Wedding Photographers

C

connersz

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,468
Name
Jamie
Edit My Images
No
This is something I have had on my mind for a while now but I wanted to share it with you to get your thoughts.

My auntie is a wedding planner/florist and because the photographers often take pictures of people carrying her flowers, or the table arrangements etc. they often give her a copy of the photo's to use (presumably with b&g permission; don't ask, different topic).

I in turn get to see what is a lot of different sets of photo's by different photographers, mostly because I do the work on her website where some of the pics end up and also because I'm interested to see them.

Now I have to say that in general the level of the work is in general is very poor and whereas I do see the occasional good set, many of them are bad.

I have never photographed a wedding, offered to do a wedding, accepted a request to do a wedding or advertised to do a wedding but I know I could do a much better job that what seems to be most of the local photographers. I know theirs more involved than taken pics etc. etc. but still...

A lot of the ones I have seen have adopted a rather skewed ratio of too many candid photos with people not looking at the camera and a lack of posing or proper group photos. A lot were shot facing into the sun with no compensation, therefore as you guessed; under-exposed faces and dark looking guests. A lot of the group photo's that were posed seem to have people looking all over the place, sometimes none are looking at the camera. The first dance photos are underexposed and sometimes noisy.

Now before I have a barrage of abuse from wedding photographers on here, I have seen most of your work and it's a lot better frankly and say I ever needed a wedding photographer (probably not likely soon) I could easily pick some on here. It just seems like a local issue or something.

I should also note that when my mum recently re-married a few years ago locally, they used a photographer who photoshopped the guests so heavily that nans and grans came out looking like page 3 models, the photographer was asked to do them again properly.
 
If I have read this correctly, you are saying there are a lot of bad incompetent wedding photographers out there.

Are the photos you see from professional wedding photographers or people with little experience who have been asked to shoot a wedding for friends and family. The difference is huge and the images will show that. If they are pros and they are delivering under exposed, heavily photoshopped images, well don't know what to say about that. Hopefully the clients looked at their work before they booked them.

Maybe if you think you could do better, second shoot for someone or shoot a wedding for a friend or family member.....:exit:
 
surfg1mp said:
If I have read this correctly, you are saying there are a lot of bad incompetent wedding photographers out there.

Are the photos you see from professional wedding photographers or people with little experience who have been asked to shoot a wedding for friends and family. The difference is huge and the images will show that. If they are pros and they are delivering under exposed, heavily photoshopped images, well don't know what to say about that. Hopefully the clients looked at their work before they booked them.

Maybe if you think you could do better, second shoot for someone or shoot a wedding for a friend or family member.....:exit:
Click to expand...

They are pro photographers, a lot of them full time wedding photographers.

The thing is that the b&g are obviously happy with them but they look of a similar standard to someone taking candids with a point and shoot.

It's not like I'm being picky for the sake of it either, some of the basics really are just being missed.
 
It's little features like this that I focus on, I've noticed a lot of other togs in my area leave out subtle things like flowers etc, I think they're a very important part of the day as the bride will want to remember what her bouquet looked like, Maybe those togs just never thought about things like this and focus on the client and not the venue etc?! Everyone's different I guess, but it's much better to document the whole day, that includes the humour, the crying, the flowers, the babies, the rings etc. Even cuff links ;)
 
Candids are an important part of capturing the day and help to tell a story. The bride and groom will normally be asked what posed shots they would like and be whisked away for half hour or so for some photos of the two of them. Then for the most part, the rest of the images will be detail and Candids. There are also the must have shots that you are expected to get. Ie, kiss, ring exchange, first look, first dance, cutting cake etc.
 
Flightphoto said:
It's little features like this that I focus on, I've noticed a lot of other togs in my area leave out subtle things like flowers etc, I think they're a very important part of the day as the bride will want to remember what her bouquet looked like, Maybe those togs just never thought about things like this and focus on the client and not the venue etc?! Everyone's different I guess, but it's much better to document the whole day, that includes the humour, the crying, the flowers, the babies, the rings etc. Even cuff links ;)
Click to expand...

+1

Posed photos are boring unless done well, most are not.
 
Exactly, I just amuse myself by taking photos of little features, even things like a chocolate fountain (which is hard when you're getting cravings etc). I've met quite a few togs in this line of work and everyone's different. But I guess as long as the B&G are happy then that's all that matters, unfortunately when I was married, we later found out our tog had been using photos from another photographer and the work was not her own. It soon showed when we received a CD in the post with no group shots, no venue shots and just a few snaps of me and the wife! Thank god we still have memories ;)
 
I get what you're saying, but some of the posed shots are of a candid nature if that makes sense.

The group is stood there like the photographer isnt ready, they are looking in different directions or talking to each other and the photographer is at an angle you would expect uncle bob to be at.

Then some of the interior shots that you mentioned as being important are underexposed, shot facing into a giant window or something.
 
Oh dear! In events like that I get the megaphone out ;) Did you find out how much experience the said photographer had? Seems like there isn't enough by the sound of it!!!
 
Flightphoto said:
Exactly, I just amuse myself by taking photos of little features, even things like a chocolate fountain (which is hard when you're getting cravings etc). I've met quite a few togs in this line of work and everyone's different. But I guess as long as the B&G are happy then that's all that matters, unfortunately when I was married, we later found out our tog had been using photos from another photographer and the work was not her own. It soon showed when we received a CD in the post with no group shots, no venue shots and just a few snaps of me and the wife! Thank god we still have memories ;)
Click to expand...

That's really sad, can never understand why people would do that. Well I can, to get bookings, but it's obvious when they deliver crap images that don't match up. Saying that, they must have stolen a lot of someone's images to have a style that matched. I hope you shamed them.
 
Flightphoto said:
Oh dear! In events like that I get the megaphone out ;) Did you find out how much experience the said photographer had? Seems like there isn't enough by the sound of it!!!
Click to expand...

Well the said photographer is more than one, quite a few actually and most have similar results. That's the reason for the post.

I have seen a couple of good ones out of the batch but not many.
 
Oh yes she was shamed, luckily we have a lot of solicitors in our family! My wife was distraught afterwards but I promised that we'll do a 'staged' shoot at some point once the baby is born, the one thing I've found is that I'm always there to take photos of other people etc but sometimes I need to stop and actually take photos of my own family (which is very bad of me :p )
 
I won't post any of them on here because I'm not part of any arrangements to use the pics but a couple were of particular interest.

Imagine taking a picture then printing it out, then taking a picture of that with an iPhone. Well a couple were like that, one had some big weird shadow across one side that looked like water was spilled on it or something and other was simialar, not to bad with the shadow but a group photo shot into the sun with the exposure decreasing from right to left if that makes sense, so you could barely see the bridesmaids on the left.

In common they both looked like old photo's that had been sitting in the sun for a long time we weird contrast situations going on. As I said before though, the b&g were happy with them, does it mean that the good photographers are just trying too hard?
 
Better to shoot people with the sun behind them. That way they are not squinting and they are backlit with no harsh shadows. You have to make sure you have a dark background though. That way you can get a good exposure for the faces without blowing the background. Have to watch for flare though, not always desirable. Shooting big groups with the sun on there faces is ok if they are far way. Open shade is good, but not alway available.
 
surfg1mp said:
Better to shoot people with the sun behind them. That way they are not squinting and they are backlit with no harsh shadows. You have to make sure you have a dark background though. That way you can get a good exposure for the faces without blowing the background. Have to watch for flare though, not always desirable. Shooting big groups with the sun on there faces is ok if they are far way. Open shade is good, but not alway available.
Click to expand...

No harsh shadows? The point I am trying to make is that they are absorbed in shadow in those photos.

How many amateur beach pics have you seen where the subject is a sillhouette because they have shot facing into the sun? Now imagine that but at a wedding.
 
connersz said:
No harsh shadows? The point I am trying to make is that they are absorbed in shadow in those photos.

How many amateur beach pics have you seen where the subject is a sillhouette because they have shot facing into the sun? Now imagine that but at a wedding.
Click to expand...

The silhouette beach pictures are in silhouette because they are exposed for the bright area, the sun and sky. If you wanted both exposed correctly in that situation you expose for the sky and light the subjects with flash. Back lit portraits are where you expose for the subject and have something dark like trees behind them. If you have to do the groups in bright sun, better to do it that way than having them all squinting. I can't comment on the images you are referring to because I haven't seen them......
 
connersz said:
This is something I have had on my mind for a while now but I wanted to share it with you to get your thoughts.

My auntie is a wedding planner/florist and because the photographers often take pictures of people carrying her flowers, or the table arrangements etc. they often give her a copy of the photo's to use (presumably with b&g permission; don't ask, different topic).

I in turn get to see what is a lot of different sets of photo's by different photographers, mostly because I do the work on her website where some of the pics end up and also because I'm interested to see them.

Now I have to say that in general the level of the work is in general is very poor and whereas I do see the occasional good set, many of them are bad.
Click to expand...

So to summarise what you are saying is:

- The clients who hire your auntie also hire poor quality wedding photographers.

I'm sure (because I know some) that there are many excellent wedding photographers working in Oxfordshire and the surrounding area - it isn't a "local" issue.

:cool:
 
Last edited:
meonshore said:
So to summarise what you are saying is:

- The clients who hire your auntie also hire poor quality wedding photographers.

I'm sure (because I know some) that there are many excellent wedding photographers working in Oxfordshire and the surrounding area - it isn't a "local" issue.

:cool:
Click to expand...
This^ - and some
Seriously do you think pro photographers deliver:
connersz said:
Imagine taking a picture then printing it out, then taking a picture of that with an iPhone.
Click to expand...
connersz said:
In common they both looked like old photo's that had been sitting in the sun for a long time we weird contrast situations going on. As I said before though, the b&g were happy with them, does it mean that the good photographers are just trying too hard?
Click to expand...
Or is there more chance the 'customer' made those pictures, and those customers, don't sound the best...

Whilst there are some truly awful 'pro' wedding photographers out there, they are also joined by thousands of wannabees shooting their mates weddings, and weddings where there is no 'photographer' at all. What sort of images do you expect in those situations?

If you want to see the real standard of wedding photographers in your town, Google will give you a fair idea, I know what the standard is like in my neck of the woods, and whilst there are some I'd describe as woeful, none of the pro's are approaching the depths you're describing.

Which leaves us with the above from Mike - the quality of photographs gathered by your Auntie's business, maybe she's not aiming for the sector of the market she ought to be?
 
meonshore said:
So to summarise what you are saying is:

- The clients who hire your auntie also hire poor quality wedding photographers.

I'm sure (because I know some) that there are many excellent wedding photographers working in Oxfordshire and the surrounding area - it isn't a "local" issue.

:cool:
Click to expand...

^ This. It basically says everything that I was thinking reading the first page of the thread I'm afraid.
 
I actually agree with the OP to an extent... it's through my own experience of having an established and apparently popular photographer shoot my own wedding badly that prompted me to start looking in to doing this myself.

There are some really good togs around my area but plenty of not so great making a living from average work, so if the OP thinks they can do better than some making a living in their area then why not go for it?
 
connersz said:
They are pro photographers, a lot of them full time wedding photographers.

The thing is that the b&g are obviously happy with them but they look of a similar standard to someone taking candids with a point and shoot.

It's not like I'm being picky for the sake of it either, some of the basics really are just being missed.
Click to expand...

I'm courious how their photos are ending up on your website, are they sending them in or are you getting them from the bride and grooms?

As for their being more candids, wedding fashions change, at the moment the more formal style is often seen as 'old fashioned' and a bit out of favor, so more people seem to favor the repotage style (not a favorite of mine I add) but what the customer want etc etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top