Photos for those getting married in a registry office

"As of last week, the government has forbidden couples getting married in registry offices from having their photograph taken as they sign the wedding register."

Hmm this is interesting as |I am not sure how enforceable it is. An act from 1948 and a subsequent data protection act in the 1990s made it clear that photographing the detail in the register was improper although photographing the signing, as long as the text wasn't visible did not controvene these acts....So I am not sure about the exact wording of this new directive and would like to see the document in full. The link was a bit too vague and lightweight on this detail. Indeed, due to public and photographer lobbying, registrars have become a bit more easy going on the whole event...Indeed in my home county of Herts, they are very liberal and have no major restrictions(apart from not directly shooting the register itself....

why on earth would that be? - i bloomin well hope that its not accurate!!!

I remember the photos we had taken of 'signing the register' werent of the actual register, it was a fake one, just for photographic purposes (this was nearly 5 years ago) As I said, I came accross this whilst looking for something else, just suprised me!

Yeah...some do put in a fake register, although if you want to shoot this "au naturale" you would get the real one....the acts state not photographing the detail in the register(data protection), although not the register itself...and that is the key element. In my experience, different registrars read the rules differently.

Hmmm yep I suppose its open to interpretation!

We photographed a registry office ceremony this past Saturday, and the registrar said the only restriction I had was that I couldn't photograph the actual signing. But when 16 of their friends and relatives stood and started shooting, I looked over at him, and he shrugged his shoulders, so I took a few shots too. He and I both knew that he couldn't stop all those people, so it was pointless to restrict me. I was being a good girl, LOL.

This is what our registrar has said - seems a little odd, but its the only restriction they have placed so I'm not too fussed!

Nothing has changed - it has been like this for a while

We have a word with the registrar in advance, and there is never a problem. We say "we will make sure that there is no discernable writing in the finished photograph"

The registrars allways respect our professional approach, and never say no. Often a blank book is popped out too

If there is good communication, tis will never become a problem

Richard King

The major problem seems to be with copyright. The crown copyright symbol is protected as well as data from other couples which may be visible.

Most registrars don't know the real reasons, so become jobsworths without knowing why.

Interesting, I had always been curious as to why this was restricted. I suppose it makes more sense not to have information from others recorded and reproduced.

This report is absolutely not true and just goes to prove you shouldn't believe everything you read.

There is no law against taking pictures of the signing of the register. However local registration services are able to make their own policies with regard to what they are prepared to accept.

Many districts have taken the decision not to allow photographing of the original register entry. This is not data protection related but simple good manners. There are 4 register entries on display; two on each page. This means that when you sign the register it is feasible that 3 other couples details are 'on show'. This information gives names, addresses, marital status etc. The question is if another couple had photos taken of them signing the register and that photo reproduced your details, would you be happy with that. I don't think I would.

Photographers are well used to taking pictures of a pretend signing that you really wouldn't know wasn't the real page.