. We opted in for ceremony and portraits, and ultimately added in getting ready photos, for some nice candids of us and our nearest and dearest, and some nice details shots of setting up and guests arriving. It was PERFECT for us. We have PLENTY of amazing photos, more than we could ever figure out what to do with, and plenty of awesome gems to gift our families. We were really pleased with this choice. Our photographer was there for probably 3-4 hours, did not stay through the reception, and it saved us about $1000.

We had ours for 5 hours. She captured the details shots, getting ready, ceremony, family/group photos, cake cutting, bridal and groom photos as well as the typical "wedding photos" of just my husband and I. We didn't feel rushed nor was anything left out. On our last meeting with her before the wedding, we went over all of the specific photos we wanted, with who, any specific poses etc and she got all of it plus so much more.

Similar to those above, we are only having our photographer for about an hour or so into dancing (until sunset photos). We are doing our cake cutting early to accommodate. Also, you should look at faking your getting ready shots - have the photographer come about 1 hr before you need to leave, have your makeup and hair people act as if they’re finishing up your getting ready, take details pictures. No need for them to stay for the hours of getting ready.