Examples to learn from

[twatkinson]

I've decided to post some of my wedding photos, in the hopes that others can learn from my

photographer's mistakes.

 

My wedding was in Feb '06. We had a hard time finding a photographer for our date (because of our

time frame, and most we contacted were unavailable), but we were given a recomendation by someone

we considered professional and knowledgable. The photographer we hired was fairly inexperienced,

with only a handful of weddings he had done, but he was confident he could provide what I wanted (I

showed him examples and gave him a complete list of the photos I wanted). I gave him total creative

control, stressing that I hate boring backgrounds and "everyone standing in a line with a posed smile" I

saw some examples of his work that I liked (however I didn't have the technical knowledge I have now)

and I booked his most basic package (I was nervous about committing to prints without seeing the final

product first). We didn't sign a contract (red flag - I know this now), but I was just happy we had

SOMEBODY.

 

Fwd to the "big day," I started to get nervous when I saw his camera and on-camera flash only. I also

knew I was in trouble when I started directing HIM. I knew he was the professional, but he was missing

SO many shots, and most were specifically asked for, and I knew his compositions weren't creative... at

all. After an hour, he finished the family groups (in the most basic "everyone in a line with posed

smiles"). I didn't get to relax or enjoy this time at all because I was making sure he didn't miss the

important ones, and trying to keep HIM from getting too flustered. Even though I asked a few times if

we could try something different, he assured me everything was fine (it wasn't). There was only a few of

the entire wedding party, all "standing in a line with posed smiles", and a few of my husband and I (not

creative... at all). No bridal portraits, no groom portraits, no groom and groomsmen, NONE of my

husband, myself and our two children (I was so upset about this), and NO formals of my kids. ALL were

done in front of a plain white background that was not meant to be used for the photographs, it was a

screen to block a bad area at the ceremony site.

 

Anyway, I was disapointed to say the least when I saw the proof book. I know I got what I paid for, and

I've learned my lesson. Hopefully, I can fix somethings in photoshop, and a friend was able to do some

nice family photos for us afterwards.

 

I'm sharing this so others can learn from my experience, so here is my advice:

 

1. Remember this is a "once in a lifetime day" most photos can't be reshot

 

2. DO NOT CHARGE MORE THAN YOU ARE WORTH!! If you are inexperienced, do it for free, or charge

travel only

 

3. Be honest about your experience and abilities (to yourself and your client)

 

4. On camera flash is not the only flash you should use

 

5. Learn from other's examples, good and bad

 

6. Plan and prepare. Don't just show up thinking everything will go fine

 

 

Finally, here is a selection of the photos he gave me, please learn from them, and feel free to comment

here.

 

www.kodakgallery.com

user email is: watkinsonweddingpics@yahoo.ca

password is: wedding<div></div>

[twatkinson]

Sorry, I should also note, I use the term "formal" to mean "composed shots" not formal in the

traditional sense. He knew I was looking for fun, relaxed, natural shots.

[twatkinson]

One more thing, I've added comments on individual pictures on the gallery

[rachael]

I'm sorry to hear that you had such a bad experience on such an important day. I myself had a few issues with my wedding photography, mostly they didn't get shots that were requested, i.e. my mom and I.

I agree that this guy should have had the guts to tell he didn't feel 100% comfortable. I do have to disagree with on thing in your post though. I don't think you HAVE to HAVE more then a camera and an on camera flash. Yes it's important to know how to use them, but not necessary to have more then that. I'm a second shooter for another photographer and both her and I use nothing more then a camera body, couple of lenses and on camera flash. I personally hate a lot of flash, it completly takes the mood out of the photograph. It's prefectly possible to shoot almost an entire wedding without any flash with digital cameras, all it takes a higher ISO. I know there are people out there that think you have to use flash for everything. I'm just saying that's not always necessary and in some cases ruins a picture.

Anyway, I hope you can salvage something out of your experience and maybe even teach others.

[twatkinson]

I agree. If you know what you are doing on camera flash is fine and of course no flash is ok

too. I think his flash is what caused the dead skin tones and really bad shadows

[laurenm]

Talitha, may I ask how much you paid and what you received for what you paid? And were there more than 30 photos?

At first glance on an uncalibrated monitor, the skin tones from the photographer look better then the fixed versions. I'd find a lab that will correct them for you. I don't think the screen as a background is that horrible though at times there are harsh shadows due to on camera flash and subjects being too close to the background. Some feet and lower dresses are cut off but posing isn't REALLY horrible.

The shot with the fan over your head, yeah, shadow is bad, but photographer can't help where you are standing, nor can they help if little kids appear funny looking in front of the camera. yes, a more experienced photographer would have done better, but I've seen worse and again, just wonder what this person charged.

[laurenm]

PS - Yes, a professional wedding photographer DOES have to have more than one camera and on camera flash.

[claudiocruz]

Hi,<br>

Sorry for you bad experience Talitha. <br>

<br>

But anybody here have heard of Gary Fong? And no flash is ok for formals??<br>

[tdj]

Hey Talitha,<br>Sorry about the bad experience. It seems that more and more of these posts are being made lately. Unfortunately, alot of people are buying a DSLR kit, printing business cards, and boom!- they are instant wedding photographers. I don't know what you paid, but I'll bet it wasn't too much, or I hope it wasn't too much. Wedding photography is about much more than just "taking pictures". It's about relationships, people skills, nailing the moment at the right time, etc. I always carry 3-4 cameras to every wedding. I shoot alot of available light, but I also use fill flash alot, too. If used correctly, fill flash is great. <P/>Best of luck...BTW, you were a beautiful bride!

[david_sparks2]

I'm sorry to hear your wedding photographer did not deliver.

 

Lack of experience definitely shows here. It looks like auto white balance was used. Colors with on-camera flash look fine when white balance is set properly...shadows and harsh light are the main problem. And I know that blue-tinted, poor flesh tone look anywhere! And the compositions were more "aim and shoot" then "compose and shoot." There are a lot of lessons to be learned from your photos. I am glad some good can come from them. And thank you for your advice!

 

Other things I noticed:

 

- The photographer didn't move his feet for the candids. Repositioning myself to get the best shot is what I constantly do on wedding days. And it's the reason my feet are sore and why I bump into people (accidentally!) at least a few times during every wedding.

 

- Photo 14...this is quite a touching moment. It's too bad all I see is one eye and one ear on you and your ring bearer. Experienced photographers know to get two eyes in frame and choose one subject that can clearly be seen. Also...too much headroom (the space above subject's heads).

 

- 29: I like this photo. It's underexposed but it has decent composition.

 

Again, thank you Tabitha for posting your wedding photos for all of use to learn from!

[fotografz]

While I don't necessarily agree with every detail of this evaluation by Talitha ( weddings

can and are shot with on-camera flash all the time), it is an important post that highlights

how importantly clients take what we do.

 

 

Times are changing and the need for new ways of thinking are becoming more apparent.

 

I'm going to start a new thread dealing with this in order to share a few thoughts and get

the thoughts of other experienced wedding photographers.

[lindsey_tropf]

I know nothing can replace moments lost in photography on your big day, but something to consider at this point would be to get *another* photographer and take some amazing, creative pictures together with your new husband. You could even do a "trash the dress" session together (see www.trashthedress.com) if you like things *really* creative. A photographer I will be assisting told me she has had quite a few couples come to her after the wedding for a session because of similar problems.

 

Best of luck!

-Lindsey

[nathan_ellzey]

Lindsey,

 

I'd never seen the "trash the dress." Those are awesome photos. I may just give that one a try with my clients.

[tammie_p]

Talitha, sorry you feel you had a bad experience. I had a look at your pictures and I can understand your frustration, however I am a little confused about a couple of things. Your "advice" is good however you state: "The photographer we hired was fairly inexperienced, with only a handful of weddings he had done". It sounds like you were very aware of his experience or lack there of, so why would you hire him? You also sounded like you knew what you were wanting at the time but the photographer wasn't on the same page...why didn't you speak up and say something. As much as I show up at a wedding with a gazilion ideas in my brain and on paper...I have couples that say "hey, what about over here?" or "I was really hoping to get a shot like this can you do it?" And I'm always open for their suggestions. It's their Wedding pictures. I don't know what he charged you, hopefully not to much. I agree with the above post, check into getting some great "post' pictures done with your husband and kids. All the best.

[twatkinson]

Thank you all so much for your comments. As I said before, the point of this thread wasn't

just to complain about bad pictures, I'm hoping people can learn something from my

experience. To answer some questions:

 

Lauren - I paid $500 for the most basic package. It was suposed to include bride getting

ready, ceremony and formals (family, wedding party, bride, groom, couple and us with our

kids) and a proof book. He was there for about 5 hours, and I got a disc with low

resolution images (for printing 4x6) and an order book with 3 1"x2" images per page and

lots of room for placing orders. The photos missing included the wedding party (there

were some, but not anything like I asked for), the same for the couple pictures, there are

none of bride alone, groom alone, groom and groomsmen, and NONE of our family.

 

As for the screen, I suggested 3 other backgrounds that were more visually interesting,

but he told me, no and that that was where he wanted them.

 

In regards to the posing of the formals, I asked for creative, relaxed, natural shots. I didn't

feel like that was what I recieved. The photgrapher could have moved for the getting

dressed shot, and more shots could have been taken of the kids (especially since they

were my son and daughter!)

 

Lindsey - I will try and find something like this in my area, though I haven't seen anything

promoted

 

Tammie - The reasons we hired him were 1) lack of availability 2) time crunch 3)

recommendation from another professional 4) he was confident he could deliver what I

wanted. I made MANY suggestions once I realized it was not going the way I had wanted

the pictures to go. It was very hard to "babysit" and direct HIM, while trying to be a bride at

the same time, and the majority of my suggestions were ignored or dismissed.

 

Thank you again everybody for your input. Hopefully this is helping someone else out.

[twatkinson]

Also, I'm not sure who did the adjustments on the photos, but THANK YOU!! I LOVE #5 & #6. I

know I'm lucky, because other than the missed shots, most of the problems can be fixed in

photoshop so that I can have something I'll be happy with. My album will just look more

"photojournalistic" than I had planed.

[laurenm]

Talitha, I'm sorry for your bad experience and hopefully your tips will help someone. You should probably post them in a bridal forum also to target brides.

 

You said, "but I was just happy we had SOMEBODY"

I realize you were under a time constraint, but you did get SOMEBODY.

 

I would imagine the $500 range is a tough one to end up with photos you love unless you were someone who really didn't care much about photography and didn't know the difference. A bride may be very lucky and get a student or apprentice who's just starting out but likely, they won't get lucky. I would stress in your advice/tips that if a bride MUST only spend 500, that she see as many photos as possible from the photographer, get references, ask about equipment, and ask for an engagement shoot for perhaps a small fee as a test.

 

Again, I'm sorry for your experience, but really, for 500, if you have the originals with some knowledge of your own and a bit of help, I don't think they are THAT bad (for 500). And hopefully you have more to work with than what you posted. Maybe not worth $500, but you can work with them. It's good of you to take your bad experience and use it to help others.

[laurenm]

One other thing to stress to other brides - you said in your response to Tammie, "he was confident he could deliver what I wanted"

It is your special once in a lifetime event. The BRIDE needs to be confident in the photographer instead of trusting that the PHOTOGRAPHER says he is confident - this would be especially true in dealing with someone who has only done a handful of weddings.

[gene_b]

I think that the best lesson you get from this is that you usually get what you pay for. I looked at your pictures and was going to criticize the photographer for doing some really sloppy work then I read your next post that stated you paid $500 for the whole job!!!

 

If you are willing to trust the most valuable memories of your life to someone that charges $500, you have about the same right to complain as someone buying a used Yugo who is mad because the car does not come with a factory navigation system!

 

I have been reading a lot in this forum about how someone can get lucky and land excellent photography for close to nothing. I strongly disagree. You don't! What you get is either someone who is so bad that only people who do not care about photography hires them or you get an "up and coming" talented photographer that may have a good eye and can take some nice shots but is very inexperienced and will most likely screw up a lot of what may be considered "must have shots".

 

To sum it up, I think you got just about what you paid for. Don?t blame the photographer. Blame yourself for going cheap.

[twatkinson]

In our area, the wedding industry is not quite what some of you may be used to. Other

photographers I had looked at charged $1000-$1500, not out of my price range, but

these pakages included prints and albums. I wanted more of a scrapbook stlye album, so I

wanted to be able to print my own photos (I wouldn't know what sizes or what photos I

wanted to use until I actually started the album). As I was paying for his time ONLY, $100/

hour sounded reasonable for professional quality (an average studio portrait fee ranges

between $60-$150 for a one hour session). And yes, between his photos, photos from my

family members and a lot of time in photoshop, I will have an album I am happy with.

 

I'm curious to see, so I will probably start a new thread on this, but is $100/hour

considered "cheap"?

[gene_b]

The answer to your question is YES! $500 to cover a full wedding is cheap anywhere unless you work in New Delhi, or you are doing it as a hobby. Looks like you got the guy with the hobby.

 

I thank you for posting here. My hope is that other brides will read this and get it. If you want pictures for a scrap book, you hire the $500 guy. Between him and the disposables from the tables you'll get plenty of snapshots to print on your home printer and glue in your book.

 

If you want artistic, professional photography that your great grandkids will look at and go "wow", do not look at the price first. Fall in love with a photographer's work then ask for the price and pay it.

 

Out of curiosity, what is your area...?

[twatkinson]

I'm in central Alberta, Canada. Around here, the average wedding is closer to $10,000

(including everything). Even going north to Edmonton or south to Calgary there is a MUCH

better market for brides. I searched for three months just to find a venue that wasn't a

convention center or hall, and a caterer that would serve passed hors d'oeuvre's (one actually

suggested bacon wrapped sausages in an appetizer buffet!)

[twatkinson]

One more thing, scrapbooking is MUCH more than "snapshots pinted on your home printer

and glued in a book". It's about having an album that showcases your beautiful photos AND

tells the story behind the photos (so your great grandkids who may never get to hear it from

you, know about the details of your day). Here is an example of a professional photo used in

a scrapbook.

[laurenm]

Talitha, the "average studio" often turns around and sells portraits from that one hour shoot so even with post production, they are charging more than 60-150/hr.

Your photographer also had to speak with you at least initially and hopefully more, checked out or visited the venue, spent some amount of time processing the images (even if they don't look like much was spent)and then meet with you after the wedding (or maybe he just mailed you a cd?) - not to mention, website, advertising, sample albums, insurance, taxes, and equipment costs. Even if he didn't have all of the above, he didn't make much money if any in the long run on your wedding.

 

Most materials these days are but just in case - wanted to remind you to use all archival materials in your scrap book and if it were my wedding, I'd use photo corners instead of glue or tape - unless you have all the photos intact in a seperate album. A scrapbook is fun and nice to have but good quality prints on archival paper and stored properly will last into further generations.

[gene_b]

I just looked around the web and saw some decent photographers in your area charging much less than in LA or NY but still in the $1800-$2000 to start. Also if photography is very important to you and you cannot find a local good photographer available, you could hire someone you love and reimburse them for travel expenses. There is a large number of great photographers that will travel to your event.

 

Regarding the scrapbook, I have to disagree with you. The scrap book is something cute and by definition amateurish in nature. You say that you "hwant to tell a story" with your scrap book. Well you won?t see any good photographers offering heirloom scrapbooks because they can and do tell the story of your special day with their photography and use design skills to put together your album and print the end product using professional services that do cost more but will last you generations. Professionally printed photographs are supposed to last 100-150 years while prints printed on a consumer printer will last 2-3 years before fading changing colors etc., etc. That is ok if you use them in scrap books and the pictures you got for your $500 are just perfect for such use. Not that good if you are aiming for a classy, artistic and professional look.

 

One more thing, the "professional" photograph you posted as one used in a scrapbook is really not that great. It's a beautiful location (reminds me of St.Martin in the Caribbean) but it has the same amateurish look. The slanted look may be the photographer?s attempt to take a "hip" photojournalistic style shot but it is taken at a very unflattering angle for the bride (she looks HUGE to the point of making the viewer feel sorry for the poor groom holding her).