No wonder professional's aren't being hired to do weddings anymore.

[todd frederick]

I have only read a few of the replies, but these are my thoughts on this:

 

Weddings nowdays are hugely expensive, to the point of bankruptcy for many.

 

There is a need to cut expenses on weddings when the couple is on a budget. That's reality.

 

Many couples do NOT consider photography as a high priority (much to our dismay).

 

Wedding photo studios also try to squeeze the last ounce of blood from the client, and that doesn't help. I can provide examples of this.

 

Why are we upset when a couple asks a friend to take some photos at the wedding? They have been pushed there by over-priced photos studios.

 

Sometimes and uncle or cousin can do a good job. Most don't. However, I have found that most clients are content with a nice proof album and the negatives or CD's. They really don't want $2000 coffee table albums or huge prints.

 

I think we need to do some serious rethinking about what we are offering our clients now.

 

It's a new ballgame and we need to adjust.

[chris m., central florida]

Great post, Colleen. I'm waffling back and forth between "DON'T EVEN GET ME STARTED" and "Everyone needs to start somewhere". So, I am simply going to continue positioning myself to attract more and more high end weddings, and let the Uncle Bobs, sister Janes and "best friend with a camera" fight it out with professionals serving the lower priced markets. Let's face it - from a purely business perspective, that's where most of this controversy originates.

 

I don't look down on anyone. Everyone truly does have to start somewhere. I have served the lower priced markets profitably for over two years since going full time ($2K packages, etc.). But I've realized there is a market for higher end wedding packages that I'm fully capable of providing, and I'm going after my share (huge price bump coming, new website, changes to the studio). In most cases, you are not going to see Uncle Bob with his camera at those weddings. And someone spending $75K or $200K on a wedding generally wants to ensure the best service possible.

 

Thankfully, I live in an area where I can purue bigger weddings and supplement it with portraits, and some commercial work. I might be singing a different tune if I was out in the boondocks.

 

I don't see the issue going away. I see it getting worse for a time. I think the thing that REALLY gets to me is that the CRAFT of wedding photography is rarely displayed and as an industry we're losing sight of some very fundamental values on this forum. The only thing that MIGHT start turning the tables is some sort of massive ad campaign by the PPA on the importance of hiring a professional and detailing what a professional wedding photographer actually is. But frankly, I don't see the PPA or any other organization marketing effectively to brides to educate them. The FPP did run a couple of ads. I'd even pay extra dues to an organization to help fund a qualified ad campaign.

 

Photo.net is great for beginners. I don't blame one single person for coming on here and asking for advice. Niether do you. Where do you think I learned the basics of my craft seven years ago? But it does get REALLY old when every 10th post seems to be "First wedding - Need Help NOW". Perhaps anything with "First Wedding", "1st wedding" needs to have a warning message pop up that says "Please read the darn archives first".

 

You know, one of the best things I did was to join a private, paid forum. Not to bash P.net, because this public forum has it's place. But I think it's too public, and therefore a lot of the most creative photographers out there are very unwilling to post their stunning images here. Some stuff will literally blow you away and really inspire you. The end result is that you start working that inspiration into your own work, and it really separates you from the Uncle Bobs out there. Might be a great next step for people out there just establishing themselves as true professionals.

[laurenm]

Gerald, try AC Moore.

 

I think my first post here was similar when I shot my first wedding last year for $100. I notice how nice most forum members are to newcomers. I also notice there are subtle differences in the poster's questions which sometimes get overlooked and receive I think some harsh responses which are generalized and not unique to the individual poster.

 

Some sound like they DO have at least some photography experience and knowledge and just haven't done weddings, some have decent equipment and some have point and shoots, some don't know what an f-stop is (I didn't a year ago :)), some have questions even some pros here can't all answer, some are doing it for a friend of a friend, while others are doing it for an immediate family member wouldn't otherwise have a photographer, some may totally screw it up, others may do a great job, some may go on to be successful pros, others will never try it again.

 

What they do all have in common is an obvious respect for professional wedding photographers for at least they are reaching out to the pros here for help and MOST (with some exceptions) do not seem to take it lightly or think that this will catapult them into a new profession after one wedding.

 

As for the "clients" I think there are different shoppers for different markets. Some shop at Walmart while other's shop at Bloomingdales. I think in many cases these posters are shooting for couples who are truely on a very tight budget and may have plenty of "pictures" taken of them by friends and family and given their financial situations, may be very smart to put that money toward a down payment on a home instead of photography. Yet, for others, they just don't see the difference between pro photos and amatuer photos and for them, they won't know the difference.

 

There will I think, always be a market for professional wedding photography. If the market starts to shrink due to average consumers having better than average cameras, then it is up to the professional industry to learn how to grow and adjust with the market. Find better ways to market, better products to offer, photographs that no other photographer takes, come up with a "must have" product. Labs have done it, album companies have done it, camera companies have done it, now the photographers must find a way to REALLY stand out from Uncle Bob and make the consumer see what your photography has to offer.

 

PS - there are bad "pros" too. My sister paid $4,000 and HATES her pictures and is VERY thankful for those from friends and family.

[stacy]

Wedding photography is a luxury- not a necessity- so I understand when people have a friend take some photos at their wedding. I don't have any wedding photos- wish I would have thought to bring a friend with a camera.

 

What really does suck though is when people pay for a pro and get bad photos...really sad :(

[laurenm]

Stacy, it was weird to click refresh after typing above about my sis's pics and see your post! lol!

[cameradude]

Well lets charge all the low income redneck and hillbilly's $10,000 for pictures. That'll solve your problem!

 

oh and when your professional photographer takes 1 year to get your album to you, you'll thank Uncle Billy-Bob for getting the disposable camera developed at Wal-Mart and the 4x6's back to you during your honeymoon.

 

Photography is a hobby for me. For the professionals, I'm sorry for you if your missing out on business. I don't know if this forum or website should be divided or separated between "Uncle Bob" and photographer John Doe just cause someone is sick of a bunch of noobies and rookies asking questions. Where were you when you started? you were asking questions, you didn't have any experience.

 

I have a lot of respect for a lot of your work. I don't have much respect for an attitude like this. Some people are poor, suck it up and move to a richer neighborhood where your neighbors will pay $10,000 for 10 pictures.

[ravi_swamy]

Some of you seem to have forgotten that a wedding is about two people getting married, not necessarily an opportunity for you to make money by showing off your great skills.

 

I've had a bunch of friends get married recently and every couple has ONE, count it ONE picture of themselves hanging on the wall from their wedding. Some people would rather have a nicer honeymoon, new furniture, or the navigation system option in their new car instead of tons of photos of their wedding. Considering the person I know who got divorced and burned all their wedding pictures that they spent thousands of dollars on it seems like the navigation system is a better investment.

[snakecharmer]

I assume by 'professional' you mean someone already being paid to produce the work. 'Professional' therefore does not always guarantee quality, or originality as someone already pointed out. The last 'professional' photographer I used made me pay $20 for 2 minutes of his time, for a boring final product that I could have beaten on a bad day. If I was ever going to run out and get myself hitched, I would be less likely to opt for a photographer who takes cookie-cutter standardized shots of a million couples every year and more likely to hire an art student (or photography teacher) from the local university whose portfolio shows creativity, is consistent, and has an artistic vision that can accomodate what I envision for my photos. Uniqueness is more and more a hot commodity with brides, maybe due to trends in wedding magazines. Brides may be resorting to hiring amateurs just so their photos don't come out looking like everyone else's. And, let's face it, when you're planning a huge event like that, after a while you just start to get apathetic, "let's get this done so we can get on with the honeymoon" attitude.

I am honestly kind of shocked with the number of you who have said you just couldn't live with yourself if you photographed a wedding and it went badly. Hello! Since it is the couple's wedding, THEY are responsible for who they hire! If photos of the 'special day' are only fifty dollars' worth of special to them, fine; maybe they are on a budget. It is only one day, after all, and they may have other priorities. Also, lots of people LOVE crappy pictures. As long as they love MY crappy pictures, I don't feel any need to try and re-educate them. If someone offered me money to shoot a wedding and I needed the money to pay off, say, the expensive camera I had just bought, I might say yes. I don't think that that makes me a bad person. Although I certainly wouldn't try to pass myself off as pro (after the pro that I sat for, I wouldn't want to anyway). And if modern women are developing a less froufrou attitude about their weddings, then more power to them! (You notice that in all of these postings everyone keeps talking about how the bride will feel about her wedding photos, as if she is the one designated to fret and fuss, and the groom is just along for the ride.)Told ya you were going to hate my response.

[kelvinphoto - arlington, t]

I blame on all digital. Because of digital, Uncle Bob can think their is no cost on film, preview, raw editor, etc and charge like $300 for services. No upfront cost. Unlimited pictures taking. Throw away the one that is ugly and keep the one that is ok and better. If Uncle Bob shoot a thousands picture and said that successful rate is 10-15%, then there are about 100-150 keeper.

 

If it is film, then Uncle BOB is limited to film cost and can't shoot a lot and afraid of mistake and scare of doing wedding. Plus if you hire uncle bob at $500-700, then you rather pay $1000 to professional.

 

I think in the future digital will put more wedding photographer out of business because of it's advance AWB, TTL-FLASH, P-MODE.

 

We are not the only one that get hurt by digital. How about Kodak, Bronica, Hassle, Mamiya, etc, and the people that work for that company.

 

Don't blame on Uncle BOB becuase technology change or the world around us is not use to be when we grow up.

[snakecharmer]

There's absolutely nothing wrong with buying your cake topper at Wal-Mart. Every wedding cake topper I've ever seen has looked stupid anyway, so why not save a few bucks.

[laurenm]

One other thought on the Uncle Bob's... the couple will get to have ALL their photos, not just the ones the pro thinks are the best and presentable ones. and Uncle Bob knows everyone and who is important to get pictures of.

 

The pro takes a couple shots of Aunt Jennie but the lighting wasn't quite right or she was making a funny face or focus isn't shrp enough, so the pictures get cut from the proofs. A few weeks later, Aunt Jennie dies and there are no photos of her at their wedding except for Uncle Bob's less than perfect shots :(

[karenco]

No wonder professionals aren't being hired to do weddings anymore.

 

It's hard to respond when the post starts with a fallacy! :) Of course people hire professionals to do weddings. I and every other pro photographer I know are being hired. As someone else pointed out, there are hundreds of thousands of weddings every year in the U.S. Probably well over 1/2 of them don't hire a professional. But there's still the other 1/2 who does. And they hire in all ranges of prices - from the very cheapest to the very highest priced.

 

If you're notseeing that business, then figuring out why is key. Sure, there's a bit more competition now and it means being on your toes a little more and really knowing your strengths and how to makret them.

 

But saying that "professionals aren't being hired anymore" is quite simply ludicrious.

 

Kaen

[msitaraman]

I'm not a wedding photographer at all, just your basic garden variety enthusiast/amateur. Mary, please feel free to delete if you think this does not add any value to this discussion.

 

IMHO,

 

1. Yes, as Marc says people are visually very sophisticated, in terms of both moving images in film and TV, and still pictures in print media.

 

However, compared to 20,30 or 50 years ago people are less appreciative of fine quality personal photographs. I'm afraid we are now a snapshot/"hey-it-came-out-real-good" generation who do not think high quality images are something within financial reach. i.e. something they can get in the process of documenting their lives.

 

50 years ago, people were less visually sophisticated when it came to still photography. Now, every teen leafs through Vogue magazine and the like and knows what fabulously stylish pictures are like.

 

On the other hand, in the old days people were used to getting pristine, high quality B&W pictures back from the lab when they took pictures themselves. More to the point, they were in the habit of expecting such high quality in documentation of their lives, whether in the form of portraits hanging on the wall, or a beautiful wedding album printed on creamy Agfa Portriga.

 

Now, its different. People have become much more wealthy, especially in the upper income brackets, but awareness of fine photography as an affordable service is much, much lower.

 

Perhaps the future is in much higher ticket wedding photography; in the last 20 years a huge amount of wealth has been created among the top 5-10%, people who would not bat an eyelid at spending $15 or 30k for a quality wedding portfolio (and other personal documentary photography) in the coming decade or two. Bigger pie, fewer slices, I suspect...

 

Again, all IMHO :-)

[annealmasy]

In the end, it sounds like most people are complaining that there's too much competition

and it's hard to get work. True.

 

It's not enough to be a good photographer. You have to be a GREAT photographer. You

have to keep up with the latest trends and technology. You have to be willing to educate

potential clients regarding photography's possibilities and limits. You have to be a

brilliant businessperson, a marketing guru, and an accountant. You have to be a "people-

person". You have to LOVE your job so much that you can laugh at all the hassles and

headaches.

 

MOST wanna-be photographers DO NOT meet those qualifications. MOST will not

succeed.

 

Those of us who bust our butts and learn and grow and persevere will do well. We don't

need to worry about the other guys.

 

Best of luck to everyone who is dreaming big dreams of wedding photography glory! I've

been in your shoes and have come through to the other side. And yes, I LOVE my job.

 

-Anne

[johnlarkinphotography]

Good pros are not complaining about Uncle Joe stealing their business. Good pros are already booked for the season. Deliver a quality product and word of mouth alone should bring you more business than you can handle. Also, calling yourself a pro doesn't always mean you take better photos than a talented Uncle Joe.

[annealmasy]

By the way:

 

Hi, Colleen! I'm a WPJA-er too! :) Thanks for bringing to light a valid issue...

 

-Anne

[colleendonovan]

I'm not saying that I am missing out on any work, or that there aren't poor people who can't afford a photographer. I'm just very frustrated at how many people think our job is so easy (and simple, etc.)that they could do it at a moments notice and get away with it. People have spent years and years learning how to get the perfect exposure, etc, and it seems like that doesn't matter anymore because Uncle Joe or cousin Robert can take snapshots with their digital cameras and PS the hell out of them until they are 'decent'. Sorry, I didn't mean to start a flame war, I am just so frustrated! And I'm seriously wondering what reprocussions this will all have on the photography market in the future.

<p/> Hi Anne! We'll have to get together on the WPJA forum! :)

[emwalker]

First off, it's uncle Bob, not uncle Joe. Uncle Joe's the one who always drinks too much from his little hip-flask during the service and makes an ass of himself at the reception. Uncle Bob's the one who just bought a new digital cam and thinks it makes him a great photographer. And in fact, it may. Truth is, these days, everyone's a photographer. With the digital revolution, it is true that the frightening prospect of burning fourteen rolls of film on blurry underexposed shots only to spend a couple hundred unrecoverable dollars processing and printing them is gone... so the playing feild becomes closer to level between the pros who've dedicated their lives and staked their livelihoods on their craft, and uncle Bob with his dandy new 7.2MP point-and-shoot that he points relentlessly and shoots until the batteries melt... in past times I've spent more on film and processing in a day than a new Powershot would cost me now...

 

But seriously, if you're having problems finding clients as a professional photographer, it's probably a reflection of the market. Blame Canon, blame Nikon, blame Sony, blame Olympus- blame the whole industry for putting affordable, easy-to-use cameras in the hands of every uncle Bob (and Joe) in the free world. But don't blame Bob... he's just trying to do the bride a favor... and chances are, he didn't really want to be there anyway...

[ellery_chua___singapore]

Its not surprising the number of happily inexperienced people covering a wedding for friends/family is increasing. Roughly speaking we can expect a new Dslr owner to come on line say what 10,000 pr 20,000 per month - if even 10% of these people decide to dabble in a wedding since now they have a tool that would in P mode work 70 to 80% of the time. Picture quality is different issue. Grant we are comming into a "need not be perfect, just good enough to see is ok" mind set - which only mean 1 thing - if you wanna to exists as a pro you have to delivery a picture that steals their breath aways, works that make grown men and women cry (not that your personal crap level has reached weapon of mass destruction ratings)call it a pressing need to deliver art not pictures to the couple. (at least a point to aim at, if you fail then they get nice shots, if you fail further they get very nice snap shots, if the mojo total does not work then they get uncle bob specials and you may have to change you name to mud for a while.)

 

In Asia, it is a lot worse. Since most of the wedding photo budget is blown on pre weddings, there is little left for the actual day. Simply because too many have never seen anything more than documentary work - they do not realised what can be done.

 

As some one remark there is a bell curve on this - the top of the market will pay for good work, the middle will pay as little as possible for something - hopefully it is not too bad, the bottom simply have bigger problems to care about than photography. If we want to remain as professional wedding photographers we need to cover the relevant section of the market and not to worry about the ones that got away.

 

Let lighten up too on the newbies - we all were onece there. At least there is a place to ask questions before the wedding.

 

Hey I did an "uncle Bob" for my first wedding. I did my first one as a favour to my best friend's sister - they had a pro they just wanted more pictures. Way over 20 years ago we had not internet, no forums and almost no one who did wedding was willing to talk another through one. Could have done with some advice, but hey being a young kid means you never think that you can fail. Trusted in the power of auto thysitor flash as main light to cover my axxxx, work with a 50mm and a stop down 35mm with my legs and some pre guessing in place of a zoom - it worked out very well. Well the prints got printed by the pro Kodak lab which they ran, and were color corrected. Georgeous colors. Did mainly candids, a little formal and kept the hell out of the way of the pro. Grin the bride still loves the photos.

[karenco]

I've been around in the industry 15 years and every 6 months or so, I see someone gloom and dooming about how the industry is in trouble because of amateurs. Seriously. I remember having this exact same type of discussion when the prices on autofocus and auto everything SLRs dropped. I remember having this exact same discussion when a couple of formerly "pro" labs started offering services to non-pros. I remember having this discussion when more and more wedding photographers started using 35mm and not medium format. The exact same thing: it's easier for amateurs to get into the business and think they can do a good job and that's not fair for those who have spent years learning and training.<br>

<br>

Honestly, there are always going to be new people and new technologies. Blaming the camera companies is [not it either] - they're making money by selling what the public is asking for. It's silly to expect them to not keep advancing technology and making things that people will buy. That's what their business is. That's what *business* is.<br>

<br>

Again, I just don't see it. I didn't see it 10 years ago. I didn't see it 5 years ago. And I don't see it now. I wish I had copies of every thread over the last 10 years that was "the amateurs are ruining our industry". I'ts always being said, and so far it just hasn't been true. <br>

<br>

Karen

[david_schilling___chicago_]

What Karen said.....

 

I'm beginning to feel like an old dude around here but I don't think that digital has really radically changed the amount of Uncle Joes or Uncle Bobs that are out there. They've been there for years. I was Uncle David at my sis-in-laws wedding in 1977. People are still hiring pros to shoot their weddings and for a large segment of the population it's the only time in their lifetime that they'll hire a pro....unless you count the pics of the kids and Santy Clause from the mall.

[bill_b2]

Stream of consciousness to follow:

 

Maybe brides prefer the snapshots. Look at how TV commercials are shot and edited. Many have a cartoonish, snapshot look although some of the best talent and equipment is used to achieve that. Those are visuals of today. Anyone wearing flip-flops in public? We are in a very casual society. Ask the owners of the men's clothing stores. Oh wait, They're mostly gone. No suit sales. No sport coats. No fedoras.

 

Analogize your photos to music. Are you offering Perry Como, hip-hop, or the New York Philharmonic? Is your work in sync with the times? Is it too clean and polite for a snapshot world? No open mouths stuffing a pound piece of cake in. There is room for many types of music and photography. But there are not many polka bands anymore.

 

Go to a wedding as a guest with a point and shoot. Are those pictures looser, more fun? I have seen a lot of fun snapshots that have communicated the atmosphere of a wedding or reception very well. We live in a visually oriented world that is ripe for photographers who are freed from the technical problems of the past in getting a good shot or print. Those are the snapshooters, like it or not.

 

When you are the pro at a wedding, do you have to contrive hip? Shooting up from ground level? Intentionally tilting the camera, for effect? Still contrived and obviously so.

 

Are your customer expectations realistic? Do you educate them? Show them different types of looks? If you have one look to offer, that's OK. Just market that look to the people who like or that you can educate to it.

 

There is still a carriage trade market that is able and willing to pay top dollar for quality. Mom will be doing the arrangements for that, I suppose. Maybe old school formal, maybe not. But always quality and high expectations. No failures.

 

Back to the TV commercials. They are done by highly skilled people who have repeat customers who know that a pro can deliver. The wedding business is not that way, unless you market to wedding planners who do the hiring.

 

These are just some thoughts on Collen's post. The market changes. If you do not keep up, you are left behind. Keeping up refers not just to technique. Do you do professional marketing? If not(probably because you think it is too expensive), either word of mouth brings you business enough to survive, or you don't.

 

Venting by photographers is good because it gets everyone to thinking and acting. As recorded music has changed the world for musicians, digital is changing it for photographers. There will still be musicians and photographers. More customers, though, will be providing their own music and photographs without hiring anyone.

 

I am not a professional photographer and never take pictures at weddings. There are pros who get paid to do that.

 

Bill

[timhaut]

Wow. Someone knows how to get something started on Photo.net....

[colleendonovan]

Well Tim, it was getting a little dull around here! :)

[ray_pulley]

Ok, no offense intended, and I must admit that I cannot resist, so please forgive me in advance:

 

How many posts are we going to see where pros are "venting", "ranting", "denigrating", talking down to or simply acting arrogant about newbies? Seems about equal to the newbie posts to me, or not far behind anyway.

 

What is it about wedding photographers that makes them think that there should be no competition, or only competition that they approve of?

 

Take a basic econ class folks. The barriers to entry in this industry have never been all that great or hard to surmount, so there is a lot of competition. Digital may have lowered the barriers even more or at least some folks think so. I personally think that a newbie had a better chance with a good TTL flash, a pro or semi-pro body, pro negative film and a good lab than with just about any DSLR/flash combo of today, and at a far lower cost in most cases.

 

Perhaps there was more of a psychological barrier with film, but nonetheless, it still has never been hard or overly expensive to stick your toe in the photography business pool. It's a lot harder and more expensive to buy a McDonald's franchise than to start a wedding photo business, for God's sake. Nobody sees the McDonald's owner whining all over the internet about the new Burger Joint opening up down the street.

 

I also am amazed at the snobbery I see so often with this subject, especially towards the clients who choose to save money on photography. What is different about that? Some people shop at Wal-Mart, some at Neiman Marcus, some buy Kias some Mercedes, it's just the way a market works.

 

Portrait photographers have had to compete with Sears, Wal-Mart, Pennys and Mall Chains for decades. The work is mediocre at best, but I would bet that they shoot far more portraits than any good studio in the same area. Same deal with weddings, and probably the same clients.

 

Lastly, I cannot see where it does anyone any good to spend one minute worrying about the legendary Uncle Bob (but I must admit it is entertaining at times!). You were probably too expensive for that client anyway, so you are not out anything in my book.