How many images/proofs to give bride & groom

[stacy_dallman]

I shoot 100% digital and have been providing couples with

their "digital negatives". I have been giving couples anywhere from

550-900 images and to tell you the truth I am starting to think that

this is way too much work for what I charge for weddings! I could

easily cut down my computer time by simply deleting a lot more of

the pictures than I have been.

 

My question is, what is the average number of photos you end up

giving your brides and grooms either as proofs or digital files. I

was married last year and my photographer only gave me about 250

proofs.

[anner]

Hi Stacy,

 

Some photographers actually state the number of proofs that they give (especially since

proofs are considered "prints" nowadays) and that may end up being the way I go as well.

At the moment I'm shooting about the same amount as you and I offered to print 300-500

proofs for my most recent bride (prints are only offered in my top two priced packages). I

let HER select which ones she wanted and she picked 466 of her favorites (from 700

something.) She also gets everything on CD, so printing X number of proofs is really just

an added benefit. I told her to use the proofs as a determination for picking which ones

she'd like to enlarge (although, in her case, I think they'll be used for scrapbooking ;-)

[Jenifer Selwa Photography]

Stacy, I shot my first all-digital wedding last December (been shooting film or a combo digi/film before this) - I ended up taking 650+ images. I printed about 275-300 for their album, and then burned the rest to low-res files with my watermark across them (600x400 dpi) to pass out to family and for the B&G. They ended up ordering several reprints off the CD, which I was really surprised about!<div></div>

[cjogo]

We average 2 rolls per hour...and the negs/prints are included. After 25+ years we are pretty conscious > when to click or not...

[nstock]

We do 250-500 images. Sometimes more if things get interesting.

These are the totals before culling out the blinks and errors (less than 5% total get culled).

 

Maybe you ought to raise your prices? If you have a lot of work flowing in and things are going well, that is the answer.

[rich_taylor____mequon__wi]

I've been thinking about and discussing with friends the same issue. All of a sudden, people with digital SLR's are shooting 1000 images per event. The technology has created an entirely new paradigm.

 

When technology offers the ability to do something, is it always the best decision to take advantage of the possibilities? When we were all shooting film, did any of us click off 1000 frames for a wedding?

I doubt it. Our brain-eye-shutter-release decisions were more thoughtful and critical. That process has undergone a transformation as a result of digital capture, and I personally don't see it as a positive change.

 

I have discovered the clear advantage of shooting in raw mode, but I don't want to be sucked into the whirlpool of endless conversion and editing, which is what must happen if one has 1000 images to work with. I am trying very hard to look through the viewfinders of my D70 and S3 (and, hopefully, soon my D2x) with the same sense of vision I used with my F5. I am consciously working to shoot less, and more critically, with my DSLRs, and I'll be the first to admit that it is not easy to avoid succumbing to the temptation to fill up those 1G cards.

 

To answer the question specifically, I have just finished editing a wedding and I am giving the couple about 370 proofs, which I think is way too much, but I edited it down from over 700. I fell into the trap, but I won't do it again. The problem is that my competition will promise to take 1000 images, while I'm telling my b&g's that I'll give them around 250 or more images from which to choose their album shots. I have to sell my discerning eye as a positive, that I don't need to take 1000 images to make a fabulous album.

 

Also, I have a family and a life. I have no intention of having children with my computer.

[russ_butner___portland__or]

Approximately 150-250 proofs.

 

Russ

[cjogo]

RICH

 

"The problem is that my competition will promise to take 1000 images, while I'm telling my b&g's that I'll give them around 250 or more images"

 

 

The way we approach this, with the competition >>> We offer to buy back @ $10 > every image not deemed quality. Excluding eyes closed, etc. The B&G feel this action, is more than enough security :: that we are qualified for the job. At least works for us...of course would not suggest this ploy if your are a heavy PJ shooter...

[larry schaefer - chicago,]

Stacy,

 

Your question poses another more naive inquiry on my behalf.

 

Directed to the digital users - Can I take for granted that the hundreds of proofs are printed by a lab or service?

[stacy_dallman]

Rich,

You nailed it right on the head, with wedding season in full swing I am finding that I hardly have a spare moment to play outside with my 1 year old. Everytime I sit down at the computer she cries! It seems like I am on the computer all day everyday and I have come to dread working on the pictures, which I loved to do at first.

I don't see anything wrong with taking a lot of shots at the wedding as it is super easy to delete them without processing, but for some reason I felt as though the bride and groom deserved to get even the so-so shots. I really think that I am going to start reducing the number of photos that I decide give to the bride and groom as digital negatives.

[scarolinael]

Stacy I have never given more than 250 proofs in the six years I have been doing weddings.

[stacy_dallman]

Larry- Not sure what you mean by "Can I take for granted that the hundreds of proofs are printed by a lab or service?" If you are asking if I provide 600 print proofs to brides and grooms, the answer is no...I just give them the CD/DVD with all of the files/pictures and they print their own at a lab of their choice. I do however recommend that any enlargements be purchased through me for optimal quality, but thus far no one has taken me up on it...guess they dont care about quality for their wall portraits or its too much of a hassle when they already own the right to print from the cd/dvd!

[laurenm]

Hi Stacy, a thought on your last comment, I think you're correct that the clients don't care as much about the quality and therefore are not ordering through you. Also, I assume it is more expensive to get them through you. I am a fairly new photographer with a decent camera and have noticed that untrained eyes may see a photo of mine and say "its just beautiful" Where as a pro may look at the same photo and see color or focus or lighting problems. I'm just learning to have a critical eye myself. So what I'm saying is my thoughts are that some couples probably want access to more "ok" photos instead of fewer "great" photos and most probably want to save money. I guess I've just made an argument for digital though I plan to stick with film myself. As far as competition, I'm guessing from what I've read in proofs this idea of 1000 photos and spending hrs on the computer will get old and pros who do that now will either start doing less shots or charging much more. So basically, its the cost of film and processing vs. time spent on computer. We'll see how it plays out until the next technology comes along. Meanwhile, I'd say "shoot less or charge more"

-an amatuer opinion

[larry schaefer - chicago,]

Stacy,

 

Thanks, just getting started here and have two more practice weddings ahead of me. I am constantly thinking about what a package should be.

 

Shooting in digital I am always wrestling with the decision of creating a package around printed proofs or watermarked disk images, or selling the disk with unlimited use or proofs and disk. It is vexing to say the least

 

Sounds like a whole new topic.

 

Thanks for your insight.

[bob_a]

"...bride and groom deserved to get even the so-so shots..."

 

I don't think so. Editing is part of the job. Don't show the shots you don't like

[darrin ballman www.crossl]

Stacy - I usually deliver 300-500 printed proofs for the "average" wedding. (I shoot 100% film, scan and PS 50-75 shots that I deem worthy) I do edit down as well. Unless it is a REALLY long day of shooting, I hope I don't hit 1000 shots - even if I incorporate digital sometime. It's too easy to burn a lot of post-process time as the shot count goes up!

[jeffo]

Sounds like a new niche is being created in the industry. Maybe somebody out there with a good eye and the patience to wade through thousands of images a day could make a dime processing the images for you.

 

Jeffo

[leeblackman]

More work:Less money < Less work:More money.

 

Hmmmmm..... do I want to take a thousand images, and spend countless time assembling them.

 

or do I want to take a few high quality images that the customer will be happy with and charge more money for them.

[bruce_rubenstein]

This question came up recently on another wedding forum (primarily PJ, digital) and the number of proof images given to the client ranged around 500 - 600. This was true even for people shooting 3000+ images. The key to digital is workflow. The first step after making backups of a shoot is an edit/sort. Do batch actions on groups of similar images to do exposure and color balance corrections. Proofs should be good, but there is no need for them to be perfect; they are proofs. Save the fancy work for print orders/albums.

 

If file tweaking is just a big PIA for you, you deliver paper proofs and charge enough to cover added lab costs, there are labs that you can send "out of camera" jpgs and they will correct exposure and color for you (Millers does this for $.60 a proof).

[jmichaelc]

Depending on the package purchased by the customer. My lowest package is 150, however i may end up giving them 250. What ever it takes basically to tell the entire day. My largest package includes 500, but that also includes a 2nd shooter and could actually end up being 700. It really just depends on the events of the day really, i will set no limit to satisify the bride. Things are so automated now that 200 is no different than 300 if you know what your doing.......what matters is a true capture of the day which should never be sacrificed by the number of shots. Stacy, what has made you decide to provide the "digital negatives"? Is this an added value on top of the proofs you provide or is it standard? I'm just curious to understand other's reasoning and buisness practice.

[jeffc1]

The B&G pay for my services, which is unlimited time, and unlimited amount of photos (normally 700-900 depending). I look at every single image and tweak them if needed. ALL images are copied on a CD and given to them (600 file size), so that they can see that they got what they paid for. I make my money from my photo service. I do have a print price also which is very reasonable. I end up making some money from prints also because the clients give me large orders from all of the images they receive. Watermark the images. Yes, they can still get around that if they want to copy, even though quality not there, but that's the business as it pertains to photography technology of today. I can only hope that they are as honest with me as I am with them, but if not, oh well, I am still booking weddings :)

[ubejammin]

I have done 3 weddings so far. My husband and I both photograph and together we shoot a total of 600-850 photos for all day wedding coverage. I don't know how one photographer can shoot 1,000 images at one wedding. To me that seems impossible.

 

If two of us shoot 850 (at the high end), we are providing about 500 printed proofs. So far the brides have been way overwhelmed by the number of photos. I'm now looking at reducing this number to a maximum of 400 in one proof book so it is less costly for me and less overwhelming for the bride. I don't promise a number of proofs, only the number of hours we will cover the event. So, I'm still safe cutting down the number of proofs without breaching my own contract. Personally, I struggle with a comment that was mentioned above: Even if some of the photos are so-so, I feel like I should be providing them to the bride. I have had this same "feeling" so far; however, I'm starting to get over that internal struggle. As I watch the B&G's reaction to the number of photos and how overwhelmed they are, I'm starting to feel as if too much is a bad thing.

[rich_taylor____mequon__wi]

Re: ". . .so that they can see that they got what they paid for."

 

I don't think you should have to prove your worth to the b&g by providing a large number of images. IMO, what they pay for is me,

based upon our meetings and conversations and their understanding of my style. If I can capture the romance and essence of their event in 200 great shots, I'm really happy. If it takes 300, so be it. If it's only 150, that works, too. I estimate how many shots I might deliver, but I never promise a minimum or a specific number. My talent, vision, style and commitment to them is what they are paying for. How many images I present to them is not the yardstick by which I want to be measured as a photographer.

[jeffc1]

I do not "count" the amount of images I take. I just LOVE taking photos. Not trying to impress anyone, I just constantly see great shots through out the day, and I get lots of great shots! So I not only work for them, I also work for myself to promote my business by capturing all that I possibly can to display in my studio.

 

And YES, it is VERY possible to capture 700-900 images alone! I work alone, and prefer it that way. Sometimes my wife tags along, as an assistant, and holds certain equipment that I decide to use. I meet with B&G more than once, plan the day very carefully as far as what time will allow, and I shoot away. I am very organized, make great use of my time and I don't watch the clock to determine if I am done for the day. My clients have been very pleased. None over whelmed so far with the amount of photos. I not only do the portrait shots & ceremony, but I also do photojournalism at same time.

 

My clients get any where from 50-200 4x6 prints included with package, of their choice, depending on the package they go with. So there could always be more, or less, depending. When I am hired to take photos of wedding, I take photos of a wedding! :) I will try to upload a few shots here in photo.net (my portfolio) over the weekend if I get time. You can also view my website www.prizmphotography.com

However, I tried downloading new wedding images last night and they didn't go I see, so I will work on that this weekend as well. I will post that it's ready as soon as I figure out why they didn't go. Hope you like. Thanks

[larry schaefer - chicago,]

Bruce!

 

Have I a mentor and visionary in my midst? I have been wondering if anyone has discovered off camera processing. Our Wolf Camera will dump your memory card and individually color correct each image and print to archival grade photo paper(4X6) for $0.25 each.

 

The results that I have seen so far are excellent. Sounds out of school but a well exposed high res JPEG cleans up beautifully on the machine's auto correct/enhance feature if you shose to do some shots individually.

 

In a digital sense is this not like toting a face cord of roll film to the processing lab?

 

I would love to see the response to this topic in another post.

 

Thanks