Registrars preventing photography

[Alan W]

I just sent this, does anyone ever experience the same problem from time to time and does anyone know exactly what their powers are....

For the attention of the Chief Registrar

Dear Sir / Madam

I am a professional wedding photographer and I have an enquiry regarding registrars conducting wedding services in Bexley.

I recently attended a wedding at Hall Place, Bexley and as is the usual courtesy I spoke to the registrar conducting the ceremony regarding photography. I was suprised to hear the registrar say that she would not allow me to carry out any photography whatsoever during the ceremony other than a shot of the ring exchange and then a mock up of the signing of the register after the register had been signed.

I told the registrar that I intended not to use flash and enquired whether that would make any difference but she robustly stood by her decision that there would be no photography.

Whilst I accept that excessive photography can be distracting I consider myself to be respectful of the occasion and I do not use flash if I can avoid it and I never photograph during the vows.

The couple were bitterly disappointed that I was unable to photograph the key moments of their special day.

What I would now like is full clarification of the powers of your registrars regarding the control of photography during the service. If it is the case that the registrar concerned was acting outside her powers I will be making a formal complaint.

Thank you

Yours Sincerely

Alan White
Photographer
Kent Wedding Photo

[lostmysnorkel]

There is a thread started by ALDP on the very same issue. They are a little further down the road with it though.

TBH I've never come up against a problem with the regostrars - only churches.

Last Saturday, I was given a free reign during the ceremony, the only thing the registrar said was "Don't stand between me and the couple and don't photograph the register".

[ALDP]

Hi Alan,

We've been trading letters with the Swindon Superintendent Registrar - Wiltshire registrars are notorious for not allowing any photography during ceremonies. Given that all the surrounding areas allow it, we feel that it is extremely unfair to those wishing to marry in Wiltshire venues.

I have asked for clarification of their legal powers to prevent photographs being taken as I think they are on very dodgy ground. Unfortunately the General Register Office which sets the rules for registrars to implement in their locality has issued vague guidance on this area - which leads to extremes in interpretation.

My thread is in the pro area if you have access - if not, PM me & I'll give you the full story.

We intend on challenging this via the local council, the local council ombudsman, the General Register Office & also we are hoping to get some support via the professional bodies we belong to. It seems to be a long-moaned about topic, but I've seen very little formal work on trying to resolve this grey area - something which I would expect the pro bodies to do on behalf of their members.

Cheers,

Simon

[george.monaghan]

Hi,

That sounds pretty standard for what we have here except they use the book that they actually sign.

The person conducting the service makes the rules and they should be made clear to the couple prior to the ceremony.

It is annoying though especially if you are careful and respect the service being conducted.

[Alan W]

Simon, I dont have acees to the PM facility but you can email me and tell me all about it if you like at alan@kentweddingphoto.co.uk

I never joined the pro section of this forum as I belong to a forum set up purely for wedding photographers in Kent which is free and more localised.

[Keitht]

I can understand the couple being disappointed at the lack of photographs, but shouldn't somebody have checked before the event?? I've seen the same sort of thread regarding both civil and church weddings before so it certainly isn't a new problem.

[ALDP]

Hi,

The person conducting the service makes the rules and they should be made clear to the couple prior to the ceremony.



From my research into this, the person who makes the policy is the Superintendent Registrar. In turn they are allowed to interpret the guidelines from the General Register Office. This is why you get the disparity in policy between areas.

But yes, the rules should definitely be made clear to the couple beforehand.

[.Ray]

I can understand the couple being disappointed at the lack of photographs, but shouldn't somebody have checked before the event?? I've seen the same sort of thread regarding both civil and church weddings before so it certainly isn't a new problem.

I think it is fair for people to expect non-flash photography to be allowed at non government, non religious venues and therefore not something people ought to have to ask. It's bad enough being told not to use flash, only to have guests firing their flash throughout. But to the the pro not to take any photos at all, then have the guests flashing away just makes the registrar look mean...
and stupid.

[ALDP]

I think it is fair for people to expect non-flash photography to be allowed at non government, non religious venues

Maybe - but we all know of venues where that would effectively mean no photography. Not many, but there are some.

To me, this should all be down to the couple's choice. Not some local civil servant with no accountability for their policy.

[Dotty.c]

Simon, I dont have acees to the PM facility but you can email me and tell me all about it if you like at alan@kentweddingphoto.co.uk

I never joined the pro section of this forum as I belong to a forum set up purely for wedding photographers in Kent which is free and more localised.

the pro section here just requires proof that you are a pro by sending a copy of insurance cert to Martin.

[Keitht]

I think it is fair for people to expect non-flash photography to be allowed at non government, non religious venues and therefore not something people ought to have to ask.

Assumptions are dangerous animals at the best of times, and even more dangerous when linked to any form of officialdom. For any situation which can't effectively be re-staged after the event it simply seems to be a sensible precaution to actually ask if photography is permitted.

Saying people should expect photography to be permitted at non-gov, non-religious venues is wildly off the mark anyway. Try taking a camera into a theatre or major live music event and see how far you get. In those locations you have also paid for the privilege of being there.

Bottom line is that in the case of a wedding or similar I would expect a professional photographer to be just that - professional - and to check the situation out in advance.

[.Ray]

Assumptions are dangerous animals at the best of times, and even more dangerous when linked to any form of officialdom. For any situation which can't effectively be re-staged after the event it simply seems to be a sensible precaution to actually ask if photography is permitted.

Saying people should expect photography to be permitted at non-gov, non-religious venues is wildly off the mark anyway. Try taking a camera into a theatre or major live music event and see how far you get. In those locations you have also paid for the privilege of being there.

Bottom line is that in the case of a wedding or similar I would expect a professional photographer to be just that - professional - and to check the situation out in advance.

It's very easy for you and everyone here to say this, but for a couple planning their first wedding, probably planning the first major event of any sort, with 1001 things to think about, asking whether photography is allowed during ceremony will not be very high on the list of things to do. Sure, it would be sensible but life is not just black and white.

I know what you're saying about cameras in public places, but I think you're comparing two very different things. If I were to hire out the whole theatre, commissioned actors to perform a one off show of my own writing with my own props and friends as supporting actors, then I WOULD expect to be able to take a camera in and photograph it. Your analogy of sneaking a camera into a public performance is simply not comparable.

Yes, the tog should check if a venue allows photography, but no it is not his duty to ask it before the venue is booked. Wedding togs are usually booked after the venue, so what do you expect the tog to do? Tell the couple to go somewhere else because we've found out the venue doesn't allow photography during the ceremony?

When I said one would assume photography would be allowed, I'm speaking from the couple's points of view. Of course the tog should check, but if I were getting married in a non-gov, non-religious venue, then why wouldn't I expect photography is allowed? Oh I know why, because there are under-trained, over zealous "officials" involved. But if they're getting married for the first time, then how the heck would they know the local officials are like that?!

[george.monaghan]

It's very easy for you and everyone here to say this, but for a couple planning their first wedding, probably planning the first major event of any sort, with 1001 things to think about, asking whether photography is allowed during ceremony will not be very high on the list of things to do. Sure, it would be sensible but life is not just black and white.

I know what you're saying about cameras in public places, but I think you're comparing two very different things. If I were to hire out the whole theatre, commissioned actors to perform a one off show of my own writing with my own props and friends as supporting actors, then I WOULD expect to be able to take a camera in and photograph it. Your analogy of sneaking a camera into a public performance is simply not comparable.

Yes, the tog should check if a venue allows photography, but no it is not his duty to ask it before the venue is booked. Wedding togs are usually booked after the venue, so what do you expect the tog to do? Tell the couple to go somewhere else because we've found out the venue doesn't allow photography during the ceremony?

When I said one would assume photography would be allowed, I'm speaking from the couple's points of view. Of course the tog should check, but if I were getting married in a non-gov, non-religious venue, then why wouldn't I expect photography is allowed? Oh I know why, because there are under-trained, over zealous "officials" involved. But if they're getting married for the first time, then how the heck would they know the local officials are like that?!

About wot is was going to say on the matter.

Most couples presume they will be allowed to take photos - had the same problem last week - couple were quite shocked at the registrar in a hired hotel - not their (Regst) office/premsies

[BarryM]

When my couples come in to enquire or book, i do ask if they know about permission for photography during the ceremony, and to check up on it, and also explain what the situation is if i know the venue.

The problem here is inconsistency across the board, Our registrar office has 5 registrars i think, 2 of them have no issue with photography, the other 3 do, those other 3 that do dont mind it when out at a hotel and not in registry office, now there is no way to know who is taking the wedding except on the day, and trust me on this one because ive asked and been told its who's available, and obviously there is no practise run for a registrars.

Churches are the same, ministers from the same denominations all differ, one says yes, one says no, and they share the same church, i bet the couple dont know who is doing their wedding till rehearsal night, and how on earth am i meant to find out.

Its not about the professionalism of the photographer or about the couples, its about the people that hold these services, i keep coming back to the famous quotation my our own Mr Worthington and its really struck home, that " when not allowed to photograph its ripping the heart out your story of their day in the album"

Im at the point of offering a backhander to the minister for his/her err donation box if he/she would let me take photographs during the service, i just wont tell em what the donation is that im pushing through the slot, holding my nose and gagging at the same time :Dm :Dm :Dm