One or two photographers

I think maybe pending the size of your wedding. I know for a small elopement only one is necessary but I guess 2 can take more shots. I say go with what your budget can do. I do not see why one will not give you amazing pictures.

It depends on what you’re looking for. A second photographer was a must for me and that package price seems great. Our package included lead photographer for up to 8 hours, second photographer for up to 5 hours, engagement session, digital rights to pictures, and a $50 print credit. The normal package price was $3800 but we got a discounted rate of $2850. The lead photographer will be with the girls before the ceremony for some getting ready/bridesmaids pics. And the second photographer will be with the guys for a bit before the ceremony. We’ll get more shots of the ceremony and be able to capture it from different angles. This will hopefully help speed up shots during the cocktail hour and we will get a few different angles of our first dance,

When youre already spending that much, and youre not on a budget, i would go with 2 just because I, personally, REALLY value photos. Also, 500 more isnt a whole lot to basically double the amount of photos.

It depends on how much you value pictures. If you'd rather have an extra 500 to save, or to spend on decore, do so. Just weigh having a second photographer against having more to spend on another aspect of the wedding. Personally, i love every photo from me and the wedding to my friends and distant relatives. You might rather just have key photos and thats ok too.

Yes, yes, yes! TWO photographers are totally worth it. Our photographer included a 2nd shooter for 90 min and we would have missed key shots with her. While #1 shot first look, #2 shot decor. Both took different angles of ceremony & reception entrance. One of my top recommendations! Skip a photo booth, programs or other items to get two photographers.

A second shooter is well worth the extra expense. There’s some moments you’re going to want multiple angles of and one person simply can’t do it; walking down the aisle, first look if you have one, first dance, etc. It can also help a ton with your timeline since each photographer can work with your respective wedding parties and families at the same time.

I would definitely recommend a second photographer. Pictures and videos on your wedding day are worth every cent. Personally for me, I will be getting ready separate from my fiancé and his groomsmen so there will be a photographer with me and my ladies getting ready and then one with him and his guys getting ready. It also gives another perspective and allows for them to capture so many more memories!

We are having a small wedding so we probably wouldn't normally need a second photographer, but our venue is an arboretum and we can only enter after their closing time. That means we only have an hour before ceremony time (vendors are allowed in before though). The second photographer will come in handy to maximize time and do separate photos of my FH and his groomsmen while I do photos with my bridesmaids. If the timeline isn't really a concern, maybe you would like to have that secondary angle for your ceremony? But if none of those things are of importance to you, then skip it and save the money!

I agree this depends a lot on the size of your wedding, the timeline, and most especially your expectations. During getting ready time, daughter's primary photographer was with her and the BMs, while the second shooter was with the guys at another location. For first look, and especially the ceremony, having two photographers shooting from different angles results in a LOT of very special photos (for example, during the ceremony, while the second shooter was up at the altar shooting, the primary photographer sprinted upstairs in the venue and got stunning photos of the ceremony from a completely different vantage point looking down on the entire gathering -- they are amazing photos). Without two, it is virtually impossible to get shots of both the B & G's faces during first look or vows. You'll still get great pictures with one photographer, but there will definitely be angles and reactions that you'll miss. As others mentioned, having two also helps make sure there is good coverage of multiple things happening simultaneously (e.g., photographer was shooting wedding party and B&G photos after the ceremony, while the second shooter was getting pictures of guests at cocktail hour and detail shots of the reception space before anyone was in it, etc.). It really depends on what you want and what your budget will support. Is a second shooter required? Of course not, but it sure is nice!