Replacement Pro due to illness - Contract Clause

I'm not a wedding photographer, so my perspective might be different.

 

Granted, dealing with someone who says she is a "lawyer wannabe" is a concern, unless the comment was made in jest. And I agree that liability beyond the price paid is unreasonable.

 

But on the replacement photographer issue, I read it as this: if you, who she has contracted with, choose a replacement that the replacement will be equally qualified (for example, not me) and that she will not be faced with charges that she had no advance knowledge or any control.

 

This is not to say that you should bear the possible cost of a replacement if your rates are under market. If prevailing rates (now I sound like a lawyer) are higher than yours, those prevailing rates should be the benchmark.

A wonder what percentage of wedding photographers have a real pro assistant?<BR><BR>Or equal? <BR><BR>Or an appentence?<BR><BR>One that comes in a separate car to the event; with the backup set of photo gear?<BR><BR>One that could shoot the event; If you "fell ill"; had an emergency; etc?<BR><BR>Are there any teams; that swap "who is the captain; who is the "film loader/digital slave? :)" of the photo event; so the less experienced person could gain real experience. <BR><BR>A situation in which an older person wants to "back off abit"; and a younger person "who needs experience" would be a good fit; maybe...<BR><BR>William; Timber and Marc; and the group; do you sometimes have assistants that could "step up to the plate"? ie to fill in; or shoot maybe a 1/3 of the shots? Just wondering abit outloud! <BR><BR>This is an interesting subject; regards to all; Kelly

Most of the time I have an apprentice shooter. They tend to stay with me for at least 3-4 years so eventually, yes, they could take over if needed. Additionally, they do shoot while I'm shooting or if I take a short break during an unimportant part of the reception. Most of them eventually leave to shoot weddings themselves.