So, weddings...

[MrsWembley]

Short or long?

Discussing timings with a couple of friends yesterday, both of whom have had their day and so have an opinion that counts - one says long, make the most of it, big party of people who will never/probably never be all together in the same room again; the other says meh, long lie-in, least time possible in an uncomfortable dress, no paying extra for evening food!

Is 12 hours from the start of the service to kicking out time too long/not long enough/just right. Service is in the same venue as the reception, so no travel time, and the venue is a place of 'entertainment' for families under normal circumstances so lots to see and do for people whilst photos, etc. are happening.

I'm worried that people may get bored/pissed/cross with grumpy DCs, but I want to have as long as possible because, well, it's my wedding day! What's the general consensus here? Long or short?

But you're assuming your guests will WANT to spend 2.5 hours in their best clothes wandering round this venue. What if they don't? What if they've already been there before? What if they don't have kids? Is it more of an outdoor wandering around place or an indoor wandering around place? What if it's the latter and it rains?

Don't get me wrong, I do believe the happy couple should have the day they want (although it generally seems to be what the bride wants in most cases) but they do need to bear in mind their guests.

It's a nightmare to try and get right OP, I feel for you. Just take into account the age range of your guests and that they will all be in their best clobber/heels (unless you advise people to bring a change of clothes) - and perhaps make sure there is a room available for older guests who don't want to be surrounded by screaming DC......... And that sitting in that room for 2.5 hours is going to be a long long time for them

The main reason we're using this venue is the guests! About 95% have DCs and we want somewhere they can run around and be entertained.

My original choice was deemed a no go for kids so I had to put that one out of my head

Tom, no-one will be sitting around in one room for hours unless they choose to!

I've never been to a wedding where 95% of guests have kids. But there we go. So it's probably fine. But is it at all weather dependant?

Shatners, I'm nearly 50...

The best wedding I went to started at 4pm with the ceremony, 5pm for photos & drink /canapes, 7pm for reception & 9pm disco.

There was just one reception as it was a late ceremony so everybody who attended the service came to the meal. There wasn't a separation of day and night guests which was good.

People could leave after the meal if they had children or stay for the disco. It was well timed, guests were fed and watered and everybody had a good time.

I really wanted a 2pm ceremony but only had the option of 12 or 3, i went for 3 as 12 felt too early.

The morning went in a flash and it would have either been a huge rush or a ridiculously early start if we'd chosen 12, I did have 5 bridesmaids to get ready though and I'm not an early riser.

There are two most important things from my perspective especially if you're starting early.... lots of entertainment and lots of food. Entertainment for everyone not just kids, and plenty of food because people are miserable when they're hungry, and people get very drunk quickly when they haven't eaten.

That seems like a very long day - how old are the children you’re inviting? If I was bringing my kids to this (age 5 and 6) I’d have to give them something to eat before we set off as 2.30 is verging on being slightly too late for them, also they definitely wouldn’t last until 9pm for evening food so I’d have to take something for them to eat 6/7ish. I actually think lunch at 2.30 and then evening food at 9pm is a big gap, maybe have the evening food at 8 at the latest?
You need to think about the fact that there’s 2 hours waiting around after the ceremony and then 2 1/2 hours after the meal - that is a lot of waiting around! I’d actually be tempted to go home after the meal and speeches, especially if I had children as I think that’s long enough to be anywhere! If you started the cermenony at 3pm you could shift your whole day,

3pm Ceremony
3.30pm-5.30/6pm photos (guests have canapés and drinks)
6pm Three course meal and then speeches
8pm Music starts
12pm kick out
You could do bacon rolls at 10/11pm as after a few drinks people will quite happily eat more food!!
Guests will have the chance to look around the venue while you have photos done. Honestly this is the most boring thing for guests and it would prob be nice to have something to look around while these are being done, although I’m quite happy gossiping and drinking during photo time!!

That's far too long a day. You have two separate hanging-around periods, one of 2 hours during photos and one of 2.5 hours in the early evening. No matter how nice the venue, that is far too much. Don't forget that some of your guests will know almost nobody, while others will be elderly or desperately trying to amuse overtired small children. If you want people to remember your wedding for the right reasons, don't make it a marathon. People just get tired after a while.

I think you have the potential of lots of hungry and bored guests with that timing, OP. I went to a wedding recently that was similar and the thing I remember most was there being a lot of standing around and a lot of just wanting to sit down and eat. The bride seemed stressed for the whole thing trying to get all her photos done and probably realising we were all bored to tears. I also went to another wedding last year in a beautiful venue where they hoped we would be able to explore the grounds, except it was pouring down and no one wanted to leave the venue and get soaked, so again, lots of waiting around, and I remember there being no water on the tables.

We had our ceremony at 3.30pm because I just didn’t want everyone hanging around or me having to think of ways to keep them amused for a whole day. We didn’t really have any photos though, just a few outside the church and then the rest were just natural photos throughout the reception. We ate at about 6pm but we had a BBQ so the caterers just kept cooking until people had had enough, so some could eat later if they wanted. Then cake and cheese table at about 9pm I think. We also supplied all drinks for free so there was always something to drink without forking out four quid for an orange juice.

If I had my young children with me, I'd find it really hard work looking after them at that length wedding with two long gaps and long sit down meal. Unless the venue is Legoland or something!!

If it's a beautiful castle with grounds or something to explore, then still too long, I've been to some like that too but I'm in heels and had a few drinks and don't normally feel like wandering around too much. Also, are you having an open bar? It's a long day once the meal has finished to be buying drinks for for either your guests or you.

I'd move the start later and people can either look round or join in the party after the meal, younger children often love to dance and you can always have some music on before the 'first dance'

We got married at 3.30pm,it flowed through nicely as we arrived at reception venue from church around 5.30pm then ate around 6 then disco 7.We didn't do an evening buffet as everyone had just eaten,we had steak,salmon and burgers on a bbq along with plenty of fresh sides.Many people don't like the lull in between day and night receptions I I've been to a few where there has been 2 hrs inbetween.

The 12.30 - 2.30 gap is the problem. you have been "advised" that you need 2 hours for photos - but you're in charge. you can get a photographer who will fit with your schedule, not the other way around

Maybe it's what the professionals think is standard, and what "everyone does" but what you're hearing on this thread is that a lot of people don't really enjoy what is standard!

2.30 is very late for lunch if people have small children, have travelled and had their breakfast at 7, are tired, are drinking alcohol, etc

Why gratuitously pick a meal time to have the service and the milling about? You could get married in the morning and serve a normal time lunch (if your guests are all local or travelling the day before); or, you could get married in the afternoon, after lunch. why (not a dig at you OP, everyone does this) why go "I've got the whole day so I'll get people nice and hungry over lunchtime"?

Far too long, I would hate this.

Two hours waiting for you to have photos done. Which is two hours chasing toddlers around, finding handbag snacks, listening to them whinge about wanting to play on my phone...
Two hours for dinner - really?? That is a LONG time to have to keep children sat down. Or taking it in turns with DH walking them around the venue aimlessly.
Then speeches on top of that? Kill me now.
Then ANOTHER 2.5 hours waiting around. Fuck that!

Sorry OP.

4pm ceremony at venue
5pm reception
6pm dinner
8pm speeches
8.30-11.30 dancing

Ok...

So if I make sure people know we're not eating until 3/3.30, then they will have the chance to snack/have brunch/whatever before the service and it's not too long between this and the evening food.

And does it really take that long in the morning to get ready? I'm having four bridesmaids and asking the friend doing my hair if she'll do theirs too, but surely it won't take all morning???!

I just worry about the meal being too late in the day.

1. / 3.30 is not a meal time (in this country at least)

Surely how long it takes to get ready is up to you? You could put a dress on in 2 minutes, or apparently, some people have make up that has "layers" which need to "take" (I do not know what this is)

far too long farting about with photos.especially with all those kids that will want food long before 2:30pm. total rethink needed and max 30 mins for photos. Even if you are having the whole day recorded from the moment you pull up your knickers in the morning ( as some brides.seem to do) you will also be hungry and fed up by then.

a lengthy wedding and kids dont match.

What time would your ceremony be if you ate at 3/3.30? I don’t think this is a particularly bad time to eat if people can have a late breakfast but it depends what time they’ll need to be at the venue? We quite often have Sunday lunch at that sort of time. Id happily eat at that time if I had a decent breakfast around 10.30/11ish and also my kids would last that long between meals and probably wouldn’t need much to eat after a lunch that late.

I have never been to a wedding and eaten earlier than 2.30 or 3.00. If the service was at 2, people automatically know the mean won't be until 3.30-4.00. If the service is at 12, they will ASSUME they will be eating 2.00-2.30

Short and don't forget to feed your guests.

even if you're getting married in an art gallery - I love galleries - 2.5 hours to wander round is too much.

what are you doing in that 2.5 hours?

also, the second round of food could be done away with if you just started later and had a big dinner.

it's a very long day you are describing.