WPJA membership

[wedding-photography-denver]

I have been perplexed at the apparent scramble to join this seemingly

prestigious organization. I visit their listed photog's in my area and

find a lot (greater than 70%) of the listed photogs are average and

have no clear style. There are a lot of good and very talented

photog's listed, but it does not represent the majority (which is what

I thought I would see).

 

So, my question is, why join/apply there? Does it include you in an

exclusive club that is perceived to be the 'better' shooters, or is it

merely another award winning ego trip/marketing tool for the large

part?

[sbp studios]

The best Photographers I know dont even advertise and would'nt know what that organization was if you mentioned it.

 

The fact is only a very small % of great Wedding Photographers even participate online yet.

[kari douma]

I'll admit that the WPJA intrests me. I have looked into it for these reasons: I am still fairly new at wedding photography, and it is a thing to boast about on my website to customers. If I entered some contests, and did well, I would have that "award winning" in my bio. If someone was looking at the WPJA website and liked it, there would be a link to my website.

 

But, let me tell you the reasons I am not going to apply at this point. 1)I am not sure if I am good enough. 2)I fear the rejection!

and 3) (the most important reason) I still feel there is a need for traditional photography at a wedding. (At least in my area) The majority of my customers want traditional images ALONG WITH photojournalistic image. They like the photojournalistic style, but don't want to give up the posed wedding party images and the alter images of the B&G, the wedding party, and the families. I still want to capture all the details of the wedding... the details that the bride spent hours agonizing over, picking out. She wants them documented. The WPJA says that only less than 20 % of your images on your website can be posed, or detail shots. I feel this would misrepresent me, because I feel that would not be acurate to what the bride would get if she hired me.

 

Don't get me wrong, I still take a lot of photojournalistic images, and I like them, but I am not willing to give up the rest.

[hooman_b]

At the very least, it could be a good advertising avenue. Also, for whatever business you're talking about, many consumers feel increased confidence when they see a company is part of a organization. You never know, putting PPA, or WPJA or whatever on your web site or brochure might be a small factor into giving someone another reason to hire you.

[think27]

WPJA comes up high on search engines which is one good reason to join.

 

As the the "clear style" or even - quality - It is questionable in some cases. My opinion but it is based on what I know about some members they've accepted.

 

I've applied twice. No answer. I'm not going to change my website to "try" and meet their requirements. I started shooting photojournalistic style before the phrase was coined. Whatever.

 

I look at the site... I see members accepted that I know for a fact are brand new in DC and have 2 to 9 weddings under thier belts. Go figure. I see others that have plenty of "traditional" images.

I see some that - sorry - but in my opinion - are mediocre.

 

Anyway - I'll try again in a few months. Maybe the "judges" change or maybe you have to hit them when they're looking for more cash flow. But from what I've heard - sometimes it takes 2-3 times and all of a sudden for no reason that you can imagine - they accept you. Wierd.

 

Kari - I wouldn't worry about rejection. I've been rejected twice and I honestly don't believe it is any negative reflection of my work. I know some other really talented photographers on another site that can't seem to get on too. There doesn't seem to be any consistancy with whom they take and don't take.

[marv_stasak___southfield__]

Personally, I think they come off a little arrogant. They sneer at this and that and suggest that a posed picture is somehow beneath them. I have always felt that the ability to pose and light a group or a couple in a way that looks fresh and relaxed is part of the art and craft of photography and marks the good photographer from the mediocre. I think a lot of the so-called "photojournalistic style" pphotographers shoot only that way because they can't do a good, well lit, group or couple shot, let alone a portrait. Kari is quite correct--there will always be a need for the posed picture and to not include some on your website would be a mistake.

 

That being said, if I thought it would be advantageous to do so from a marketing standpoint, I wouldn't hesitate to join; I would simply make sure that I had enough "PJ" shots on my web site to cover the 80%.

 

One thing I noticed: They also make an issue of your web site having to be original and not looking like a copy of another photographer's. I wonder how they can take in account the many templates out there. I already see duplicate sites for that reason.

 

And,so, this is my rant of the day. :-)

[lukas_kisiel]

Before defenders of WPJA join us here, I find that WPJA is another one of those "photographer organizations" that has a sole purpose of making a profit from photographers. Yes, they aren't even a non-profit. I can't even find their mailing address on their website. So why would I trust them to tell my clients who I am? Well, as far as online advertising goes, they are pretty cheap. And google searches are important, too.

[colleendonovan]

Whoa people!!! The biggest misconception I have heard at least three times about the WPJA is that once you're in you're only allowed to take certain kinds of pictures at a wedding. That simply isn't true. I do formals at every wedding. They are marketing 'journalistic' photography. It would make sense to not have 8 million posed shots of weddings on your website if you are applying to the WPJA. That doesn't mean you refuse to take any. <p/>I disagree with Marv that they are arrogant.

<p/>I also disagree that the photographers who belong can't take great and well lighted posed shots.

<p/>I agree with Gino that there are a ton of photographers who are REALLY good who aren't in the WPJA. But there are quite a few who are... David Jay, David Beackstead, Lianna Lehmen, Me Ra Koh,(me, haha) just to name a few. People probably look at my site and wonder how I got in, but to me it was really exciting. It was almost like I had been validated somehow. Now, three weeks later, it isn't such a big deal, a lot more people go to my website, and I feel like I am free to take the kind of pictures I want to at weddings. Don't ask me why. I'm sure it's some psychology mumble jumble.<div></div>

[stacy]

I joined mainly for business/advertising reasons. It's cheap to join- like $80 a year and I get as many hits there as from the knot ($75 per month). Plus...it's fun to participate in the contests (and no- I've never won anything). Its sort of like a little photography club.

[rich_dutchman1]

Reasons why: It's very inexpensive advertising compared to other sites, that is, if you choose to advertise. Clients who found me through WPJA spend more money with me than referred clients.

 

Reasons why not: I think the owner - a wedding photographer - has stopped shooting weddings to focus on the site. It appears he's increasing the number of advertisers, and he's coming up with some creative ways to take more of our money. Crowded listings could reduce the number of bookings, but who knows.

[wedding-photography-denver]

Mary! I am shocked and horrified. They are missing something elementary if they manage to refuse your work.

 

Kari, I too realize that the majority of brides require some (often a fair amount of) posed/formal shots and am not about to drop that side of shooting.

 

So, its a marketing tool, right?

[kari douma]

Yes, that is why I would want to join, as a marketing tool. I have a template website too. Hmmm... so does coleen, and it wasn't a problem for her.... Hmmm... I am still thinking about this.

 

Mary, I can't believe you haven't heard back.

[think27]

Colleen is right - there are a ton of very talented photographers on WPJA....

 

On the other hand - they've rejected a ton of very talented photographers for some reason that I can't understand. I've checked out the websites of some DWF photographers that have also not been accepted that were awesome and outstanding... It surprises me that they do have lots of "rules" for being accepted - yet I've seen the rules broken for some and others that seem to fit the bill are not accepted.

 

Whatever it is or isn't.. I still think it is a good place to try and get into from a marketing standpoint. There is a perception of quality and prestige by potential clients. Someday I'll get lucky and get accepted. It won't make me feel like "I made it"...because I think [know] their "high standards" are not consistant.

 

Yes - there are some top people there!!

But when/if I get in it will happen because I hit them at the right time and perhaps the right person. I've heard this sentiment time and time again from the photographers on another site.

 

Anotherwords...don't take it personally and keep trying.

[colleendonovan]

Okay, let me say this first - Mary, I love your photos and from the first day on this forum and seeing your stuff I've always tried to take as good of pictures as you do. Really, I remember going to my first wedding and having your pictures in the back of my mind. But, there are requirements that are listed on the WPJA's site that you aren't meeting. I don't want to get into it on this public forum, but if you want me too I could give you a few tips ( some that I have received from other people before I got in). It took me awhile to realize what was holding me back from getting accepted. Then everything clicked and I got in. I've seen some pretty crummy work from sites on the WPJA too, but I really think that they are few and far between, and that if you look at those sites they ARE 'journalistic'. Just maybe not the most creative. Who knows. Use it for marketing, or not. I certainly don't think it's going to make or break anyone either way.

[susan_flewelling]

It makes sense to me to be in an organization that you have to be accepted to rather than you pay and are in. Where is the prestige in that? Like it or not that is what a lot of this (marketing to weddings) is. I like the idea of not everyone including uncle Joe with a digital camera is not going to be in the same organization that I am. Just a thought.

[wentzu_chang]

last year december, I found out wpja, applied, and got accepted. up to right now 2 months, there is one bride contact me and book me through the wpja.

 

I will see how the advertising from wpja goes through the year...

 

I believe that the membership fee I believe is 180 dollars per year now. and I hope they won't increase the price every year...

[marv_stasak___southfield__]

Coleen,

 

You need to re-read my comment. I never said that WPJA photographers can't pose groups or adequately light a portrait. What I did say is that, in my opinion, many photographers who label themselves "PJ" can't do it. I have NO idea who can and who can't in the WPJA. All I DO know is that, when I visit photographer's web sites in general, I suspect many of the "PJ" people can't do it. If they could, I would expect to see a few pix that would demonstrate it and I often don't. As to WPJA arrogance, when an organization invites people to join and then treats their efforts with silence if they don't measure up, that's arrogance. There is no other word for it. Courtesy and common decency would require a polite explanation and would take only a minute or two.

[vladimir_pcholkin___washin]

I joint WPJA last December. I send my info, and a couple of weeks later I was in. It is really good advertising. I have stats for my website. In average 30-40% of my traffic comes from WPJA. I have 2 bookings this year from link on WPJA. 2 month ago I quit Knot, because I had one wedding a year from them for almost $1000 a year. In WPJA I pay $300 for 3 listings for a year. So far works great for me and I think they have pretty good pix in their contests.

[colleendonovan]

Well, Marv, maybe you're right, but if you had hundreds of people asking you to look at their website everyday would you reply to the ones you didn't like? It says right on the application that there is no way they can respond to every one and that they are not in the business of critiquing websites.

[blueworldstudios]

I don't believe that for a second. If you have time to look at a website and make a decision,

you have time to write a simple note to the applicant.

 

I also don't believe they get 'hundreds' of applicants everyday.

 

What not responding does provide is the ability to mask how completely arbitrary and

variable the selection process is.

[colleendonovan]

I don't know how many applications they get, and it really doesn't matter. If people are such cry babies then they shouldn't apply for pete's sake and then they won't have to worry about getting a reply or not, will they?

[lisa_berry___northampton_m]

I was rejected twice as well! But I know that I do really good work. It left me with a

strange feeling of inadequacy, but I know it shouldn't matter as it's only designated by a

few opinions. I wonder if it's worth trying again with an updated website. I wanted to join

for an opportunity to put myself out there for destination weddings. Does anyone know of

another effective way to do that?

[jgrim8]

Why are people getting so snooty?

[brad_walters]

How many of you bashing the WPJA have any formal training in photojournalism? and yet

you feel confident that you can determine who should and shouldn't be accepted?. These

members (most of us) have actual photojournalism experience. In fact, one of us was just

shot in Iraq while covering the war. How many of you have spent more than 10 minutes

looking at the award winning images and asked yourself what makes them so special? my

point is, it is obvious that most of you are speaking from a lack of knowledge about real

photojournalism. The WPJA is not stating that "you suck and I want nothing to do with

you" because you do not get accepted, they are simply saying you do not have the same

style. That is all, you're reading into it too much. You very well may be an incredible

photographer. And as for the remark about the "profit from photographers", I assure you,

that's not the case. I encourage everyone to spend some time looking at your own

website, then looking at WPJA memebers sights. Find the moment, the story, the facial

expressions, the events that mean something to the B&G and that make you feel

something other than "oh...thats a lovely photo" This is what the WPJA is about. As for all

of you who think I'm a terd now....you started it...but I still want to be your friend. :)

[drolight]

Brad hit the nail on the head - there is way too much white noise here about WPJA without understanding the concept behind the group. I know way too many wedding photogs who have started branding themselves as "photojournalists" without having worked a day at a daily newspaper or shot for an editorial magazine. Scary! Added to this is of course those very same "photojournalists" who use low-ball tactics to attract unsuspecting clients away from those who really know what they are doing. I am starting to rant ... so, I'll leave it at that ... Every organization is what you make of it. There are photogs who got in who in your opinion shouldn't have, but leave the management to those who manage it. Work on your craft and be in control of what you can control.