Contract Wedding Photography Work... good/bad ?

[rob_s___san_francisco_bay_]

I was wondering if anyone has any experience or thoughts about shooting weddings for a company or a

larger photography studio that basically takes the leads, books the weddings, and then takes the images

from you and does what's necessary to deliver them to the bride & groom.<p>

Obviously, the first requirement for me is that I get to keep full rights to my images. Next, I need a fair

rate of compensation, etc... Yeah, I know the rates are typically going to be near bottom of the barrel.<p>

btw, what do you guess is a decent rate for that type of gig? Let's say this is in a major metropolitan area

and a basic 8 hour wedding package is in the $3k range which includes a custom album plus some prints.

Just to show up and shoot what percentage would you expect?

<p>

I would think that an arrangement like this could be good for someone starting out because it is a way to

gain experience, meet potential clients and get your name and your images out to the guests and family of

the weddings

that you shoot. And let's say you're good enough to where you're sure to do a good job, maybe you'll get

the referral instead of the company that they

intially booked with. You also get to shoot for your own wedding portfolio.<p>

BUT, on the other hand when you hand over the images who knows what the company will do with them.

They may hire someone who probably ( or very likely ) wouldn't spend the time processing the images that

you, the photographer, would. And almost certainly would apply a different "look" to the images (good or

bad). And perhaps they use a cheap album design and/or designer. Even though you had nothing to do

with that back-end process, you're the one who shot the wedding so your name is attached somehow.

<p>

I guess it depends on the company. I'm sure there are very good ones who treat photographers very fairly.

<p>

I'm mostly just curious what other people thought.

[jimstrutz]

<I>"I'm sure there are very good ones who treat photographers very fairly."</I>

<P>

I'm not so sure about that. Hopeful, perhaps, but not at all sure. If there are studios like that they likely aren't hiring fresh new photogs. They'd be looking for very experienced wedding photographers, or perhaps very cheap assistants that they could train for a couple years while they worked them like slaves.

<P>

Some issues you will likely face in your search for a "fair" wedding studio: Keeping full rights to images. A "fair" rate of compensation will most likely be considered more fair to them than to you. Seeing that "your name is attached somehow." Getting hired as a photographer without considerable experience.

[rob_s___san_francisco_bay_]

<i>>> "I'm not so sure about that. Hopeful, perhaps, but not at all sure."</i>

<p>

yeah, same here actually... I was trying to be polite :-)

<p>

and I'm also pretty sure I'm past the point of taking on most of these kind of gigs :-)

[kevin cook - stratford upo]

UK.

 

If you ever find one then keep it to yourself! Such companies in my experience, if they, exist are far and wide between. I've worked for some off and on and have found them very dismissal of the photographer's role. Firstly they always take the sole copyright, they can't really contract with a client if they don't own what they sell really and to ensure their reputation they can't have you advertising their wedding on your website etc.

 

Kodak, when they did it, wouldn't even let you keep a copy!

 

Rates, very poor. The average her was 145 pounds for 4 hrs on a clients ?1400 package.

 

Nor would they allow you to associate your name/company or approach any guest or the clitents with business cards etc.

 

It's experience though without risk but not employment!

 

Just my TCW

 

Kevin

[nancy s.]

If all you want to do is work for the money.. then go for it.

 

If you think you own the images, dream on and if you think you will be paid well, just compare your rate per hour, the cost of travel and whatever else are "your" expenses to the hourly rate paid for retail work.

 

If you, as a contractor, must provide the equipment as well, you are likely better off doing something else with your time.

[don_hill]

<em>Obviously, the first requirement for me is that I get to keep full rights to my images.

</em></p>You will have a difficult time finding a reputatble company that will allow you

to do this, specifically when you are working with an established studio that is charging

3000+ per wedding. To be able to

charge at the level takes a few years of excellent work and a positive track

record on the part of the studio or principal photographer.</p>Most likely, you will find

that the studio will pay you on an

hourly basis anywhere from 10 - 40 per hour based on experience. If you are just starting

out, you will make very little money and most likely be a grip for a few gigs. Regardless of

how good you may be, any mistakes that you make by being green are now the

responsibility of the studio who booked the wedding. Therefore, the good paying jobs

surface after a level of trust and expertise has been gained on your end.</p>Regarding

the handing over of your images for post production, this is work for hire and it is not

your images. The hiring studio owns the work that you produce, and if they are a good

studio, they will have many resources to produce an excellent album. Look at their

samples if you are concerned about how the final work will be presented. You may have

shot the weddding, but the bride and groom hired the studio - <em>not you</em>.

That is the name they remember.</p>Above all, this

is a

business. There are responsibilities and liabilities that the studio assumes when

photographing this event. They have built up a reputation, and it only takes a few

mistakes from a gung-ho newbie to destroy years of hard work.

[bruce_rubenstein]

What you have remember regarding usage rights is that the clients signed a contract with the studio and not you. Whatever usage rights they gave are for the studio and not you. Even if you retain copyright, you can't use them to promote your business. You can also be pretty sure that any studio hiring you will require that you sign a work for hire contract (transfers copyright to the studio).

 

How much you get paid will either be a straight per hour rate, or shooting fee and not be tied to the overall package price that the clients contracted for. How much you make will depend on the studio and the price level they charge. There will be low end wedding mill studios that pay a couple of hundred dollars ranging all the way up to very high end studios. (There is someone here who shoots for Fred Marcus Photography, and that's a high end studio in NYC. Maybe he'll post on this thread.) On a 3k gig, I would expect that you would get around 1k.

[BrianS1664879711]

You might be asking for too much. The best you might get is a job here-and-there, a paycheck for your time, but not much else. I won't repeat the wisdom posted above, but I'll reiterate that few studios are interested in taking a risk on a new shooter. Plan on "paying your dues" by doing edit/printing, album design, coffee making, assisting, etc. before they let you shoot a real event. After all, if you want to drink the cream, it's best to learn how to milk the cow.

[matt_k1]

I recently crossed paths with a company that was hiring photographers. They were not

paying much. Basically it was $50 an hour to shoot the event, so about $400 for an 8 hour

wedding. No travel or expenses covered. Images

are turned over to them, but they would let you use them for your portfolio. <p>

It seemed to me that they were seeking out beginners without much experience who

would

work for little pay in order to get images to build a portfolio. The wedding images on

their

website were not very good at all... not in line with the prices they had listed, but I could

clearly see that the quality was a reflection of the level of photographers they had been

hiring.<p> Not worth it in my opinion. I don't understand how brides can work with a

company like that where in a lot of cases they don't even meet the photographer before

the wedding day.

[picturesque]

Independent contractor work has good and bad, just like anything else. Most of the time, you will not get to keep rights to your work, you get paid hourly, not by percentage of package, and you will not be able (legally) to market yourself and your name to clients gotten by the studio you work for. So your reasoning re good for starting photographers to get your name out is no go.

 

On the other hand, it is a good set up for someone who does not intend to go full time as a wedding photographer and has a job during the week. You don't have to deal with sales and marketing, or album and print fulfillment, both of which can be costly and time consuming.

 

The companies vary, of course, and there are exceptions, such as Fred Marcus Studios in New York. You have to be very good to be hired by them. You should analyze your goals if you are considering working for another outfit. If you are attached to your "art", and intend to make wedding photography a full time career, or even part time but targeting the higher end of the market, you probably shouldn't work for someone else.

 

You should only consider this type of work as a beginning photographer, just for a little while, and to get training and background on the industry itself. Mining leads from the company's client base is unethical. As for compensation, it varies. I would say urban areas might be $75 and up per hour, but remember that you are solely responsible for your equipment, vehicle and insurance. So if your gear gets stolen, or breaks, etc., you are the one replacing it, not the company.

[StuartMoxham]

Another way to look at it Rob, say you find somewhere that will pay you $60 per hour for an 8 hour gig and you hand over the card at the end for them to proccess and make the album. How many jobs are going to pay you $60 per hour. Now you could do better going on your own but you have to find the work promote your company deal with the price shoppers pay for prints pay for albums keep an archive not to mention making proofs post proccessing. When you start you may not be able to book high end weddings and you may not be able to book that much work in your first few years so regular work as a contractor may not be so bad after all.

[colleendonovan]

Check out Bella.

[StuartMoxham]

Bella do they have a website.

[conraderb]

Rob - I shot a few weddings once for $250 for 6 hours. That was before I realized that for the cost of putting a portfolio together and putting up a website, I could be making 4x or 5x that rate for the same work.

 

I stopped shooting for that company very quickly :-)

 

Overall, I think the fact remains that if you are talented enough and can handle the pressure and responsibility, and have enough time to administer the business, you will always be able to give yourself a better deal if you book your own gigs. Plus then you have ownership, get to know your clients better, and are able to filter out the clients who aren't a good match, and you get thank you cards from clients and all of that.

 

You can't do any of the things above when you shoot for someone else, AND you get paid less.

 

Some people shoot for studios because their work is inferior and the studio doesn't expect much - it is just a wedding mill.

 

I don't know about you, but I take ownership in my work, and I'm proud that I haven't had a disappointed client yet. I'm not a wedding mill - I'm a good photographer and my clients love me for it. Yes, the money is good, but I love the thrill of shooting a wedding and having the bride and groom tell me how much they love the pictures makes it very rewarding in nonmonetary ways.

[idobelieve]

I am currently working as a contract photographer for a more experienced photographer that is getting too much work to handle on his own. As a newbie I find the situation ideal. I have a mentor, I make a fair amount for my work ($100/hour), I retain copyright and can use all images as I please, I participate in B&G meetings, show up at weddings and edit my images, the rest is all taken care of. It's like a paid internship. I count myself extremely lucky to have found such a great person to work with. I found him by searching the web for photographers I liked in my area and sending out emails asking about 2nd work. He took me on as second and soon started sending out on my own. I make money, get great advice and experience and build my folio, he makes money on days he is already booked. I would recommend this setup to anyone new or struggling with the business. (Just make sure you draw up a solid contract and agree on detailed terms!)

[conraderb]

michelle - that sounds like a very sweet gig. most photographers I think would be hard pressed to find something like that...

[colleendonovan]

Sorry whoever asked for a website! It's right here <a href="http://www.bellapictures.com" >Bella Pictures</a>.

 

<p>You go and shoot the wedding for them, you send the cards that they supplied you with and that have the wedding pictures on them back to Bella (after you have copied them to your computer so that you can use the images however you would like), they deal with the rest, you get paid. It's a great way for photographers just starting out or trying to build their portfolios beacuse all of the images that you take are still yours. They don't put any usage limits on them. Also, you don't have to do any of the post production stuff. If you go to their website there is a phone number you can call to talk to them.