Wedding photography and the recent requests for freebies...

[fracster]

The ONLy thing that matters is that the happy couple are pleased with the end product.There is no one right way,there is the way that makes the couple happy. One persons right way may well not be the way the couple want the event photographed,therefore it becomes the wrong way.

This is not aimed at anyone in particular,but some so called pro`s on here sure are insecure.

 

[Moonhawk]

Having set up my own business doing it!

Which is more than most of the people questioning my intentions have ever done. Being a member of several professional organisations.

NOT being sued.

And you?

Ali - I think what they are trying to say is - that is what worked for you. Everyone is different and there is more than one way to skin a cat. Some people work well under tuition, others shine when thrown well and truly in at the deep end, others still will never "get it" regardless of the training and experience afforded to them. There is no "one size fits all" approach.

 

[snapzz]

Having set up my own business doing it!

Which is more than most of the people questioning my intentions have ever done. Being a member of several professional organisations.

NOT being sued.

And you?

I am not alone out here then

 

[Arkady]

Oh dear Hoppy you are not getting it, I'm actually trying to HELP those starting out and encourage them to do it the right way. That way nobody is going to end up getting sued...

No-one will be getting sued as long as both parties come to an agreement over what is expected from the photographer... why do you have such a hard time getting this into your head?

...I did say a few months back that I would stop responding to weddings threads myself perhaps it's time I took my own advice.

Good idea...

 

[snapzz]

The ONLy thing that matters is that the happy couple are pleased with the end product.There is no one right way,there is the way that makes the couple happy. One persons right way may well not be the way the couple want the event photographed,therefore it becomes the wrong way.

This is not aimed at anyone in particular,but some so called pro`s on here sure are insecure.

What is the polite way of saying "what a load of rubbish"?

 

[neo2810]

Really? Have you seen some of the underexposed poorly composed stuff that has been on offer recently!

How many mashed faces have we seen where people don't know how to shoot a couple kissing?

White balance errors?

Bad cropping?

All basic stuff, all posted on here. It's a heck of an implication!

And your point? Clearly those folk have not learned the technical side as well as having no natural ability. That doesn't address my point at all.

Having set up my own business doing it!

Which is more than most of the people questioning my intentions have ever done. Being a member of several professional organisations.

NOT being sued.

And you?

I don't feel the need or have the desire to splash my pedigree or acheivements on a forum, but I shoot weddings as well, quite successfully thanks. I've never failed to delight, or ever been sued, and I certainly didn't spend a year second shooting. What works for one may not work for others. I haven't seen you accept anyone else's view at all in this thread. You seem hell bent on thrusting YOUR opinion on everyone as the right one. I'm not for one minute saying the way you did things was not correct for you, I'm saying it's not the right way for everyone.

Ali - I think what they are trying to say is - that is what worked for you. Everyone is different and there is more than one way to skin a cat. Some people work well under tuition, others shine when thrown well and truly in at the deep end, others still will never "get it" regardless of the training and experience afforded to them. There is no "one size fits all" approach.

My point....

 

[Arkady]

What is the polite way of saying "what a load of rubbish"?

But he's right...just because it doesn't look right to you, doesn't mean it's not right to someone else...

 

[neo2810]

I'm not going to waste any more of my time on people who are only here to stir and cause an arguement.

I thought we were having a healthy debate? Or is that your resigning get out clause? :thumbsdown:

 

[AliB]

No, but I do reserve the right not to reply to people deliberately baiting. And please, do feel free to splash that pedigree about a bit.

 

[InaGlo]

You know what... we can debate this point all day of 'how to get started' with weddings , and it seems we'll be forever locking horns with it.
My biggest concern in all this is the reflection on TP as a site.

Personally Id rather not see a section dedicated to freebie/cheap weddings, I think it cheapens TP.
If brides-to-be want to place a 'wanted' ad, and someone wants to take them up on it, then ok....thats there business, but surely it doesnt need to be in a section that highlights 'Free & Cheap'.
I just dont think thats something I want to see associated and seemingly encouraged with TP ... regardless of my own personal feelings towards wedding photography.

 

[Tyke Tiler]

Everyone I speak to is agreeing bookings are down. Digital have changed many things and the way we cover weddings as well as couples requirements.

Forgive me but are you suggesting that digital technology is in any way responsible for a decline in bookings snapzz?

 

[Moonhawk]

This thread is going round in circles now as there is no middle ground to be had.

We are all on here for the same reason - a love of photography, we just have to start accepting each others differences.

I'd say its time to lock it up before it starts to get out of hand

 

[Arkady]

This thread is going round in circles now as there is no middle ground to be had.

We are all on here for the same reason - a love of photography, we just have to start accepting each others differences.

I'd say its time to lock it up before it starts to get out of hand

Agreed...

 

[Tyke Tiler]

I'd say its time to lock it up before it starts to get out of hand

I disagree mate, unless of course the mods have all the info/opinion/perspectives they need. The idea of the thread is to discuss the pros and cons of the said forum section.
Censoring a debate, now matter how silly some of the responses are getting, may not be the best option, yet.

On second thought, rather than closing the thread, anyone who displays the inability to discuss matters without being polite get's ejected from the thread?

 

[Keith W]

This thread is going round in circles now as there is no middle ground to be had.

We are all on here for the same reason - a love of photography, we just have to start accepting each others differences.

I'd say its time to lock it up before it starts to get out of hand

I was just about to post and say the same.

</thread>

 

[HoppyUK]

Oh dear Hoppy you are not getting it, I'm actually trying to HELP those starting out and encourage them to do it the right way. That way nobody is going to end up getting sued.

If you listen to any of the trainers in the business they will tell you that one of their prime motivations for doing it (as well as being good business) is to try to raise the bar because there are genuine concerns about the level of photography on offer. Those trainers have recognised that there is a need for the fledgling pro to raise their game and thus get a foot on the ladder before they drown.

And I can look after myself quite nicely thank you, perhaps you would prefer if I didn't share any experiences and just kept my own council and let others drown? Which if you notice is exactly what is happening, how many of our resident pro togs even bother responding to wedding threads now?

I did say a few months back that I would stop responding to weddings threads myself perhaps it's time I took my own advice.

Dear Ali (may I call you that ?)

I was not referring to your own positive input. I was speaking about the general impression I am getting from this thread (although I could cite several specific examples).

Some posters claim to be solely concerned about the couples getting a good job done when a) they are really concerned about making money for themselves, and b) it's frankly none of their business to interfere in what a bride does or doesn't want. Why else should they care? Bridezillas are big girls who can make their own choices (and mistakes).

The world of professional photography is changing. It is not valued as a skill or primarily as a professional service by the general public in anything like the way it was. You do not need to be a seasoned professional to produce a clear, bright and colourful record of the day, and brides know this. If that is all they want, and they are not prepared to pay what they consider to be extravagant professional fees, then we must all apply ourselves to the new world order.

Customers are utterly ruthless. They will pay for what they consider is good value, to them. Not for anything else. A successful business fits itself to changing market needs, and prospers. If it tries to change the market to suit itself, it dies.

I think it is the painful realisation of that conflict that is at the heart of this debate.

 

[neo2810]

No, but I do reserve the right not to reply to people deliberately baiting. And please, do feel free to splash that pedigree about a bit.

I don't bait, I discuss... And no, I've already stated I don't need to splash my business side on a forum as I work within a partnership. I'll only post personal stuff here thanks...

 

[Arkady]

I disagree mate, unless of course the mods have all the info/opinion/perspectives they need. The idea of the thread is to discuss the pros and cons of the said forum section.
Censoring a debate, now matter how silly some of the responses are getting, may not be the best option, yet.

I'd agree with this but for one thing - the polar-opposites of the two camps involved - there seems to be no middle ground and each 'side' seems unwilling/unable to accept the other sides' POV...


I'm very disheartened by the seeming inability of a few people on here to realise that this could be benficial to them... a means to educate would-be customers that it's in their best interest to hire someone if they actually require 'professional-quality' imagery and by helping them get in touch with someone else if they don't require that...

 

[snapzz]

I think this is my last last post on this subject

I know some of the laws in this country but doesn't qualify me to be a police officer or solicitor.

I can diagnose when someone has a headache and can dress a cut but doesn't qualify me to be a doctor or a nurse.

In all of these cases it requires expert training and on site training. I have no objection to anyone setting up a photography business either full or part time. That is assuming they train to do the job, provide a set of accounts to customs & revenue and carry the appropriate insurances. This is called a "level playing field".

At no point do I consider myself insecure but I do object to anyone competing with me for free. Often these people (I'm talking generally) try it for a few months then give up sell their equipment as the only referrals they get are also for freebies. I have no objection to anyone charging £250 for a days coverage although cheap they are at least charging.

There are those who think wedding photographer overcharge just for taking a few pics on a Saturday! Photography is a skilled profession which does require a certain amount of technical knowledge. This simply cannot be gained by shooting any event without some sort of guided tuition. Those who think they can usually post a "help my first wedding" post and expect those with the experience to pull them out of a hole! Pro's who frequent this and other forums do so to help others who ask for assistance but not to tell them how to do a job they are not equipped to do and shouldn't have taken on in the first place.

In about an hour I leave to shoot a wedding. Looking out of my window I have seen bright sunshine, cloud and rain. Its also quite windy. Today I will have to overcome these changing condition along with the restrictions of the venue and still expected to provide a set (not just a few) images. I would not wish todays conditions on anyone who is covering their first free wedding.

It is interesting though to note that some (not all) who have posted on this thread have no real interest in the subject and couldn't careless. Suggesting we are wingeing, insecure or over protective is really uncalled for. The current financial climate proves people are spending less therefore the need to be competitive is greater but we still need to earn a living as you do who do not rely on photography to pay your mortgage. Hopefully some may realise this when you find your job is at risk or receive that redundancy letter.

 

[Tyke Tiler]

I'd agree with this but for one thing - the polar-opposites of the two camps involved - there seems to be no middle ground and each 'side' seems unwilling/unable to accept the other sides' POV...


I'm very disheartened by the seeming inability of a few people on here to realise that this could be benficial to them... a means to educate would-be customers that it's in their best interest to hire someone if they actually require 'professional-quality' imagery and by helping them get in touch with someone else if they don't require that...

Again, very well said and very well communicated.

I do think that censorship isn't the best remedy though, unless Marcel and Co have what they need.

 

[snapzz]

Forgive me but are you suggesting that digital technology is in any way responsible for a decline in bookings snapzz?

Partly. Before digital everything was shot on film and incurred a cost. Digital has no immediate cost like film and you had to have prints. Costs of DSLR's has dropped heavily and even smaller cheaper compacts are producing good quality images. Also the style of wedding photography has changed as have the demands of couples getting married.

Inspite of the rising costs of staging a wedding some couples may prefer to spend a few hundred on chair covers than on photography. Most guests now take a camera or camera phone to weddings and some couples are quite happy to collect these images as coverage to their wedding. You can even make your own printed album for about £30 and providing they can get a couple of good ones they are happy. Although I'd be interested to know how many regret not having professionally taken photographs afterwards!

 

[HoppyUK]

Partly. Before digital everything was shot on film and incurred a cost. Digital has no immediate cost like film and you had to have prints. Costs of DSLR's has dropped heavily and even smaller cheaper compacts are producing good quality images. Also the style of wedding photography has changed as have the demands of couples getting married.

Inspite of the rising costs of staging a wedding some couples may prefer to spend a few hundred on chair covers than on photography. Most guests now take a camera or camera phone to weddings and some couples are quite happy to collect these images as coverage to their wedding. You can even make your own printed album for about £30 and providing they can get a couple of good ones they are happy. Although I'd be interested to know how many regret not having professionally taken photographs afterwards!

Excellent post Honest too

The problem in a nutshell.

 

[Arkady]

I think this is my last last post on this subject

I know some of the laws in this country but doesn't qualify me to be a police officer or solicitor.

I can diagnose when someone has a headache and can dress a cut but doesn't qualify me to be a doctor or a nurse.

In all of these cases it requires expert training and on site training. I have no objection to anyone setting up a photography business either full or part time. That is assuming they train to do the job, provide a set of accounts to customs & revenue and carry the appropriate insurances. This is called a "level playing field".

At no point do I consider myself insecure but I do object to anyone competing with me for free. Often these people (I'm talking generally) try it for a few months then give up sell their equipment as the only referrals they get are also for freebies. I have no objection to anyone charging £250 for a days coverage although cheap they are at least charging.

There are those who think wedding photographer overcharge just for taking a few pics on a Saturday! Photography is a skilled profession which does require a certain amount of technical knowledge. This simply cannot be gained by shooting any event without some sort of guided tuition. Those who think they can usually post a "help my first wedding" post and expect those with the experience to pull them out of a hole! Pro's who frequent this and other forums do so to help others who ask for assistance but not to tell them how to do a job they are not equipped to do and shouldn't have taken on in the first place.

In about an hour I leave to shoot a wedding. Looking out of my window I have seen bright sunshine, cloud and rain. Its also quite windy. Today I will have to overcome these changing condition along with the restrictions of the venue and still expected to provide a set (not just a few) images. I would not wish todays conditions on anyone who is covering their first free wedding.

It is interesting though to note that some (not all) who have posted on this thread have no real interest in the subject and couldn't careless. Suggesting we are wingeing, insecure or over protective is really uncalled for. The current financial climate proves people are spending less therefore the need to be competitive is greater but we still need to earn a living as you do who do not rely on photography to pay your mortgage. Hopefully some may realise this when you find your job is at risk or receive that redundancy letter.

I think it's the assumption that someone agreeing to cover a wedding for free in order to gain experience will neccessarily be a beginner to photography in general that really irks me...

Take me for example - I've been a pro for many years, but seldom cover weddings as it's not a field I'm interested in doing. I may be coerced into acting as a 'second' at a freind or friend of a friend's wedding, and for that I probably wouldn't charge them - maybe I wouldn't cover all the bases that a full- or part-time Pro Wedding photographer could, but I'm pretty damn certain that my images would be of a professional enough standard that the couple would be very happy with them...and in many cases, they might even be better images than a Pro Wedding togger would provide, simply because I'm not doing the same thing day-in, day-out and thus am able to provide a fresh take on things...no guarantees...but maybe...

And I'm equally certain that there are many, many photographers who are members here that would be equally adept...

 

[Tyke Tiler]

It is interesting though to note that some (not all) who have posted on this thread have no real interest in the subject and couldn't careless. Suggesting we are wingeing, insecure or over protective is really uncalled for. The current financial climate proves people are spending less therefore the need to be competitive is greater but we still need to earn a living as you do who do not rely on photography to pay your mortgage. Hopefully some may realise this when you find your job is at risk or receive that redundancy letter.

I am a photographer, photography accounts for all of my income and this is my stance so far:

If your work is individual, consistent, reliable and most of all, of the standard associated with that of a professional, then the chances of you actually agreeing to provide a service for the folk with budgets under your standard rates are slim. Your not going to provide a full days coverage for £250 so either someone will or the couple goes with what's available (relatives and guests efforts).

The chances would also be as equally non existent with you providing a service to the folk who may ask for it for free, so again, that particular couple aren't getting any of your work are they and again, either someone will step in or the couple goes with what's available (relatives and guests efforts).

I find this more than accurate:

Customers are utterly ruthless. They will pay for what they consider is good value, to them. Not for anything else. A successful business fits itself to changing market needs, and prospers. If it tries to change the market to suit itself, it dies.

It's our job to keep our socks pulled up
If your truly happy with what you do, if your truly satisfied with what you can achieve, then whatever the technology, you should really have nothing to fear.

To be fair, budding wedding togs offering to do a wedding for free is of no threat to the industry in my opinion.

My concerns are whether it's a threat to this forum. I remain undecided.

 

[Arkady]

I am a photographer, photography accounts for all of my income and this is my stance so far:

If your work is individual, consistent, reliable and most of all, of the standard associated with that of a professional, then the chances of you actually agreeing to provide a service for the folk with budgets under your standard rates are slim. Your not going to provide a full days coverage for £250 so either someone will or the couple goes with what's available (relatives and guests efforts).

The chances would also be as equally non existent with you providing a service to the folk who may ask for it for free, so again, that particular couple aren't getting any of your work are they and again, either someone will step in or the couple goes with what's available (relatives and guests efforts).

I find this more than accurate:



It's our job to keep our socks pulled up
If your truly happy with what you do, if your truly satisfied with what you can achieve, then whatever the technology, you should really have nothing to fear.

To be fair, budding wedding togs offering to do a wedding for free is of no threat to the industry in my opinion.

My concerns are whether it's a threat to this forum. I remain undecided.

All very good points...and to the last one the answer I suppose is: 'We'll See...'

 

[Moonhawk]

Ignore - misposted

 

[Moonhawk]

I think this is my last last post on this subject

I know some of the laws in this country but doesn't qualify me to be a police officer or solicitor.

I can diagnose when someone has a headache and can dress a cut but doesn't qualify me to be a doctor or a nurse.

.
.
.

The current financial climate proves people are spending less therefore the need to be competitive is greater but we still need to earn a living as you do who do not rely on photography to pay your mortgage. Hopefully some may realise this when you find your job is at risk or receive that redundancy letter.

I dont get your police and nurse analagies - both of these require professional qualification and specialist training - and they carry legal responsibilities. Setting up as a photographer is nothing like this - you dont need any of these things, they are nice to haves, but not essential.

Also - the reason I am looking to branch out a bit and diversify is because I have been made redundant recently - twice. I know exactly what it is like.

 

[Tyke Tiler]

All very good points...and to the last one the answer I suppose is: 'We'll See...'

Indeed mate, normally I would be afraid of the 'we'll see' option but I'm positive that Marcel and the gang will leave little or nothing up to much chance when developing and crafting the guidelines.

 

[mrtoad]

this is a fantastic thread...with no real outcome
two camps, two valid points
what about the clients point of view, inasmuch as what they want for a record of the day
the product i assume varies from family shots to well composed and presented professional work?

i find the whole argument or difference in viewpoints also emerges when one goes on a diy forum and asks how to wire up their oven etc
you get the real SP and you also get the 'hire an electrician' from the forumites who are most experienced and able to solve any electrical problem...
what is more to the point their work is guaranteed and to the specifications of the most recent electrical standards...safe!!

having known so many professional photographers over the years i would feel slightly guilty about even thinking about moving over their ground. the responsibiliy and weight of necessary success would detract from my pleasure of just taking shots to suit myself

photography is fun!!

 

[PsiFox]

a means to educate would-be customers that it's in their best interest to hire someone if they actually require 'professional-quality' imagery and by helping them get in touch with someone else if they don't require that...

Now in my humble opinion there is the only thing that needs to be said about this subject.

What's the freebie equivalent of "caveat Emptor"?

O.K that's 2

 

[Moonhawk]

Now in my humble opinion there is the only thing that needs to be said about this subject.

What's the freebie equivalent of "caveat Emptor"?

O.K that's 2

Thats pretty much what everyone in favour of allowing freebies has said all along. None of us have suggested that we are marketing a professional quality service for free and I for one would not be happy doing so.

On all of my shoots - the couples are made acutely aware that I am not a pro protographer, and even have to sign a contract agreeing as much. They have all decided of their own free will to ask us anyway (the alternative being that they dont have a photographer at all). Nothing would be gained if I where to turn down these jobs.

 

[mrtoad]

Now in my humble opinion there is the only thing that needs to be said about this subject.

What's the freebie equivalent of "caveat Emptor"?

O.K that's 2

when does the buyer become the seller

as the OP infers...the question really is selling an opportunity

it would be unwise for amateurs...that is freebie lads...to go pimping for wedding jobs...totally unprofessional

 

[Tyke Tiler]

....having known so many professional photographers over the years i would feel slightly guilty about even thinking about moving over their ground. The responsibiliy and weight of necessary success would detract from my pleasure of just taking shots to suit myself

Whilst I respect your comment Mr Crow, It's not about 'moving over someone's ground', if your good at what you do, it's natural to want to continue doing it.

If folk stop caring about their 'ground', then it's fair to say they may not be standing on it much longer.

There will always be competition although I have no interest in competing.

You say that the weight and responsibility would detract from your enjoyment, that's more than fair enough, I have very good friends who can shoot a decent frame and have no interest in turning it into a career but responsibilities are unavoidable and to some, a photographic weight and responsibility is more acceptable than others.

photography is fun!!

Agreed and it can be a fun living too but business is business, if your going to stay afloat then you have to consider many variables, strategies and plan for the future.

 

[mrtoad]

Whilst I respect your comment Mr Crow, It's not about 'moving over someone's ground', if your good at what you do, it's natural to want to continue doing it.

If folk stop caring about their 'ground', then it's fair to say they may not be standing on it much longer.

There will always be competition although I have no interest in competing.

You say that the weight and responsibility would detract from your enjoyment, that's more than fair enough, I have very good friends who can shoot a decent frame and have no interest in turning it into a career but responsibilities are unavoidable and to some, a photographic weight and responsibility is more acceptable than others.



Agreed and it can be a fun living too but business is business, if your going to stay afloat then you have to consider many variables, strategies and plan for the future.

my view is ..i dont want to make money from photography...even if i was any good/better..!!!!
i have made enough doing what i thought i was better at...engineering and accountancy
i have had photography as a hobby for many years and due to my non competitive nature only take what i want in the way i want it when i want and not to anyones beck and call....<what a ranting old codger crow is>

regarding business ethics...having run a limited company i know how to cut to the chase..

 

[Tyke Tiler]

l....<what a ranting old codger crow is>

Crow's don't rant They caw!

 

[Hammerhead64]

snapzz ..... I appologise in advance that I have quoted solely from your posts in this reply but this is mostly from a devils advocate stance as most of your comments I tend to agree with/appreciate ....

At no point do I consider myself insecure but I do object to anyone competing with me for free. Often these people (I'm talking generally) try it for a few months then give up sell their equipment as the only referrals they get are also for freebies. I have no objection to anyone charging £250 for a days coverage although cheap they are at least charging.

Thats business if you don't compete or provide different or higher standards ....

There are those who think wedding photographer overcharge just for taking a few pics on a Saturday! Photography is a skilled profession which does require a certain amount of technical knowledge. This simply cannot be gained by shooting any event without some sort of guided tuition. Those who think they can usually post a "help my first wedding" post and expect those with the experience to pull them out of a hole! Pro's who frequent this and other forums do so to help others who ask for assistance but not to tell them how to do a job they are not equipped to do and shouldn't have taken on in the first place.

..... Some do as do some builders, bakers and candlestick makers etc.

..... Beg to differ on your point of Photography as a skilled profession requiring technical knowledge ..... I would argue that "True" Photography is an art form and only requires those naturally talented to have the basic knowledge much as a painter only needs to have a basic knowlegde of the tool (pencil/brush/pen etc.) being used to paint with.

I would not wish todays conditions on anyone who is covering their first free wedding.

Surely this doesn't matter if it is free or paid ..... it still comes down to the competancy of the tog .....?????

Partly. Before digital everything was shot on film and incurred a cost. Digital has no immediate cost like film and you had to have prints. Costs of DSLR's has dropped heavily and even smaller cheaper compacts are producing good quality images. Also the style of wedding photography has changed as have the demands of couples getting married.

Inspite of the rising costs of staging a wedding some couples may prefer to spend a few hundred on chair covers than on photography. Most guests now take a camera or camera phone to weddings and some couples are quite happy to collect these images as coverage to their wedding. You can even make your own printed album for about £30 and providing they can get a couple of good ones they are happy. Although I'd be interested to know how many regret not having professionally taken photographs afterwards!

...and I think you'll find that this is marking the end of middle income B&G paying large costs towards photos ..... the move to the more casual shots and away from the formal ..... is also a possible indication of this. Pro wedding photography could well be going the same way as printing, signwriting, boatbuilding and many other skilled/creative trades .....

I dont get your police and nurse analagies - both of these require professional qualification and specialist training - and they carry legal responsibilities. Setting up as a photographer is nothing like this - you dont need any of these things, they are nice to haves, but not essential.

Also - the reason I am looking to branch out a bit and diversify is because I have been made redundant recently - twice. I know exactly what it is like.

 

[mrtoad]

Crow's don't rant They caw!

this one does..:razz:

 

[Matt]

very interesting reading. Marmite subject is this...

 

[alexkidd]

honestly though i love marmite, i dip a spoon in the jar and lick it off like a lollipop

 

[Tyke Tiler]

honestly though i love marmite, i dip a spoon in the jar and lick it off like a lollipop

Ye gods, I'm a follower of the marm, but licking it off the spoon?! That's just perverted!