Priest Ruins Ceremony

jmphotocraft

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oReLN5nntKw&noredirect=1

Awkward!

(no I was not the photographer!)

NagoC50

Yikes. Frankly, I would not shoot from there but talk about calling someone out. Really curious about any "backstory" or history that may (or may not) have preceded this.

Wonder whether the photogs, video had talked to priest before the ceremony? Regardless, I think priest should have moved them in a fashion that was far less confrontational simply for the sake of the B&G.

While nothing like this -- speaking of intrusive, had a recent wedding where one of the video guys actually walked backwards in front of the bride down the aisle -- about three feet in front of her. I've never seen that before and if that's a new trend, I am going to pull my hair out.

divamum

The looks on the bride's and groom's faces are really painful... they are just dying, there. I take his point, but (unless, of course, this was staged and is an elaborate hoax), he really could've handled a lot more graciously...............

Y'all will be pleased to know I've spoken to EVERYBODY about what's allowed and where for tomorrow!!

Gaby617

^^^ Looking forward to see the results!

michaelglenn

That situation could have been handled differently on so many levels! First off, it's always a must to talk to the priest/pastor/etc. before the wedding. If the photographer didn't do that, it's foolish on his part. However, the priest could have been a lot calmer about it, instead of making everyone feel out of place. The bride and groom looked mortified! Imagine trying to photograph genuine moments at that point? Awkward indeed!

Matthew Saville

I've already posted my opinion in numerous other places so I'll just paste it here:

I think both are equally to blame, for creating the confrontation itself and thus the end result, which is what the couple and wedding guests will remember.

If the priest thinks that his outburst will be less significant in the couple's / guests' minds than the photographer's alleged rudeness, then he's got a screw loose and doesn't deserve to be officiating ceremonies.

On the other hand it is downright disrespectful to EVERYONE attending the wedding, if you're standing 5 feet behind the officiant with your "spray and pray" shutter. It's called a 70-200, USE IT. And if your camera doesn't have a worthwhile "quiet shutter" mode like the Canon 5D mk3 has, then at least shoot conservatively.

Some photos just aren't worth such intrusive behavior, in my opinion. To the hotographers who think this is okay- get over yourselves. You are NOT God's gift to wedding photography, just because you have the audacity to do whatever is necessary to get the best angles.

Unless of course you are specifically directed by the couple (and OK'd by the officiant) to be over-the-top in-your-face, so as not to miss a single moment. And even then, put your dang camera in "quiet shutter" mode and shoot conservatively, like I said.

Or get a rangefinder or mirrorless P&S etc. style camera, if you want to be the Robert Capa or Gary Winogrand of wedding photography... There is a reason that some of those street photojournalists were so good at what they did; their cameras were SILENT. Your 8 FPS mirror-slapping monster is NOT.

Make no mistake though, like I said before- the officiant's decision to take action and make a scene is equally douche-y. You can talk about how this is a holy, reverent event and I totally agree with that. But you still "ruin" the day more than it already has been. Your rude outburst, not the photographer's rude shooting, is now going to be the memory that is ingrained in the couple's minds forever.

All in all, neither attitudes belong at a wedding. Both the officiant and the photographer (I don't blame the video guy, since they don't make any sound) need to reconsider their priorities and maybe even their career decisions, if they have this kind of attitude regarding what is acceptable at a wedding ceremony.

Just my two cents...

Also, something that was pointed out by a friend: Pay close, close attention to the very last second of video. You see another photographer there, wearing a brown hoodie. The guy looks like a 2nd shooter, but even if he's a wedding guest....WHO WEARS A BROWN HOODIE TO A WEDDING? I'm betting that the photographers at this wedding were extreme newbies, thus the intrusive angles and the spray-and-pray shutter...

Matthew Saville

By the way, if you guys want to do some digging, apparently the original photographer in the situation has piped in (can't verify) with the original article that helped this go viral, on my website: http://www.slrlounge.com/can-say-awkward-easily-avoidable-wedding-photography-mistakes

Apparently, it was mostly just a perfect storm of situations that led to this, from what I can tell. The photographer is actually not as much to blame as you would think- They were actually clicking from far behind the videographer, indeed using a 70-200. However the sound of the shutter must have attracted the officiant, and when he turned around and saw the videographer there, he might have confused the two and assumed that the video guy (who was indeed pretty close) was the one making "all the racket".

So, while I certainly wouldn't click my shutter that incessantly, I can see how this is largely just a case of terrible attitude and misunderstanding by the priest.

=Matt=

Sam

Matthew Saville wrote: »

By the way, if you guys want to do some digging, apparently the original photographer in the situation has piped in (can't verify) with the original article that helped this go viral, on my website: http://www.slrlounge.com/can-say-awkward-easily-avoidable-wedding-photography-mistakes

Apparently, it was mostly just a perfect storm of situations that led to this, from what I can tell. The photographer is actually not as much to blame as you would think- They were actually clicking from far behind the videographer, indeed using a 70-200. However the sound of the shutter must have attracted the officiant, and when he turned around and saw the videographer there, he might have confused the two and assumed that the video guy (who was indeed pretty close) was the one making "all the racket".

So, while I certainly wouldn't click my shutter that incessantly, I can see how this is largely just a case of terrible attitude and misunderstanding by the priest.

=Matt=

Matt,

You are certainly the detail guy. I had to re-watch the video three times before I saw the hoodie photog.

I will say that 6 feet is too close. Y'all have more experience then I do but I don't think I have been any closer than about 20 feet. My goal is to be as inconspicuous as possible.

Easy to use a 70-200 and crop as needed.

Sam

Matthew Saville

Glort wrote: »

Seems to me these days a lot of the digital come lately shooters seem to think that weddings are for their benefit not the couples. Reading here I see people complaining that the DJ didn't set the lighting to what they the shooter wanted and that they complain about other lighting or things that were part of the day. Get over yourselves. You are there to record the day not as this priest says, make it a photo shoot.
......

Glort, I get where you're coming from, but at least personally I'm not talking about making the day "all about me and my photos". I'm just talking about professional courtesy and respect. All it takes is a little coordination and cooperation, and EVERYBODY can get exactly what they want. If the lighting is set right and the photo / video guys respect each other, they can get everything they need without stepping on each others' toes and without blocking the view of guests or making a huge scene. THAT is what most wedding shooters' goal is, to work together and not distract from the focus, the couple.

Yeah, there are divas out there who think they're the Robert Capa of wedding photography, crawling all over the altar (or the mandap, or the sofra, or the chuppah...) to get their shots. Those guys are tools and they don't belong in the industry. But they are the exception, I would like to think.

By the way, regarding this particular situation- Because it was my website that helped this video go viral, (SLR Lounge), I actually got to talk to the photographer who was in this video. He was in fact an experienced professional, and he did in fact talk to the officiant before the ceremony. The officiant was irritable and curt from the very start, according to two different sources actually, and told the photog that he could go "anywhere but the aisle or the front row, I don't care". It was a vast outdoor venue, with loads of space behind the officiant, and the photographer was shooting from far behind the position of the recorded video. And yep, he was using a 70-200. When the priest turned around, he mistook the videographe for the person who was making the shutter clicking noise, and that is why he flipped out. The video camera position you see was un-manned for most of the ceremony, but at that exact moment the videographer had simply come up to the camera to check the recording.

By the way, afterwards, the bride and groom immediately went to the photographer, apologized for the officiant's outburst, and said they were actually shocked that the photographer didn't deck the priest for his rudeness. So there, now you know what ACTUALLY happened.

Simply put, it was a perfect storm of misunderstanding and an admittedly very poorly timed shutter burst or two.

So, should the videographer have picked a better spot? Yes, absolutely in my opinion. But other than that, this one's on the officiant if you ask me.

However regardless of what anybody thinks, regardless of how poorly managed the situation was up to this point, the bottom line is still this- what will the couple and their guests remember about their wedding ceremony, FOREVER? The outburst. The threats. A photographer / videographer who stands a little close, or lays on the shutter a little too much, yeah that's annoying an unprofessional, but the memory of it will fade with time. This on the other hand gets to go down in history.

That is why, plain and simple, the officiant should have held his tongue, or at least been tactful / polite about it.

If you ask me, that is simply part of being a wedding photographer. Even if I accidentally offended or disrespected someone at a wedding and they spit in my face or something else shockingly crazy, I would smile, apologize sincerely, and keep working. Because IMO it is still my #1 job, above all else, to NOT RUIN THE COUPLE'S DAY.

=Matt=

Matthew Saville

Sam wrote: »

Matt,

You are certainly the detail guy. I had to re-watch the video three times before I saw the hoodie photog.

I will say that 6 feet is too close. Y'all have more experience then I do but I don't think I have been any closer than about 20 feet. My goal is to be as inconspicuous as possible.

Easy to use a 70-200 and crop as needed.

Sam

Sam, check out my other new response regarding the additional back story. It's pretty interesting, and does confirm (in my opinion) that the priest was indeed overreacting.

=Matt=

divamum

Thanks for sharing that, Matt. It seemed likely there was more to it than the clip that went viral (there usually is!), so nice to have a more measured account from the horse's mouth.

Brett1000

Matthew Saville wrote: »

Glort, I get where you're coming from, but at least personally I'm not talking about making the day "all about me and my photos". I'm just talking about professional courtesy and respect. All it takes is a little coordination and cooperation, and EVERYBODY can get exactly what they want. If the lighting is set right and the photo / video guys respect each other, they can get everything they need without stepping on each others' toes and without blocking the view of guests or making a huge scene. THAT is what most wedding shooters' goal is, to work together and not distract from the focus, the couple.

Yeah, there are divas out there who think they're the Robert Capa of wedding photography, crawling all over the altar (or the mandap, or the sofra, or the chuppah...) to get their shots. Those guys are tools and they don't belong in the industry. But they are the exception, I would like to think.

By the way, regarding this particular situation- Because it was my website that helped this video go viral, (SLR Lounge), I actually got to talk to the photographer who was in this video. He was in fact an experienced professional, and he did in fact talk to the officiant before the ceremony. The officiant was irritable and curt from the very start, according to two different sources actually, and told the photog that he could go "anywhere but the aisle or the front row, I don't care". It was a vast outdoor venue, with loads of space behind the officiant, and the photographer was shooting from far behind the position of the recorded video. And yep, he was using a 70-200. When the priest turned around, he mistook the videographe for the person who was making the shutter clicking noise, and that is why he flipped out. The video camera position you see was un-manned for most of the ceremony, but at that exact moment the videographer had simply come up to the camera to check the recording.

By the way, afterwards, the bride and groom immediately went to the photographer, apologized for the officiant's outburst, and said they were actually shocked that the photographer didn't deck the priest for his rudeness. So there, now you know what ACTUALLY happened.

Simply put, it was a perfect storm of misunderstanding and an admittedly very poorly timed shutter burst or two.

So, should the videographer have picked a better spot? Yes, absolutely in my opinion. But other than that, this one's on the officiant if you ask me.

However regardless of what anybody thinks, regardless of how poorly managed the situation was up to this point, the bottom line is still this- what will the couple and their guests remember about their wedding ceremony, FOREVER? The outburst. The threats. A photographer / videographer who stands a little close, or lays on the shutter a little too much, yeah that's annoying an unprofessional, but the memory of it will fade with time. This on the other hand gets to go down in history.

That is why, plain and simple, the officiant should have held his tongue, or at least been tactful / polite about it.

If you ask me, that is simply part of being a wedding photographer. Even if I accidentally offended or disrespected someone at a wedding and they spit in my face or something else shockingly crazy, I would smile, apologize sincerely, and keep working. Because IMO it is still my #1 job, above all else, to NOT RUIN THE COUPLE'S DAY.

=Matt=

the angry priest made the national news