Wedding shots, really not that important??

Andy_S_T said:
My wedding album has been viewed many times. We also have framed prints around the house. I know where the album is, there are some pictures in there that I hold most dearly. Maybe it's because there are pictures of people who have now passed away and seeing them looking happy and having fun helps me to remember them. My uncle for instance was the vicar that married us, he passed away from stomach cancer 18 months after we were married, and it is the last time the whole family were together before he was diagnosed.

Our album is very reportage though, as this is my preferred style. So seeing natural un-posed photos conveys the atmosphere of the day, and the enjoyment on peoples faces.

I suppose it depends on what your view of marriage is, for us it was a day filled with joy and celebration, and one I would like to remember as best as possible. If you take the cynics view on everything, then why bother with photos of anything at all!
Click to expand...

Ha some of the posts on here definitely come across as a tad cynical lol.
 
Richard King said:
It is customer driven

With us the customer has a choice how long we work. We can do exactly what we were doing 20 years ago - shoot for about a hour and produce an album with 12-20 photographs... or shoot all day, and produce the usual mass of photographs - customers choice. In the main they hire us all day

So if you hire me all day, I recon in total that generates me nearly a weeks worth of work -if you include processing, office time, editing time, backups etc.. Bearing this in mind, what would it cost to hire a mechanic, plumber, brickie or most other people for the same amount of time - probably very similar to what we would charge

In all industries there is a level of bull and mystique, and the one in ours is that wedding photographers are loaded, and dont do much for the money. I would argue that only applies to very few. The other areas revolve around kit, and processes - there seems to be a high level of "my gun is better then his gun" The elitist views of some are wholey self serving... In saying that, in the main, most wedding photographers work damn hard for the money, and have perfectly adequate kit

I actually charge exactly the same rate for wedding photography - per days shoot, as I do for anything else (i.e. product shoot)

If the customer chooses to squirrel the album away in a draw, that's entirely their choice

On my website I labour the point about "hanging it on the wall". I sell other products mounted fine art and silver prints, and real art painted by artists mainly because these will actually make it onto a wall. We have had a couple of clinets order a painting, a box set of fine art prints, a few mounted and framed silver prints and a small 12 page album - in this instance, the images are for sure going to be seen day in day out
Click to expand...

This is not a criticism, far from it, just an observation. If I was a wedding photographer, I would do exactly the same thing.

But to say that the business is customer driven, and then to make a list of all the various things intended to drag even more cash out of the client, is at the very least ironic.

It's like all these industry bodies that are supposedly set up to protect the consumer and ensure a high standard of service - from the banking ombudsman to the SWPP - they are all actually there to protect and promote their own industry and interests.

To express an opinion, I am actually more on the side of the full time professional than the weekend warrrior. The pro has an interest in the long term, the WW is an opportunist who sees a handy lump of cash in return for what appears to be not much work. Their motivation is short term reward, not a long term business in five years time, and that affects the whole way you approach and do the job - minimal up-front investment, and cut and run if it goes wrong.

Some of the people that post on here have very basic equipment and a scary-low level of photographic skills. Perhaps worse, they have no idea of what goes into organising a professional wedding shoot where very often the picture taking aspect is very much the easy part.

If you're just a friend doing a favour, then good on you for that and best of luck. It's a heck of a job, which you probably won't want to repeat if you're anything like me.

However, if you market and present yourself as a wedding photographer, and accept a serious sum of money for your services, I think the couple have every right to expect you to deliver a complete package to a professional standard.
 
I think it is down to what you value, and what you don't.

It surprises me that those with an interest in photos and photography generally, hold such little value on wedding photographs for their own wedding (except of course if you are no longer together), whereas I understand some people have no interest in photos at all, and pictures of their wedding would be no different. Not a criticism, just my personal thoughts.

Currently requested photo ideas such as shoes, dress on hanger, table place settings etc. etc do seem trivial to many (and I sometimes wonder whether it REALLY is worth taking them), but there ARE couples who put a lot of thought and money into the 'details' and really do want to remember them in their album.

I have been married for 22 years and have probably looked at my album once in the last 10 years, but if we had a house fire, my wedding album and family photos would be what I would most like to save (as well as my wife & kids!!).

Now, if we take cars as a comparison, something I use EVERYDAY..... I have no interest in spending any more than what many would consider less than minimum requirement (Astra). Yet many people would not be seen dead owning a Punto for instance, which will transport you from A to B just as well as your 5-series BMW. For those people, spending more to get better than the basic 'that works, why pay more', means a car is something they value more than I do.

Nothing wrong with that.

Chris.
 
HoppyUK,

I agree with your tem of a WW but are the couple to be not at fault here? Its thier big day and their cash, should they not be doing thier homework and shopping around to make sure they are actually gettign a pro? I certainly wouldnt go and buy a car without seeing its service history and having a test drive in it. If you are stupid enough to hand over what is a substancial amount of money without knowing what the photographer is capable of then IMO your a mug and you diserve all you get.
 
I think that hindsight plays a big part in this. Some of us that have been married for a while (and not divorced) just don't look at the photos from our wedding. I certainly look at the pictures of my boy as a tiny baby much more! They seem to mean so much more than photos from 1 day (5 in my case!) that may have tied you legally to another person with whom you already had an emotional tie. The wedding itself is more for the family and guests in my book. I would compare it to looking at the photos of a birthday party, a big one though, with a zero on the end!
 
HoppyUK said:
To express an opinion, I am actually more on the side of the full time professional than the weekend warrrior. The pro has an interest in the long term, the WW is an opportunist who sees a handy lump of cash in return for what appears to be not much work. Their motivation is short term reward, not a long term business in five years time, and that affects the whole way you approach and do the job - minimal up-front investment, and cut and run if it goes wrong.
Click to expand...

While I generally value your input I have to say that the above is absolute rubbish. It has been said many times before on this forum that there is no difference in the ability or professionalsim of part-time and full-time professionals. In fact (as a part-time wedding photographer) I know several full-time professionals who have less talent and FAR less motivation and enthusiasm than myself.

Take the 30 year full-time pro who has been there and done it, gotten totally bored with the whole thing and now treats each weding as a chore. He shoots the same thing week-in, week-out and has long since given a monkeys if the couple get a top quality product and service or not.

Now compare him to me or other part-time photographers.

I spend as much time on each wedding as a full-time photographer. From meetings, to the wedding day, to image editing to the final album design and delivery. To suggest otherwise is VERY unfair. The only difference is I have to find the time to do the necessary work at very unsociable times of the day. Which in turn makes me very tired and (sadly) means I'm less able tio suffer such a foolish statement.

Sorry but your argument DOES NOT stand up. At all.

On the subject of albums someone (in her 60's) said to me that an album I had produced was the best album she had ever seen. She didn't have to say that to me - it came out of the blue. Whether the couple are looking at it in years to come or not I can't say. But at least it's good.
 
Reading through the replies here I think pretty much every one backs up what I was saying at the start.

Look at what we've agreed. You can shoot beautiful and artful images at weddings but few actually do. There are some people that do regularly enjoy their wedding pics but most don't. Even in a community of photographers. For those of us that do hold their photos as something close to their heart, it's because they document the people they love or loved.

Taking all this into account, next time someone posts asking how to shoot a first wedding for a mate, or mate's mate (AND HERE IS THE MAIN POINT FROM THE START) can people accept it's not the be and end all and stop being so bloomin precious?
 
chip said:
...Now, if we take cars as a comparison, something I use EVERYDAY..... I have no interest in spending any more than what many would consider less than minimum requirement (Astra). Yet many people would not be seen dead owning a Punto for instance, which will transport you from A to B just as well as your 5-series BMW. For those people, spending more to get better than the basic 'that works, why pay more', means a car is something they value more than I do...
Click to expand...

Not quite - try spending 14 hours in a Punto and you'll be crippled (I did it once in a new diesel Astra and it was OK - just, but the road-noise made me deaf for a day afterwards).
A 5-series BMW isn't just designed to go from A-B, but to deliver the occupants - including those (who might be working during the journey) in the back seats - in a fit condition do continue working and then go back to the point of origin without them needing a day off work afterwards. And do it again the next day and the day after that, etc etc etc...

It takes six hours to drive from my house down to most places in Bavaria, longer if I'd started from Koln...
Germany is a big place.

If you only need your car for 35-minute commute to work every day and a two-hour journey once in a while, then fine: anything will do, but, just like camera equipment, you pick the right tools for the job.
 
Also, just to be clear. I'm not saying couples shouldn't employ one of the great shooters and have those fine shots if they want but if they ask the bloke/girl at the office to do it. They know they're not getting that kind of product.
 
From where I am 26 years on from my wedding the photographs and all the memories they bring back are the most important thing that hapened on the day,apart from tying the knot of course
 
Arkady said:
Not quite - try spending 14 hours in a Punto and you'll be crippled (I did it once in a new diesel Astra and it was OK - just, but the road-noise made me deaf for a day afterwards).
A 5-series BMW isn't just designed to go from A-B, but to deliver the occupants - including those (who might be working during the journey) in the back seats - in a fit condition do continue working and then go back to the point of origin without them needing a day off work afterwards. And do it again the next day and the day after that, etc etc etc...

It takes six hours to drive from my house down to most places in Bavaria, longer if I'd started from Koln...
Germany is a big place.

If you only need your car for 35-minute commute to work every day and a two-hour journey once in a while, then fine: anything will do, but, just like camera equipment, you pick the right tools for the job.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but can you get the bloody warning lights to go off!!!! Espeically the air bag one :lol:
 
ryanyboy said:
While I generally value your input I have to say that the above is absolute rubbish. It has been said many times before on this forum that there is no difference in the ability or professionalsim of part-time and full-time professionals. In fact (as a part-time wedding photographer) I know several full-time professionals who have less talent and FAR less motivation and enthusiasm than myself.

Take the 30 year full-time pro who has been there and done it, gotten totally bored with the whole thing and now treats each weding as a chore. He shoots the same thing week-in, week-out and has long since given a monkeys if the couple get a top quality product and service or not.

Now compare him to me or other part-time photographers.

I spend as much time on each wedding as a full-time photographer. From meetings, to the wedding day, to image editing to the final album design and delivery. To suggest otherwise is VERY unfair. The only difference is I have to find the time to do the necessary work at very unsociable times of the day. Which in turn makes me very tired and (sadly) means I'm less able tio suffer such a foolish statement.

Sorry but your argument DOES NOT stand up. At all.

On the subject of albums someone (in her 60's) said to me that an album I had produced was the best album she had ever seen. She didn't have to say that to me - it came out of the blue. Whether the couple are looking at it in years to come or not I can't say. But at least it's good.
Click to expand...

You may be right. It's an opinion. So you may not be. It's not realistic to compare an enthusiastic and talented part-timer (ie you) to a jaded old smudger, professional or otherwise.

Arkady said:
Not quite - try spending 14 hours in a Punto and you'll be crippled (I did it once in a new diesel Astra and it was OK - just, but the road-noise made me deaf for a day afterwards).
A 5-series BMW isn't just designed to go from A-B, but to deliver the occupants - including those (who might be working during the journey) in the back seats - in a fit condition do continue working and then go back to the point of origin without them needing a day off work afterwards. And do it again the next day and the day after that, etc etc etc...

It takes six hours to drive from my house down to most places in Bavaria, longer if I'd started from Koln...
Germany is a big place.

If you only need your car for 35-minute commute to work every day and a two-hour journey once in a while, then fine: anything will do, but, just like camera equipment, you pick the right tools for the job.
Click to expand...

Thanks for you input to the weddings debate Rob :thumbs:

I do agree though, cars are extremely important. Especially mine. (Which was recently stolen and used as the getaway in a bank robbery! :eek: )
 
I think you can happily extrapolate this thread to cover the whole of the wedding industry, it is massively bloated and stupidly over priced for what is essentially a meal and disco for your friends and family.

Having been to a few weddings in the last year I'm sick of the tick box exercise with everybody competing to be the best at some 'traditions' when 99% of it will be in the bin that evening and forgotten by the morning. The same goes for the photography it's out of hand, multiple photographers with multiple cameras covering everything from the bride waking up to practically the consummation which some would probably shoot for a fee!

As someone has already said this is consumer driven is this is what they think they want and need. Sadly it's also a self pereptuating vicious circle as people are inherently greedy and the more they get the more they want so weddings get bigger and flashier and soon we will need third shooters.

What gets forgotten is that the day is supposed to be about the love two people have for one another and that has nothing to do with favours, best man speaches or pretty pictures.
 
a1ex2001 said:
I think you can happily extrapolate this thread to cover the whole of the wedding industry, it is massively bloated and stupidly over priced for what is essentially a meal and disco for your friends and family.
Click to expand...

That's probably the funniest thing I've read in this whole thread.:thumbs:
 
Ok I see the point of the thread, but imagine this, say someone dies (be it family or the bridge/groom) then that person is probably very glad they have some quality photos of them at their happiest.
 
HoppyUK said:
This is not a criticism, far from it, just an observation. If I was a wedding photographer, I would do exactly the same thing.

But to say that the business is customer driven, and then to make a list of all the various things intended to drag even more cash out of the client, is at the very least ironic.

It's like all these industry bodies that are supposedly set up to protect the consumer and ensure a high standard of service - from the banking ombudsman to the SWPP - they are all actually there to protect and promote their own industry and interests.

To express an opinion, I am actually more on the side of the full time professional than the weekend warrrior. The pro has an interest in the long term, the WW is an opportunist who sees a handy lump of cash in return for what appears to be not much work. Their motivation is short term reward, not a long term business in five years time, and that affects the whole way you approach and do the job - minimal up-front investment, and cut and run if it goes wrong.

Some of the people that post on here have very basic equipment and a scary-low level of photographic skills. Perhaps worse, they have no idea of what goes into organising a professional wedding shoot where very often the picture taking aspect is very much the easy part.

If you're just a friend doing a favour, then good on you for that and best of luck. It's a heck of a job, which you probably won't want to repeat if you're anything like me.

However, if you market and present yourself as a wedding photographer, and accept a serious sum of money for your services, I think the couple have every right to expect you to deliver a complete package to a professional standard.
Click to expand...
I agree

I call it making a living, but doing it the way that makes the most sense to me - as a businessman and as a photographer. I hate the thought that my work sits in a box never to be seen again. Yes we sell albums, but I would rather sell framed prints/art. the work/profit ratio is about the same

Also, we made a determined effort to differentiate ourselves and offer something different

We are in a resession, if people want to pay me to do a job thats great, if they want to pay me to do a bigger job - Im all ears. I offer 1 hour, I offer all day - its up to the couple

also

Back in the day, the photographers just shot 8 weddings a day, and probrably had a better living from it with a lot less work
 
shabba said:
Ok I see the point of the thread, but imagine this, say someone dies (be it family or the bridge/groom) then that person is probably very glad they have some quality photos of them at their happiest.
Click to expand...

Thats a pretty extreme case that I would love to see a wedding tog use in his advertising can't see 'Hire a wedding tog just in case you die young' being a particular crowd pleaser allthough it could be used throughout the industry 'Get Your Portraits no so your loved ones can enjoy pics of you looking your best if you die tomorrow' could be ventures new strap line!

In the case of people I know who have died I much prefer seeing pictures of them in their normal every day lives as they represent the people they were. Very few people are at there most natural on a wedding day!
 
Last edited:
shabba said:
Ok I see the point of the thread, but imagine this, say someone dies (be it family or the bridge/groom) then that person is probably very glad they have some quality photos of them at their happiest.
Click to expand...

Um...I think they'll be dead and probably beyond caring about what photographs exist of them...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top