The best weddings are often the ones that celebrate the couples' personalities. It shows in the details -- from Broadway show tune processionals and choreographed dances to "Star Wars"-inspired cake toppers and "The Lord of the Rings" costumes.
More and more, how a couple chooses to document their wedding is yet another extension of their collective identity. Just as technology and smartphones are changing the way we interact with each other, they're also shaping decisions around wedding-day pictures.
Some couples are crowdsourcing images from guests to complement or even replace professional photography. At the same time, some couples are asking guests to "unplug" and put away their cameras and phones altogether.
The varying approaches are just the latest example of how people are responding differently to technology's increasing grip on our everyday lives.
"Everyone's a photographer now. It used to be that six megapixels was a pro camera. Now you have that on your phone," said Rocky Bowles, co-founder of SmugMug, a file-sharing website that allows wedding photographers to host virtual storefronts. "For clients and couples, it's great because they have so many options. For photographers, it makes the competition serious."
Most Americans are bombarded with images and media all day, sharing everything on social media platforms, said Chicago-based photographer Angela Garbot. The need to share is heightened at a momentous event like a wedding.
"Regardless of what kind of photographer you are, we all know that the best camera to take a picture with is the one you have in your hand," she said.
Garbot doesn't see crowdsourced wedding photography as a threat to the professional craft. In fact, she teaches classes in iPhone photography.
"I see it as another tool in your tool kit. It's not going anywhere, so we might as well embrace it," she said. "But just because you're taking pictures with a phone doesn't give you license to take bad pictures."
For couples who love the limelight, the more pictures the better, regardless of quality, said Ohio-based wedding photographer Corey Ann Balazowich, who recently extolled the virtues of the "unplugged" wedding ceremony in a Huffington Post column.
Others prefer to keep their weddings more low-key. "I understand both sides completely, but after seeing the results from a few weddings that used wedding app image collectors and hashtags, there's not a whole lot in there that is worth keeping," Balazowich said, acknowledging she's "a bit pickier than most" when it comes to judging the quality of images.
Elizabeth and Scott Taylor are the kind of folks who don't enjoy the limelight.
The thought of exchanging vows in front of a crowd was daunting enough; the last thing they needed were camera flashes illuminating the altar throughout the ceremony.
Elizabeth Taylor saw a friend's Facebook post about "unplugged" weddings in which couples ask guests to refrain from taking pictures. That could help, she thought: People might actually pay attention. It would minimize the chances of snap-happy relatives standing in the aisle, obstructing views of the ring exchange.
"It was already an anxious day for us, so we figured it might help ease everything," she said. "I just didn't want flashes going off every two seconds or people standing in the aisle."
The couple decided to enforce the rule only during the ceremony, the most solemn portion of the celebration, when there's no opportunity for do-overs. Before the procession, the officiant read a note asking guests to refrain from taking pictures.
Much to the couple's delight, it produced the desired results. People laughed at inside jokes written into the ceremony and the images came out without a single photo-bombing relative.
It also made shooting the ceremony easier on their photographer, who didn't have to worry about stepping around guests in the aisle or standing in front of the altar.
It's not a big deal during the reception, where there are several chances to get great shots. But the ceremony is (hopefully) a once in a lifetime deal, said Balazowich, who has shot several unplugged weddings.
"It's not me that you're hurting, it's the bride and groom and those who have been invited," she said. "You don't want to be the person who blocks the first kiss not just from me, but from other guests, or whose flash ruins the shot when the bride's father is crying as he walks down the aisle."
Taylor said a few guests expressed disappointment over not being able to take pictures. But overall, the benefits outweighed the drawbacks.
"People weren't happy with it, but it's our decision. I really think it was right for us," she said.
"We're spending all this money on a photographer. I didn't want screwed-up pictures."
Her only regret is that she and her new husband didn't make it clear guests were welcome to take pictures of the rest of the celebration. It's a shame, really, because there are now more ways than ever to share images with the couple, other guests and well-wishers who couldn't make it.
Many couples still want pictures from guests' perspective to complement professional images, but the disposable cameras of yesterday are slowly giving way to wired solutions.