> It seems that wedding photographers keep the copyright so that they can reproduce them for self-promotion and advertising That's probably not the main reason

> It seems that wedding photographers keep the copyright so that they can reproduce them for self-promotion and advertising That's probably not the main reason, since many other artists are able to use their work-for-hire in self promotion. All they'd need is an appropriate usage license, not copyright ownership. More likely, when wedding photographers try to keep the copyright, they are hoping to charge separately for additional prints or DVDs, control which print shop reproduces their work, enforce the presence of their watermarks, or relicense the images as stock photography. These are all additional revenue and advertising streams that would not be available if the customer held the copyright.