|
Forums >
General Industry >
Shooting a wedding for the first time - should I?
I consider myself a hobbyist photographer and have done a few paid jobs for web site photography, child photography, and personal portraits. But yesterday I was asked if I'd be interested in being the photgrapher for a wedding. I've heard the horror stories, yes. But I also know it can be very lucrative. Apparently the estimate the couple has received so far for a wedding photographer were in the range of $3000--which I think is absurd. I haven't spoken to the couple yet, but I was thinking of charging something like $100/hr for the actual shoot and then per photo retouching, prints, etc. Is that underpricing myself for a first time wedding shooter? Or is no amount of money worth the headache? My biggest 'fear' is missing a key shot since I'm not sued to shooting "real-time" as much as setting up shots, posing models, etc. Is it really that different of a world of photography? Aug 19 06 10:47 am Link If it's a large wedding, try to find a backup photographer/assistant. Too many times I found myself simply at the wrong location at the wrong time and missed shots. Also, if they are having a rehearsal ( at the site ) make sure you attend. Your quote should take that into account. I've stopped taking wedding pics for awhile simply because I do not have the time. There's a lot of work to be done after the ceremony to put the package together etc. Not to mention all the "assistance" you may recieve from the parents of the bride etc.. It's sometimes a real lesson in Diplomacy... Good Luck !! Aug 19 06 10:52 am Link Sleepy Weasel wrote: Wedding photography is a highly specialized, highly competitive, high-stress area of photography. You are talking about being the sole provider of photos for a one-time event that costs thousands, sometimes tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to put on. Aug 19 06 10:52 am Link Don't do it. Just don't. You'll regret it. Guaranteed. Aug 19 06 11:02 am Link My first wedding went off without a hitch, the b&g were not demanding, in fact were pretty uninterested in photos. I charged $500 for 300 photos on a disk and a signed model/property release. The whole thing took about 4 hours and they fed me and offered me the open bar. However, I don't reccomend taking them up on that offer!! A drunk photographer at a wedding sucks!! I agree with you that $3000 is a ton of money and I personally would not pay that, I also do not offer prints in the package. I let them print all the photos themsleves, I don't want that headache. I pp them and put all the good shots on CD. That's it. Aug 19 06 11:11 am Link Hello Great opportunity to get your feet wet!, Have a written agreement where you detail your style and the "product" you will deliver, when you will deliver. Take an assitant. For the shots you should take, have a chat will the bride and she will tell you want she wants. Good Luck ! Aug 19 06 11:12 am Link Weddings are very difficult to fully cover by yourself, especially now that a "photo-journalistic" style of shooting is what alot of people want. Most of us do reasonably well with posed, choreographed shots. But there is so little time to do this effectively (especially between the end of the wedding and the reception) that it is one MAJOR headache. I used to think that all I had to do was please the bride and groom. WRONG!! You have to deal with both sets of parents, the grandparents, and extended family. I once had a complaint that I only got one picture of the bride's grandmother and I had a checklist of the shot's she wanted and the bride herself only chose one posed photo to be with grandma! We got that shot. It didn't matter, everyone was still upset. My advice: Unless this is something you REALLY want or need to do and you think you can do a good job PLUS you are willing to put up with all the headaches (and there will be MANY), don't do it! And if you do decide to do it, do as one poster said: Hire an able back-up shooter too. I also recommend an assistant or two. Seriously, this type of shoot is almost impossible to do alone. Just my two cents Aug 19 06 11:21 am Link Thanks all - good advice. I don't plan on being a full time wedding photographer. One of the reasons I'm even considering it is $$ and exposure. Referrals ARE the best advertising, right? I was told it's not a huge wedding, but I don't know if it's inside, outside, or whatever. An outdoor wedding would play much more in my favor since that's my typical style (using mostly natural light). I can't think of any reason someone would charge $3000 to shoot a wedding. $1000-$1500 if it including all retouching and prints--maybe. I think $100/hr is more than reasonable if they're wanting to save money and use a first-timer. With rehearsal, wedding, and reception, I imagine probably 5-8 hours or so, yes? That's $500-$800, and a flat charge for each photo that needs to be retouched, resized, etc. Then I can burn all images to a DVD and let them print what they want. So I could easily make $1000 for a few days' work and save the couple a few grand. Hmmmm...tempting, but I would definitel talk to them and meet them first, find out where the wedding is, etc. Aug 19 06 11:29 am Link Best thing to do is find out how much time you will have onsite and then figure out how much post production you will have.. Then base your hourly accordingly. But do not forget the post production side.. An 8 hour wedding may have 20-40 hours of post work. As a note, I shoot a number of beach weddings where I'm on site for no more then 2 hours and most of my post work is done through actions so I don't even have to sit at the computer. For those 2 hours they will be a min. of 85 fully edited images, generally no major retouches it's all very light if any and burned to a disk for the B/G and both parents for $500.. I know some will bash me for being low, but most clients that take this are from out of country. And I have done literally 4 in a day.. Make certain you back-up equipment and get a list of must have shots prior to the wedding. It also helps to have someone who knows everyone to help get them gathered up while shooting the posed shots. But most importantly know exactly what the couple wants and make sure they understand you have never done a wedding before.. And $3000 for a wedding really is not absurb. Basically wedding photography is combat photography. Even more so when you have divorced parents involved. What most tend to forget is that this is one of the few shoots you can NEVER redo; well, at least until they divorce.  So it's high pressure and high stress.. Also, couples tend to forget that your work has just begun when you leave the reception.. And as an example, I have a couple whose albums will be nearly $4000 dollars and that did not include the cost of shooting the wedding and rehearsel dinner. That was about another $2000.. Good luck and when it's over, you'll understand why we get paid what we do... Aug 19 06 11:48 am Link Anyone who thinks $3,000. is absurd to shoot a wedding clearly hasn't shot one yet. It's the hardest work you will ever do. The day of and for a long time after. It's actually quite reasonable. There is a REASON people charge what they do for weddings. I love shooting them in small doses. If that was the only way I could make a living shooting I'd drink, a lot. Good Luck if you decide to do it! Aug 19 06 11:52 am Link Keith aka Wolfie wrote: This a photographer that knows what they are talking about! Read it twice...especially that last line. Aug 19 06 11:55 am Link 98 Percent Photography wrote: I like this idea, or for that matter, shoot by the hour, but end result, give them a disk and let them print the photos and be done with it. I shot weddings in the day of FILM, and you had to deal with all the prints and additional appointments to show the results to the Bride and Groom, not to mention, hope they would come back with the "proofs" and order photos. Aug 19 06 12:22 pm Link I can guarantee you IF you do it that you will wish you had charged much more than $100/hour and will say to yourself, "wow, now I know why pro wedding photographers charge thousands..." The equipment, assistants, etc. alone that is required bars most hobbyists (and pros for that matter) from venturing into this highly specialized area. My advice...the cons far outweigh the pros. You do a poor job in the eyes of the client (their perception doesn't have to be the reality) and you will be miserable. You have ruined their special day. Do a good job and that's what was expected. There are no second takes at a wedding. I would never shoot a wedding but that's just me. Then again, I hate weddings. If I have to watch another "cake in the face" display I'm going to vomit. I think Divorce Photography is the wave of the future but perhaps that's another post. Aug 19 06 12:33 pm Link Michael Pandolfo wrote: Boy oh Boy do I agree with this, the cons far outweigh the pros, and talk about an overdone photograph (cake in the face). Aug 19 06 12:47 pm Link I have shot a few weddings and no one works harder than the photographer. Everyone has their part in a wedding, but the photographer is ususally there from the beggining from when the bride is getting ready, to the end as they drive off...Planning ahead is EVERYTHING....... Make sure you scout the area first, from the church to the reception area. Designate the best spots to take your key posed pictures.......consider bright overhead sunlight if it is outside in the daytime, around 12:am is the worst light. I would always tell the bride & groom to concentrate on enjoying their day and not stress about everything else, including the pictures. Just have one person responsible for gathering the relatives of each family for the posed shots. Tell them ahead of time that you need a scheduled amout of time for the posed shots, maybe 45min etc......make sure your ready for the key shots, ceremony, walking down isle, leaving, dance, cutting cake, etc. Absolutely make sure everything is ready the night before, especially everything having to do with your equipment....backup equipment if you have it.... Diplomacy is key, don't over manage anything, but take control where you have to. If drunk realtives intrude too much then just tell the bride or groom or find a key person that knows all of the family..........As far as pricing, nothing last from the wedding but your pictures, and they are for a lifetime, for their kids, kids.....Some higher end weddings in the bay area can start at $10, 000.00 and go up from there, so don't let pricing bother you. The caterer has one job, the florist another, but no one works harder than a photographer, he almost becomes the director at one point...........Anyway it's not that difficult if you Plan ahead. Aug 19 06 01:00 pm Link One Key thing everybody 4got. Make sure you stay out the Videography way if you never worked with one. My partner does video for weddings, while i do the photography. One biggest pain you can get besides from the family is, the video guy, either getting shots you not around or him being in your shot. also vice versa, I had time where the photographer some how find himself in between the videocamera and B&G. So keep that in mind and have a talk with them if its getting videotaped, you might want to work out a system with them as well. VideoGraphy for a wedding is very stressful as well, and you dont want to get into it with them as well as the B&G. Aug 19 06 01:22 pm Link should i ? throw my camera in its bag and run screaming to the hills, yes, yes, yes. i have done hundreds of weddings and this is now my approach, RUN DUDE. NO AMOUNT OF MONEY IS WORTH THE SOBBING BRIDE, THE OBNOXIOUS GROOM, THE DRUNKEN BEST MAN, the pissy guests. i charged 1500 to 3k and i left it alone 12 months ago. NEVER AGAIN. Aug 19 06 01:25 pm Link I hope you have read some of the above posts and taken them to heart! I'm a 20+ SURVIVOR of the wedding photograpy field. My best advice is if you have no experience shooting weddings DON'T DO IT! But if you insist be throughly prepared before you jump in. Forget about having any control at a wedding. It's an illusion! Weddings move at their own pace and you must move with it. Forget about all those covers you saw on Brides Magazine. It just don't happen that way! Just getting the bride and groom to pose in traditional poses will be tough enough. Since I'm assuming from your post you have absolutely no experience in weddings get on line and do some research for posing ideas. There isn't enough room on this site to explain them all to you. Try to remember when arriving at the brides home in most cases they will not be ready. In over 20 years of wedding I can count on one hand when the bride, her brides maids, mother and father were waiting for me. No matter when you get there THEY WON'T BE READY FOR YOU! And it's been my experience the wedding day doesn't officially start until you hear in a panicked voice, "OMG! the photographers here!" You MUST TAKE CONTROL of the bridal party at that point. Be nice, Be Diplomatic but take charge. The Bride and her mother will love you for it! Take the Maid of Honor aside and give her the responsibilty of herding the brides maids around. You concentrate on the Bride and her mother. Once done there make sure you get to the church AHEAD of the bride. Make sure you check with the person officiating the wedding to get the ground rules of that particular church. The only places where I was ever allowed the use of flash during the ceremony were Catholic churches and Jewish Synagogues. For the rest long lenses and available light were my only options unless you have time to re-stage the ceremony. After the ceremony and BEFORE the bride and groom go outside shoot the Wedding Formals. And this I can't stress enough. DO NOT GO OUTSIDE the mother/father, brother/sister, grandma/grandpa circle for formals. I know everyone will want to get in on these but DON'T DO IT! All the "favorite" aunts, uncles, cousins, friends will be better off shot at the reception, informally! From experience most of these shots won't sell but everyone wants them taken. And DON'T DO TABLE SHOT! During the reception there are some must shots. Those usually take place during the beginning part of the festivities. Then balance of the must shots usually take place toward the end. There is a big block of time during which people are eating, drinking, dancing and the bride and groom will be making the rounds of the tables. That's the time you get the photos of everyone outside the CIRCLE. I through trial and error developed a shot list of 134 shots YOU MUST GET! A lot will depend on the size of the wedding party and IMMEDIATE family. Once you get these everything else is gravy. Backup your equipment. DO NOT go to a wedding using only one set of equpment. That is certain death! It may be working flawlessly the day before but you can bet that on the day of the wedding SOMETHING wil malfunction. I used to take three of everything and that included medium format bodies, strobes, cords, batteries, anything that even remotely stood a chance of breaking or malfunctioning. You have one shot at weddings with no re-dos. That is why my average wedding was $3,000. Good luck! Hope you do ok! Make sure you have sharp razor blade for when you want to cut your wrists! Aug 19 06 01:28 pm Link Don't do it. Or do it once but don't expect to make money at it. I've been doing wedding video and now photos since 93 and I have never heard of 1 rich wedding photographer. Rich celebrity photographer - yes. Rich seminar speaker or tutorial salesman - yes. Every good wedding videographer or photographer I know is looking to do something else because you never get enough money for the time and work you put in and every wedding, you have to start all over again. You can't make a career out of it and most people can't even make a living at it. Aug 19 06 01:34 pm Link FKVPhotoGraphics wrote: All joking aside, everything the above poster has said is pretty much gospel. Aug 19 06 01:38 pm Link Do it only if you feel confident about your equipment and settings. I would work it into the agreement that they do the printing on their own. The sooner you are out of the picture (no pun intended )the better for your sanity lol I'd do it at starting $2,500 initial fee. Aug 19 06 01:41 pm Link I say to go ahead and shoot the wedding. It will definitely get your feet wet and will let you know why some photographers charge what they do. There are so many ways to put packages together...there is no way to be able to say that $3000 is too much or even too little. I think that for you, starting out at a reasonable price is a good thing. However, for a 4 hour wedding at $100 an hour is only $400 and this is WAY too little! The first wedding I ever did I charged the couple $475. This was for 8 hours of photography and if it wasn't for the fact that I was so excited about doing my first wedding, I would have died! I quickly "upped" my price and no one balked. This past year I even offered a $500 wedding which was "ceremony only" and nothing else but pics on a disc, but even that one I won't be doing next season. My prices now run about $2000 average for a wedding and this includes no prints or albums. Why do brides and grooms pay this much? The only thing that I can think of is that I have made myself a little bit of a reputation for getting the right photo at the right time and THAT is worth more to a bride than anything. But, be prepared to be running your butt off from an hour before the ceremony to days afterwards with getting everything edited and put onto a CD. I've only had minimal problems with parents of the bride and never with the bride herself. It is a very emotional day though and you have to almost have a sixth sense to know when to catch a tear or not. The tears shed by the mother of the bride while she speaks to her daughter before the ceremony is definitely a shot to get. The tears shed by two bridesmaids arguing about something before the wedding is NOT! Father and daughter sharing a few special words before the ceremony is ONLY permittable to catch IF they are not behind closed doors. There are so many times that people don't want you to intrude on that special moment. Then again, as photographers our gut instinct is always to get that one moment that will be savored forever. I am under the opinion that not everyone can do wedding photography. If you react well to stress and you work well under it, then this is definitely something you might enjoy. If you aren't that kind of person, no matter how much you want to do the wedding, you will be back here right after it telling us that you will never do it again! Can't wait to hear which works for you. Jump in and do it! If you need any other advice, I'll be happy to answer what I can. Make sure you post later to let us know how you did. Good luck!  My wedding photography site: www.blisswed.com Aug 19 06 01:42 pm Link There is an aspect that is being overlooked here, which I feel is important. Having photographed hundreds of weddings in all kinds of situations and locations over the last 25 years (had one last Saturday, got one next Saturday) I felt it needed to be brought into the discussion. Most of my work has been with film, of course, so I am sorta biased. FYI for you digital kids, for many years the image quality of film was at two very visibly different levels - amateur stuff, and pro stuff (Kodak and Fuji both offer pro lines of film). The pro film required much more precision in exposure, etc., to get much better resolution and color than amateur film offered, until just the last 5-6 years. Likewise, professional lab processing, instead of drug store processing, also made a big difference in the final quality and appearance of images. It took more work, and cost more money, to do this. So why did we deal with the extra hassel and cost? This was important because everything was about the print. People saw prints in an album. Those were what they paid for, in their mind. All your hustle, creativity, expensive cameras, extra work before and after the wedding, were not really a consideration to the customer. Shooting digital changes a lot. But people almost always still want a wedding book, and digital age or not, they still want to have prints, and to give out prints. Allowing the bg & family to have cd's, and then they go off and have prints made - you must realize that you are putting so much work into creating images, maybe retouching/editing them, and then abandoning all control when they take the cd and have prints made. (Did you really think all they do is look at the images on a computer monitor?) Will they be seeking out a firm that will give them top quality prints? Get real! They will take the disk to WalMart, or someplace else offering 19 cent digital prints. Or make prints on their $69 inkjet printer. Probably not even on photo type paper. For the same reason they will pay you $500, instead of someone who makes a living as a professional wedding photographer $3,000. Most people consider only the immediate cost. And when this is all done, people will see these prints, which will fall short of your standards by numerous measures. Prints that have glaring posterized colors, blown-out highlights, pixilated shadows, etc., etc., because the algorithms applied to digital printing at almost all "public" digital photo finishers really print to the lowest standard. Or maybe it will be some smeared, slightly fuzzy low resolution ink jet prints, instead. And people who look at these prints will consider this stuff your work. Would that have been your choice? I tell b&g's who say "And we get the negatives, right?" that as a creative and a business person, the control of the final look of the image as presented is as important as the original creation. If I came to their wedding with point and shoot one-time use cameras instead of my professional gear, I could use my skills to make some good images. But only if I could have the film done by a good, professional lab which printed it right, to my standards. Not the photo counter at RiteAid. Good prints prints represent my skills, too. If they look awful - and which do you think would do better, a professional service, or the drug store? - then as a photographer I look awful! People look at the photos and say 'Who did these? They're not very good pictures.' because they judge the prints as much or more than the content and creativity. So I control the printing of the images, and I get results I am proud of, that represent me and my work in a positive light. Any b&g who cannot understand that - they need to find another photographer. It's my business, and I have to avoid the spread of that negative reaction to my work from poor quality prints. I do not give out the negatives (or files) and let them print whatever they want wherever they want, to control this important aspect of my image. I think you would be making a mistake if you do not have some control over the final appearance of the images you worked so hard to create. Also - that figure being tossed around of $3,000? Or more? Most likely part of that is covering the cost of prints and album, and the work to order and assemble them - something you are not including. So you're comparing apples and peaches. But $500 is still giving it away! Aug 19 06 01:56 pm Link $3000 is NOT a lot of money for a wedding! You need at least TWO of EVERYTHING you need to shoot with. You need an assistant. You both need to be dressed appropriately, no cheap suits!! You need to be good/fast enough to shoot basketball or volleyball and SO DOES YOUR ASSISTANT!! You need to be able to make split second decisions, get ALL the important shots, keep track of your equipment, change your entire plan of attack in a heartbeat. You must NOT disrupt the wedding in any way, you must be stealthy. You have NO margin for error, they will not redo any of the special moments just because you dropped the ball. You also need to be a polished smooth talker, a diplomat. You will need to be able to pose 15 people in 2-3 minutes and GET THEM TO STAY THERE! Before you take a job like this, practice shooting sports for a while and then try to go to a wedding or two as a total freelance with no responsibilty. I've shot a few weddings, it is VERY stressful. You WILL get torn a new asshole on a fairly regular basis by people you cannot punch out or walk away from. I am not saying don't shoot weddings, I am saying it sounds like you don't have the experince you need to tackle one yet or to make a decision as to whether or not this is something you want to do. I would advise you to tell them to hire somebody else and ask if you can be allowed to come and shoot on a freelance basis. Watch what the hired photographer does. Check out what he is toting with him. Don't expect him/her to talk to you at the wedding, there is NO time for anything but the job at hand. Best of luck to you. Aug 19 06 01:57 pm Link Doug Mackay DMP wrote: The bride's mother. Don't forget the bride's mother. Aug 19 06 02:04 pm Link Just remember amongst your kit, very, very good insurance for when you get sued by the happy couple for any screw ups that you may make.. I've been asked to do four to date. I've refused everytime, and no amount of money could make me re-consider. Its an exceptionally stressful, specialized and difficult area of photography. Only proceed if you can operate all your kit with your eyes shut and have back ups available which you know the same way. I've seen a three week old Canon D1 fail totally at a wedding before now. The photographer had to borrow my F3 to finish the job..all because he was sure a new camera was reliable enough for the job. If anything can go wrong at a wedding - it will Aug 19 06 02:07 pm Link The best way to test the dark and murky waters of wedding photography is to start by assisting, this will give you a front row seat to the hell you would be getting yourself into. I agree with the other photographers here that though it can be very high-paying--for me the money isn't worth the hassle. Just make sure your bases are covered should you choose to take this assignment. Get your release, get everything in writing before the event where they sign that they understand they will be getting x amount of prints from you, a cd, an album--whatever. This way when they want to get more out of you, you can pull out that paper and say "no--you only paid for this. if you want that, it'll cost you $x.xx more." I'll tell you that it's alot of stress, you have to be very good at directing people and taking control of the situation. Wedding guests will want to take pictures WHILE you are setting up your shot and you got to make sure everyone is looking into YOUR camera while you take your shot. Some photographers don't allow guests to take pictures which I think makes the stressed out guests even more pissy with you, i say better to roll with it, but don't be afraid to take control. Good luck! Aug 19 06 02:22 pm Link You guys are scaring me. LOL. I'll wait and see if the person calls me to ask, how big the locations are, where, indoor/outdoor, number of guests, etc. I think I've determined if it's a small outdoor wedding, I could handle it fine. Otherwise, I might be getting more than I bargain for. Aug 19 06 02:54 pm Link Sleepy Weasel wrote: You gotta respect a guy who asks for help, gets some great advice from a bunch of people who have been there done that, and then he just decides to pretty much ignore it all! Aug 19 06 04:16 pm Link I've done 3 or 4 for free (family or friends) and they turned out alright for the most part, but I do think that shooting a wedding takes about 5 years off one's life. Aug 19 06 04:30 pm Link Sleepy Weasel wrote: Dude.. if you ever listen to a single thing I've ever said on these forums.. please make it this. Aug 19 06 04:38 pm Link I've read nothing but good advice here. If you are asked to shoot a wedding as the primary photographer for the first time without any experience, maybe you should refuse. You are well advised to pass the job on to an experienced wedding pro and go as an assistant. People are their own worst enemy at weddings and those who only want journalistic type photos may be cursing at you even when you're in the grave. Assholes are abundant at weddings and some of these assholes are the people who are actually paying you: especially the bride's father. The bride and groom led you to believe that they are the bosses at their own wedding but the're probably not. Getting a list of shots and someone who knows who all the people are is a must. This person must be with you throughout the wedding. Personally I hate to be the one to cover the day that people are making the worst mistake of their life. I hate weddings and won't do them for any amount of money. Aug 19 06 05:21 pm Link Some very good advice from some very experienced photographers. They are right. Weddings can be very high stress. You absolutely CAN'T screw up because there are no re-shoots. You have limited control over the whole thing. Backup equipment is critical. For all those reasons, just jumping in and doing a wedding is not generally a good idea... But... well, my first wedding was sort of like what you are thinking of. And it can work. I had already done a fair amount of other event photography. My equipment was pretty new and reliable. I was pretty sure of my skills. I read up on it and was pretty sure I knew about all the critical shots. Most importantly: I knew the bride and groom well, and they knew I'd never shot a wedding before, and their expectations were low. This took all the pressure off. If I missed a shot or two, it wasn't the end of the world. I charged them $500 plus the cost of prints. My second wedding was pretty much the same. $3000 is not at all absurd for a professional wedding photographer. If you present yourself as a professional wedding photographer, they will expect great prints, and anything less than perfect will leave you with upset and angry customers. Usually those kinds of prices include the shoot, plus a book and package of professional prints, not just a CD and permission to print them at the nearest Costco. But if you charge them a minimal fee, and let them know that you don't have experience doing weddings, then I think you can get away with it. I did. Everyone has to start somewhere. Where you can really get in trouble is passing yourself as a professional, charging professional fees, and then failing to deliver (or have an equipment malfunction in mid-ceremony). As long as your price is low, and their expectations are low, then go for it. I did okay on my first couple of solo weddings. No great art, but no major screw ups either. They were happy with what they got, and I got the experience I needed to expand into that field. My biggest surprises in my first weddings: I went through a lot more batteries than I had anticipated (fortunately I had plenty of extras). A lot of churches don't allow flash, so you have to have fast glass and be good shooting indoors with available light. I spent a whole lot more time in post processing than I anticipated (I usually spend at least twice as much time in post processing as I do actually shooting the wedding). Aug 19 06 06:52 pm Link ADG Photography wrote: Not that I recommend being a dick to anyone @ a wedding, but the only people you really have to cater to are the ones writing the check. I've had pushy relatives try to corner me into shooting their family portraits @ a reception...I simply told them I was busy doing what the bridal couple requested...and if I got some free time I'd be back. Pays to be polite, but some people need to be made aware of who you're working for. Aug 19 06 07:11 pm Link I would never want to discourage anyone from doing what they love but I see disaster written all over this. During the years I owned a studio I photographed about 115 weddings of all kinds. It is the hardest work you will ever do and it is the most important work that you will ever do. To the bride and groom, and their family and friends, it's not just another shoot, its the culmination of a lifetime of dreaming and there is only this one chance, ever, ever! People don't pay $3,000 just for the photography, they pay to ensure they have a photographer who has the ability and experience to get it right, all of it right, the first time. There isn't a reshoot, ever. By accepting money to shoot this wedding you are representing to your client that you are a professional with all the responsibilities attached. Screw up, just a little, and your world will turn to Hell. If you think word of mouth and referals will help your business you are right, and if you screw up, even a little, then its over for you. More than that, should you really fail to deliver the key shots, the once in a lifetime shots that the bride has been dreaming of since she was a child, then you are putting yourself in a position to be sued. Do your clients know that you have never shot a wedding before? Do they know that you don't know if its large or small or inside or outside? Do you have at least two of every camera, portable flash, studio strobe and anything else you are going to need? Have you gone over the shot list with the client? Do you know what the bride wants the pictures to look like? She does, she has been thinking of them since childhood and she knows exactly what they are suppose to look like, and they don't then God help you. $3,000 is nothing for a wedding. Its not just the pictures, look at Aunt Edna wrong or upset Uncle Ted who is shooting with a point and shoot and tripping your slaved stobes and you are doomed. A wedding is a sacred and holy place for the Bride and a terrible burden on the family responsible. Tensions can be high, family members can be at war with each other and you are going to be pulled to pick a side. War is Hell and a wedding can be a war on the emotions of those involved, and those who wanted to be involved. Photography is a hobby and a passion for me now, so I am not down on those of us that don't do this professionally everyday. But, there are some things that are best left to the properly trained and experienced. All the best to you. Tim Aug 19 06 07:39 pm Link Go stand in the middle of the expressway and shoot cars/trucks going both ways... then imagine shooting a wedding.... if you wouldn't do the former, dont do the later. Weddings are total killers.......if you are indeed a thrill seeker, then proceed, assuming you survived the expressway test... but charge as much as possible, hire a second shooter and an assistant who keeps you working your way down the clipboard of mandatory shots. After the wedding go home and stand in a hot shower and cry and remember all those on MM who said DONT DO IT! I have, never again unless I'm: a. the second shooter and b. can shoot editorial/candids. be advised. Aug 19 06 07:51 pm Link PLEASE READ TIM LITTLES COMMENTS ABOVE. It's the best articulation of what a wedding is that I have read in a long time. Thanks,Tim!! Aug 19 06 07:56 pm Link Sleepy Weasel wrote: Small weddings where everything (the "getting ready", the ceremony, and the reception) is at or near the same location are easier to shoot than large weddings. However, all the important advice and little "must dos' mentioned by those of us who have done weddings still applies! I don't mean to scare you and my guess is most of the others do not wish to do so either, but no matter what size the wedding, it is still the bride's special day. You CANNOT do this shoot over! So it is still important to back up your equipment, have an assistant or two, and go over --IN DETAIL-- with the couple exactly what they want in the way of photography. There is less room for failure here than just about any other genre. Aug 19 06 07:56 pm Link Jeff Marsh wrote: Actually, I thought your advice to stand in a hot shower and cry was pretty good as well! Been there, done that! Aug 19 06 07:58 pm Link The reason many photographers charge $3000.00 for a wedding is they can prove to clients they are worth the money. If they can't show $3000 worth of value they would never get the contracts. Now if you feel you are worth $100.00 hr then charge what you are worth but remember if something goes wrong ( something always does) then you are 100% at fault for the missing photos that cannot be reproduced. Last month my best lens went out of focus and had to use my backup for 85% of the wedding. Last week my 6 month old flash unit burned out. Do you have at least one back-up camera and extra set of lenses, extra flash, a third camera just in case. How about really fast lenses because most churches do not allow flash and people get really mad if the images are not bright and in perfect focus, especially the ring and first kiss photo. And don't forget those fast walks down the isle that are more like a run than a walk. And last but not least a great ending photo in total darkness when they leave the reception. You need to be ready for anything and everything if you accept any money for shooting the event. Most model shoots you can do over with a little spent for hair and make-up if you have a problem, a wedding is a one time shot. Aug 19 06 09:33 pm Link |
