So you want to be a Wedding photographer

[holly mikel]

C. Carl and Mathew Kane say it all... Claire, if you are so angry at those beginners for not having knowledge - direct that energy at helping them and answering their questions instead of chastising them for attempting to become better photographers. Yes, Uncle Jed with a brownie and no experience should not be charging $3,000 for his services - but talented photographers who are just trying to get ahead need all the help they can get. And the reason for the rates in my area has nothing to do with talent..these guys are very talented photographers....it's simply relative to the income of the clients. Not all of the "weekend shooters" can afford to move to the larger cities to target the upper class. This DOES NOT mean that their work is inferior to yours.

[holly mikel]

C. Carl and Mathew Kane say it all... Claire, if you are so angry at those beginners for not having knowledge - direct that energy at helping them and answering their questions instead of chastising them for attempting to become better photographers. Yes, Uncle Jed with a brownie and no experience should not be charging $3,000 for his services - but talented photographers who are just trying to get ahead need all the help they can get. And the reason for the rates in my area has nothing to do with talent..these guys are very talented photographers....it's simply relative to the income of the clients. Not all of the "weekend shooters" can afford to move to the larger cities to target the upper class. This DOES NOT mean that their work is inferior to yours.

[steve_levine]

In a scene reminiscent of the last reel of "Frankenstein",the villagers are marching towards Nancy's house with torches & pitch forks.

[teresa_earnest]

Steve,

I'm carrying a bucket of fried Chicken. A Peace offering.

[melisa]

Choked on my Diet Coke...LOL!

[kevin m.]

Mmmmm, fried chicken! Oh, wait! Original recipe or extra crispy???

 

I had a long-winded response typed up, but since the Olympics are still on, I'll just summarize:

 

1. Weddings aren't that hard.

 

2. An enthusiastic amateur with a modicum of experience trumps a burned out 'professional' every time.

 

3. A matter of taste, perhaps, but Monte Zucker is a hack.<div></div>

[teresa_earnest]

Neither, it's Hartz Fried Chicken off of hwy 280, HELLOOOO!!!!

[bill_clark___minnetonka_mi]

Monte & I are laughing, all the way to the bank.

[kevin m.]

Ah yes, the bank. Can't argue with that.

[picturesque]

Sooo...can we all admit that there is room for traditional and PJ photography, old-style and new-style photographers, Monte Zucker and Kevin Mendenhall, newbies and old-timers, professionals and amatuers, film users and digital users, etc., etc., etc., and get back to learning from each other? There are ways to discuss something without sarcasm, attacks and disparaging remarks.

[bill_clark___minnetonka_mi]

Agree with you Nadine!

 

This is a wonderful place to help and to learn. I want to learn more about posing and lighting techniques and I can help with getting the client, business practices, selling and profitability of a business.

[WM]

Teresa, you always crack me up, you're hilarious ! Heehee !

 

Glad this thread is starting to have some fun after all that serious talk....................phew ! What a relief !

 

Now, let's go do some shooting eh ?

 

Wee-Ming

[steve_levine]

This has generated more response than Timber's "Kodachrome Manifesto",or when Philip Gauthier suggested it was okay to stare at the sun for extended periods of time.(he hasnt been around lately,I hope he didnt go blind?)

[runkel]

"I cannot agree that it is right or proper for someone with no knowledge to start charging for something they don't even have a basic grasp of."

 

. . . but enough about your web designer.

[teresa_earnest]

Does it have to end? For the first time I saw a glimmer of a smile on the imaginary face I've given Steve.

[httpwww.photpiaimaging.]

Matthew,

 

You say ". . . but enough about your web designer."

 

and your point is???

 

I see you don't even show a link to your site.

 

It amazes me the number of people prepared to leap to he defense of people

who have taken on paying work before they learn the basics.

 

I don't quite understand what some people are advocating here.

 

Surely no-one thinks it's right for someone to take on a job and charge for it if

they can't deliver.

 

That is all I am against.

 

I suggest some of you re read my posts.

 

I don't have a problem with anyone learning, of starting out and having

questions.

 

My only problem is with people who take on work without even the most basic

understanding of photography principals.

 

No photography isn't hard if you understand the basics.

 

How many posts do you see about balancing flash ?

 

These are clasic exaples of people just not knowing what they are doing or

understanding their equipment.

 

10 minutes practice and a note book would have saved one recent poster a

year of cave like interior shots. More importantly it would have given his

clients much better images for their money.

 

C.

[fotografz]

" My only problem is with people who take on work without even the most basic

understanding of photography principals."

 

Name one. Who are you talking about? No one here that I know of. No one in my area

that I know of.

 

This horse has been beaten beyond death, ground up, made into dog food, ingested,

divested, became fertilizer in some grassy field ... where some horse was grazing ... and

now we're beating THAT horse to death ; -)

[httpwww.photpiaimaging.]

Marc

 

I'm sorry but your answer just lacks credability.

 

In all the time you have been coming to these forums and in all the time you

have been taking pictures you have never come across a single person who

is taking on more than they have the ability to do, or should reasonably expect

a client to pay for.

 

Or are you saying photography is so easy that anyone can do it and deliver a

quality product.

 

If that is the case you are perfectly entitled to that view and we will just have to

agree to differ.

 

C.

[al_kaplan1]

I guess I learned photography in another era. A time when even PJ syle photography involved choosing WHEN to push down with the right index finger as opposed to just holding the button down whenever it looked like an interesting situation might evolve in the next 10 seconds. When the concept was to actually immortalize a "decisive moment" rather than HOPE to catch one, and of course once you lock yourself into the camera's make exposure/advance the film sequence there's no way in hell that you can get that one great shot if it happens during advance mode; all you can do is pick the best of of a series of mediocre photographs made by your-hand held surveillance camera. Nope, now too many "photographers" brag about making 800 exposures, especially with digital, thinking to impress the customers and one another. All your client really wants is an album with complete coverage of the event consisting of good photographs. The other 700 photographs? I guess it makes the shooter feel good.

[holly mikel]

Teresa, I hope you brought enough for everybody...I like mine extra crispy ;)

[kevin m.]

Claire, I think the whole point this thread was intended to make lacks a basis in reality. Lots of people have posted asking for help with the basics of wedding photography, but I don't recall one saying they were charging real money to do it. Most of them were shooting for friends and for relatives and for FREE.

 

OTOH, you could write volumes about going-thru-the-motions professionals delivering mediocre results, but people tend to get touchy about their livelihoods, don't they?

[bruce_rubenstein]

"...too many "photographers" brag about making 800 exposures, especially with digital, thinking to impress the customers and one another. All your client really wants is an album with complete coverage of the event consisting of good photographs."

 

This is another example of backwrds thinking. This is a market driven phenomenon, not a photographer driven one. For whatever reason, clients who want "PJ" coverage expect tons of pictures. Is it good/bad photography? Maybe, maybe not. The important thing is making clients happy. Wedding photography is a retail service business. You sell into the market segment you are most comfortable with.

 

Not providing 800, 1000, 2000 or 3000 pictures, when that is what your client expects is bad business and dumb.

[fotografz]

Okay, on to horse #3.

 

"Marc, I'm sorry but your answer just lacks credibility."

 

In what way?

 

" In all the time you have been coming to these forums and in all the time you have been

taking pictures you have never come across a single person who is taking on more than

they have the ability to do, or should reasonably expect a client to pay for."

 

No Claire I haven't. Yes, there have been panic stricken neophytes, but they know they're

in over their heads, and have the good sense to ask for help. And we give it to them. Why?

Because it usually involves circumstances that preclude going to a professional. Like

money, or the lack of it. Some people don't have the money Claire. Sometimes NO money

at all. There ARE poor people out there. And I don't know of one single case of

catostrophic failure by a beginner in my area. ONLY pros taking some poor bride to the

cleaners. But all of this has been explained to you by a bunch of regular forum

contributors repeatedly.

 

And even IF there were an occasional arrogant beginner, there are enough watchdogs here

to set them straight in a NY heart beat. But to my knowledge we haven't as yet had to set

the dogs on anyone that's come here for help.

 

So I again ask, who are you talking about in your original post?

[rob_partridge2]

I totally agree with Nancy here. When I did my first solo wedding, I didn't sleep the night before. People fully expect you to change the weather, make the earth spin backwards etc.. etc.. at weddings. And you have to be able to set expectations without cheesing off the mother-in-law at the same time.

 

odd requests I've had.....100% genuine....

 

"Can you do a shot that looks like we're flying like superman an Lois Lane"

 

"We want a 36" X 24" of the recessional displayed at the reception" (asked half an hour before the wedding.....but I managed it)

 

"Can you take an aerial shot - as if it was taken from a helicopter above the church"

 

Then there's the usual "I'm not standing next to that ?#+*!! " etc.. in the group shots. And when there's a wedding with 300 guests, you do a couple of shots of the whole group, and they complain you can't see enough detail in the faces at 10X8.

 

Weddings = stress, but I love them, and wouldn't give up for the world. I love the "keeping the in laws happy" routine....making them believe they're in charge, and ensuring the B&G are tottaly happy at all times.

 

Regarding kit - you can't have enough spares. I have a medium fomat for formals, and have spare everything. body - lens - flash - backs, even dark slides (right pain if you lose a dark slide, beleive me!!!). I even carry a spare (if somewhat decrepit) tripod in the boot of the car. For candids, I use a Canon EOS10D, with an EOS5 as back-up. I have two 70 to 200 zooms that I use for Candids, the only piece of kit that isn't doubled up is my 24-70 f1.8L, but I've got a couple of fixed length lenses in this range that would do. My Canon flash (550EX) is backed up by a 430EZ - so if I have to use it, I lose E-TTL, and have to use my brain (it's in there somewhere!!!)

 

To those who want to do weddings......start slowly, and in the shallow end. It may not seem exciting to do the candids at a friends wedding, but give it your best, and everytime tyou press the shutter think "I'm being paid for this" (even if you are not, there may come a chance to sell the prints later). Get a job as a photographers assistant (great as a second job, as most weddings are on Saturdays here in the UK) - you'll be lugging gear about, and loading film backs and being a general dogsbody, but you will get a feel for weddings.

 

Regarding formal photography....get yourself on a course to learn the poses, lighting, and gain tips from a decent pro - just look in the back of most photography magazines - there's guys always advertising such courses on a 1:1 basis, or very small groups. Typical costs are between ?200 and ?500 for 2 to 5 days. They normally involve using a few models too, so you'll be able to build a small portfolio. Money well spent.

 

Just remember that a wedding is a unrepeatable event....and they don't want a stroppy photographer who takes ages, and has no confidence. Be happy, ooze confidence, and you've won half the battle.

 

I've had to shoot a couple of unrepeatable events, just the other night I was called to a hospital to do some portraits of a new-born baby that was only going to survive a few hours.....probably the most emotional and touching job of my life, and incredibly stressful.

 

So in summary.....learn to enjoy the stress, ooze confidence, gain a sense of humour and a thick skin, flirt, smile and laugh, be in charge, don't be bullied, AND BE TOTTALLY SURE OF YOUR ABILITY AND YOUR KIT!!!

[rob_partridge2]

Just as a small addendum to my above post....

 

At my own wedding, our pro went sick and sent someone else.....He got lost on the way to the church, got lost on the way to the reception, had his 9 year old daughter as an assistant (conseqently lost a film as she loaded a film back to front) and was generally a god-awful photographer. Forgot details like changing the angle of my wife's glasses, so you can hardly see her eyes in any of the shots, was generally rude, and smelt like an old brewery.

 

And I paid him - what was wrong with me!!!

 

Just something to think about.