Should I pay more for videographer?

Question

We currently have a videographer booked for our wedding/reception. We have him reserved for a little over 4 hours. We recently changed our wedding/reception location, so now we are looking at a total of 5 hours for wedding and reception. Should we pay an additional $125 for another hour or so? Or just let the videographer leave 45 minutes early? You think he would really miss anything? Should we just have him leave? or pay the extra money?

Answer 1

Hey whats $125 at this

stage of the game

Pay him the xtra!

Although I do agree

about them being a waste

of money to begin with!

Answer 2

You seriously don't need a videographer. A photographer is all that is necessary.

Answer 3

I hired a videographer for my wedding and have NEVER watched the DVD.  It was a waste of money.  I chose to spend more on a great photographer.  It was a great investment.

Answer 4

Definitely not. A videographer isn't at all necessary ... I've heard from so many brides that their one regret is not axing the videographer all  together and putting the money toward the photographer or something else because they never watch the DVD, but EVERYONE sees the pictures.

I would definitely keep what you have. The last hour of a wedding is everything just winding down, anyway, so unless you're having a huge send-off or something, they won't be missing anything, and you can put that 125 bucks toward massages or a nice dinner on your honeymoon.

Answer 5

As long as you can get everything you want captured before the last hour or so, and I have a feeling you can, then let him leave. I've heard from a lot of people that a videographer isn't even that necessary because you rarely watch the DVD/Video.  

Answer 6

I'd say if your budget can keep up then YES, if not then NO...If you guys are all finished w/the reception stuff (cutting cake, bouquet/garter toss, couple dance & family dance & guest dance, speeches, and people peforming) then let him leave

Congrats guys!