One of the most common questions couples ask when choosing their wedding photography coverage is whether they actually need a second photographer. The honest answer is: it depends on your priorities, timeline, and the size of your day — but having a second photographer can make a bigger difference than most couples expect.

A second photographer adds coverage and flexibility. While I’m focused on one part of the day, a second photographer can document something happening at the same time — like one partner getting ready while the other finishes final touches, or guest reactions during your ceremony. It allows more moments to be captured without rushing or splitting attention.

It’s especially helpful for larger weddings or complex timelines. If you’re planning a big guest count, multiple locations, or a tight schedule, a second photographer helps everything run more smoothly. We can divide and conquer during family photos, cocktail hour, and reception moments so nothing important gets missed.

That said, not every wedding requires one. For smaller, more intimate celebrations with a relaxed timeline, a single photographer can absolutely document the day beautifully. My job is to help you decide what coverage makes sense for your specific plans — not upsell you on something you don’t need.

If you value comprehensive storytelling, guest candids, and layered perspectives of your wedding day, a second photographer is often worth the investment. It adds depth to your gallery and ensures more of the in-between moments are preserved. Ultimately, it’s about choosing the level of coverage that aligns with how you want your day remembered!