Wedding photographer

Our photographer switched to medium format the 'official' portraits in the garden of the venue for the sitdown/evening party after the church.
 
Well we hired a professional tog for our wedding. He turned up late, then rushed through all the staged shots, then in a blink was off. As he was running late for his next wedding !
I got some very good pictures from guests on there cameras. Which ranged from mobile phones to expensive bridge cameras.
Even worse we did not get our pic's for almost 3 months, and none of the photo's were put on his web site for guests to buy.

If I was to do it all again I would just get friends and people from this forum to do the photo's. I do think this approach is best as it should yield many photo's of which some should be good enough !
 
Tysonator said:
Well we hired a professional tog for our wedding. He turned up late, then rushed through all the staged shots, then in a blink was off. As he was running late for his next wedding !
I got some very good pictures from guests on there cameras. Which ranged from mobile phones to expensive bridge cameras.
Even worse we did not get our pic's for almost 3 months, and none of the photo's were put on his web site for guests to buy.

If I was to do it all again I would just get friends and people from this forum to do the photo's. I do think this approach is best as it should yield many photo's of which some should be good enough !
Click to expand...

That ought to have taught you that it's important to ensure you have a good relationship with your photographer and to understand exactly what it is you are buying.

Instead, your lack of interest in the deal and your photographers subsequent behaviour have led you to believe that your mates can do better than a genuine pro.
 
That is a bit presumptuous that it is all the clients vault for not understanding nor being interested in what he bought.
 
dejongj said:
That is a bit presumptuous that it is all the clients vault for not understanding nor being interested in what he bought.
Click to expand...

Surely you at least have to check how long your photographer is going to spend at your wedding, how many hours you get from them.

Believe me, not all wedding photographers work this way. Personally, I only ever shoot one wedding on a day, I am there for the client the whole day and I don't limit how many hours that entails. They never have to rush or fake anything to get a shot as I'm there when it happens. I just got back from an engagement session, 1 and 1/2 hours I spend with every client a few months before the wedding so we can get to know each other a little better before the wedding, give them some nice romantic photos that are taken without the stress and rush of the day, and give them confidence in me so when I turn up to the wedding they know what to expect.

You obviously don't get this kind of service from someone charging 'beer money' to shoot a wedding, but the final product is going to be a far cry from what you will get taking a chance on friends and hoping some of the shots will be good enough.

There's cowboys in every industry, just because someone calls themselves a 'pro' doesn't mean their service is actually any good.
 
Hey I do agree lensflair, I find it amazing how any photographer can do more than one wedding in a day.

Your way of working sounds right up my street, and is what we bought as well. Although it wasn't cheap, I think it was value of money. As you say, the initial meeting(s), travel, long actual day ours I think was at 11 at my wifes house, didn't leave until 11 at night. Then post processing, hard copy samples, another viewing session together.

I honestly can't remember but I think we paid somewhere around £1,500 including our album with 36 shots, and extra for the others. Which I was pleasantly surprised by.

I honestly don't know how anyone can get a true pro for a few hundred considering all the time before, during, after, paying taxes, materials used, blah blah blah. I do get very wary when people quite a too low a figure.

BTW My uncle bob lets call him Leendert :) is a pro (primarily media documentary) but I wanted him to enjoy and be part of the day. His present was an A3'ish album of the day through candids that he took with his beloved prime. That was very lucky for us and a nice surprise.
 
Below is a quote from the spiel I used to send out to prospective clients:

There is no doubt a place within the realms of Wedding Photography for a friend or relative with a digital camera to take pictures on the day, and that is that of a guest. There is also no doubt that some of the images they take, indeed possibly many of the images may be of a high quality and will end up being treasured for years to come by the Bride & Groom, but these images should be as an 'addition to', and not an 'instead of' a recognised professional Wedding Photographer.
 
I also never did more than one wedding in a day (too intense and my brain would never have coped with all the different names that I always made a point of learning), except for one time when at a particularly busy church (more like a conveyor belt) who had one wedding having after ceremony photos at the rear, a ceremony going on inside and people arriving for the next wedding outside the front of the church. As I was leaving I overheard the bride and groom who were waiting to go in and were quite distressed at the fact their photographer had not turned up. I shot a quick roll of 120 (12 set up shots, Bride, Brides Dress, Bridesmaids, Groom, Best Man, Bride & Groom, 'Bride, Groom & Bridesmaids' 'Bride, Groom, Best Man, Bridesmaids, Bridesmaids with Brides Mother' and a few more) with them and gave them the film to get processed (as a wedding gift) and told them to try to get their guests to take lots of photos and pass them on to them. Then I carried on to the reception of my own wedding.
 
Last edited:
I'm not a photographer, I'm trying to learn the ropes and take a great deal of pleasure out of my hobby and I have been asked to shoot 2 weddings :shrug: I am so nervous and reading, reading, reading. My camera's only the Canon 500D but I have managed to expand my lens collection so have a 18-55mm kit lens, a 70-300 zoom, a mid-range 50mm prime and a 100mm L series (thanks to my wonderful hubby, I now understand the term fast glass).

I think the main reason I am happy enough (happy is the wrong word, I'm not happy, I'm terrified) to do these weddings is that both couples know I am not a professional photographer and that I am not masquerading as one, that I am not charging anything and that neither would have any sort of photographer otherwise - both were going to reply on guest only shots. I have also booked myself on a wedding photography workshop to learn how to deal with trickier situations however not in time for the first one
 
EdBray said:
I also never did more than one wedding in a day (too intense and my brain would never have coped with all the different names that I always made a point of learning), except for one time when at a particularly busy church (more like a conveyor belt) who had one wedding having after ceremony photos at the rear, a ceremony going on inside and people arriving for the next wedding outside the front of the church. As I was leaving I overheard the bride and groom who were waiting to go in and were quite distressed at the fact their photographer had not turned up. I shot a quick roll of 120 (12 set up shots, Bride, Brides Dress, Bridesmaids, Groom, Best Man, Bride & Groom, 'Bride, Groom & Bridesmaids' 'Bride, Groom, Best Man, Bridesmaids, Bridesmaids with Brides Mother' and a few more) with them and gave them the film to get processed (as a wedding gift) and told them to try to get their guests to take lots of photos and pass them on to them. Then I carried on to the reception of my own wedding.
Click to expand...

I think that is fantastic of you! And as the 'booked' B&G we would not have minded at all. Can't imagine the distress for the other party.
 
but these images should be as an 'addition to', and not an 'instead of' a recognised professional Wedding Photographer.
Click to expand...

But that is only YOUR view as a wedding photographer! My brother in law asked me to do his wedding photos as they didnt want the formal pictures and the intrusion of a pro doing it. Like it or not, these days the market has changed not everyone wants formal photos (this was an expensive wedding by any standards, £30k plus, it wasnt that they couldn't afford a pro, they didnt want one)

As to the original post well if this guy gets bookings then why worry. People on here bang on about being a business first and a photographer second and this guy is going that route. Fact is most non photographers would think his work was great just because it is better than they could produce.........
 
DannyDMR said:
if it's all down the the tog as to how good he is with any given camera then why do nikon sell D700's D3s's D3x's? and why do pro's use these camera's?

A good tog can take a great picture with a cheap camera, but the quality wont be anywhere near as good as with a high end camera.

I can take great photos on my 12mb camera phone, but i wouldn't shoot a wedding with one!
Click to expand...

Because sometimes you need that low noise/high ISo capability. Not all pros use FF all the time, some use DX, some use both,whichever is suitable for the task in hand.
 
Last edited:
Iris, you've got a good selection if lenses there. But I'm worried that depending on how big the room is, and how many people you're going to be shooting, you'll be using your kit lens a heck of a lot more on the family shots.

Does anyone agree? I'm only an amateur never been, but in this situation I would like to have spent a bit of money on a good quality, coated 17-55 rather than the kit lens.

Just a thought....
 
I got asked to do my friends wedding, which I did as his wedding present to him.

I used an old 350D with kit lens, 50mm canon F1.8 and Tamron 70-300mm. (poor poor poor kit)

I also did the Wedding video for him (3 video cameras)

It was the first time I'd been asked to do anything weddingy... I was bricking it.

The video turned out to be really good, and I incorporated many of the photos into the video.

The B&G were so happy with the Photos & Album I presented them. Which meant a lot to me as the fear of letting them down was incredible. But as I edited, inspected and chose the pictures I noticed things that I was disappointed with, digital noise, poor White balance, soft images, poor composition etc. things that come naturally to a pro with top end kit weren't even in my thought process.

Since then though I've been asked to do the same for 3 more couples, and I really want to, so I've bought a 7D, and some new lenses.

I've got sooo much to learn, but I appreciate that... I'm only doing it for friends, but should someone I don't know come along and ask me to do it for them then I wouldn't feel confident enough to ask for any money (I know that's terrible).

I'd be so much happier being a photographers assistant and getting £70 in my pocket and learning but I'm pretty sure that Pros wouldn't want to train their competition... So what do I do?!?! I would love to be a professional photographer, but initially I'd be undercutting most people...

Do any of you agree there is a Market for amateur photographers at cut price rates for couples on a budget? Say £350 all in? As long as, of course, the clients were fully aware of the difference?

I'm too honest for my own good most people say, but the guy in this thread must be feeling like I did... This is the most important day of this couples life, and needs that respect.
 
Do any of you agree there is a Market for amateur photographers at cut price rates for couples on a budget? Say £350 all in? As long as, of course, the clients were fully aware of the difference?
Click to expand...

YES.

as long as people know what they are getting and are happy with the price I dont see a problem. Not everyone wants or can afford a high end tog and lets face it, £350 for a day's work (+pp of course) is an attractive sum for most of us.

This is the most important day of this couples life
Click to expand...

Is it anymore? a lot of couples live together for years now, in many cases the wedding is a bit of confirmation of commitment, its just one of the things that has changed so much for many couples today it's not necesarily such a big deal.
 
Last edited:
lancsoatcake said:
Iris, you've got a good selection if lenses there. But I'm worried that depending on how big the room is, and how many people you're going to be shooting, you'll be using your kit lens a heck of a lot more on the family shots.

Does anyone agree? I'm only an amateur never been, but in this situation I would like to have spent a bit of money on a good quality, coated 17-55 rather than the kit lens.

Just a thought....
Click to expand...

My friend has the same camera and different lenses so I was thinking of asking him if I could go round and have a play with what he has and grovel for a loan if anything proves worthy. I also plan to visit the church and the reception venue soon so at least I can read up on the bits that will be especially pertinent to this wedding. Another friend is trying to break into the wedding photography market, I'm not sure how experienced he is so thought he might enjoy a freebie for the experience too if he's not yet at the charging stage.

Ed, that was very kind and considerate of you :)
 
lancsoatcake said:
I got asked to do my friends wedding, which I did as his wedding present to him.


Do any of you agree there is a Market for amateur photographers at cut price rates for couples on a budget? Say £350 all in? As long as, of course, the clients were fully aware of the difference?
Click to expand...


yep. As long as you don't misrepresent yourself why not. If the client is happy with what you produce with your experience and kit I don't see a problem.
 
Look around on Google. The guys who appear on the first page have invested money in their google rankings, spent alot of time on their websites and have sometimes mediocre portfolio's. These are the guys who charge the big money.

Skip straight to page 10 of your google results and you'll find the cheaper togs who, more often than not, have better portfolio's than the others.

It is all relative to the client though. What is perceived as a technically good photo to a talkphotography member with some knowledge is quite often different to what the client wants. I see selective colour and a little bit of me dies inside; however I'm asked for this ALL the time.

Then comes the post processing. On a wedding last year the bride cut some pictures out of magazines to give me an idea of what she wanted the images to look like. High contrast, warm white balance, heavy vignette. She loved the images when I presented them to her. I got 3 weddings off the back of that one. Great success. However when I posted the pictures on here the general census was that the pictures were overdone and nobody liked them.

Remember that, it is all relative to what the client wants. I'd rather pay £800 to have a crap photographer that gets the pictures that I want, how I want them than to pay £400 to a good photographer who does his own thing and crumbles on the day.
 
Phil V said:
That ought to have taught you that it's important to ensure you have a good relationship with your photographer and to understand exactly what it is you are buying.

Instead, your lack of interest in the deal and your photographers subsequent behaviour have led you to believe that your mates can do better than a genuine pro.
Click to expand...

We visited this guy a number times, in fact getting to see him was just difficult full stop.
What he promised ( the contract ) was not delivered in full. As photo's where not up loaded to his web site untill 3 months after the wedding. Technical problems as he was moving premises was the answer we got.
He was late for the wedding and then shot of early as he was late for the next one.

I had a very big interest in the deal, sadly he did not ! :thumbsdown:
 
Tysonator said:
We visited this guy a number times, in fact getting to see him was just difficult full stop.
What he promised ( the contract ) was not delivered in full. As photo's where not up loaded to his web site untill 3 months after the wedding. Technical problems as he was moving premises was the answer we got.
He was late for the wedding and then shot of early as he was late for the next one.

I had a very big interest in the deal, sadly he did not ! :thumbsdown:
Click to expand...

I'm probably being thick here:thinking:, but when you spoke to him about your wedding, did he say that he was giving you limited time? Did you agree limited coverage as a budget issue? Or did he promise you all day coverage and then bail out on you (not delivering the contract)?
Or was the non performance due to his late posting, or another issue?

I'm in no way trying to defend the photographer here, I wouldn't photograph more than 1 wedding a day, it's not really my style. But I'm interested in what you feel you missed out on and what he promised and didn't deliver.
 
Phil V said:
I'm probably being thick here:thinking:, but when you spoke to him about your wedding, did he say that he was giving you limited time? Did you agree limited coverage as a budget issue? Or did he promise you all day coverage and then bail out on you (not delivering the contract)?
Or was the non performance due to his late posting, or another issue?

I'm in no way trying to defend the photographer here, I wouldn't photograph more than 1 wedding a day, it's not really my style. But I'm interested in what you feel you missed out on and what he promised and didn't deliver.
Click to expand...

Well he did not indicated he was tripled book for the day. We agree a number photo's in a wedding folder plus a bumber of photo's not in the said folder / binder.
We did not get all the secondary photo's of our choice.
And the guest could not buy any photo's from his web site. As he was moving from his employed / franchised site to his personnal site domain.
Plus the time scale he promised for the processed photo's end up being 2-3 months longer than the initial period.
 
Last edited:
I feel sorry for the couples that cannot discern the difference between good and bad photoraphy until it is too late. At least you have an interest in photography and are already organised. In Scotland we find it varies from wedding to wedding whether you are allowed to shoot during the ceremony or not. Often the cowboys have spoiled it for everyone by not respecting the rules.


 
Last edited:
Interesting thread...

My missus had met a photographer at a wedding show, who came round with his albums and dvd's. At the time, I confess I hadn't invested the time or effort to see how good wedding photographers could be.

It was only when a wedding thread got started on another forum that I started getting worried. The photog I'd booked looked very poor in comparison. I emailed him in the end asking for any recent pics as his website hadn't been updated for a while.

Imagine my joy and surprise when he said he'd have to cancel me as he had a family wedding to do that had been booked for the same day.

I promptly booked one of the photographers from that wedding thread and from the preview pics of the wedding a month ago I'm glad I did.

He was totally professional, arranged a pre wedding shoot so we knew what to expect, and impressed us with his all round manner.

It's best to spend the time and effort seeing what other photogs produce, than being impressed by websites and settling for the first person you find at a wedding show.

As for the kit debate...

Knowing a tog had 35l 1.4 and a 85l 1.2 and how to use them, meant I wasn't worrying about low light shots where he wouldn't be able to use a flash.

I know how hard it can be to take pics with a kit lens in low light.
 
Last edited:
I've only been married once so can't class myself as an expert and thus just an opinion :) But the few wedding shows we saw, hmmm can't say I was impressed with any of the services on any. And that is not just photographers, also other services. Let just say that in my experience the products/services on offer on those thing do need their marketing and sales like that.
 
Wedding is one big mine field of headaches and a photog is just one of them.
I plan my wedding on Excel, with expenditure, reserve find, name list for A, B, and C lists.
It all worked fine, and still we over spent ! !
There is all ways some thing you have not accounted for that will turn and require money ! !
 
gingerjon said:
He (and more crucially she) is absolutely delighted with them though. Sometimes it seems the worst peope to assess whether a photo is any good (good in the sense that it brings pleasure to other people) are photographers themselves.
Click to expand...

I suppose it really depends on the person who is paying for them - presumably upon seeing a portfolio they are happy with what they are shown and hence hire the photographer - and I suppose that's what matters as long as they are happy with what they paid for.

I have been doing lots of portrait photographs lately and I spend hours fiddling and tweaking them because they are just not right (in my eyes) - eventually there come a point I must stop but I still am not happy.

But when I hand the photos over everyone is delighted with them.

and I am delighted with my payment a nice box of Chocolates because I am taking them for friends :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top