Imagine - you are planning your wedding and need to decide how to best preserve your memories. You think about photography and video, don't you? One of the questions is if you have to choose between two approaches or can you have both? That is not as easy to tell, as the answer leads to a few implications. Firstly comes budged as hiring both wedding photographer and videographer will cost more than just one of them. You will say, "But there are offers when one person will do both for a small extra!" True, I have seen the offers, but then think, please. How would one person be able to do both jobs at once? They will inevitably give more effort to one discipline and the other will suffer. Do you want the most precious moments to be lost in video or on pictures? I guess not. So in the end budget implications cannot be dismissed easily.
Secondly there is this interesting consideration - will they be able to work without disrupting each other? Most probably if both wedding videographer and photographer are professionals then there should be no problem. Although I would advise to speak to perspective photographer and videographer and let them know your intentions. In any case be prepared to see videographer in some pictures and photographer on the video. Nothing bad though.
And here comes third consideration - do you really need both video and photography from your wedding? You may think that using video as newer technology is more future proof. On the other hand photography has been around for longer and is still one of the best ways of preserving the memories! You only need a short glance at a good photo to revitalise your memories. Video requires considerable time to watch and still often is less captivating than photography.
There is also one technological aspect - I have video of my wedding on a VHS (who knows what it is) and have no way of watching it at all. All photographs are still easily enjoyable and easier to digitise. OK, this has been improved by video coming directly to computers, but formats still change more than picture formats.
The message? If you really like video then go for both! But if you are tight on budget hire just a good photographer... I'm not sure if I can recommend hiring just a videographer though. Ultimately the choice is yours.
Secondly there is this interesting consideration - will they be able to work without disrupting each other? Most probably if both wedding videographer and photographer are professionals then there should be no problem. Although I would advise to speak to perspective photographer and videographer and let them know your intentions. In any case be prepared to see videographer in some pictures and photographer on the video. Nothing bad though.
And here comes third consideration - do you really need both video and photography from your wedding? You may think that using video as newer technology is more future proof. On the other hand photography has been around for longer and is still one of the best ways of preserving the memories! You only need a short glance at a good photo to revitalise your memories. Video requires considerable time to watch and still often is less captivating than photography.
There is also one technological aspect - I have video of my wedding on a VHS (who knows what it is) and have no way of watching it at all. All photographs are still easily enjoyable and easier to digitise. OK, this has been improved by video coming directly to computers, but formats still change more than picture formats.
The message? If you really like video then go for both! But if you are tight on budget hire just a good photographer... I'm not sure if I can recommend hiring just a videographer though. Ultimately the choice is yours.