Complaint I'm hearing

<p>Just thought I'd throw this out there. I've heard multiple people who have complained about wedding photographers that put 2,000 plus images on their website for the bride and brides mother to comb through to order photos. The complaint is that it is overwhelming trying to go through all the images and they wished the images have been edited down to a more reasonable number. I have heard this from several people who talk to me about wedding photography.<br>

The most recent person told me that it is going to take her hours to go through them and with a full time job she just hasn't had the time to do it. Her son's wedding was over two months ago and she still hasn't gone through them all to get an order together. The complaints haven't had anything to do with the quality of the work but how much trouble it is to go through all the images.</p>

<p>The client should be communicating that to the photographer. I have an option for the client to have a spiral proof book - which is easier for the clients to flip through and choose images. I also place the images in categories on line for eg. "bride getting ready" "bride with mom", etc. Then my client receives a form with the top 3 images of each category that our studio can work off of the create an album design.</p>

 

<p>Yeah, that has been my experience as well - people want what THEY think is a reasonable number to have to view through. For some it's 100 for others 300 and so on and so forth. 2000 (or, basically, anything around the 1000 mark and above) is too much. HOWEVER, believe it or not, even I who don't do weddings as a mainstream thing, have come across a couple of brides who INSISTED on seeing all the images from the wedding (something around 1500) and now, almost 6 months later, they still haven't gotten back to me about orders...</p>

<p>Let's face it, you cannot win all the time...you can only do your best. What I usually do is put up two galleries: my selection (which is rarely above 250 images) and "All the rest" which is, well, for lack of a better term, all the rest. If they want, if they have the patience and stamina, they're welcome to them. And 90% of the time, 99% of their orders come from my selections...;-)</p>

<p>About 15 years ago when I was hiring a photographer for my own wedding I faced that issue and had that discussion with several local pros. Unless I was going to be getting great photography for a bargain price I had no intentions of doing "their" editting for them.</p>

<p>Anyone who offered to shoot lots of pics and let me sort through them was promptly dismissed from consideration. Those that would shoot less and bang them on a CD were promptly dismissed from consideration. The pro I chose offered (after some not-so-subtle hinting) to shoot his best quality imagery and show me only the best. I seem to recall looking at less less than 50 images (or maybe more, IDK for sure), almost all of which went into a formal album... which is just as great to look at today as it was 15 years ago.</p>

<p>I like "old school", I suppose, whether I'm receiving or delivering. This oft heard complaint you speak of is just another example of professional laziness in my opinion. I see this "you do" attitude in many "professional" endeavors in which I'm currently engaged.</p>

<p>But in all fairness... some people must sincerely want jillions of images to sort through, otherwise people wouldn't be offering that service so often.</p>

<p>I agree. Every time I hear of a photographer deliving 2,000 pictures from a wedding I'm amazed at how they managed to find 2,000 picture to shoot. On a big wedding with lots of coverage, there might possibly be 2,000 occasions to click the shutter. But there is no way that there are 2,000 different, unique photos to be made at any normal wedding unless there are 500 guests and maybe you pose each and every one of them in multiple combinations with the bride and groom. In the days of film, every time you clicked the shutter cost as much as $1 in film, developing and proofing, so a few hundred was the max you could shoot and have any hope of being profitable. I strongly suspect that the people who offer 2,000 pictures are showing the client every frame they clicked, without bothering to edit them down. Even after you've eliminated blinks and bad exposures and out of focus shots, you still have to eliminate duplicates. Granted, with a group you might need to show muliple frames because some people look better in one shot and others in the next shot. And even with a portraint of bride you can show different expressions on her face so she can choose. But six frames of the bride with no change in expression or pose isn't six pictures -- only the one best shot should be shown. Clearly this is a digital phenomenon, both of the ability to shoot 2,000 frames without spending $2,000 and people jumping into the business without knowing the fundamentals. </p>

<p>A solution is to provide a complete set and a "favorites" set. The favorites set may consist of only 200-300 photos that are of the best quality and provide a good representation of the day. The favorites gallery can/should be separate.</p>

<p>2,000 seems to be a bit excessive - but on the other hand - I have had enquiries recently asking how many photos I deliver for a 5 - 8 hour wedding -</p>

<p>My response was - anywhere from 100 - 700 keepers... some may be duplicates or edits of shots...but in general that's what they'd be getting.</p>

<p>The bride's response - well, I want a LOT of photos - and 500 doesn't seem like a lot...</p>

<p>It appears to be all in the eyes of the beholder.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

<p>We deliver in the range of 1,500 to over 4,000 depending on the wedding. We've never heard a complaint and only get good comments on how many photos they received. There are some important rules to follow.</p>

<p><strong>1.</strong> Don't over deliver on formal photos. These are the print photos and one good one of each pose/group is just fine. </p>

<p><strong>2.</strong> DO over deliver on reception candids. This is where things are unique at any given moment. I could take 10,000 unique photos at a good reception. If there are 3 good photos of each guest at a 300 guest wedding, that is already 900 photos and I don't think that is unreasonable. (note we do not try to get photos of every reception guest, but we are going to take as many as we can to get photos of as many guest as possible.)</p>

<p><strong>3.</strong> DO sort them into categories as mentioned above. We do so on our site and on the discs we deliver. We also use Toast for Mac which has a little built in program to help find which folders are on which folders.</p>

<p>One important note is that our business is not based on prints. We don't make money off prints, we make money off the work the day of the wedding and editing. Print sales don't matter as we deliver digital negatives to all wedding couples. We shoot the wedding to build a photo book with custom layouts that are designed from scratch by us. That is the keystone to what we deliver. How many images and how you deliver them is dependent on your business model.<br>

One final note, our cut rate is about 35%. We deliver about 65% of the photos we take. These moments are fleeting. They don't last forever, so we shoot a ton. A posed photo only takes one, but moments you don't control require taking more to ensure you capture it. You try to predict what is going to happen, but you don't always know.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"I've heard multiple people who have complained about wedding photographers that put 2,000 plus images on their website for the bride and brides mother to comb through to order photos" (Bob Crisp)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>* </p>

<blockquote>

<p>"2,000 seems to be a bit excessive - but on the other hand - I have had enquiries recently asking how many photos I deliver for a 5 - 8 hour wedding . . . I want a LOT of photos - and 500 doesn't seem like a lot..." (David Haas)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>One report is of after the event, with the Client having purchased the product; the other report is of before the event, with the client buying the product.</p>

<p>Perhaps, in both cases, the Client did know exactly what it was they were (or should be) buying?</p>

<p>Perhaps, rather than the answer being addressing all that after the event: the answer is to address all of that before the event, <em><strong>with the client? </strong></em>Easier said than done? Dunno, just suggesting.<br>

WW</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>"<strong>How many images and how you deliver them is dependent on your business model."</strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Understood and I agree 100%.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>I have many that complain how long it takes to view them all, but don't regret having them. </p>

<p>I agree with others, it sounds like something that should be ironed out with the photographer and client. I like they idea of having a separate gallery of photographers favorites.</p>

<p>Steve,<br>

Please tell us on average, how many printed photos are actually purchased from your weddings. Anyone else can chime in too with your statistics and let us know how many you present for viewing as well.</p>

<p><em>" I could take 10,000 unique photos at a good reception..."</em></p>

<p>A four hr. reception -- that is one photo every 1.5 secs. How do you manage that and shoot good photos of the bride & groom that require patience (poses, 1st dance, toasts...)?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>We deliver in the range of 1,500 to over 4,000 depending on the wedding.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Really? What do people do with so many photos? I would get bored looking through an album with more than fifty in it.</p>

<p>Our average purchased printed photos is 0 per wedding. Our model is not about selling prints. Every wedding package we offer includes an album. Which are flush-mount books. These are the key. These books don't really resemble individual photos, unless the page is a full image. They are custom designed. We shoot to build the album. The other photos are great, but digital is where things are. Not many people we work with are interested in printed photos in a album. They want digital and the flush-mount.</p>

<p>Ken, to elaborate my wife and I are a team and shoot every wedding together. So technically it would be 5,000 each and 1 every 3 seconds each or so. We shoot no posed photos during a reception. We are flys on the wall. No interaction. The moment we interact, we've changed the natural progression of the reception. Our brides and grooms are well aware of how we shoot and go with us because of it. Photographing the toasts and dances aren't just about the bride and groom. We cover that and look beyond. Emotion extends to the family tables, parents, grand parents, the friends, the bridesmaids and groomsmen. So all of those things must be captured. Everyone will be watching the dance and will remember what that looked like. Not everyone sees the tears of joy in mom and dad's eyes.</p>

<p>Steve, our flush-mount albums end up with 50-75 photos in them. But as I said don't really resemble individual photos. They are more magazine layout. Printed photos just aren't part of our business model. But the couples do get all those (1,500+) final images on disc. If Aunt Edna wants that photo of her cutting a rug ... then they should have it.</p>

<p>Just to clarify, when I said printed photos, I meant images which you've answered now.<br>

Curious as to whether you take full control of selecting the images for the album or do the bride and groom make their own selections, thanks.</p>

<p>I still get blown away when I hear of such large numbers of photos taken at a wedding. Many years ago I did part time weddings using film. I'd shoot three rolls of 36 exposure film most of the time. I'd always have a few rolls of 24 with me if there were others I could take. I offered 100 photos in an album, period. Some smaller weddings I had a hard time even finding subjects for the 100 shots. Most of the special shots were taken in multiples, but not more than 2 or 3.</p>

<p>Are these large numbers of photos taken "machine gun" style? Pose the bride and groom and blast away, taking mayber 25-50 shots all at once? Cutting the cake rat a tat tat? Or is each and everyone composed and taken? <br>

<br />Whatever works I guess!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I was thinking about having a beer with a Bloke. We might be in a bar when I visit SF. We will discuss the theoretical 10,000 images taken at the reception . . . specifically the culling of them:</p>

<p>Maybe just the first cut, to eliminate which ones are definitely “not keepers”.</p>

<p>Maybe each view takes 2 seconds - to view and decide – definitely decide.<br>

(If my mental arithmetic is OK) That’s over SIX hours work and we have only culled the Reception – I would be brain dead after that effort.<br>

I would much rather put more effort into thinking through when exactly, to release the shutter.</p>

<p>But in defence of the opposite view: I can understand culling from a <strong>total shoot</strong> of 4,000 or even 6,000 shots - from the entire day. I wouldn’t use that business model, but I do understand it.</p>

<p>Maybe “10,000 at the reception” was a little exaggeration to make a point.<br>

I dunno, I am just reading it that way.</p>

<p>WW<br>

</p>

<blockquote>

<p>So technically it would be 5,000 each and 1 every 3 seconds each or so.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>So you shoot family snapshots on their behalf? :o)<br>

Yes, I'm being mischievous but I guess you are giving the client what they want. Or are you? Aer you setting their expectations? Do they come in saying 'I want 4,000 pictures' or do you say 'we deliver all decent shots which number about 4,000' and they say 'that sounds like good value!'. Our wedding in 2001 was shot with digital and we got 40 pictures delivered. More than happy.<br>

I know there are some clients who want all the pictures and I wonder if they are confusing machine-gun shooting with quality. And how many are bloody-minded with the view that 'digital costs nothing and I will get everything I can for my money'.</p>

<p> Re Ted's two questions:</p>

<p>Over about 25 years we didn’t change much. We showed the B&G and Family a selection of Photographs, which we had edited from all that were shot. Over the span of 25 years, even though the numbers didn't change that much, we did change how we presented the Viewing, to the Clients.<br>

The Clients had full choice of the Albums’ content from any of those edited and presented to them. Though we (usually me) would offer assistance as to layout and guide them as to sizes / finishes and etc to make the album overall a package which they would enjoy – but if the Client wanted “that photo” on “that page”; “that size” in “that finish” – that is what they received. <br>

That selection the Clients viewed was between about 400 to 600 images. Typical Wedding, 160 Guests, 6 Hours, Brides House only before the Ceremony, Formals at a third location. Total number of images taken would be about 450 to 800. Though these numbers would vary but not necessarily proportional to the number of Guests or Hours on the job. Anyway, I never charged by time, to take Wedding Photographs.<br>

From about 2004, with digital, add about 20% to the total number taken (i.e. up to about 1000 images for a big Wedding) and the cut rate was a little more.<br>

The initial cut rate was always more if I used a second Photographer. That’s not because the second Photographer was inferior, but because, half the time, we shot the same shot or close to it from a different Vantage Point and I choose the better. The other half of the time we were shooting different things.<br>

I shot on contract for a few years for the new owner after I sold the Studio. I totally removed myself from the business several months ago. The studio still uses the same approach, generally, but now has a few more regular Photographers working for it – five I believe: and some of them shoot around 2,000 images per “typical” Wedding. The veiwing number is still about the same.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Wow. I don't even take 2000. I think 1000 is already heavy. And regardless, it should be edited down to 200 or less keepers. </p>

<p>Commodity shooting fits the trend of wedding photography as a commodity product.</p>

<p>I liked Jeff Ascough's response when a client questioned his delivery of "only" 200 images ... he throws down 200 photos on the floor like so many pick-up sticks ... question answered before the shoot.</p>

<p>My technique is to open a previous completed wedding folder of 250 to 400 images and scroll through them on a 30" screen ... <em>"Oh, that's more than enough, I wouldn't know what to do with all those." </em>... question answered before the shoot.</p>

<p>Commodity numbers are somewhat abstract until actually seen. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Wow, I'm exhausted from just reading this...</p>

<p>I do not think this is only with respect to wedding photography. When i was doing a free shoot for my mentor at my day job, for a dance for his daughter (Arangetram), i gave the full set for them to sort through. This was my first experience. I still havent heard back from them.<br>

So the next person i did this for, I simply provided them with a list of frames that I think are good and also actually put some of them into an album as an example and they ended up buying the album directly.<br>

I think folks who are giving the photos are those that do not want to do the real work of photography - making the print, but just digital age folks lloking for a click and forget choice.</p>