How many photos to give the bride and groom?

<p>I just recently completed my first 2 weddings, and now begins the process of editing the photos. I took approx 1,200 pictures at each wedding, and i told both sets of bride/grooms that i didn't know how many i would end up giving them, as i'm new to weddings. I want to give them a fair amount of edited photos so they feel like they got their moneys worth, however i think too many will just be overwhelming.<br>

How many do most photographers give? I was thinking i would aim for 300 edited photos, period. That includes all the formals and misc reception pictures of people dancing etc. I will be giving them a disc of their photos and maybe enlarge & frame my favorite as a gift.<br>

Any feedback would be great! Thanks! :)</p>

<p>you give the amount that's needed to tell the story... some do it in 50, others 500... only you can decide how many pics do you need. to give out X amount just because the rest are doing it too... well.. that's just kinda dumb.</p>

<p>I average between about 75 and 150 to tell the story. That said, I average about 10 rolls of film, so that 360 photos and about another 200 on the digital side.....so about 550 total photographs on average. I used to do 750-1250 and found the workflow slow and painful. So I clcik the shutter less, and only when it's an image that maters.</p>

<p>We usually average 50% of what we shoot, which is rarely over 400 to 500 selects for a full day from two shooters (I'd like to get that closer to 300). Less for a shorter span of time. However, it really depends on what happens at any given wedding. Some have all kinds of stuff going on, others are more laid back.</p>

<p>Of that, I select 90 to 100 for a slide show, and out of those, maybe 40 to 90 for the album depending on which album type and size was selected ... if at all. </p>

What Mark T said (except "...well.. that's just kinda dumb.) :-)

<p>And definitely what Marc W said. I average about 500 images max (I typically shoot alone) and usually cull them to between 250-300.

<p>Only pass the ones worth passing...either becuase they tell the story, capture a moment or are just too damned good not to pass.<br>

If you have trouble culling, get a fresh set of eyes (I kindap my wife for a couple of hours after my initial cull) to be ruthless.<br>

Lightroom is (and other similar programs) is quite good for quickly rating photos (go with your gut, fi you have to think about a photo, at best it's a maybe). Anything that passes my initial review then gets Red (ditch) Yellow (maybe or needing cropping/edit) and Green (Pass).<br>

My proofs usually run to about 50% of pictures taken, per the other folk above., many are duplicates to avoid eye blinks etc. so a best of is picked, but others are ones that are just bleh! or shots taken during a silly moment that don't quite work.</p>

 

<p>Hi Brooke<br>

I provide my clients with a minimum of 150 images for about 8hrs works and I rarely go over the 200 mark.<br>

For me it’s not about quantity but providing my clients with a set of photographs that concisely tells a story of the day. Go through your images and take out all the bad shots, pick out the best of the repeats and keep it tight.<br>

There seems to be a lot of pressure on photographers to provide hundreds if not thousands of images for their clients but who in their right mind wants to sit through that many images? The most important thing is getting the story of the day in a number of good quality images. <br>

Good luck with it all – it’s a long and hard journey but extremely rewarding when you get it right.<br>

Kate</p>

 

<p>Thanks everyone! Your advice has DEFINITELY helped. I was going to aim for quality vs quantity because if i were the bride, i could just imagine how confused i would be after looking at 200+ photos. Eventually it would take away from how special a lot of them really are.<br>

Thanks Kate - I worked for 8hrs both weddings so your answer really helps. I just wanted to make sure i'm in the right ballpark :)</p>

<p>Hmm, I recall one of these threads not that long ago and many of the answers were in the thousands, lol :-)))</p>

<p>I'll be perfectly honest, this shouldn't be a question after shooting the weddings but before and I can't imagine anyone offering to shoot a wedding for hire that needs to go to an international online forum to ask "what should I do".</p>

<p>For myself I rarely cull more than 10-15% of the images that I take and that number has been pretty consistent with all the established professional studios that I've done weddings for over the past 17 years. If you're planning on providing 200 out of over 1000 images then you might want to tell the B/G that they'll see less than 2 pics out of each 10 that you take. During the wedding, spend a little while with them shooting about 50 images and explain that they won't even see 40 of them, but they can trust you to pick out the best. While shooting style can influence how many images are taken, seems to me that if you're trashing 50-80% of the images that you take, then you could be much more selective with what you take.</p>

<p>On average, the couple is able to view 500-800 in their online gallery. While some may feel this number is on the larger side, I am confident that the results I am seeking will always be positive. In other words, I often see photographers only focus on the bride and groom. While they should be the center of attention, it is also the family, guests, details, ect. that truly make the day as memorable as it is.</p>

<p>IMO, Ker is closer to the industry standard...............</p>

<p>Ouch, what a harsh response, David. Where else are beginners supposed to go for help? This international online forum is the treasure for those of us who can't, for whatever reason, go for prolonged training, or who have good photo skills but are trying to use them, in this economy, to pay our bills. Your answers are always rock solid (you're a moderator of this forum, aren't you?) and your help is invaluable. I, for one, don't know anywhere in my local area that I can go for such good advice as yours. I've asked some 'dumb' questions here, but I'll think twice now.</p>

<p>Stephanie, the response was not meant to be harsh.....just bluntly honest. I'm glad you think that my posts are helpful, but no, I'm not a moderator and honestly hold too many strong opinions to ever hope to be a moderator.</p>

<p>I have no issues with hobbyists that are looking for beginner information because they've been asked to shoot a friends wedding, often because their budget is too lean to allow for much in the way of wedding photography coverage. I also don't mind beginners asking questions about getting started in the business. However, people that hold themselves out as professionals (especially those that advertise their services for a "reasonable" fee), that have a website, a price list, business cards, etc.... should not be asking newbie questions that reflect that they are ill-prepared to be shooting weddings professionally to begin with. I get even more irked when they embellish their experience and pad their resumes in an attempt to lure clients. Once lured, the clients become fodder for the newcomer to learn/gain experience at their expense. You'll find more thoughts here: <a href="../wedding-photography-forum/00X53j">http://www.photo.net/wedding-photography-forum/00X53j</a></p>

<p>I've always encouraged new shooters to get some professional training, find a mentor, and whenever possible to secure an apprenticeship of some sort. Also joining a network of other pros and membership in pro organizations such as WPPI and/or PPA. Assisting and/or 2nd shooting for a season or two would completely eliminate the need to ask any of the common "dumb" questions.</p>

<p><em>If you're planning on providing 200 out of over 1000 images then you might want to tell the B/G that they'll see less than 2 pics out of each 10 that you take. </em></p>

<p>Why? It is not like a cook lets the customer taste the raw materials while the meal is being prepared. I wouldn't expect the customer to be allowed to meddle with or adjust the recipe either, or see what the pudding looks like before it goes to the oven. If the customer is expected to be able to improve the cooking then the cook should never have been let into the kitchen in a professional capacity in the first place.</p>

<p>At least the way I see it, the pictures made with the camera are nothing but the raw material and the final product is the selection of pictures that tell the story. There are many nonessential pictures which might take the story off balance. These must be left out. Not because they're necessarly bad pictures but because too much is too much and if there is repetition in the final book/album, it will not be viewed many times. Also, if you use techniques like shallow depth of field, or try to do any experimental shots which have a low probability of success but very high potential gain, only the successes are shown (obviously).</p>

<p>By making the customer eat an unhealthy, oversized meal, the cook has done them a disservice. It is better to make it just the right size, so that it is enjoyable to eat and leaves a desire for a bit more.</p>

<p>I've seen wedding albums that are thicker than any book in the couple's shelf and which contain images after images which are so similar that I can't for the life of me see why they included so many of them. Probably what happened is that the couple were shown all the images and they (since they are not photographers or experts in photography) couldn't choose which ones were the best. The result was that they chose 10 cm thick album full of pictures that differ from each other by subtle traces of expression, and are not truly interesting, different images at all. This is absurd and it's a pain to look through no matter how beautiful the bride looked. This cannot be. It's the equivalent of "eat all you can" restaurants (or "restaurants"). Each individual picture that is shown should be substantially different from each other, each illustrating something different, an essential part of the story, and so that no two images are similar to each other visually or in content (swapping people with different ones is not enough of a change IMO; other things must change also, such as the activity, visual layout, backgrounds, and in particular, the emotions). The images should each stand alone and yet be an essential part of the whole so that if you remove any image in the final product, it will break the whole story. If you <em>can</em> remove an image without breaking the rest of the story then it <em>should</em> be removed.</p>

<p>Anyway, that's what I'd like to do in wedding photography. Long way to go, yes, but at least I have a goal.</p>

<p>I've several times run into this situation that I've produced a smaller set of prints of selected images which I think are essential and then a DVD with a much larger set of images (i.e. some crazy number, 600 or so). Each time they loved the small (i.e. 100) set and were overwhelmed by the amount of work in just going through the larger set. I think it is much better to spare the couple this effort and produce the images that really count, and just those. Leaves a much better taste in the mouth when the stomach is not filled to double the capacity.</p>

There's no such thing as an industry standard. I've heard of people delivering less than 50 images, and others more than

5,000.

 

But if there were such a thing, I'd suggest a standard of 500-800 is probably a bar set too low. For all the reasons that

Ilkka explains, I also aspire to smaller, richer sets. I'd love to cover a wedding in less than 200 images but it's a tough

goal, and one that requires substantial practice. But that's where I'd like to be, and I keep it as a target. I definitely view

quantity as a poor substitute for quality, and my view on robust editing is that it's a value added service, and very much

part of what the photographer should be providing.

 

Of course, not everyone agrees, nor should they. It comes down to how each person sees the process and what they

think they've been hired for. The difference in interpretation allows for differentiation and market opportunity..

<p>Neil, While you may not believe that there is any such thing as an industry standard...... I challenge you to go to any half dozen established professional studios here in the Midwest and look at the typical quantity of images produced for the typical wedding and I'm willing to bet they will be more similar than they are different. However the major caveat is that it must be an established studio which eliminates all the weekend warriors, occasional craiglist shooters and the new crop of churn & burn shooters. While there is always variation, you can still find approximately 68% of the industry plus or minus one standard deviation following established norms. While you may wish to focus on individual perceptions and wishes, focusing attention on the 32% of the variation at either end doesn't negate the norms. I also haven't claimed that varying from the norms is wrong, individual differences and variation is one of the things that can set one studio apart from the others. The presence of norms also does not dictate any need to "follow the pack". Attendance at most any PPA or WPPI trade-show would likely support my position. Granted, I'm also being an ego-centric American but that's also where I live.</p>

<p>It does not have to be a choice between quantity or quality if one can produce both.....then it's simply a question of balance.</p>

David, I certainly concur with your closing point. Balance is almost always a good thing, and I hope would flow naturally

from professional judgment.

 

Norms interest me less, though. For the simple reason that a norm is a point of mediocrity, not a point of speciality. The

photography market is heavily striated and any external reference point really needs to be considered in context. What's

normal in portraiture is different from what's normal in documentary; and what works in location A may be undesirable in location B. And if there were several similar studios in a given area I'd conclude none were worth much consideration, as each would have failed to realise any competitive positioning over the other.

 

I offer this as a question, though.

 

In any wedding, is it possible to produce more than 200 truly unique, interesting pictures?

As the numbers go higher don't we start to see increasing evidence of repetition, duplication, loss of visual rhythm, or just

plain dull pictures?

 

I believe the the only thing anyone can aspire to is to represent the day they saw and produce interesting work. The two constraints are in tension, hence the need for balance. I can only assume that the people shooting large

numbers are more focused on the first goal than the second.

<p>Neil, I can typically cull 500-800 images down to around 150 images that can tell the story of the couple's day quite well and those images will go on a slideshow that I'll present the B/G. A typical wedding album will contain somewhere near 50-75 images that will also tell the story. They'll have the option of eliminating some images and/or adding some for both the slideshow and the album. The rest of the images are going to be made up of other moments of the day, plenty of fun candids off the dance floor, occasional pics of cute kids, detail shots, etc... I also try to get a good image of each guest as a couple, typically on the dance floor, (average size wedding is about 175 guests plus the bridal party which means around 75 couple shots alone). I generally avoid table shots but will do them if the B/G request them. If I take a backdrop, then in addition to the the B/G portraits together and separately, I'll do individual portraits of bridal party members, grandparents, kids, family groups, 3 generations, etc.... The B/G may not be interested in a nice portrait of their parents next door neighbor or best friend but the couple may appreciate it and purchase a print. I've taken portraits of officiants and given them away as gifts (marketing) along with a some action shots of the DJ or a nice portrait that I'll offer gratis (marketing and networking).</p>

<p>In the end, all the images are available online in chronological order. I've never had a bride complain that there were too many. I offer packages where the B/G can select 50, 100, or 200 pictures and have heard that it was difficult for them to narrow down and limit their choices.....but it's OK with me if they decide to buy more ale carte, or up-sell to a larger package. If they'd like they can purchase all the images. I've had a few couples that purchased the digital files along with the printing rights and have given reprints to family and friends as gifts.</p>

<p>Photographers that shoot for large studios will shoot primarily to satisfy their studio, many pros will follow a formula that offers to maximize their profits (and profit isn't necessarily a bad word or inconsistent with some artistic sensibilities). Some "artists" can certainly shoot to satisfy their sense of art. Ultimately I believe that variation within the industry is healthy but will pay homage to established and evolving norms. Just as it's OK to break the "rules" of composition and style, it's first important to be aware of the rules.</p>

David, thanks - I appreciate the description of how you work and it makes it easier to understand numbers.

 

It's reasonably clear that how people work, what they shoot and who they're working for will influence the size of their

deliverable. Your attention to print sales also has a bearing, as it becomes implicit that you have to add to the set to

increase its value. From your description it seems you would consider everyone a potential client for you images, and your

final compilation has to reflect that.

 

By contrast a documentary shooter will do very few of the things you've listed. Print sales are seldom a consideration and

there is usually only one prevailing client. All the effort goes into the album, and a strong album requires a reduced image

set in order to increase its value.

 

Hence the danger of norms. If two styles of photography have different processes and different goals, there's no reason

why they should produce the same outcomes. Any perceived "industry standard" needs to be considered in context, and

ignored if it's unsuitable.

<p><em>Your attention to print sales also has a bearing, as it becomes <strong>implicit that you have to add to the set to increase its value.</strong> From your description it seems you would consider everyone a potential client for you images, and your final compilation has to reflect that.</em><br /><em> </em><br />Here's another either/or comment...... No, I do not <strong>have </strong>to add print sales to increase the value of the documentary coverage. There is value and profitability in doing both, which likely helps to explain why the business model is the most common here in the States.</p>

<p>Yes, I do consider everyone attending the wedding as a potential client and as a future referral source and treat them accordingly..............</p>

<p>Stephanie:</p>

<p>It is true that you need to have a tough hide in internet forums. Everybody has at least one opinion. If we polled 100 photographers on the "right line of thinking", we'd get 101 opinions or more. :)</p>

<p>I agree with Dave that it is unprofessional to come to a board *after the fact* to figure out how many images to give to clients. That's an expectation that should be discussed before the first click of the shutter.</p>

<p>I disagree that the cull rate is an indication of anything other than an artifact of shooting style. In the days of film, every extra exposure was lost money and opportunity. In the days of digital, not so much. (That assumes an efficient workflow at discarding near duplicates. The more exposures, the longer editing will take.)</p>

<p>I probably cull 80% of my shots. Of those, a handful may be due to various mistakes on my part. I wouldn't want them to see the light of day. :) The rest? They're what I call near duplicates. I rarely fire a single shot. I usually fire a burst of 3-5 shots. Why? Experience tells me that I might catch somebody with an unflattering expression. I'd rather take a couple seconds to pick the best out of 5 than to discard that shot just because I caught somebody in mid blink.</p>

<p>I explain this to my clients and tell them that part of my job is to pick the best of the "near duplicates." I present them with the best and discard the rest. The only time somebody has ever wanted to see more shots wasn't because she really wanted to see more. It was because she wasn't comfortable with how she looked. Once her friends and family started raving about how beautiful she was, the issue of other shots was quickly forgotten.</p>

<p>Eric</p>

<p>David:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Neil, I can typically cull 500-800 images down to around 150 images that can tell the story of the couple's day quite well</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's slightly more than the 10-15% cull rate you quoted earlier. :)</p>

<p>Eric</p>

<p>Apples and oranges Eric.....the B/G and the online gallery still gets the 500-800 images that I've culled from the total exposures of 550 to about 900 that I had taken. Of the 500-800 final, post-processed and edited images I'll select about 150 for a slideshow DVD with background music which represents just the highlights of the day. Typically less than about half of those images will go into the wedding album......and the B/G always get a voice in adding or subtracting the slideshow and/or album images.</p>

<p>We all have to start with our first wedding, there's just no getting around that. YES i have been a second shooter and i have been shooting other subjects like kids and families for over a year. So it's not like i picked up my camera yesterday and decided to go shoot a couple weddings. Once your name gets spread, people start to ask. So i said yes, for a fair price and with the understanding that i'm new to weddings. How will i know if i love shooting weddings until i try? I don't live in a major city with hundreds of photographers to learn from. I don't have any close friends who also do photography. I don't want to send emails to random photographers whose blogs i follow and bother them with random questions. I thought that's what this forum is for, to ask questions and learn from very valuable photographers.<br>

I'm not sure why when a question is asked, people just jump down the throat of those who ask. I had a general idea of how many photos i would be giving the couple but as i'm editing along, i wanted to make sure i'm on the same page as other photographers out there. Why do i need to know this information to a T before i shoot a wedding? It didn't hinder my ability to take pictures of their day. </p>