What to Expect from a Documentary-Style Wedding Photographer

“Documentary wedding photography” sounds like it should be fairly straightforward. Surely it means someone who quietly photographs your wedding as it happens? Right? Well...

The problem is that there isn't really a rulebook for what a photographer can call themselves. Documentary, reportage, storytelling, candid, editorial, cinematic, fine art, traditional, you'll come across all of these terms when you start looking for your wedding photographer, and different photographers can use the same word to describe quite different approaches.

So rather than trying to give you a definitive dictionary of wedding photography terms, I thought it would be much more useful to explain what these approaches actually mean to me, and importantly if you're considering me as your photographer, what my approach looks like on a wedding day.

Featuring some of my favorite images from weddings I've photographed over the years! Want to see more, here's my portfolio.

First things first: what does documentary actually mean?

In it's truest sense, documentary wedding photography is about documenting the day without interruption.

A photographer taking a genuinely documentary approach wouldn't coordinate your family photographs, pose you for couples' portraits or manufacture moments for the camera. They would observe, anticipate and photograph what is happening in front of them.

And there are couples who want exactly that. They don't want their photographer stepping in and directing anything. They want someone who is almost invisible, quietly recording the day as it unfolds.

You'll also find a lot of photographers who describe themselves as documentary wedding photographers but take a slightly less strict approach and that's where I sit.

My approach: documentary with gentle editorial direction

I'd describe what I do as roughly 80–90% candid and 10–20% gently guided.

The vast majority of your wedding is simply me being there, watching, anticipating and photographing what is happening. I don't want you spending hours of your wedding day posing for photographs when you could be drinking champagne with your friends.

But there are moments where a little direction makes sense.

For example a first look with your mum, dad or bridesmaids. Someone needs to know where to stand in order to capture that moment. Somebody has to work through the family formals list, make sure everyone is looking at the camera, take the sunglasses off the person who somehow forgot they were wearing them, and make sure that you actually get those photographs of all the people who matter to you.

That's not really documentary photography in its purest form. It's gentle guidance to make sure that the moments and photographs you care about aren't left to chance and that you get them quickly and efficiently.

What about couples' photographs?

This is where I think there is probably the biggest difference between photographers who describe themselves as documentary, editorial or somewhere in between.

I don't believe that documentary wedding photography means you should have no beautiful photographs of yourselves.

I also don't believe you need to spend 50 minutes or an hour away from your guests having a full editorial photoshoot to achieve them. My approach to couples' portraits is much more relaxed.

I see myself a little more like a film director than a traditional portrait photographer. I'm not trying to position every part of your body perfectly and create a photograph that looks like you've been frozen into place. Instead, I'll give you something to do and photograph you as you do it!

Walk from here to there. Tell each other a story. Swing backwards and forwards. Write a word on each other's cheek. Move closer. Walk away. Look at each other. Don't look at each other.

They're tiny prompts that give you something to interact with, rather than asking you to simply “pose”. The finished photograph can have an editorial polish, but the experience of taking it is very different from an editorial photoshoot and that's really important to me.

I would rather take an imperfect photograph of a perfect moment than a perfect photograph of a moment I've interrupted and made imperfect.

Ultimately, your experience of your wedding day matters more to me than creating a technically perfect photograph. My hope is that when you look at your photographs in ten years' time, you remember how that moment felt. You remember laughing with your new husband. You remember the way your dad looked at you. You remember how ridiculous you felt writing something on each other's faces.

The photograph becomes beautiful because of the memory attached to it, not because you remember being told exactly where to put your hand.

“But isn't that candid?”

Sometimes it is. And sometimes it's what I affectionately call a fake candid.

I even have “loves a fake candid” in my Instagram bio because I think people often don't realise how many photographs that look completely candid have actually been gently set up.

For example, I might ask you to walk from A to B and talk to each other. From the perspective of somebody looking at that photograph afterwards, it looks like I just happened to photograph you walking and laughing together but actually it didn't. I created an opportunity for that photograph to happen. That's not to say the moment is fake because it's so gently prompted that what happens after the prompt tends to be a real reflection of a couple. To give you an idea of how this works in practice I ask couples to 'dance with each other' some will embrace and sway back and forth, others will go full 'Pulp Fiction' and others might waltz or spin the other. It's you and your connection that I'm capturing. If I told you both to throw your hands in the air and wiggle your bum then it would be a photograph I manufactured and it frankly might not feel like you, look like something you'd do or be a photo you'd love.

If you want genuine candid photographs, you have to give your photographer genuine moments to photograph. If you want a photograph of you laughing with your grandmother, go and talk to your grandmother. If you want photographs of your friends dancing, get on the dance floor. No photographer can manufacture the emotional moments of your wedding day. We can only be there to notice it and capture it as it happens.

Documentary, reportage and photojournalistic

These terms are often used almost interchangeably.

A photographer with a background in press or editorial photography may describe themselves as reportage or photojournalistic rather than documentary, but the underlying idea is often similar: observe what's happening, interfere as little as possible, and tell the story through real moments.

You'll often find photographers using these terms because they want to make it clear that they're not a traditional, heavily posed wedding photographer.

Storytelling

Storytelling is another term you'll see a lot, and I think this one is particularly interesting.

For me, storytelling is less about how a photograph is taken and more about how much of the story you're choosing to tell.

A classic wedding gallery might focus primarily on the key events like:

Walking down the aisle.

The rings.

The kiss.

The confetti.

The group photographs.

The couple's portraits.

A storytelling photographer will probably include more of everything around those moments too like, the tears in the ceremony or a dropped handkerchief.

Some people might look at those photographs and call them “filler” but I don't.

Those are often the photographs that bring a wedding gallery to life and remind you what it actually felt like to be there.

Editorial

Editorial photography sits much further towards the other end of the spectrum.

If you're looking for a collection of photographs that could sit comfortably in a fashion or wedding magazine, you're probably looking for an editorial-style photographer.

The photographer is likely to spend more time deliberately creating the image: considering the location, lighting, composition, posing, styling and every tiny detail within the frame.

That doesn't make it better or worse. It's simply a different priority. An editorial couple might be very happy spending a significant amount of time away from their guests creating those photographs because the photographs themselves are a major part of the wedding experience.

And there are couples for whom that's exactly right but that's just not really me.

My photographs have an editorial polish, but my actual approach to photographing you is deliberately relaxed.

Fine art

Fine art is one of those terms that I think needs to be treated with a little caution because it's incredibly subjective.

To me, fine art is primarily an aesthetic rather than a specific way of photographing a wedding, and it often has an editorial lean but everybody's idea of what constitutes “fine art” is different.

It's a little like going to the Tate. You might look at a piece of art and think it's beautiful, while the person next to you wonders what on earth they're looking at and that's why I wouldn't choose a photographer based purely on the label. I would always recommend asking to see a couple of the photographers favourite galleries- do those images represent how you'd want your photographs to look?

I think there's an important distinction between somebody who considers themselves an artist and somebody whose priority is creating photographs that represent the couple.

I'm much more interested in the latter. I want the photographs to feel like you, not simply like photographs that demonstrate what I can create or what I consider to be art.

Cinematic

Cinematic is another wonderfully subjective word.

When I hear “cinematic”, I think of photographs that feel film-like: more movement, more storytelling, a mixture of wide and close-up images, interesting framing, perhaps subjects positioned away from the centre of the frame and a more considered visual sequence.

But cinematic can mean completely different things to different photographers.

Your idea of a cinematic wedding might be dramatic and sweeping. Somebody else's might be soft, nostalgic and intimate.

The important thing is to look at the portfolio again (I know, I've already said this!)

Don't just ask whether somebody is “cinematic”. Ask yourself whether you actually like their version of cinematic.

Traditional or classic

Traditional wedding photography is generally more structured.

Think formal family photographs, posed couples' portraits, clear direction and making sure you get all of the expected wedding photographs.

Again, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Some couples want that reassurance. They want to know that their photographer will organise everyone, make sure every important photograph is captured and spend plenty of time creating beautiful portraits.

The important thing is matching the approach to what you actually want from your day.

TL;DR: Which style are you looking for?

If you're looking for a collection of highly polished, perfectly composed photographs that could sit in a magazine, you're probably looking for an editorial-style wedding photographer.

If you're looking for a collection of candid photographs documenting your day exactly as it happens, with little to no interruption, you're probably looking for a documentary-style wedding photographer.

And somewhere between those two poles are all the variations: storytelling, reportage, candid, traditional, cinematic and everything else photographers use to describe themselves.

The problem is that these words don't have one universal definition.

The best thing you can do is stop worrying about the label and look closely at the photographer's actual work and then ask yourself how you want your wedding day to feel while those photographs are being taken.

For me, the answer is simple: relaxed, present with just enough direction to make sure we also create a few photographs you'll treasure forever.

What I want my photography brand to stand for

This blog has actually made me realise that there are a few principles that sit underneath everything I do.

Your experience comes first.

Your wedding isn't a photoshoot. The photographs matter enormously, but they should enhance your experience of the day rather than dictate it.

Real moments over manufactured perfection.

I'd rather photograph something imperfect that genuinely happened than create a technically perfect photograph by interrupting a meaningful moment.

Gentle direction, never rigid posing.

When guidance is useful, I'll give it. But I want you interacting with each other, not performing for my camera.

Beautiful photographs without losing your day.

You deserve photographs that you're proud to put on the wall, without spending hours away from the people you've invited to celebrate with you.

Your photographs should look like you.

My job isn't to impose my idea of what a beautiful wedding photograph should be onto you. It's to understand who you are and create photographs that feel authentic to your relationship, your personalities and your day.

Notice everything.

The obvious moments matter, but so do the little ones. The tears, the laughter, the chaos, the people in the background, the tiny interactions you didn't even know happened.

Be a calm presence.

I want to be the person you can trust to know what needs photographing without making you feel like you're constantly being photographed.

Photographs are there to help you remember how it felt.

Years from now, I want the images to take you straight back into the moment, not back into a pose.