Working for Bella Pictures??

Hello,

any of you out there has ever shot for Bella Pictures?

I feel like I lived on the moon....I never heard of this name before, then I checked their website and apparently they are huge and all over

USA!

How big are they?

What are they ....a SUPERMARKET for wedding?

Is this good news or bad for our business?? Sounds bad to me!

 

R.

I don't know what it's like to live on the moon but Bella's been a forum sponsor for quite awhile now and their name has been mentioned frequently...might try a search: http://www.photo.net/search/?cx=000753226439295166877%3A0gyn0h9z85o&cof=FORID%3A11&ie=UTF-8&q=bella+pictures&qx=bella+pictures&section=all&sa.x=13&sa.y=8#1129

A friend applied about 2 years ago to work for them. They finally called him and he's happy. Bella sends you the flash cards for the wedding and you simply send them back after the wedding. He's also happy with the payment program. He's making about $500 to $600 per gig.

I worked for them very briefly-they sort of politely let me go after I had to cancel out of a second wedding due to a scheduling conflict-I had a last minute job come up with my main commercial client (I would have to work a lot of Bella weddings to make up for losing this client).

 

It sounded like a good idea to fill in some empty dates, but for $325 a day until you get 'certified', and then maybe only $500 after that, plus the travel (my weddings were all upwards of 50 miles away), I would rather be spending my unbooked days working to get more bookings on my own. I was also a bit put-off by the very specific camera settings they tell their photogs to use-medium quality, high res jpeg, what to set the sharpening at, and a list of approved and not approved cameras. They also recommend a machine-gun methodology of shooting-they want at least 1000 images a wedding if I recall correctly. So, envision the micro-managing boss from 'Office Space', but as a large corporation you never get to meet.

 

I think their approach is a bit risky for the potential bride as well-I think one of the great things about hiring a freelance photographer is that every job they shoot, they are trying to outdo their last job, improve their reputation, wow their clients, etc. At least that's what I do....but I found when I was shooting for Bella I was less invested in the work I was doing. I still produced a good product, but it likely was lacking something the couple would have gotten if they had hired me directly. I also saw the gallery of images they sent to the bride-they do next to no color correction, and very little editing down. There were some obvious test shots, squints, photos that should have not been shown that were shown.

 

Bottom line-it's very good news for Bella's business....not so great for Brides and photographers IMO.

Hey David,

living on the moon is quite nice thanks.

I`m new on the forum (this is my second day) and I didn`t notice that they were a forum`s sponsor....

So I guess they are not completely "bad news" for photographers considering they are paying for this forum.

Go Bella Pictures!!

Any decent photographer who also has a head for promoting themselves and networking can get enough work on their own without Bella, and for more money. WAY more.

 

Bella doesn't offer anything MORE than a bride could get if she shopped around for a good photographer herself, and in the end, I suspect in many cases they wind up getting LESS. The bride doesn't know who's going to show up, she doesn't have a chance to communicate with them before the wedding day, she has never seen that photographer's work, and has no measure of their actual skill. Whomever shows up could wind up being "less invested" in the final product, as suggested above.

 

Would I rather knock myself out shooting for 6-8 hours to make $500 from Bella, or $2000-4000 for myself? Uhhhh, let's see. Hmmmm. That's a toughie.

I heard they do over 1000 wedding per year........true?

Well, my thoughts are that they simply don't do what an individual/independent does. Not in a bad way, more like another approach to the same thing.

 

I think brides do know who they will have to shoot their day, and AFIK they get to talk to, or at least communicate before their day with, the photog. I think the attraction to the bride is they get to "choose" from a few photogs (like a pool of them, who are supposed to match their "style/needs") and get the backing of a national brand. All that for a "reasonable price".

 

So, do you like Starbucks? Not everyone's cup of tea, but its perfect for many.

I have no direct knowledge of them but they sound no different than any other studio (at least in my area) that hires out from a list of 'approved' photographers and that are 'on call' for weddings - they just shoot, submit the cards, and get paid. No real investment in the bride/groom and the final product. Not my thing, but apparently there's alot of shooters out there willing to work that way. --Rich

I have to say that from a business perspective, there appears to be an interesting paradox here.

 

It's often been said that "knowing how to do the technical work of a business" (ie "photography") and "Successfully

running a business that does that technical work" (ie "Running a photography business") are more often than not,

worlds apart - and here we have a good example of that.

 

I'm sure that many (most?) here cringe at the thought of having to comply with Bella's standardised approach to

shooting - all are convinced that they (meaning themselves, not Bella) produce a product of a far higher standard -

and yet, from a business point of view, Bella's owners probably make more money and their company shoot more

weddings in a year than everybody here combined. So - from a business perspective - which approach is more

successful?

 

Like any successful franchise (McDonalds perhaps the best known example) it's standardised - fine tuned -

complete --- and successful (and in terms of customer satisfaction, customers have already voted with their wallets),

 

Would you like fries with that?

Good point Colin!

Cookie cutter wedding photography ?

You should think twice before working for Bella because they use your name against you.

 

If a bride is shopping around, they will ask her who she has checked out, and if your name comes up, Bella has

been known to say, oh yea, s/he shoots for us, and you can get him cheaper from us ... so be wary. They are also

known for using your name/business for adword searches ... so if you type in Mike's Photo Indiana, then, you will get

Bella's link 1st before yours, becuase they pay more to have the keywords redirect to their site.Those of you on DWF

should remember this when one of the Bella honchos came on to the forum, and finally said that they will not go

against company policy.

 

thx/MrPhoto.

It is a good way for a newcomer to gain experience as a second photographer. The photographer retains the rights to the images and can use them for their portfolio.

 

It is not good for the brides as they do not get to select the photographer or meet with them prior to the day of the wedding and the amount Bella charges is as much as most mid-tier wedding photographers.

 

Bella pays for a lot of advertising and depends upon that, not word of mouth referrals, for its business. It is a business model focused on volume and providing "acceptable" results for their clients.

Agreed on the business model thing. Bella doesnt actually have a vested interest in the final product, it just has to be "good enough". Lets pretent shall we... "I'm a bella exec. all I have to worry about is advertising then then to sign you up when you call; as far as the pictures go, well it doesnt matter to me as long as I charge you, I pay him (to show up) and then you get whatever we feel like giving you".

 

My 2 cents

<p>What do they require for a portfolio/education? I don't have a degree...just years of experience...just curious.</p>

<p>It seems to me that if you can shoot well enough to be working for a wedding photo company, and the expected shoot fee from that company is anywhere near $500., you could be booked up to your eyeballs if you charged in that price range for just shoot and burn.</p>

<p>Bella may pay the photographer in the area of $500. or so, but the client pays more than that. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>The money sounds dreadful. What is your time worth?</p>