Have you closed it yet, seems to have gotten way off track into a slanging match
In wedding photo's and I've seen a few in the last 40 odd years IMO it's not about what you pay it's about how good the photographer is at their job, you both have valid points
Seems like it's a sin to try and make a living doing wedding photography. If not a sin, then, we should be ashamed of what I /others charge,
Just to clarify my post, i dont personally care what you charge.
You charge what people will pay, just like any other freelancer.
My point is the article you linked to appeared to be very distorted
in how she tried to justify her prices.
Ie, if she could do only one shoot per week for a year
her income would have been ~120k ( not bad for the time invested ).
To whinge about doing it tough based on funding a years existence
from say 15 weeks of working time is just not helping her cause.
H, like I said from the start, you charge as you feel, I charge how I feel. Why the angst? It almost seems you are trying to forgive yourself for charging what you do?
I have no ill will towards you whatsoever. We disagree over a price and some other small points. Is it worthy to get all insulted and bent out of shape over?
I have and will never put fellow photogs down for charging as they do. I cannot personally see why, but that is MY perception of it. Yours is entirely different. If you want to earn a living as a wedding photog, go right ahead - no one is stopping you and be prepared for competition. Being competitive in price does not "devalue" the profession we are both in.
In latest news, terrorists sick of being treated like photographers...
Seems like it's a sin to try and make a living doing wedding photography. If not a sin, then, we should be ashamed of what I /others charge, because apparently it's really easy work and because it's easy, we should be giving our work away.
Very rarely do people call to question the rates that other professions charge to the same extent photographers charge. But, when it comes to photography, because anyone can buy a DSLR nowadays, it's open season. Like, no-one will be able to tell the difference between someone who bought their first DSLR yesterday, with someone who's been shooting 15+ years, not withstanding savants and naturally-gifted artists.
I often wonder whether the people who deride photographers earning a decent living, talk dentists or mechanics or plumbers or lawyers down in charges?
The $500 client wants a disc of images and will usually ask a relative or a friend to photograph their wedding. The one day in their life that everything should be perfect. The person who is spending a sizeable amount, is paying for ability, reliability, consistency/style, experience and a good product.
It is true that some of the most highly paid photographers in the world aren't the best photographers. They're good business people. And, vice versa. I've seen examples of both.
If you're happy servicing the $500-odd base, more power to you.
In the end, it suffices to say that I value my craft and feel no wrong in charging accordingly. There will always be $500 clients, and, there will always be $5K+ clients. I must be doing something right, as I've now got bookings six months in advance. And, every half-a-dozen bookings, I will raise my rates accordingly by a small percentage. It is how I value myself. 2013 is my year. I hope to give away my career by the end of this year to be self-sufficient off what I consider my favourite hobby: making beautiful pictures.
I'm meeting a couple at 10 tomorrow morning. I'm hoping they choose a package with an album; I'm now getting my albums printed by a boutique in the US that makes gorgeous products.
Sorry, Carlos!
H
Agreed entirely. (But we surely have no need to apologise to Carlos, as I think the original topic is well and truly flogged to death.)
I really don't mind servicing the $500 crowd. I expected Thongs and Stubbies crowd, but I am getting the Volvo and Saab crowd. Happy with that Not Mercedes or Rolls Royce yet, but working on it. I find the $500 crowd to actually be VERY pedantic and picky too, so I wouldn't pigeon hole any of them. 3 of the models I shot have come back for weddings to me.
Few fire ships here. although H is right doing weddings takes a very special talent.
Thought I'd cheer things up a bit,my son has no problems with stolen photos,he put this image in a posh looking photo comp-now the head organiser has contacted him from Nethalands,they want to use his image to promote comp,and other things.
I am a retired professional Photographer with over 30 years under my belt.
We did a job for Colgate-Parmolve with a studio shoot of Colgate toothpaste using a pretty female model. We did the shoot, paid the model & sent in the invoice. We were paid and that was that...........Then one day we discovered our studio shot appeared in magazines all over the world. They airbrushed the image to change the toothpaste box in the models hand into 80 plus languages but keeping the original image. We could have shot that model holding 80 odd boxes of Colgate toothpaste in Arabic to Zulu however it was not to be and we got screwed. True story.
Ps We also shot 1000's of weddings (on film) however nothing under $1500 plus album. We were booked 2 years in advance........Digital killed us in the end.
My last post in this thread and on this topic (honest, Mike!) is this: So many of the people I know of - not pointing any fingers here, mind - who are the first to leap screaming and frothing at the mouth about "bloody pirates!" etc are people running cracked or otherwise "pirated" copies of Windows, as well as apps such as Adobe Photoshop, and games, and have hard drives filled with music and movies they've ripped or downloaded.
As I said, I'm not suggesting anyone here is a hypocrite like those people, and I'm sure every one of you only has "legal" copies of software and multimedia, with no "illegal" copies. It's tough to be legal like that, what with the fine print on everything. (Read it and discover just how hard it is to truly remain legal, and how nigh-impossible it is to actually legally own something for which you've paid.)
weddings are honestly one of the easiest damned things to shoot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewisM
Pfft. What's hard about it?
Lewis, I could be wrong - but I suspect that it was these comments that raised H's hackles.
The way I see it is that photographers are free to charge whatever they like to shoot weddings, and clients are free to pay that charge or not.
The onus is on the client to do their homework. To have a clear idea of what they are after, to look at photographers portfolios, and maybe contact people they have previously done weddings for, and decide whether they are worth the fee they are asking. And if not, move on.
The flip side of the fee is the clients expectations. I would suggest that clients who pay higher fees will have higher expectations of the quality of not only the delivered product, but also the levels of service given by the photographer before, during, and after the wedding.
It is possible that the reason you find weddings so easy to shoot, is that the fee you are charging, in general, attracts clients with lower expectations. I am not saying that the product you deliver is lower in quality, nor am I trying to denigrate your skill as a photographer (of which I have no knowledge). Setting a low price, then exceeding expectations is certainly one way to create happy clients.
If I buy a chinese $20 cordless drill at bunnings, and it gives up 1 day after its warranty I would be less inclined to raise a stink than if it were my $350 german made equivalent. A poor analogy, but anyway...
Lewis, I could be wrong - but I suspect that it was these comments that raised H's hackles.
The way I see it is that photographers are free to charge whatever they like to shoot weddings, and clients are free to pay that charge or not.
The onus is on the client to do their homework. To have a clear idea of what they are after, to look at photographers portfolios, and maybe contact people they have previously done weddings for, and decide whether they are worth the fee they are asking. And if not, move on.
The flip side of the fee is the clients expectations. I would suggest that clients who pay higher fees will have higher expectations of the quality of not only the delivered product, but also the levels of service given by the photographer before, during, and after the wedding.
It is possible that the reason you find weddings so easy to shoot, is that the fee you are charging, in general, attracts clients with lower expectations. I am not saying that the product you deliver is lower in quality, nor am I trying to denigrate your skill as a photographer (of which I have no knowledge). Setting a low price, then exceeding expectations is certainly one way to create happy clients.
If I buy a chinese $20 cordless drill at bunnings, and it gives up 1 day after its warranty I would be less inclined to raise a stink than if it were my $350 german made equivalent. A poor analogy, but anyway...
Lewis, I could be wrong - but I suspect that it was these comments that raised H's hackles.
The way I see it is that photographers are free to charge whatever they like to shoot weddings, and clients are free to pay that charge or not.
The onus is on the client to do their homework. To have a clear idea of what they are after, to look at photographers portfolios, and maybe contact people they have previously done weddings for, and decide whether they are worth the fee they are asking. And if not, move on.
The flip side of the fee is the clients expectations. I would suggest that clients who pay higher fees will have higher expectations of the quality of not only the delivered product, but also the levels of service given by the photographer before, during, and after the wedding.
It is possible that the reason you find weddings so easy to shoot, is that the fee you are charging, in general, attracts clients with lower expectations. I am not saying that the product you deliver is lower in quality, nor am I trying to denigrate your skill as a photographer (of which I have no knowledge). Setting a low price, then exceeding expectations is certainly one way to create happy clients.
If I buy a chinese $20 cordless drill at bunnings, and it gives up 1 day after its warranty I would be less inclined to raise a stink than if it were my $350 german made equivalent. A poor analogy, but anyway...
Adam
I certainly don't think that the model I shot 4 sessions for prior to her wedding - as she was "checking me out" (and using the photos too) had low expectations
In fact, none of the ones I have shot do. Most actually come to me after being disgruntled by high charge photogs that show their portfolios and they do NOT like what they see (like all those cheesy "photographers" who troll Model Mayhem for the lingerie or nudie shots and take abhorent pictures and still charge the noob models money!). One client told me a photog wanted to take 20 photos only, charge her $3000, and demanded to be put up in a hotel etc., and yet her photos were flat, staged looking and melancholic.
99% od the time, the planned ideas I throw out the window. I like candid, not puppet shows. I will do the staged, but most of the time, the staged ones I shoot candidly (shooting when they are not ready etc) and it is THOSE pictures they usually decide on. There is NOTHING on earth like a real smile vs a posed smile.
I have had couples comment after wedding shoots that they didn't even know I was there, or forgot I was. My work then, is complete If I can do it all, not be noticed, everyone totally natural, then...win win win. Of course, there are time for the group portraits etc.
As I said, I prefer a natural reportage style than a scripted wedding.
I have had couples comment after wedding shoots that they didn't even know I was there, or forgot I was. My work then, is complete If I can do it all, not be noticed, everyone totally natural, then...win win win. Of course, there are time for the group portraits etc.
As I said, I prefer a natural reportage style than a scripted wedding.
So what you're saying is that you take candid "snaps" of the people at a wedding (something anyone with a mobile phone, etc., can do) and charge $500 for it .
Lewis, true photography is an art, if, as you have done in your comments, you denigrate studio and/or other styles of photography to bolster your choices, then one has every reason to question anything and everything you say on the subject.
I would hardly call them snaps... there is a complete art to reportage... and one that will usually bring better $ than staged stuff. Canid does not equate "snaps" from Maand Pa.
Candid means not posing someone. People at their natural best, without forcing expressions or emotions. If that is what you like, then go for it.
I have done a lot of studio work. I don't like the look. Many do.That is their choice. I have done a lot of natural photographs with the only light source ambeint light or reflected ambient light. THAT is the style I like, and also the style 99% of GOOD wedding photographers use.
That's me. To call candid properly composed photographs "snaps" is insulting :LOL: I take offence, let me slap your cheek... PFFFT
Amazing where this thread has gone, just now finished catching up with the latest. Some interesting points raised about wedding photography.
Here is my 2 cents: (come on, you knew it was coming !)
Great wedding photography does not happen by accident.
Not everyone should even attempt it.
It is the most demanding form of photography although these days it is a little less so due to the ability to review the shot immediately.
It requires someone with excellent attention to detail.
It requires someone who can deal with people at their level, whatever that level may be.
You have to be a diplomat and sometimes a magician to get people to do the things you know will give them excellent images even when they do not want to co-operate.
You need reliable, high quality equipment for the job, and you need 2 complete sets of it.
You need to stay 'focused' the whole time you are there.
I know people who will do the job for $500 and have friends who charge several thousand for the coverage.
I am not the most experienced by a long shot but I have shot in excess of 400 weddings and would not take on one for less than $1500.
I shot almost all of the weddings on film, using Nikon F4s, F5 and Mamiya 645Pro equipment (about $ 30,000 in equipment went to each wedding)
I also had an assistant to almost every wedding to whom I gave an F5 with an 80-200 F2.8 to shoot candids.
I looked at it this way:
With landscape photography I was very happy to get 3 great images out of a roll of 36 Kodachrome. With wedding shoot I was cross if I ended up with 3 rejects out of a roll of 36.
Not posed, they didn't know it was happening. This is the shot they chose on the wall of their home (and that also won me a local award). It's not the best quality here, as this is my facebook page version. Taken on a stormy day (at Coolum, Matt) - the whole shoot was "planned" but that went out the window right quick!
I am not talking candid as in bride's brother getting drunk in the corner, or cheesy grin shots... I mean spur of the moment, off guard stuff.
Lewis, I too like the 'candid' approach but with weddings I found you had to give the people what they wanted and then add those images that you knew they would love.
The styles have changed so much that I would not pretend to be up with current trends having been out of it for 12 years now. In fact my daughter who is getting married this winter, is after a totally different style to what I was asked to shoot.
Probably. Just bored on a rainy day. Trying to edit some pictures for an advertising shoot I just did for a local aviation company, and too unenthusiastic to get cracking at it. They'll get their photos on Tuesday (5 days ahead of schedule). I had to succumb and do the cheesy counter and office shots... ah well...not much scope there.
Got some free flying out of it - that was my charge for the shoot. Looks like that flying will have to wait in this weather, as not much point doing aerobatics in cloud
Not Mercedes or Rolls Royce yet, but working on it. I find the $500 crowd to actually be VERY pedantic and picky too, so I wouldn't pigeon hole any of them. 3 of the models I shot have come back for weddings to me.
although H is right doing weddings takes a very special talent.
.
:LOL: I take offence, let me slap your cheek... PFFFT
