Why we MUST concentrate on magic moments ...

[fotografz]

Yesterdays' wedding may be the worst case of "Digital Hell" I've yet experienced.

 

There was a Phalanx of digital shooters ... not just "Uncle Bobs", just about everyone !!! It was actually

comical. Something would start to happen and a zillion people would whip out a P&S like a gun fight.

 

During dinner, half the place was busy chimping their LCDs or showing each other their shots... including

showing the B&G their "work".

 

During the outdoor procession people were leaning into the aisle to get their shot while blocking mine.

 

During the Grand Entrance so many people were shooting that it literally created a wall of light that lasted

full seconds, and grossly overexposed my shots.

 

Here's the kicker, and the reason for the title of this thread ...

 

At around 9:30PM, the Maid of Honor presented the B&G an album of shots from getting ready through

part of the reception. AN ALBUM !!! Were the pics horrible and crappy? NO they were not. A few were

pretty darn good in fact. Most all of them were technically well executed.

 

These people are on to technology. It's only going to get worse, not better. IMO, craftsmanship isn't going

to be enough as we move into the future.

 

The only counter will be overwhelming talent and art IMHO.

 

Now, back to processing what I shot with a refreshed zeal to be ruthless in editing, more daring in

cropping, and not to play it safe when given the choice.

[stacy]

"Don't be boring", "Safe is Risky", "Very good is BAD" all quotes from Seth Godin in "The Purple Cow". I'm trying to live by these rules because I've had very similar experiences to yours Marc. Time to be innovative :)

[annealmasy]

Wow. I'm not even sure what to say! I'm not surprised by the level of skilled displayed by

newbies, but I AM surprised that anyone would go to the trouble of producing an album of

finished prints DURING the wedding!!! Sheesh... Go them.

 

You have a great point, Marc. I think the middle- to lower-end price range is going to get

especially tough. High-dollar clients want a pro, and they want to pay good money for it -

who cares if all of their guests have cameras! If you're thinking about jumping into the high-

end market, now's the time. It'll soon be flooded...

[thomas_sullivan]

heh....nope, ain't gonna say it.

 

I had sort of the same experience a little while ago. My son in law has a video cam that also shoots stills. He had taken his son (from his first marriage) to Villanova to see if that was a school the boy might be interested in attending in a couple years. Well, at a family gathering they are passing out all this Villanova gift store stuff they bought for the family. I get interested in something else, rejoin everyone a while later while they are watching a slide show on the computer screen. Me, thinking it was a CD he bought at the gift shop, commented that the pics and slide show was pretty good. He says "Thanks".........turns out, he had taken them with his P&S Video cam using the still mode, and just used the cams software slide show thing to show it.

 

I fully agree with Marc's title to the post....."....Why we MUST concentrate on magic moments...."

[timcorridan]

i wonder if the guests will start to think, "hmmm, mabee when i get married i'll post a note on the invitation", "please no cameras at ceremony" or mabee the photographers could start mentioning it at meetings. perhaps whip out an example. of course, the invitations could be sent out already. i know this has been brought up before, with alot of common sense shooting this idea down, but i wonder if it could fly someday. also, irony-- the people that can hire marc, have the funds to purchase better technology. the ones that can't hire marc, (lack of funds,) can't buy the technology. ie: pricey piont and shoots, laptops, dslr's, ect...for what its worth marc, i'm 100% sure, you'll always have wedding work as long as you wish...

[bdp]

Yeah, I was shooting a wedding yesterday and woman comes up to me saying...'I'm sure they're not as good as yours but... " and then hands me about 4 prints of the wedding ceremony. They did suck, but I'm thinking... great, now I have to compete with people not only bringing good cameras, but printers also!

[fotografz]

I don't think you just "jump" into the high-end market. You've got to have the contacts, word

of mouth, and most of all the images they recognize as being more than ordinary.

 

Yesterday's client told me they hired us because of a Quick Time movie I had done last year

for an Art Director that wanted my most creative work for his wedding. I mean some pretty

out there stuff. The client even used the music I had used on that movie for their first dance.

 

They are not art directors or writers or musicians. The Bride is a Dentist.

[jairy hunter]

I love your last line ("ruthless in editing, more daring in cropping, and not to play it safe

when given the choice....").

 

The problem I find is that although regular (I do not mean that in a perjorative way) people

can recognize good "art" when they see it, they still apply rudimentary standards to what

they consider good picture."

 

I still get "it's a good picture, but you can't see the top of his head," or "it would be nice if

the camera was straight."

 

I just shot a wedding that was held on a creek where shrimp boats actually dock--it's a

sort of quaint setting that screams location/place/atmosphere here on the coastal

marshes. The mother chastised me for taking pictures "with those old shrimp boats in the

background."

 

I told her that was precisely the reason the bride chose this venue.

[fotografz]

BTW, I didn't mean to belittle craftsmanship in any way. It's a given IMO. In fact, the

traditional part of wedding work is still where we can blow away the rest of the gang. It's

why I went to using a MF camera for that part so Uncle Bob can't compete ... and am still

trying to improve my posing techniques.

 

However, a lot of clients these days aren't making the decision on that basis. It's just a

prerequisite to get the job. They're looking for more.

 

I think it's all about the heart. If you can make them feel the work, relate to it on a human

level, then all the spec's and grimble just falls into place.

[marcsaint]

An hour ago I just came back from a fantastic wedding -- beautiful day, beutiful location, beautiful bride, handsome groom. Perfect.

 

During the reception, I noticed one of the guests holding up something while people were dancing. I thought it was a cellphone camera but it was a small slaved strobe he was holding for another guest who was shooting with a 35mm camera from quite a distance. I saw the camera's focus assist light every time he took a shot which gave me some clue as to his level of "expertise".

 

A tad PO'd, I had my associate put an SB800 on a monopod and proceeded to shoot 2 light shots of the dancers. Frankly, if I had a slave available for the SB800 I would have put it on and aimed it at his camera when he shot his pictures. Juvenile? Perhaps, but it made me feel better.

 

Anyways, Marc W. is absolutely correct that we must show clients magic moments, but there are far too many people who are learning how the magic is made.

[Spearhead]

<i>but there are far too many people who are learning how the magic is made.<p>

 

</i></i>A very telling comment...<p>

 

People need to get some perspective on photography. It is, if nothing else, a <b>technological</b> activity. It is based on technology, which is why it is always changing.<p>

 

I was looking a few nights ago at a book of portraits by Disfarmer and realized that nobody replaced Disfarmer as the local portrait photographer, and that was because people could buy cameras that did most of what Disfarmer did, which was take their photo. Prior to that, it was too expensive and required too many specialized skills, such as mixing chemicals, developing and printing, that the locals didn't have. However, minilabs and much more automated cameras were arriving, and the small town portrait photographer, regardless of his unique vision (which Disfarmer did have, albeit quite a misanthropic vision), was quickly displaced by new technology.<p>

 

The fact for most wedding photographers is that unless they offer something particularly special, it is going to get more difficult. The most problematic thing for most people with photography was getting a decently exposed shot, a major reason for hiring professionals, and that is gone. The guests can get a decent exposure, and if not, can change the settings so that they can, because they can instantly see if they got it right.

 

<p>

 

This puts a lot of pressure on professionals to do something more. That's not a bad thing, it's just the way it is. Obviously, some people will be forced out and some will find ways to survive.<p>

 

These days, I make more money doing sports photography (specifically boxing) than anything else, and I have to be honest about it. What I have that most people don't have is access. I figure I am a better photographer and have the right equipment, but in the end, I'm the guy with the unobstructed view, which comes from a pass, not from any kind of talent. That's something to think about - what is the equivalent for wedding photographers? Instead of whining about what technology has enabled, which is a continuous process, think about what is going to make it different than everyone else that is in the scene.

[kari douma]

On one of my weddings this summer, the bride informed me that her aunt would like to take some pictures too. I have never been against this, and have always been very accomidating. Well, the bride decided that she didn't want the aunt there for the getting ready shots, or the bride and groom portraits, but she could be there the rest of the picture taking time and the wedding.

 

Fast forward to last week. The bride came to order her album. (This was included in her package.) When I asked her how her aunts pictures turned out, she said that they turned out very good. In fact, her mother in law had a lot of them, and her grandma did too. But, her grandma was upset, because she didn't get any formal bride and groom pictures. The grandma didn't want to spend $15 on an 8X10 from me. I had the pictures online for 60 days, and I did not recieve one order. Not one. The only thing the bride ordered was the album that came in the package. The mother of the groom has said several times that she is going to order some prints, and the bride said her mother would sometime too. I am not holding my breath for any large orders.

 

It makes me want to rethink my business policies. I have always been kind to the "uncle bob's, or aunt sue's" at weddings." So, do you not be kind to them? Do you say no other cameras? Or, do you make sure you charge enough on the wedding upfront, that reprints are not an issue? But, there is talk that the mid priced photographers (which I feel I am) will not make it very long. Everyone will want the bargin priced photographer, or the high end fine art photographer. What are we to do?

[gluteal cleft]

Just the other day, I was thinking about how in some ways, digital cameras are like crossbows.

 

When the crossbow came about, it fundamentally changed something: No longer was a night (or a nobleman) relatively safe from the commoners by virtue of their armor, weaponry, skill, and/or horse. Even with their armor, they were vulnerable to a sniping attack at any time. Needless to say, they weren't terribly pleased about that.

 

Now, relatively inexpensive digital cameras have powerful computers, analyzing the scene and making exposure decisions that were the realm of top-of-the-line pro cameras not long ago. They'll also shoot hundreds (or thousands) of pictures on a memory card. Suddenly, it doesn't take a fancy camera, a knowledge of films or developing, just a $300 camera, Walmart, and just a spattering of an "eye", and wedding guests are cranking out some decent material - and some wedding photographers are feeling the pressure.

 

steve

[fotografz]

"instead of whining about what technology has enabled, which is a continuous process,

think about what is going to make it different than everyone else that is in the scene."

 

Maybe "whining" is a bit of an incendiary term Jeff. More like observing the very

phenomena you're pointing out and discussing what alternatives are possible. The

problem is defined, that's why I posted this here and others have responded with similar

observations. The question is: what are the various alternatives?

 

I'm seeing a lot of clients for whom technology and technological expertise is a given.

They DO select based on other criteria, not the least of which is raw talent and a sense of

timing that eludes others. They can spot it. To assume they're ignorant because some

clients say stupid stuff sometimes is a fallacy. This is the most visually literate population

in all of history. Constantly improving TV and Motion Picture photography has made sure

of that.

 

So, how do we separate ourselves? In Japan, everyone engages in Calligraphy, but the

great Calligraphers are recognized as national treasures. Anyone can buy a Digital Video-

cam, but it doesn't make them a Cinematographer. People may be able to take compentent

photos with today's technology aiding them, but it doesn't mean they have the eye for

composition, an uncanny sense of timing and hightened sensitivity to their surroundings.

 

What it does point out is that going to a wedding with the objective of just getting all done

and exposed well is the fast track to going out of business.

[Spearhead]

Marc, maybe you missed the quoted text at the beginning of my post. People do whine, it's not that uncommon every time this subject comes up. The "Uncle Bob" posts alone should be a warning about the whole issue of "whining."

 

Photographers are like anyone else - they have to adapt or do something else. Complaining gets people nowhere.

[Spearhead]

<i>What it does point out is that going to a wedding with the objective of just getting all done and exposed well is the fast track to going out of business.</i><p>

 

But that has been the bread and butter for many wedding photographers for many years...<p>

 

If you are asking for what can be done, a good friend of mine comes to mind. He shoots a lot of weddings, but I think of him as an extremely edgy fashion photographer. His stuff is really on the edge, and he gets the weddings of musicians, artists, and people who want something that is on that edge and that wouldn't result from the typical friend or relative shooting and getting decent shots.<p>

 

I also think about my sister's wedding - the photographer did quite a few weddings with her (she was in the wedding business at the time.) I went to a show of his work and he made Brooklyn look like the set of <i>The Crow.</i> He has no problem getting very high end work because his stuff has a completely unique view. He didn't care about anyone else with a camera, even during his setup shots, because nobody else was going to have the same results as he did. I didn't shoot, I went to enjoy my sister's wedding.

[fotografz]

Yeah, you're right Jeff. Those examples are good ones.

[matt_needham]

"I was thinking about how in some ways, digital cameras are like crossbows."

 

What I find ironic is that from what I've found to read, the current sentiment of some pros about the introduction of digital photography technology mirrors what was said by some pros over 100 years ago when film was first introduced. Namely that it makes photography too easy, and now any yahoo, err... Uncle Bob, can be a photographer.

 

"Photography has not changed since its origin except in its technical aspects, which for me are not important." -Henri Cartier-Bresson

[blakley]

Marc, I love your reaction to this; it's what will guarantee that you remain the best in the business. It's also great evidence that you didn't get where you are by accident.

 

For the record, I disagree with Jeff. Photography has never been about the technology. It's always been about seeing.

 

The key to success when everyone has the technology to take a technically good photo is, to paraphrase Steve Jobs, to "see different".

[jfr]

I think you're rigt, Marc. The future of wedding photography might well be in showing how you experienced the day. This can range from details to expressions.

 

But people also hire photographers so they are sure they will get good photos, not just trust on people that shoot family snaps. In hiring you they are more or less assured of getting good prints.

 

I do see a day in the future where even brides will be getting very irritated by all the happy snappers, even if they like to be center of attention. The day might come where there will be asked that there be no photographing in certain locations of the wedding.

[jfr]

I forgot to mention. I don't think you need to bring your game to a higher level at a wedding where there are many photographers on the side. You're hired to do your thing. And since you don't live of print orders you can leave it at that IMO.

 

But it is good to look ahead.

 

Last week I was in the same situation. There were so many shooters that it was hard to get a true expression in times. During the cake cutting I had to my elbows to get in front of the other photographers and was pressed up against the table with the cake. Good thing I swapped my 50mm for a 16-35. Even during dinner everyone was walking around with their cameras.

 

John

[uk]

Interesting thread Marc.

 

The Best Man at last Saturday's wedding was carrying a Canon 350D with zoom and

passing it to his wife every time he was in the frame. He wasn't a nuisance and later

showed me some nice pictures, but obviously taken over my shoulder.

 

For his speech, he erected a laptop/projector/screen presentation and I expected him to

show his shots from the day. He didn't, and I'm tempted to say thankfully but that would

be wrong as it's not how I feel about it. Surely the day is not far away where somebody

collects the flash cards and shows everybody's images at the reception - it's just family

entertainment.

 

My view is that, I've been hired to do a job and that job is capture a set of images for a

'collection', album/DVD/framed prints/ .... etc. That is what I do and charge for. The job

often includes managing the day between the ceremony and reception in quite an

organised way. When it does, I welcome the guests to get involved in the photography,

because the opposite results in anxiety and angst and that would make the job less

enjoyable for me. Their pictures are often completely spoiled by automatic flash and poor

composition, and sometimes not.

 

I recently shot the wedding for a graphic designer. He didn't want an album, but bought

33 10x8 prints to scan and distribute to his family and friends. Quite enterprising IMO.

 

One can't argue that our response is to become more skilful and aim at high-end

weddings and Jeff Spirer and Marc have good examples of what the best photographers

can achieve. However, not every photographer here has the level of artistic skill to

completely change direction and many will take time to develop their approach to that

market.

 

Thankfully we wedding photographers are taking just as much, if not more, advantage

from technology and using the web for communication and as a primary learning tool. By

continuous study of web galleries, understanding skill weaknesses and shooting weekly,

we'll anticipate the changes and continue to get profitable bookings.

 

All IMHO.

[andrew dobell - surrey uk]

I was assissting at a wedding recently where the Groom was a Pro Under Water Photographer and it seemed like the rest of his family where all serious Amateurs.

Everywhere I looked there where 350D's, D50's, D200's and various other SLR's. When ever there was a Photo op, the BIG camera's came out and it was like the Press was there covering a Top Celeb's Wedding or something.

Both myself and the Main Photographer felt extreamly intimidated by it all.

 

But the thing is, the role of the Pro at weddings is something I dont think will ever stop being used.

The Pro gets Access all areas during a Wedding.

He goes to the Prep, the Ceramony and the Reception. He gets to move around the Church/Room during the Ceramony (Sometimes - depending on the Officiator), gets to pose the Bride and groom and the rest of the family how he wants, he gets to take the Bride and Groom off and do those intimate shots no guest will ever get.

The Pro is also outside the events, the Bride and groom dont want him in any of the Shots. Where as they will want a Photo of Uncle Bob.

 

Im covering the Wedding of some friends next year and my girlfriend has already said "But you want be any of the Photo's!!!"

A disadvantage at this friends wedding true, but an advantage over every Uncle Bob at other weddings.

 

Then there is the Training/Artists Eye the Pro brings, or should bring. There are some Photographers that treat each wedding the same, just get in there, get the shots without really thinking about them, no artistry at all and provide substandard work. With Digital making Photography available to anyone, these will find life harder in the future. Some will survive, others wont. To survive in this field, you will need to bring something else to the table in the future.

[ben_rubinstein___mancheste1664880652]

Of course we have to defrentiate ourselves by the captured moments, but I also think that one of the other important ways is by our lighting, through good use of lighting we can seperate ourselves from the pack, both artificially created and by using the light. I've gone from shooting at the wedding dinner with an on camera flash with LS mixed with ambient to using a mix of manual strobes and wireless ETTL, it is unnecessary but I have to put my everything into making the pictures look as professional as possible and lighting is a large element of that.

 

Another very important point is presentation. The pro only products on the market place, i.e. albums, storybooks, etc which are still (G-d help us if they ever let the consumers buy direct!) for the pro only, are significantly superior to the options open to the bride who wants to do it herself. There is nothing close to a Zookbook that a bride could have made up from Uncle Bob's photographs! That is an area that has to be exploited, not only do the photos have to be a cut above in both execution and content, but the presentation has to be something that is similarly impressive and more importantly, exclusive.

 

Let me tell you about your worst nightmare:

 

The future has already happened, in Israel. Israelis, particularly the Ultra Orthodox (charedi) sector, are photo mad. They are also not in the top earning sector in a country where you are either 'just making ends meet' or rich, with very little middle ground.

 

There are a lot of wedding photographers in Israel, a glut of wedding photographers. Although there are a huge amount of weddings (relatively) there is a lage amount of early retirees from all over the world to Israel who are continuing their profession that they had in the diaspora, plus all those mad about photography Israelis who were bought an EOS 3000 when they were barmitzva and decided then that they wanted to become a wedding photographer.

 

I have a friend here whose son just got married in Jerusalem. He is a pro videographer here. He told me that they had a package of two photographers and two videographers with 3 assistants, the photographers shot 1300 frames and presented 500 of them in a bound storybook album (I saw it, not great printing but who has the time to make 500 photos into storybook format!) and all the full rez files on DVD. They paid $1200 for the entire thing. Given the exchange rate, $1200 would pay the monthly mortgage of a small apartement in Jerusalem - and after expenses and paying the assitants that had to be split 4 ways.

 

The future is there, wedding photography as minimum wage.

 

G-d help us..

 

Admittedly that is an exaggerated case though on par apparently for Israel. I certainly do not want to have to rely on wedding photography as a profession when I go back there, too cut throat, just not worth the bother.

[steve_levine]

So buy a printer, and offer "on-site" albums. If people want "junk", why not sell them "professionally produced junk"?

 

 

I think the issue is one of aesthetics. The new "snap shots as art" trend has simply overshadowed the old school, more formal ways. Uncle "Bob" can't ever do what I do without years of training and experience, but he can do what my $500 competitors do.

 

When people's tastes, and the market changes, we must change.

 

 

Every time a new medium arrives, or an old one evolves. It isn't always for the betterment of the art form. And when one looks at our current state of "popular culture", it is easy to be "artistically" depressed. We are at the mercy of a very non-discerning public.

 

 

So the answer to surviving in this business, is to educate our brides. And provide them with a product that is way out of Uncle "Bob's" league. Or buy an entry level DSLR, and become Uncle "Bob".