Quote:
Originally Posted by Barrykgerdes
At $500 a shoot (+food and transport) is about half the last wedding shoot my family had. (Serves them right for looking like they could afford it  ) and it took ages to see the previews.
Pity you live so far away
I used to do videos for my family members (no charge of course). 30+ years ago with a home made colour video camera recorded on a 1/4" tape. The camera was a two vidicon device that I converted from NTSC to PAL. I still have some video from that camera and boy is it terrible compared to modern stuff.
Barry |
For sure - I have a friend who's minimum wedding shoot cost is $1500. I have NO IDEA how they justify this, as weddings are honestly one of the easiest damned things to shoot. Everyone is already dressed and made up, everyone (mostly) looks pretty, usually in a nice location. Pfft. What's hard about it? Photogs that charge more are just hoping for that one person who thinks paying more = better photos, which 99% of the time is incorrect.
Longest I have stayed at a wedding has been 5 hours. At $100 per hour, that's still $80 per hour more than most jobs. Processing takes little time if you planned your shots to a theme properly - maybe 20 mins per shot MAXIMUM. Longer than that and you know the shot is NOT good! (usual per photo is 5 mins max).
I refuse studio work. Don't like false settings, and to me a studio is false. If I cannot do it indoors or outdoors in a natural setting, i won't do it. Sure, there is a time and place for studio, but not for me. ALL my model portfolios I do outside or inside (we have a long elegant hallway with PLENTY of natural light that looks INCREDIBLE in photos) Portraits and nudes done in a studio to me are absolutely grotesque - humans are natural, don't stuff them in with snoots, softboxes and barndoor lighing, especially not with purple gel backlight... YIK!!!
Anyway.