Wedding Pics - a cautionary tale!

I've lost track of how many times I've stumbled across this argument in the short time I've visited these forums.
 
TriggerHappy said:
I've lost track of how many times I've stumbled across this argument in the short time I've visited these forums.
Click to expand...



yes, boring are'nt they and I shoot weddings lol

If someone thinks I charge to much ......I don't care.

If someone thinks I charge too little .........I don't care.

If someone thinks my photos are rubbish ...... I don't care.

If my clients like my style. my photos and me. I care.

I don't feel the need to justify myself.

But I see, there are some who do.

I say get a life, stop arguing and go take some photos, it sure is more fun.
 
jolsterj said:
yes, boring are'nt they and I shoot weddings lol

If someone thinks I charge to much ......I don't care.

If someone thinks I charge too little .........I don't care.

If someone thinks my photos are rubbish ...... I don't care.

If my clients like my style. my photos and me. I care.

I don't feel the need to justify myself.

But I see, there are some who do.

I say get a life, stop arguing and go take some photos, it sure is more fun.
Click to expand...


Post of the day.............:thumbs:
 
jolsterj said:
yes, boring are'nt they and I shoot weddings lol

If someone thinks I charge to much ......I don't care.

If someone thinks I charge too little .........I don't care.

If someone thinks my photos are rubbish ...... I don't care.

If my clients like my style. my photos and me. I care.

I don't feel the need to justify myself.

But I see, there are some who do.

I say get a life, stop arguing and go take some photos, it sure is more fun.
Click to expand...

Yep, top post !
 
if peop;e are fortunate enough to afford a pro. brilliant.
just amuses me a little when some of them think a freind with a point n shot will produce pro spec prints.
ya cant win em all.
we had a comment at a recent weding.
"bloody hell. two camera bags, 5 cameras and all that stuff.
do you realy need all that?"
i replied.
"yes, and we know how to use it properly too.
thats why we get paid a fair amount of money for shooting weddings "
 
Nice website, the Brindleys certainly know thier stuff but the part that bothers me is the bit were it says the new studio will be fully open by the end of May...Tina needs a new slave..one that doesn't have a cleavage fetish and who will finish the job instead of swanning off to shoot gigs......some really nice images on your site mark.
 
TriggerHappy said:
I've lost track of how many times I've stumbled across this argument in the short time I've visited these forums.
Click to expand...

Same here, but in reading these threads, I have come to realise just how much goes into shooting a wedding, it is something I will never wish to do, and I don't begrudge any figure a wedding photographer charges, as far as I am concerned, a bride and Groom will contact the photographer, he/she will give them a price, it is then up to the B&G if they wish to use that persons services.

It is part and parcel in being involved in a free market, and if the photographer can make a living, consistently, based on the quality of their work, and the prices they charge, well fair play to them.

And as long as people keep biting on these threads, the more I learn.
 
48thEagle said:
Same here, but in reading these threads, I have come to realise just how much goes into shooting a wedding, it is something I will never wish to do, and I don't begrudge any figure a wedding photographer charges, as far as I am concerned, a bride and Groom will contact the photographer, he/she will give them a price, it is then up to the B&G if they wish to use that persons services.

It is part and parcel in being involved in a free market, and if the photographer can make a living, consistently, based on the quality of their work, and the prices they charge, well fair play to them.

And as long as people keep biting on these threads, the more I learn.
Click to expand...

I have a friend who is a brilliant wedding photographer and photographer in general, he has published a book before today and charges a minimum of £1500 and up to £5000 for a wedding he is booked to the hilt and does very very well out of photography and he lectures too but he doesnt blow his own trumpet or sneer at people less experienced, infact he has given me lots of advice in the past about general photography, it is a pity that more wedding togs dont give up information more freely without giving you a slap on the wrist every time they dispart a little gem of information......as long as people keep biting on these threads as you say, you will see the same old suspects rolling up thier sleeves and its a shame for TP members, I have bitten my tongue so many times in the past when reading wedding photography threads because its the same old crap from the same old faces.

here is my friends website http://swpp.co.uk/members/goto/rd.cgi?redir=http://www.tomleephoto.co.uk
 
Paul

There is a big difference between giving advice (which I spend an awful lot of time doing both here via PM and on other sites) and being accused of unjustifiable prices. To his credit TheCrow has come back with a revised opinion so in that respect the details that I, and others, laid out about what goes into a wedding was worth doing.

So, whilst there are no doubt wedding photographers who sneer at amateurs I don't think I'm one of them. However, when someone has a dig at what I do then I will stand up for myself.
 
Actually I think this thread has been well debated. I've seen similar boil over with physical threats. When ever this type of argument arises it is usually by someone voicing an opinion on a subject they no nothing about.

Shooting weddings is quite stressful. Sometimes you have to cope with unresponsive vicars/priest/registrars. Lousy locations. Overweight brides. Couples with extreme height differences. Guests who are hell bent on jumping in your way. I even had a groom walkout as he couldn't stand the attention anymore! And when everything is running late who's to blame? ..... the photographer!

My final say on this thread is I have no problem with a bride & groom who cannot afford a pro but are grateful for any pics supplied by guests (of any denomination).

I do have a problem with bride & grooms who advertise for someone to shoot their wedding free.

I do have a problem with wannabes who advertise free weddings for portfolio shots. I have been reading on another forum a similar instance to this which is now heading for a court case.

I do have a problem with people who criticise wedding pro's for their outlandish (their words) prices when they have never covered a wedding and no nothing of what is involved.

This is my final say on the matter.

Now where is that Nikon v Canon thread? :bonk::cuckoo::help::lol::lol:
 
snapzz said:
Actually I think this thread has been well debated. I've seen similar boil over with physical threats.
Click to expand...

I think this is true of most of the threads I have participated in on this forum. They evolve into informed debates where people can admit it if they realise that some information they put in an earlier post was wrong.

Similar threads on some other forums turn to name calling and mud slinging which is of no use to anyone.


Steve.
 
Stop bickering everyone, for gods sake! This has been done to death, time and time again! Ill end on this...

jolsterj said:
yes, boring are'nt they and I shoot weddings lol

If someone thinks I charge to much ......I don't care.

If someone thinks I charge too little .........I don't care.

If someone thinks my photos are rubbish ...... I don't care.

If my clients like my style. my photos and me. I care.

I don't feel the need to justify myself.

But I see, there are some who do.

I say get a life, stop arguing and go take some photos, it sure is more fun.
Click to expand...


/thread
 
I did a 2nd shooter for a good friend and very good local photographer yesterday. We had a meet on Thursday and tested equipment, worked through the itinerary and shot list, worked out who would be carrying what and what back up kit we would have in the car and in our bags. We cleaned sensors, cleaned lenses and double checked everything worked. We also checked routes and locations and double checked that we had current mobile numbers for each other. The weather was variable so we also packed wet weather gear.

He did the pre-wedding shoot whilst I went to the wedding and reception venue and got the atmospheric shots, table shots, groom and best man etc. I then got the brides maids and family arriving and set up the kit ready for him to get the bride arriving.

At the venue itself there was 6 different sub-venues. Exterior front, exterior back, house interior, gardens, wedding service marquee and reception marquee. There was usually something happening in at least two of these at the same time so we worked our butts off.

I did 3 and half hours (on site) which took us up to the reception and my mate did the bride getting ready through to the end of reception (13 hours). We had 2 battery packs fail (even though charged and pre-tested) and a 580 flash fail. Between us we had 6 flashes, 12 battery packs, over 40 AA's (brand new) for the flashes and 4 external battery packs for the flashes.

The main photographer had already spent half a day with the couple doing planning and a further couple of hours with the wedding organiser and doing venue visits.

We now have over 40 Gb of raw images to sift and select from and then process the ones we want to show the couple.

Before we even start processing images a total in the order of 30 man hours has gone into this event.

The actual photography covered everything from overcast exterior, under-lit interiors, variable exterior (bright sun with dark fast moving rain clouds). No flash, flash only and fill flash. It was mentally and physically a very demanding and fast moving event that needed you to know your equipment backwards.

Have no doubts about it. We earned every penny yesterday.

John
 
Can I ask, insurance keeps on being mentioned, how much would insurance be?

And is that public liability or equipment insurance, or both?

Ta. :)
 
It doesn't matter how much time, effort, and money it takes to shoot a wedding. The majority of people don't know what a good photograph is and are very happy with the sort of shots that most of us would bin on a first cut. I take the odd snap of friends as a newbie amateur I get them telling me they are 'amazing' and want prints done. My colleague at work is immensely proud of his wedding photos that are absolutely dreadful in my view (some are GIF compressed for god's sake!)

Some people will always pay for quality though, if you can attract that market, good for you :) But I'd happily take my SLR to a friend's wedding to take some shots for them if they didn't have the means to pay for a pro, and I know they'd be chuffed to bits with what I could manage.
 
redhed17 said:
Can I ask, insurance keeps on being mentioned, how much would insurance be?

And is that public liability or equipment insurance, or both?

Ta. :)
Click to expand...


Just to jump in again - glad this thread didn't go 'sour' (as I thought it was heading :)

Insurance cover is a bit like car insurance here - 'Fully Comp' (as I have) covers all the gear, Prof Indemnity, Public Liability, and all while out & about, in studio or at my home (including computers, desks, everything!!!)

And... is still only around £300 pa - anyone shooting Weddings without it wants Shooting IMO :D Protection for you, your gear & the couple :thumbs:

DD
 
The following is a quote from a post I made a while back about insurance.

Insurance is what covers you when you slip in the shower getting ready to go and cannot shoot the wedding. Insurance is what covers you when you have just taken your gear out of the car and your assistance closes the boot on your hand. Insurance is what covers you when you put your bag at your side and a guest trips over it. These are just some examples.

When you and your client sign a contract there are obligations on both sides. If, through no fault of your own, you cannot meet those obligations then your insurance is what is going to keep you out of the poor house.

There are 4 types of insurance you should consider:-

The first is liability insurance. This one is really essential and covers you for accidents and accidental damage to property and persons. You really need this as a minimum. Little Jimmy takes an eye out on your umbrella and you are possibly looking at £2M of damages.

The second is indemnity insurance. This indemnifies you for claims for non-performance eg. no show etc.

The third is legal insurance. This will cover your costs of legal advice if sued.

The fourth is equipment insurance. This covers the cost of replacing equipment in the event of theft or damage.

As a professional (full time or part time) you have to consider the implications of an unexpected event and the cost of protecting yourself. I would bet that most photographers give a higher importance to equipment insurance than they do to liability insurance.

I am currently with Photoguard but will be moving to Aaduki next week. No problems with Photoguard but I can get better cover and a personal service.

www.aaduki.com tel. 0845 838 6933

I have no connection with them but they have been strongly recommended by a number of people.

John
 
jpwone said:
The following is a quote from a post I made a while back about insurance.

Insurance is what covers you when you slip in the shower getting ready to go and cannot shoot the wedding. Insurance is what covers you when you have just taken your gear out of the car and your assistance closes the boot on your hand. Insurance is what covers you when you put your bag at your side and a guest trips over it. These are just some examples.

When you and your client sign a contract there are obligations on both sides. If, through no fault of your own, you cannot meet those obligations then your insurance is what is going to keep you out of the poor house.

There are 4 types of insurance you should consider:-

The first is liability insurance. This one is really essential and covers you for accidents and accidental damage to property and persons. You really need this as a minimum. Little Jimmy takes an eye out on your umbrella and you are possibly looking at £2M of damages.

The second is indemnity insurance. This indemnifies you for claims for non-performance eg. no show etc.

The third is legal insurance. This will cover your costs of legal advice if sued.

The fourth is equipment insurance. This covers the cost of replacing equipment in the event of theft or damage.

As a professional (full time or part time) you have to consider the implications of an unexpected event and the cost of protecting yourself. I would bet that most photographers give a higher importance to equipment insurance than they do to liability insurance.

I am currently with Photoguard but will be moving to Aaduki next week. No problems with Photoguard but I can get better cover and a personal service.

www.aaduki.com tel. 0845 838 6933

I have no connection with them but they have been strongly recommended by a number of people.

John
Click to expand...


Actually I saw the equipment insurance as a bonus :)

I'm with aaduki too

DD
 
agreed!! i'm a wedding photographer and having just started out (only 2 (3rd coming up) weddings under my belt) i can understand the price now. The pressure is enormous on the day, you get things wrong and that's that there's no going back, that couples day is ruined in terms of the memories in photographic form.

I find it sad that i'm getting e-mails now for quotes saying 'cheap as possible'. It makes it hard to refuse due to the current economy but also i feel i'm underselling my work at the same time. It's not a nice time to work in :(
 
danieljamesphoto said:
I find it sad that i'm getting e-mails now for quotes saying 'cheap as possible'. It makes it hard to refuse due to the current economy but also i feel i'm underselling my work at the same time. It's not a nice time to work in :(
Click to expand...

This is the same for any business and with less work around, look forward to lots more competition and a need to lower your prices.

As an example, the building industry up until a few months ago had been doing well - too well in fact, with contractors being paid more than they should have been paid. This has dramatically reversed recently and with the work drying up there will be lots of contractors chasing diminishing work opportunities in the industry and anything else they think they can do.



Steve.
 
Be very, very careful about dropping prices. It's one of the biggest mistakes that beginners can make IMO - people will pay for quality and by dropping your prices you can see a bounce, but this can turn into a treadmill and a lower of the quality of your work. As the quality drops, people consider you to be worth less and you need to drop your prices more. The circle is complete and you're finished.

Work out your price, ensure you're charging at a level commensurate with your quality and tough it out. There are a lot of photographers raising their prices this year and still seeing an increase in bookings.
 
mid_gen said:
It doesn't matter how much time, effort, and money it takes to shoot a wedding. The majority of people don't know what a good photograph is and are very happy with the sort of shots that most of us would bin on a first cut.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid I simply don't argree with that. More and more people have cameras these days, they are used to seeing pictures, it's very common for brides to look at hundreds of online shots before choosing a tog, she'll know what she likes and what she doesn't. Some turn up at our studio with printed pics from the web they like, they want us to copy the style etc. Many people are more knowlegible about photography than you might think
Plus most people have an "uncle Bob" or neighbour whos in the camera club or whatever, he'll be quick enough to point out any problems with your photos if they haven't spotted them.
 
As an example, our local paper ran a bridal feature this week with a feature on a new wedding photography business called 'No Frills Photography'. Obviously the service is stripped down back to basics style.

To quote part of the article:

No Frills offers a Wedding Only package for £150 covering the ceromony and family pictures afterwards. The Wedding Plus package at £210 covers the bride and bridesmaids before the ceromony plus the wedding. Alternatively, this package can cover the wedding and the reception. The Complete Day, £330 covers the bride and bridesmaids beforehand, the ceremony and reception and includes a DVD of images

These prices may horrify some of the wedding photographers here but people providing this sort of service are going to become more common due to the combination of people needing to earn some extra money and couples not being able to afford an expensive wedding.


Steve.
 
I have had couple come back to renegotiate prices recently. My solution (for want of a better word) has been to reduce the coverage to match their price level. For example, a couple wanted coverage that included the bride getting ready, groom at church, bride arriving at church, church service, family group and bride and groom posings, arrival at reception, reception scene and place settings etc., toasts, speeches, first dance, reception party. This was going to be a two photographer job with an assistant.

I have reduced the price but they have lost the bride getting ready, the arrival at the reception and coverage will now be into the first hour of the reception . They will now get one photographer and an assistant.

I don't have a problem with trimming prices but services have to be trimmed as well. You can't have a Gary Rhodes meal on a McDonalds budget.

There will also come a point when I recommend (as a colleague of mine has just done) that a couple look for someone else to photograph their wedding as I cannot do it for less than I have quoted. The other consideration I have when chopping prices is that I am now committed to photographing a wedding at a discount and could end up turning away another couple who would be paying the proper price.

My father had a saying 'No business is better than bad business'. In the current climate you are sometimes better saying no and moving on rather than trying to get the business at any price.

I have done a couple of low cost events and learnt the hard way that they expect the same level of service as if they had paid top price for a known name.

Having said this, a small group of photographers in my local area are considering and looking at ways of offering a service to the low end of the market. We should have this up and running in the next few weeks. This will be aimed at the mid-week registrar office type wedding and will be fixed price, DVD only and fixed time. All paid in advance at the time of booking. We'll see how it goes.

John
 
jpwone said:
I don't have a problem with trimming prices but services have to be trimmed as well. You can't have a Gary Rhodes meal on a McDonalds budget.
Click to expand...

I agree entirely but in recent years, couples have started to expect much more. e.g. hundreds or even thousands of images on a slideshow DVD, wedding book, etc.

In the 'olden days' i.e. the forty years my father spent as a wedding photographer, most couples got an album of about 60 pictures and any re-prints were ordered separately. I imagine that something like this would be all most couples really want especially if they have a tight budget.

My father was only a wedding photographer at weekends (he was a heating design engineer on weekdays) so his wedding work just paid for his personal photography. Even the photographer he worked for couldn't survive on just weddings, he had a portrait studio and did commercial and product jobs too.

If I was going into the wedding business (and there is no way I'm going to!) this is what I would do. I would use film, not digital and get the film processed with 7x5 proofs (I wouldn't do any post processing myself) select the best 50-60 and put them in an album. This would be the basic package priced accordingly and re-prints would be extra.

I have done a couple of weddings like this for friends (not for money though) and it works very well.

I don't really see that anyone can make a full living just on weddings as there is not the opportunity to do one (or two) a day for five days a week. It's a bit like my own part time work as a semi-pro musician. If we wanted to live on our musician wages from one or two weekend gigs per week we would have to charge about £2000 per gig instead of the £160 - £250 we charge at the moment. I don't think we would get any bookings at £2000!


Steve.
 
After staying out of these arguments for so long I can't help but get my 2 pence in now. Note, I have nothing against wedding photographers or the price they charge. If they make a living from it full credit to them, I'm certain I couldn't do it!

So here it is, my 2 pence:
It all comes down to economics.
If people want the service enough they'll pay the price for it. The more they expect of the service the more they will be willing, but not necessarily able, to pay.
If there's there's the desire and willingness to pay (demand) for the service at the price you're charging, and that price and demand equates to sufficient income to make wedding photography a feasible sole career then you're on to a winner.
If either the service you provide doesn't justify the price you charge or the same service is available for a lower price then you will lose out on business and may not be able to survive on the reduced custom you receive.
That's a free market economy for you, if you don't like the competition involved or can't make a living from the money you earn then you're in the wrong industry.

No offence meant.

Jamie
 
Thanks for the replies regarding insurance. :)

I'm glad I don't try to make a living from weddings. Stress apart, it seems that pictures are an aspect of the wedding that people don't value as they perhaps should, and is the 1st place they economize on during the boom times, never mind the times we are now in. :nono:

A friend and I have taken pics at 3 weddings for people we know for nothing. Maybe taking business from some pro photographers, but if they were willing to get us to do it, then they probably wouldn't have paid anyone anyway. :shrug:

I did the 1st for the experience, and wouldn't have done it alone. The 2nd was to see if we could do it better, and the 3rd was for my boss. Though more for all he's done for me rather than out of any fear of losing my job. :lol:

All the weddings were done on the understanding that they were getting what they were paying (nothing) for, and we wouldn't be responsible for rubbish pics. We also wouldn't do any editing or printing of pics. We would take them and give them the pics to do with what they wanted. :shrug:

Doing it that way certainly took the stress away. I mean, we'd do our best, but we told them, if you want professional quality, you pay a professional.

I don't think I will do one again, as I didn't enjoy the experience. My friend is more of a 'people person' and even she had trouble trying to keep control of the different groups to take pics of.

I have great respect for people who do weddings, and feel you shouldn't under value what you do (yes I know I did them for nothing, but you may have done your first few for nothing for the experience too ;)) because if you are giving a quality result/experience to the couple then they should pay the going rate. Easy to say when you are not making a living from it I know.
 
redhed17 said:
My friend is more of a 'people person' and even she had trouble trying to keep control of the different groups to take pics of.
Click to expand...

That's exactly what it's all about. My father used to state that wedding photography was 10% photography and 90% people skills.


Steve.
 
That might have been true in the older style, traditional, line-them-up-and-take-a-shot days. I'm not sure it's the case anymore.

On a typical 12 hour wedding shoot I'll dedicate no more than 30 minutes to formals. The rest of the day is completely undirected.
 
swanseamale47 said:
I'm afraid I simply don't argree with that. More and more people have cameras these days, they are used to seeing pictures, it's very common for brides to look at hundreds of online shots before choosing a tog, she'll know what she likes and what she doesn't. Some turn up at our studio with printed pics from the web they like, they want us to copy the style etc. Many people are more knowlegible about photography than you might think
Plus most people have an "uncle Bob" or neighbour whos in the camera club or whatever, he'll be quick enough to point out any problems with your photos if they haven't spotted them.
Click to expand...

No offence, but I think if you are in the business of wedding photography and market yourself at the middle-classes with money to spend then you have a skewed vision of what the general populace knows/cares about photography.

The more I learn about photography, and the the better I get, the more I realise that most people just don't care. Even the people with DSLRs, my parents being a prime example, don't have the foggiest how it all works, they just care that they can point it at something, and it'll go click and have a correctly focused and exposed shot 90% of the time.

Case in point.....a colleague has a picture on his desk of him and his wife sat on his desk....quite a nice composition really, them strolling across the grass, taken from ground level......and it's been GIF compressed :bang: . He LOVES it. Go figure :)

My tuppenth.....
 
Radiohead said:
That might have been true in the older style, traditional, line-them-up-and-take-a-shot days. I'm not sure it's the case anymore.

On a typical 12 hour wedding shoot I'll dedicate no more than 30 minutes to formals. The rest of the day is completely undirected.
Click to expand...



:agree:

I tend to have 15-20 mins of group etc shots immediately after the ceremony, then the other 'formal' stuff are having a bit of fun with the Groom etc. beforehand and the couple for 30mins or so when things are a bit quieter - even coming out to play later if there's a great sky/sunset

Though I may still agree that only 10% of the 'business' of Wedding Photography is actually the taking of photos

DD
 
I'm not playing down the value of a pro at a fancy wedding, but there really is a place for a "mate with a camera" - my wedding two years ago cost £300 all in (I'm not kidding - did you know Asda do wedding rings for £25? )

My best friend took the pics on a compact, they are perfectly nice pics, and the degree of niceness is entirely in keeping with a £300 wedding.

I didn't want or expect professional pics, it wasn't that sort of day.

There is no 'one size fits all' wedding photography.
 
mid_gen said:
The more I learn about photography, and the the better I get, the more I realise that most people just don't care. Even the people with DSLRs, my parents being a prime example, don't have the foggiest how it all works, they just care that they can point it at something, and it'll go click and have a correctly focused and exposed shot 90% of the time.
Click to expand...

I think that's at the heart of the matter - most people know very little about photography, and they don't care to know anything more than that their cheap compact or mobile phone takes photos - you just point it and press the button - and they look great to them. So just how hard can it be?

Photography in general has a low perceived value these days - due to the proliferation of digital, images are everywhere. Created without any thought in the blink of an eye, and disposed of just as easily. Professional photographers are not respected or valued for their considerable expertise or even for sheer hard graft.

Unfortunately, I think that is how it is, and will continue to be. I do not envy professional photographers one bit.

I've come late to this thread and just read it through. Some excellent posts :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top