the $500 wedding photographer, some actual evidence

<p>I like what you wrote, Mark</p>

<p>Jeff "I find it really unfortunate, maybe more like completely unpleasant, that some people here find it necessary to disparage other people based on their finances" - well said.<br>

I've been young and poor and $500 is a LOT of money to some (many) people.</p>

 

<p>I Detroit there are places were a house goes for only 4 to 10 times the 500 buck wedding folks trash here as wrong.</p>

<p>Well... some people have $1000 to spend on their wedding, some people have $30,000.... thus the $500 photographer is hired... but, believe me, if you have a 20k wedding, you aren't going to hire a $500 photographer.</p>

<p>I can buy a blouse from a high-end department store and pay $180 for a quality garmet, or I can go to the salvation army and get one for $.50 for poor quality but it'll cover me up. If I've got $5,000 to blow for my shopping trip, where am I going to go? Where would I go if I only had $10?</p>

<p>Not everyone's parents can pay for a wedding. Not everyone can afford a $2500 photographer. Not because they're cheap, but because literally the money isn't there. I have yet to see a $500 Craigslist photographer that had the skills of the $5000 photographer. Brides know this. I don't see the $500 photographer cutting into the bottom line for the $5000 photographer, I don't see why everyone complains about it.</p>

<p>Salvation Army in Houston, may have better quality on some items then the $180 item, but the Salvation Army does not sell garments for 50 cents as a rule. I don't know why people care what other people charge, and being cheap does not make it wrong, Wal Mart got big buy promoting cheap, after they quit promoting buy American made, I guess cheap sold better than made in America;-)</p>

<p>Let's look at this from a customer's perspective. In general, it does not matter how good you think your product is, it does not matter how good you think your photos are, it does not matter how good your photo equipment is, the only thing that matters is, the customer's PERCEPTION of your product's value.</p>

<p>Perception is a fickle thing, each person feels differently about the exact same thing, it's emotional and sometimes irrational. That's why business people like to separate out their customers based on something called market segments. Segmentation can be based on price, base on customer's culture, whether the customers are informed consumers or not, based on age, based on style, race, sex, etc etc.</p>

<p>You cannot hope to ever target your product and services to every bloke on the street. What you would end up is a washed out message, a kind of jack of all trades, master of none and ends up being swept aside. What you need to decide is, based on the market segments, which ones should I go after? Which ones am I in right now? Do I want to market myself to another segment? Do I have the skills and know-how to get those segments? Does it make financial sense for me to go after those segments? How can I market myself to those segments? Once you've decided, then you know where you can excel and let every other photographer make their living in some other segment. You can't be the master of every segment.</p>

<p>As an aside, next time when you're watching advertising on the TV, ask yourself what the company tried to convey and which target segment they're trying to go after. You might be surprised to find even large companies like Coca-Cola don't try to market to everyone.</p>

<p>PS: Marketing is not the same as advertising, but this is another matter altogether.</p>

<p>If you own a nice fine dining restaurant are you going to get pissed off if some diner opens in your town and offers $2 burgers?<br>

If someone wants cheap, it's their option. It's a free market, learn to live with it.</p>

<p>As a direct response to the original question, price is the easiest thing that people try to differentiate their product. But it's also one of the most useless. Why? Because everybody can lower prices, that's easy, it's not an advantage. </p>

<p>But how come Walmart is so successful? Because they are not only cheap, but they offer everything in one store and because they managed to offer it to small towns where their excellent logistics let's them reap profits where others cannot. Those are Walmart's real advantages, the price is just what the consumers sees, but not every consumer will like Walmart's style and the cheapness of the product. What are the real advantages that you have to offer to your client?</p>

<p>I have done some low cost photography here and there. Sometimes people are putting their wedding together quickly for various reasons, and generally have a tight budget. If I have nothing booked I try to work with them. Not sacrificing my rates so much as adjusting packages way down to meet there needs. Like Ray Say work is better than no work</p>

<p>As a complete layperson, I thought the Flickr versions of the wedding pictures were just fine for the money. (I think it's crazy that the photographer posts out of focus pics on his site, though) I really think the memory was caught and that would be the important thing to me for a wedding. Maybe the composition wasn't worth $2500 or whatever, but the price wasn't that as well. Some people don't care about perfect composition...and if their wedding budget was ~$2500, it would be crazy to spend more than $500 on a photographer.<br>

<br />I often see pictures (sometimes even here) that are prime examples of beautiful wedding photography. Other times, I see pictures that are supposed to be prime examples that are over-posed, over-processd and look like cartoons. Just as pics can be too awful, they can also be too perfect.<br>

<br />So we all have our opinions on what value we place on something. The OP's worrying about it is only going to give him an ulcer. It's not going to stop the $500 photographer. Every industry has it's low-ballers. It's not just photography.</p>

<p>I think the biggest problem is just what the original poster stated: There is an obvious difference in the quality of photography between the $500 CL poster and the $3500 Educated, Experienced, Professional Photographer. <br />I as a bride 5 years ago had a wedding budget of $2,500. I wasnt going to have the reception catered so I could afford a decent photographer, but I ended up getting a deal with a photographer *friend* who does stills for a living so he just did my wedding on the side as a favor for $400. I KNEW I wasnt getting the works with this arrangement, and even though I didnt get the full blown lighting and props and posing I got what I needed, pictures of everyone there and of the ceremony. <br />But as a photographer I know the difference. THAT is why we need to make it a point to show clients the difference in product that accompanies the price. I ALWAYS show/send my pictures to a B&G before prices because I want them to see and appreciate the work FIRST without the price factoring into their decision. The $500 CL lister needs to be UP FRONT about what they are (and are NOT) providing with this price. <br />*It does bother me though that the $500 'professionals' are popping up everywhere because I live in second cheapest place to live in the country and people look at the price before the pictures. It is VERY hard to make a living doing this when people around here compare you to WalMart or the CL lister and havent even seen your work because of the prices. <br />The true professionals will weather the cycle though- and I'll be one of them. :)</p>

<p>I have to agree with Jeff Spirer and Mike Dixon. We had a very low budget wedding as we just did not have any money to spend on it but that does not matter as wedding is about a couple getting married not about how much money it costs.</p>

<p>And then there are people like my wife and I. We simply chose to have a skilled friend photograph our wedding (my second, but the only traditional one) and agreed that it would be his gift. Cost-free! They weren't pro looking photos but they were decent and a record of all that occured at the event, which is just what many of us want! He even put them in a nice book. Our wedding was NOT cheap either, costing multiple thousands.<br>

As one poster said, most of these wedding books sit on the shelves forever, some even getting lost! Even I once took photos of a friends second wedding, with good equipment, and gave them the photos as my gift. They were very pleased! I'd probably do a small wedding for $500 if asked, because it would just be a part time job for me. Some people with second weddings only want more of a record, with decent photos, than a fancy photo shoot. Now let me see..where is that wedding book of ours...</p>

<p>So someone tipped me off that there was talk about my website. My name is Shawn Brandow and I am the owner and operator of Da Bull Photography (da-bull.net). Thank you to the person who sent me that nice email.<br>

To answer some questions asked above:<br>

YES: I'm a new photographer here in Albuquerque, NM<br>

YES: The photos in the portfolio gallery <a href="http://da-bull.net/packages/weddings">http://da-bull.net/packages/weddings</a> are of my FIRST and ONLY wedding so far<br>

YES: The images are low resolution. I don't care to have someone rip them off of me so they can be used elsewhere. There are only 5 because I chose the best 5 out of 100. <br>

YES: The website is still under construction. More photos and packages are coming soon. <br>

YES: My packages are cheap, and this is because I am competitive and inexperienced. <br>

YES: My package names are a little out there, but hey, it got your attention didn't it?<br>

Everyone has to start out somewhere. You have to first build a portfolio before you can do anything and that is the hardest step. It's easy for a reputable photographer to get business because they have a full portfolio that is appealing to the customers eye. Well, that is what I'm working on. Perhaps after I get more business, I may up my price a bit, but maybe not. If I earn the reputation that I provide quality photos and that I was affordable, they will spread the word. In the present economy, the average consumer has a hard enough time living day to day, and planning a wedding is expensive and doesn't help that they are looking at photographers that charge an arm and a leg. <br>

By the way, my lowest package isn't $500, it's $450 ;-)</p>

<p><strong>Moderator Note:</strong> I am removing Shawn's posted image of himself because forum guidelines don't allow for posting of an image that one didn't take oneself. I encourage you, Shawn, to post your image on your personal page.</p>

<p>Our B&G receive the same quality ( 30+ years) for a $500 wedding -- just only end-up with a 2 hour coverage and the 2gb card >> right from the camera.ANd maybe we only wear a suit >> not a tux .</p>

<p>All I can say is that I had contracted a graduation photog, one of the standard guys who was also contracted by the university to shoot every graduate when they collected their degrees. </p>

<p>The quality wasn't that great, I didn't get a shot when you sit there and holding your scroll. He was more into sitting / leaning on the table ..... The images were a bit washed out, maybe that is his technique, not sure. Perhaps it is a softening effect he used. The 6x4 were better though. </p>

<p>I had friends who got a senior student who also did photography and they advertised on the campus grounds. More shots than me, color and b/w, they also get the negs, cheaper. I also had friends who went to a children studio like next to Wal Mart, I am in New Zealand, but similar. Think it was Pixicolor. They got some very large nice prints done. Not sure what camera they used though ....</p>

<p>In terms of price, dunno, I think I paid maybe $200US for 2hr sessions, 1hr outdoor at campus and 1hr at his studio. He does weddings too. </p>

<p>The prints were individually priced, I think I had the 12x 6x4 package in a album that might of been $300US or like, and 2 larger prints, 16x12 I think that were like maybe $100US each ...</p>

<p>Well, after seeing Shawn's limited work ( since he only has 5 images ) all I can say is that I've seen "pros" with worse work charge more than he does... so yet another proof that price does not equal quality</p>

<p>as for the quality of Shawn's work...I wont comment unless he wants me to :)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I often advertise on Craigslist as a supplemental. I'd rather book a $500-$1000 event than sit on my hands if I have an open afternoon. Maybe I am wrong but who cares??? If a B&G can only afford $500 then that is their business. The reality is that there is a lot of competition at that price point and the best photographer usually wins. If a wedding photographer is too good to be so cheap then it is likely below them to even look at CL. So why do it???<br>

I have had clients approach me looking for just a dvd of images from their two hour event. If I were in their shoes I would not want to pay over $1K just for that. I may be guilty of being too cheap at times, but I provide quality service, my clients are happy, and I'll gladly take the business if someone else won't do it.</p>

<p>Mark, I am very open to suggestions and I welcome anything you have to say about my work :)</p>

<p>@christopher cerubin: i guess it's fine if you simply shoot and burn and then give the couple their cd with all the images unedited. but i rather sit in my hands 1 afternoon rather than shoot a $500 wedding and have a week worth of postprocessing to go through. I might have nothing better to do for 1 afternoon but I'm sure I'll have something better to do the rest of the week.</p>

<p>@shawn: ok..since you asked...here it comes..and all this is just my opinion..others might agree/disagree..oh.. and just as a warning, i'm pretty direct in my comments.</p>

<p>your images pretty much reflects the work of a "typical lower end CL shooter" to me. the photos are blurred and out of focus ( i seen point and shoot cameras producing sharper images than those in your port ).<br>

I'm not sure if it is caused by the resolution resize or what, but you might want to see if the originals are sharper and redo them so they look better cuz as of now they are kind of terrible.<br>

And put more than 5 images.. I'm sure out of the other 95 images you have some that rival the quality of the 5 you have on right now ( at least I hope so. 5% hit rate ain't that good ). Even CL shoppers won't hire you if you only show them 5 images.. Those goes to the CL shooters that shoot for free..not $500.</p>

<p>Watermarks.....i hate watermarks... and your images are full of them... let's face it, your images ain't that good, I don't see thieves stealing your images anytime soon. there are far better photographers that put their work online without any watermaks..if thieves are going to steal images, they will go for those. i don't think you have anything to worry about when it comes to image thieves as of now. get rid of the watermarks.</p>

<p>package names.... you are not going to break into the high end market with ghetto names like those. It is never too early to create an image of yourself so you don't have to re-brand later. same goes to your studio name... da bull? what's that? are we shopping at a hardware store or what? What's wrong with Shawn Brandow Photography?</p>

<p>the schedule on your website... unless you are booked pretty solid throughout the year, i don't see a point of having an empty calendar on your website showing clients how little to no job you have booked so far.</p>

<p>i think that ends my rant.</p>

<p>Mark, <br>

I thank you for your insight and I'll take a look at submitting the higher resolution versions. Another possibility of why they look "fuzzy" is the Portraiture filter I've applied for a softer look. And you're right, what's the point of having an empty schedule showing?</p>

<p>oh...you might also want to remove the link to this post from your "home" portion of the website.. I don't think that's gonna get you brownie points with potential clients</p>

<p>

<p>The thrust of this original post reeks of a similar sentiment shown a previous post here at Photonet where an Australian site was torn apart simply because the (American, residing is Australia) owner offered free images. . .</p>

<p>In that older thread, (apparently now deleted), the owner of the website came on board and made many comments also.</p>

<p>I agree with J Spirer and M Dixon and others of a similar mind.</p>

<p>Good on Shawn Brandow for responding, and good luck to him.</p>

<p>Poor Original Post – Shame.</p>

<p>Honi soit qui mal y pense</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p> </p>

</p>

 

<p>To Shawn :<br>

Good for you for posting! I agree that you need some more photos, and I think they should be sharp ones. <br>

Some things to consider for your next wedding, if you want:<br>

1. Shoot the bride with and without her glasses on. Especially from farther away, the small shape and reflections off of the glasses make her look like she's asleep or has her eyes closed, as in image 1/4. Glasses can be tricky, and they are a style item that will make the portraits dated (not "timeless") that much faster.<br>

2. Watch for overhead and background clutter, such as power lines and fences. If you can't avoid them, shoot tighter in to the couple and use a wider aperture to take the focus off the clutter and put it on the couple. (Image 3 of 4)<br>

3. Have a heavier bride put her elbow a little out from her body; it will make her upper arm look thinner. <br>

For your website:<br>

4. Package names are humorous, it's true, but there's no harm in calling them something just a little gentler. They might appeal to a feminine audience more if they were just a little sweeter - like "just starting out" instead of "starving couple" (especially ironic with a chubby couple photo right next to that name...).<br>

5. Navigating through your portfolio is not easy; consider another method of navigation. The arrows are hard to find because they are so low on the page (due to the large banner). Make the banner less tall too - and consider making the banner image less contrasty, a little darker maybe. It kind of looked like lunchmeat at the deli at first glance. Basically there is a lot of upper and lower banner content on the site and not much changing content. Your site should be the other way around - content rich, banner narrow. </p>

<p>I know it feels scary to maybe have your images ripped off, but really, I don't think you need to worry about that as much as you need to worry about getting customers. You will get more jobs with more content. Some couples also like to be able to see that you can shoot a whole wedding and will look for those other photos before confirming. </p>

<p>Make sure your images really are sharply in focus in at least one place. If not, find out what happened so you can avoid that next time. You can always apply "soft focus" later, but if you need it sharp and it's gone, you can't get it back. What you give the couple versus what you post on your portfolio can be different. Sometimes it's better that way, if you prefer the image in black & white but they wanted color, for instance. </p>

<p>Good luck and keep shooting.</p>