Combating the 400.00 weddings

<p>Have you noticed a downturn in business. More couples looking for ehs 500.00 weddings? Have you

changed your marketing to keep your bookings consistant? If so, what are you doing different?</p>

<p>coincidence?</p>

<p>http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1014&thread=34249847</p>

<p>I disagree. I find the more I raise my prices, the more brides book me. For $500 I would expect very little in terms of quality.</p>

<p>A guy at a camera store told me that he was partly to blame for the market downturn. He said we would not believe the number of $2,000 cameras he sells to uncle Bob so that he can shoot the wedding rather than hiring a fancy photographer.</p>

<p>So Missy, when do you shoot your first $20,000 wedding? :) JJ</p>

<p>there will always be those who are looking for $500 photographers, and there will always be those who are looking for higher end ones..</p>

<p>It's just a matter of which market you rather go with.</p>

<p>Take better photos than those who offer $400.00 weddings.</p>

<p>I'm very busy.</p>

<p>Maybe this old photography called "Classical" is something some like. </p>

<p>The lower end of the market is always very competitive. That is where all the price shoppers are. They are more interested in price versus the higher end that pays more attention to quality and style. Or so I've heard.</p>

<p>I just started my business and feel I have to start low on my prices in order just to get work. I'm certainly going to raise my prices in the future but for now I feel I have no choice. </p>

I usually ask the people what their price range is. If it's $500 fo something I usually tell them about craigslist.

<p>No, actually having one of my best years and may take on a few associates. $500 shooters and the brides who contract their high-megapixel snapshots aren't part of my reality. It's all a matter of taking the red pill, Neo.</p>

<p>Up until 2 months ago I was one of those $400 photographers. My rates have increased, but I'm still under $1k for 8 hours. What's great is...I'm still getting plenty of work, and I have to do less to make the same amount.</p>

<p>It took me a long time to decide that the finished product I give to clients is worth more than $500 for 6 hours.</p>

<p>Where I live, there is a lot of $500 and under wedding photographer. If you want to find them, just look them up Craiglist. It had some what hurt and de-value my work. Just recently, a bride wanted 6 hours of coverage and the high res. DVD. Her budget, $600.00. Did I mentioned it is an out of town wedding?<br>

I kindly declined the offer. She replied, "I am having a simple wedding." Her wedding maybe simple but she does not understand the post process, wear and tear on the equiptment and me.</p>

<p>It's well known that a $2,000 camera will take pictures that are four times as good as a $500 camera.<br>

 <br>

I wonder how much this has to do with the economy -- the trend sems to have started a long time back.<br>

 <br>

Surely the emergence of simple digital photography has encouraged Uncle Bob.  But there have always been Uncle Bobs, right? <br>

 <br>

The NYT had a piece several months back about how people have become comfortable with (my phrasing) low quality.  The cellphone/MP3 player/can opener/camera does a so-so job of everything, but it's "good enough."  It's sort of the opposite of the 1970s and the advent of the three-head quad sound reel-to-reel, or the expensive SLR.  Why should prospective brides be immune form this trend?<br>

 </p>

<p>The fact that (some, not all) established photographers are still doing okay, or even doing well, is incidental and antidotal information ... and perhaps not indicative of what is actually happening. Plus, it can vary widely depending on geographical location. Just because I am doing fine doesn't mean I think everyone is.</p>

<p>However, I do not think the $500. wedding is the issue here. There are always going to be clients in a low price situation ... perhaps a lot more now with the huge economic down-turn ... so the amount of shooters doing those is naturally going to increase to meet the demand. Perfect for the occasional shooter with that $1,500."Swiss Knife" digital kit that doesn't rely on this work to make a living.</p>

<p>Frankly, "good enough" has generally become more prevalent in our society as people adjust to the realities of the new economic world they live in. Just look around you for proof of this. Economic compromise is everywhere you look ... and weddings are not immune.</p>

<p>Where the issue may lie is in some the regular bread-and-butter wedding work ... where clients are cutting back on those mid-range packages that fill out a year for many wedding photographers ... or are a staple for middle price range shooters. So in turn, they try to move up to cover the short fall and put pressure on the upper-end price range.</p>

<p>It's very odd these days ... where a couple who clearly have a preference for my work but just can't make the stretch, and then compromises over $300. ... while another signs for my biggest package without blinking using very odd criteria (in this case because they like my work AND because I use a Leica, having heard that was the best camera? ... a first for me, but who am I to argue with him ... LOL!).</p>

<p>Very odd times indeed.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>It's interesting how people perceive value based on price. If someone charges more for something, then clearly that "must" be a better product, right? I once had a dean of a law school tell me that he was thinking about having the school raise tuition because there were students who thought the school must not have been very good because it was modestly priced. This sounded crazy to me. Law students should be skeptical thinkers--to assume something is better based on price is a logical fallacy (at least a decent part of the time). Drinking water is free compared to Cognac, but drinking more of the former and less of the latter will keep your liver much happier. <br>

As an interesting experiment, a new shooter might consider charging an insanely high price for his work and market it only to the rich. He could be the equivalent of a Louis Vuitton of photography, even though his work might actually be mediocre. People will just assume he's an artistic genius based on the price.<br>

I think the lesson for experienced photographers is that they actually lose by trying to compete with Uncle Bob and Johnny High School with a DSLR. Jack up your prices, work less, make more, and focus on selling the fact that you are an artiste!</p>

<p>As a musician, I do not compete with those who would service a wedding for $400 or $500. I set my prices based on the expertise of the musicians and their time included in the package. I tell people who were "hoping to pay less" that I am sure a high-school group would be willing to play for less and offer to give them the names of some local high school music teachers.</p>

<p>Also, something that musicians have that I'm unaware of in the photography world is the existence of a union. We can debate the pros/cons of unions, but I'd rather not. The point is that there's a larger body of people who act in unity to protect the interests of the individual. This is important in cases where a client might try to take advantage of a situation.</p>

<p>In any case, I'm not suggesting that you form a union - that's not really practical in every situation. But what I would do, and what I have done from time to time, is call my friends in town - the ones I really respect (not the uncle bobs and those types) - and we talk about the current situation. We discuss whether raising rates is practical in the economy, and even compare products and services. That way, no matter who gets a job, everyone is on somewhat equal footing.</p>

<p>My experience in this tells me that my colleagues appreciate being in on the know and that everyone gets an opportunity to win. There's enough business for everyone, you just have to know how to work it.</p>

<p>Also - as a side note, I do not shoot weddings at all. Not professionally, not as someone's friend with a camera. On the other hand, I have been a violinist since I was very young and a gigging musician for more than half of my life.</p>

<p>Hello - Interestingly enough, I was writing an article looking at it from the 'amateur' point of view. This is what I perceive as the differences and would share with anyone considering the same. Perhaps it will be useful to you. Cheers!</p>

 

<p align="center"><strong>Overview</strong></p>

<p >So you saw an associate’s photographs on Facebook or another photo sharing web site and you are thinking about asking them to shoot your next event or even your wedding? Or perhaps a well intentioned amateur photographer friend has told you that they can shoot your next event for you at what appears to be a ‘big savings’.</p>

<p >Well, before you both agree to do something that may not turn out the way you anticipate, let’s examine the differences between an amateur photographer and a professional. Are there real differences between the equipment and approach? And what do you get for the price these professionals are asking? What are your risks if you go the amateur route?</p>

<p >While I’m sure that the amateur photographer is honored that you liked their images well enough to ask them for their help, and they certainly appreciate the opportunity to gain more experience, make sure you understand why professionals are typically worth every penny they charge and more. I believe you will realize, like with anything, there is no such thing as free lunch; you get exactly what you pay for. </p>

<p >So if it is a choice between an amateur photographer friend and Uncle Joe who owns a ‘point and shoot’ because you simply have no budget at all for your next event, then yes, perhaps going the amateur route makes sense for you.</p>

<p >But if you want images like you’ve seen on the web and want to enjoy your next event without concern for risk and interruption due to the photographer fumbling around, I suggest you find a professional and tell them your budget. They can make it work for you; I am sure of that.</p>

<p >I’ll outline for you below just a few of the major difference between an amateur and a professional photographer. The three major categories that come to mind are Equipment (camera sensor, strobe lighting and modifiers, and lenses), Assistants, and Post Production.</p>

<p >I’ll also help you understand the investment these professionals make in both equipment and time to deliver their results so that you can see why they are worth what they are suggesting you pay and what the typical amateur has invested in by comparison. If nothing else, you can then ask both the amateur and professional questions to help you determine the qualifications and experience of both to determine what is right for you.</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p align="center"><strong>Equipment</strong></p>

<p >Reliable, high resolution images - Professional ‘Full Frame’ cameras vs Amateur ‘aps-c’ frame sized camera sensors</p>

<p >$600 vs $5,000+ (@$2,500 each)</p>

<p >Full time, professional event and wedding photographers typically have invested ‘full frame’ image sensor camera setups and keep reinvesting in their equipment so that they have the most up to date, functional equipment possible to assure a successful outcome for you. They also typically have multiple compatible full frame cameras so that they have backup for these crucial events. Though the megapixel rating can appear to be similar between the two types of cameras, the detail / resolution is very different in the final images since the sensor size is physically larger in the full frame cameras and able to capture more detail for greater resolution. This is especially true in later, post production, cropped images where small areas of image are magnified even greater.</p>

<p >Camera bodies with APS-C or cropped sensors owned by the typically amateur have a resolution that is sufficient for most images viewed via web or even printed to 8x10 size. However, if there is a need to highly crop / magnify an image, or print an image beyond 8x10, the resolution will be far less clear. The differences between these two sensors also increases dramatically in low light conditions in favor of full framed sensors. And should the amateur photographer’s camera fail at the event, typically they lack a backup camera to allow for the same lens selection and quality.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Low light – ISO Settings</p>

<p >The ISO ratings on these same professional cameras bodies is typically higher (can be as high as 25,000 though realistically up to 6400 may be usable). This typically means they can capture images in lower light with no or little image ‘noise’. This high ISO rating is especially helpful when you don’t want to or can’t use strobe flash to augment the ambient lighting conditions because of the particular situation or environmental limitations.</p>

<p >In contrast, the ISO ratings of amateur grade APS-C cameras may go as high as 1600 or 3200, and can be ‘noisy’ at times. This means photographers using these cameras will have to either use flash more frequently or will need to compromise on the quality of light or image in low light situations or forego the image altogether. <br>

<br /> </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Strobe lighting – TTL functionality and remote triggers</p>

<p >($300 vs $900+)</p>

<p >Full time event and wedding photographers have invested in higher quality strobe lighting that works in support of their cameras. They have highly dependable remote triggers that work in concert with these strobes and can span long distances (300’+) and support TTL camera functionality. This means they can place strobes ‘off camera’ for the best lighting effect, while the flash and the camera electronics communicate to measure the amount of light reflecting back to the camera sensor to adjust the camera settings automatically. And with these same remote triggers, the strobe flashes can be located in advance strategically and fired remotely with the same TTL support. </p>

<p >Most amateurs will use either built in camera flash or have limited off camera flash capabilities. The on camera flash units produce stark, unflattering ‘mug shot’ lighting effects that are common to these limited lighting configurations because the flash is direct and head-on to the subjects with limited range and coverage, so are of limited use at best. If these same amateur photographers do have flash strobes that can be fired remotely, they still may not support TTL functionality and the camera and / or flash will have to be adjusted manually, which causes critical missed shots in these fast moving event environments or many annoying flash photos will need to be taken in order to ‘get it right’ in more static environments. Their remote triggers typically are lower grade (100’ range or less) and can misfire more frequently. </p>

<p >Light modifiers –</p>

<p >($150 vs $400+)</p>

<p >Professionals invest in light modifiers and equipment to further enhance the lighting quality and control the light in a given environment. They will have all the necessary light stands, grips and umbrellas to support flash photography for portrait/group shots. They also typically have soft boxes and light rings that allow quality light conditions in the most demanding indoor and outdoor environments.</p>

<p >Amateurs may have limited light modifying equipment in form of light stands, but typically require a much more controlled environment, that cannot stand up to much wind (due to umbrellas) and require designated areas they can setup in advance and control in order to get acceptable lighting and background.</p>

 

<p > </p>

<p >Lenses – aperture settings</p>

<p >($1,750 vs $7,000+)</p>

<p >Professionals spend thousands and thousands of dollars on high quality lenses. They invest not only in varying focal lengths, but also in the ‘speed’ of the lenses to accommodate low, natural light shooting when possible. They also have ‘backup’ lenses in case of failure of these electronic devices.</p>

<p >At a minimum, the pro will require at least four lenses and their associated capabilities to cover a typical event. By way of an example, this may consist of a 10-22 wide angle zoom, an 18-60 medium zoom and a 70-200 long range zoom as well as least one ‘normal’ 50mm prime with macro capabilities. They will also possess many ‘prime’ lenses for their low light quality and high resolution and backup. All of these lenses will also be ‘fast’ sporting ‘f stops’ from 1.4 to 2.8.</p>

<p >This allows full coverage of each situation encountered such as long distances, (from back of church, indoor, outdoor guest shooting) wide angle, (interior of churches / buildings, and large groups) and mid range, (portraits of the people) as well as extreme close-up ‘details’ of rings, hands, and other small items requiring a ‘macro’ mode lens.</p>

<p >Amateurs may lack a sufficient range of focal lengths to support the various situations at weddings and other events that range from up close, detail work to longer range telescopic photos. They will lack backup of these highly electronic devices that can fail unexpectedly and most of their lenses will have limited capabilities in low light with f stops more in the f4 and higher category. This means fewer quality shots in low light and fewer shots over all since lighting conditions and motion of subjects will restrict the feasible range of these lenses and their resulting images.</p>

<p > </p>

<p ><strong>Assistants – attending to the details</strong> </p>

<p ><em>Priceless!</em> (As the commercial goes)</p>

<p >Professionals almost always have experienced <em>assistants</em> for important events providing them and you with, you guessed it, <em>assistance</em> ! They will help with equipment and help direct you and your guests, the subjects, and arrange the environment to make it easier on everyone and allow the photographer to focus on the shot and getting the job done more quickly and easily for you.</p>

<p >Amateurs typically will try and do it all themselves and this can result in shots lacking careful arrangement, confusion for the subject participants in terms of following photographer directions and typically requiring significantly more time in order to capture the image adding frustration on an already stressful day.<br>

<br /> </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p ><strong>Post Production – Time and experience involved</strong> </p>

<p >$300 vs. $1,700 + post production time @ 40 hours +</p>

<p >To begin with, the professional typically owns the necessary image software, computer, hard drives, monitors and color matching equipment and has a relationship with an existing lab to develop and deliver electronic and printed photos and final albums. They also have the necessary training and experience to not only arrive at an accurately rendered image, but also to add artistic flair to transform something from simply an image to a cherish photograph. </p>

<p >Your ultimate satisfaction with the final photographs is typically related directly to the quality of the post production work. Beyond the equipment and the photographers ‘eye’ is the creativity and quality of the post production work performed on your behalf. This post production work is a function of both time and talent.</p>

<p >The time required to capture 1,000 to 3,000 raw images at a special event spanning 3-12 hours pales in comparison to the time required to manage, review, select, edit and produce 10-20% of these images. Typically, this function can easily be budgeted at a 3 to 1 ratio for an experienced professional. This means that the professional, or their post production assistant(s), can easily spend 36 hours or more in post production to simply arrive at a final, accurately rendered photo. (i.e. white balance, cropping, sharpening, selective blur, touch up, color adjustment etc). After that, they will apply their creative talents and more time to achieve a particular ‘look’ that is so often desired by customers today.</p>

<p >The amateur, by contrast, may have a computer and a copy of Photoshop, but may not be experienced with the more advanced features of the software or have the time or inclination to add the important artistic qualities to the image. They may not be able to devote the time to the project after the shooting is over, or if they do, it may take several months for them to devote sufficient time to getting you your images. And this still may leave you with the responsibility to find a printer and buy the necessary prints without any guarantees of quality in the process. </p>

<p >In the end, you may receive a selection of accurately rendered images, but you are not likely to receive an artistic renditions of the event that compare to what you have seen on your favorite websites. Those beautiful web images on that professional photographers site caught your attention for a reason: the professional that made them, knows how to do it well ; they are different and compelling.<br>

<br /> </p>

<p > </p>

<p ><strong>Summary: </strong> <br /> The introduction of highly capable amateur equipment has led to some confusion about the similarities and differences between the amateur photographer and the professional photographer in terms of quality and cost.</p>

<p >At first, it may appear that the investment in a professional photographer and their services is unreasonable while viewing the photographs on the website of other amateur photographer associates.</p>

<p >However, when you examine the quality, risk, time investment and your satisfaction in what is ultimately the artistic expression of photography, you will see that the increased equipment quality and experience of a professional photographer is really more cost effectively than ever. A skilled professional photographer can now deliver unique and precious photographs of your next event in ways not previously possible.</p>

<p ><strong>Amateur Investment: </strong> </p>

<p >Camera body $ 600 <br /> Lighting and modifiers $ 450 <br /> Lenses $ 1,75 0 <br /> Post Production Equipment $ 300 <br /> Assistant $ NA <br /> Post Product Work/Art $ NA <br /> Printed Images / Albums $ NA </p>

<p ><strong>Professional Investment: </strong></p>

<p >Camera body $ 5,000+<br /> Lighting and modifiers $ 1,300+<br /> Lenses $ 7,000+<br /> Post Production Equipment $ 1,700<br /> Assistant $ 120 (12 hours @ $10/hour+ travel)<br /> Post Product Work/Art $ 800 + (40 hours @ $20/hour)<br /> Printed Images / Albums $ Based on your options</p>

<p>"Have you noticed a downturn in business. More couples looking for ehs 500.00 weddings?"</p>

<p>I have noticed a downturn in business since 2008, but I don't think it has much to do with cheap wedding photographers. More folks are considering inexpensive, DIY weddings, but what this means is they don't hire a photographer at all. Everyone has a camera and will be snapping away, and there is always at least one photo enthusiast friend around with fancy DSLR. Why pay $500 for mediocre pics when you can get it for free?</p>

<p>This year I've had a lot more last minute calls from brides in the few weeks before the wedding. They all said something along the lines of "We were just going to have a friend do it, but then I visited your website..." In the last quarter I picked up 6 weddings.</p>

<p>I've had several odd calls from concerned Moms. They say their kids don't want to hire a photographer, but they are trying to talk them into it. The parents will pay for me and everything, but the bride and/or groom insists on no pro photographer.</p>

<p>I don't worry about trying to educate folks on why they need a pro. If they can't spot the difference in my portfolio with their eyeballs no amount of yakking is likely to change their minds.</p>

<p> </p>

<p><em>So Missy, when do you shoot your first $20,000 wedding? :) JJ</em><br>

lol I wish!<br>

<strong><em>Professional Investment: </em></strong><br>

<em>Camera body $ 5,000+</em><br>

I disagree!! Jessica Claire shoots with a 5d. You can get a used one for $1100. Jasmine Star shoots with a MK2, those are $2200.</p>

<p>oops..i see that I lost my parenthesis after the $5,000. It originally read: Camera body $ 5,000+ (2@$2500 each). Certainly prices come down, but at issue is that compared with a $600 investment for the amateur, the pro invests more heavily and continuously in order to assure the quality and reliability of the images for the client. </p>

<p>You can you compete on price, as many have noted. If many couples are happy with $500 wedding shoots... or if $500 shooters can deliver enough to satisfy many couples... that is just the way that it is. The higher end pros will need to compete harder for the rest of the couples. It is certainly happening in wedding cakes and flowers. The good people will do OK, the low end will do OK, the average and less able pros may have a harder time and be squeezed by the $500 shooters.</p>

<p>I will disagree about APS-C cameras vs. full frame. Full frame is great, but there are many things APS-C can do just as well.</p>

<p>I know of some excellent professional wedding photographers who use APS-C cameras on a regular basis (for one of those photographers it is their only format) because they simply don't need the narrow DoF for everything. A shot can be well executed with an APS-C camera and come out equally as good as a full frame camera could deliver for the same shot - provided the shot does not rely on the visual effects that a full frame camera provides. </p>

<p>Also, APS-C gives extra reach you can't get from a full frame sensor without a much larger lens. For instance, the 70-200 f/2.8 IS gives you 320mm at f/2.8 with IS, so you don't have any reason to carry around a 300mm lens. Although it's not a necessity for most cases, it could be useful for a ceremony with mobility restrictions. The 7D is a very capable APS-C camera that captures as much or more detail than the original 5D classic (which to this day outresolves the Nikon D700 and D3 at low ISOs), and with a comparable or better noise level at similar ISO settings. Even if it isn't the pinnacle of current high ISO noise compared to the 5D II, D700 or D3/s, it's still much better than anything preceding it and is sufficient 99% of the time. Wedding photographers had to cope with far less in the past.</p>

<p>I also question the accuracy of TTL-supported remote triggering with distances of 300' or greater. Although, as of 2009, radiopoppers and pocketwizard's ControlTL do offer this, the majority of professional photographers I've seen still use radio triggers that don't provide TTL support, such as the original pocketwizards thru plus II, elinchrom skyports, or alienbees cybersyncs; these all have ranges from 150' to 1500' and are quite reliable (pocketwizards being the least reliable, by reports from pro photogs). And the photographers still do a great job with them. You must be referring to the very inexpensive Cactus V2 triggers and related varieties that are sold on ebay, in which case I agree that they are unreliable and poor quality.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I agree Joey. Slapping an f1.2 lens on an APS-C body will still provide a very narrow DOF. Not a huge difference between that and FF. The opposite is true against FF....with my 7D, I never have soft edges and corners that some of my FF fellow photographers get. I hate mushy edges and corners....and I never get them on APS-C.</p>

<p>And yes, used 5d bodies are going for about $1000.</p>

<p>Oh, and to the OP....the easiest way to combat the $400 photographers is to charge $1500 and up. </p>

<p>Great post by Mr. Harris. As an amateur landscape photographer, I am sometimes asked to do this sort of thing and turn it down since I not only lack the equipment and the talent and the experience, but the inclination as well. I have a lot of respect for people who take on this sort of high pressure work. And I suspect in addition to the above, there is also the skill you have all developed in applied psychology, getting the trust of the people in the wedding, finding the right shots, blending into background to let the events happen and so on. Even when the amateur had been taking pictures for years, none of my experience taking landscapes prepares me for <strong>this</strong> sort of thing any more than being an amateur painter would prepare you for sculpting.</p>

<p>And as you say, people with NO experience in any kind of photography usually are quick to underestimate the time involved sitting on the computer trying to post process (and my post processing is nowhere near as complex as a wedding would be). I'd say you get what you pay for.</p>

<p>It's not just that the f/1.2 lens will still provide narrow DoF on an APS-C body, but in fact some photos don't require a narrower DoF in order to be technically excellent. In my opinion, that's more challenging than having a narrow DoF because you have to make all the elements harmonious instead of being able to blur them away.</p>

<p>I agree about soft corners, they are much more common with full frame sensors - however most shots don't need the corners to be sharp because the point of interest is not usually in the corner.</p>