Do you need both?
Most couples do book both, and the real question isn't really "do I need both" so much as "will they get in each other's way." Here's how it actually works on the day.
One leads portraits. One stays out of the shot.
A photographer and a videographer aren't fighting for the same coverage - a photograph and a film do different jobs, so in practice the day splits cleanly. The photographer usually leads posed portraits and group shots; I work around that, then film freely everywhere else - the getting-ready, the ceremony, the speeches, the reception - without needing to direct anything.
The only thing that actually matters is whether the two of us have spoken beforehand about the running order. I'm always glad to hear from photographers ahead of a wedding we're both booked on - a five-minute conversation about the day's shape saves both of us stepping on the other's shot.
Two different records of the same day.
How everything looked. Portraits you print and frame, the detail shots, a still you can hold. Better resolution and better light than any frame pulled from video ever will be.
How everything sounded. The vows, the speeches, the room's reaction, your partner's voice saying your name. None of that survives in a photograph - it's the whole reason a film exists.
If you want more of the photography side of the day covered without booking a separate photographer for everything, Social films and stills is £450 added to any collection. If you only want the social side, Wedding Content Creation starts at £695: short vertical videos, with your main highlight the next day and usable original footage to keep - see the Wedding Content Creation page.
Tell me who, and I'll reach out.
Photographers: the same goes for you. Get in touch and I'll do the same for you on the next one we share.
Explore wedding film examples and collection coverage and prices, then discuss your existing photographer and plans through the date-enquiry form.