First wedding...

[natalie_odonnell]

<p>Hi, I'm going to be shooting my first wedding in about 1 month. It's seems to be very casual, small (backyard), and the bride and groom (sibling of a friend of mine) are very laid back about the whole thing. They also know that I've never done a wedding before. As far as my equipment goes, I have a Canon 30D, 430ex flash with diffuser, memory cards, and I will be renting a lens- I think a 70-200mm. Would anyone suggest more equipment? Also, I'm figuring out prices and am a little unsure about how to go about this... Should I charge for my services and then give them pricing for each photo they want to buy? If I do that do I give the prices per photo after the wedding? Or do I include the pricing for photos with the overall charge for the wedding? I am also unsure if I should send them out to a proffesional lab or do them myself, I have an Epson R2880. One more thing, I never shoot in RAW but the research I've been doing suggests that for a wedding I should. Is that something I should consider? I know some people will say I shouldn't do this wedding because I have so many questions, but how else can I gain experience? Everyone has to start somewhere. Any answers to these questions would be greatly appreciated!! Thanks!<br>

Natalie</p>

[picturesque]

<p>Natalie--the 'normal' way to gain experience is to assist and second shoot for an established wedding photographer. This way, you can gain experience and even make mistakes without consequences. The consequences can be large, so the first thing I would do is put together a contract. The sibling of a friend of yours, unlike a family member, isn't going to forgive you so easily if things don't go well.</p>

<p>Sometimes, especially today, you can't find an apprentice position, and if that is the case, one can self start, but if you do this, be very sure you are accurately assessing your skills and business sense.</p>

<p>As for your questions, I would say that the 70-200mm isn't the first lens I would choose for a small backyard wedding. It will be too long on a 30D, most probably. Hopefully you have the kit lens or a lens in the 17-50mm range. Hopefully you have complete back up and lots of spare camera and flash batteries.</p>

<p>How you work out selling your images is up to you. No one can suggest the best thing to do here. There are many different way of doing this, from handing over the images on disk with no print sales to print sales only.</p>

<p>If you do print out the images always use a reputable lab. I would not do any printing myself. You shoot a lot of images at a wedding. Usually printing at home is not economical.</p>

<p>Shooting RAW is up to you, but if you aren't routinely nailing most of your exposures to within a stop under and 1/3 stop over, I'd shoot RAW. If so, be sure you have enough memory cards.</p>

[kris-bochenek]

<p>Natalie<br>

you will get a lot of better advices from pros here but here is my humble advice<br>

in you equipment list i dont see any wide angle to short tele lenses like 18-50 or 17-55 the long 70-200 is ok I use it mostly for candids and when I cannot be too close to the action<br>

as long as the couple is aware of your "freshness" you should be fine. I suggest you get to know your flash and know how to balance it with ambient light. make sure you'll bring extra batteries and memory a backup camera would be good too should you 30D (knock on wood) fail.<br>

Also many will suggest that you work with a pro for a while untill you learn all the tricks and are confortable with such events. Weddings are fast pace events and you need to know how to use your gear so that you won't miss the shot.<br>

As to how much you should charge well you would have to calculate the cost of your gea (wear and tear) and what you want to get out of this shoot.<br>

should you include the CD with photos in the package or charge them for each print is up to you.<br>

I include the CD with all the hi -res files with the rights to reprint in all my packages.<br>

I wish you luck and hope to see some shots.</p>

[kris-bochenek]

<p>well Nadine was faster :-)</p>

[konrad_bilinski1]

<p>Buy a used 50mm 1.8. It will run you less than $100 and you could shoot almost the whole wedding with that one lens.<br>

It is after all the nifty fifty.</p>

[william-porter]

<blockquote>Hi, I'm going to be shooting my first wedding in about 1 month. It's seems to be very casual, small (backyard), and the bride and groom (sibling of a friend of mine) are very laid back about the whole thing. They also know that I've never done a wedding before.</blockquote>

<p>Natalie,<br>

It's good that they know you've never done a wedding. But that doesn't get you off the hook, especially if you plan to charge them.</p>

<p>*</p>

 

<blockquote>As far as my equipment goes, I have a Canon 30D, 430ex flash with diffuser, memory cards, and I will be renting a lens- I think a 70-200mm. Would anyone suggest more equipment?</blockquote>

<p>It's not really about equipment. But I think that the first thing most of us here will notice is that you only mention one camera. Read through the forums here for new wedding photographers and you'll see that just about the first piece of advice given over and over is, get a second camera. Cameras do break, get dropped, get stolen, get champagne poured on them. It does happen. If you have no backup to turn to, you're SOL. Not good - especially if you're charging. If you can live with this risk and accept the consequences if your one camera does become unusable, then fine.</p>

<p>*</p>

<blockquote>Also, I'm figuring out prices and am a little unsure about how to go about this... Should I charge for my services and then give them pricing for each photo they want to buy? If I do that do I give the prices per photo after the wedding? Or do I include the pricing for photos with the overall charge for the wedding?</blockquote>

<p>If this is your first wedding, I'd suggest that you do it for free. It's still a good idea to have a contract and treat it absolutely as a paying gig in every way. But doing it for free makes it completely clear to the bride and groom that you're a newbie and this should take a lot of pressure off, which will be valuable. Besides the experience you get from this is worth more than the money you could charge.<br>

If you do charge a fee, the easiest thing by far is to charge a flat free. Keep it very low. Make sure your contract explains what they get for that (for example, coverage of the wedding, plus processing of 100-200 files, plus a DVD with high-res jpegs, to be delivered within 4 weeks after the wedding, etc.). You can charge for prints afterwards if you like but I would not charge much. Don't the bride and groom want digital files? Most seem to, these days. If you give 'em digital files on a DVD you might not have to worry about prints at all.</p>

<p>*</p>

<blockquote>One more thing, I never shoot in RAW but the research I've been doing suggests that for a wedding I should. Is that something I should consider?</blockquote>

<p>YES. In my opinion, you should shoot raw all the time, for just about anything. For most photographers the only significant downside to raw capture is that the files are a good bit larger, so you get fewer files stored on a single card. But storage is cheap. But 4 GB or 8 GB cards - or simply be prepared to change cards frequently.</p>

<p>*</p>

<blockquote>I know some people will say I shouldn't do this wedding because I have so many questions, but how else can I gain experience? Everyone has to start somewhere.</blockquote>

<p>Yeah, this is the classic problem - can't get a job without experience, can't get experience without a job. What you're doing here is fine, in my opinion, provided that the bride and groom know that you have no experience and (in my view) provided that you're not charging.</p>

<p>Wedding photography is difficult in every sense of the word. You work hard, you need a lot of skill and experience to do a good job - and it can be personally or emotionally "difficult" since you're dealing with a lot of people who themselves are on the edge emotionally.</p>

<p>You didn't mention anything about what experience you do have. Given the questions you ask, I'm guessing you don't have a lot of experience shooting events of any kind. That's fine but it means you have a lot to learn in a month. Will you shoot formals? How? Do you have a tripod and (ideally) a cable or remote shutter release? Will you be shooting flash? How good are you with flash photography, which can be really challenging?</p>

<p>There are lots of resources available and I urge you to find some and read. There's stuff for new wedding photographers here at photo.net, elsewhere on the Web, and there are many books on the subject. Study is important. But it's even more important to practice. Do everything you can right now to anticipate the kinds of photographic challenges you will face that day and then practice for them.</p>

<p>Good luck.</p>

[scottyt]

<p>Hi Natalie.<br>

I wouldn't charge. Chalk it up to experience.<br>

Scott.</p>

[aimee_pieters]

<p>Natalie,<br>

With each response you will get a different opinion. Being that this is your first, you should keep your price low, but you shouldn't work for free. The sense that I often get is that NOT charging gets you off the hook in terms of responsibility and that's just not the case. One has nothing to do with the other. Should you charge the same as an established studio? Of course not as you're not really able to provide the same level of experience. Should you work for free? I don't think so.<br>

I would come up with a reasonable fee for the day and don't forget about post production and the manner in which the client will view the images. This can take as long as the shoot. In terms of product, start with doubling the price of an album and about 5 times your lab cost for prints. In terms of files; perhaps pre-arrange a price or if they make a large purchase, then just include them. Remember, that when you release the files you have no control over the printing process. No one ever asks someone where they had something printed, they just ask who took the photograph; so your reputation is at stake.<br>

As other have said, you MUST have a complete set of backup equipment along with lots of cards and batteries. Good luck....-Aimee</p>

[savagesax]

Depending on the backyard, if there's no shade, just sun all over the place, the 430 strobe probably isn't powerful enough.

 

You should surely use a pro lab to do the printing. Your inkjet printer can't match the quality of computerized imaging. It's also a lot less expensive. The going rate for color corrected prints is about 40 cents a print and I'd pay 4 times that, before printing myself.

 

If you charge, which I don't think you should for your first wedding, get a contract. There are too many things that can go wrong at your first wedding.

 

If you don't charge, keep your receipts with the understanding that the couple pays you for the lab bills.

If you do a really good job maybe the couple will give you $100 or something for your hard work and for your time. Your friend that suggested you to shoot the wedding can also suggest to the couple to give you a few bucks.

[roger_smith4]

<p>"You should surely use a pro lab to do the printing. Your inkjet printer can't match the quality of computerized imaging."<br>

<br /> Really? Based on what? I have Epson R1800 inkjet prints that are almost identical to Frontier prints sitting side by side. The Epsons should last longer, too. See the accelerated aging tests here (donate $25 to this great non-profit to see the full list of results) http://aardenburg-imaging.com/cgi-bin/mrk/_4102c2hvd19kb2NfbGlzdC80</p>

[William Michael]

<p ><strong ><em >"I have a Canon 30D, 430ex flash with diffuser, memory cards, and I will be renting a lens- I think a 70-200mm. Would anyone suggest more equipment?"</em></strong></p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p >You need a second camera, a second Flash and another lens, capable of shooting the whole Wedding should your main zoom fail. A fast Prime in the area of 28mm to 35mm would fit these requirements and also would allow some creative shallow DoF portraiture and Available Light capture, even in tight spaces and / or for small groups. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I too think the 70 to 200 will be too long for a “Small Backyard Wedding”. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >I assume you have the Canon kit lens: the 18 to 55? I assume also that the Wedding will be in the daylight hours. If so, your kit lens and your Flash should get you by. The kit lens works quite OK around F/8 to F/10 and if you nail the exposure you will get quality prints. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >*** </p>

<p > </p>

<p >On techniques you might consider: it would be beneficial know how to use Flash Fill in daylight. You should also know that you will be working fairly close if you want to use Flash Fill on a sunny - another reason why the 70 to 200 would not be on my priority list. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >*** </p>

<p > </p>

<p >On charging, I now charge for my services and send everything to print professionally. I have also done mostly everything in house - there are pros and cons for both methods. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >As this is your first, I think you have enough to think about just doing the gig and even though printing the final product comes later, when you might have some time to do that work, you will need some proof or selection device. In this regard, I think you will be best teaming up with a pro lab to expedite the turn around and perhaps utilize some of the lab’s expertise in Photo Finishing - which might be an advantage to you.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >If you plan to use a lab, then you should get and idea of what services are available, sooner rather than later, and what files they want, cropped or not. . . </p>

<p > </p>

<p >But I highlight you have not mentioned what the selection device will be - - - i.e. what will the B&G be viewing to choose their “Final Prints”? – Whatever the device / method, it will have some impact on whether you send the image files to a Professional Lab, or not. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >*** </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Whilst I agree that everyone has to begin somewhere, and that I acknowledge that you are seeking answers to very sensible questions, it would be unprofessional of me not to mention that the questions you are asking are rudimentary, and whilst not making any assumptions upon your General Photography experience, the questions asked indicate inexperience and ignorance with Wedding Photography, both in the Technical Imaging Processes and the Client Management & Business systems. Commenting on the issue of Business Protocol only, I advise you to be aware of your legal responsibilities and the safeguards you need to ensure, should this gig you are charging for, go belly up. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >WW</p>

<p > </p>

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p>You've got good information above with the exception suggesting that you charge a fee, at this point I would recommend doing this as a gift in exchange for the experience. I'm also not sure that you need a contract since the contract itself implies a level of professional service and liability. I also agree that there's no need to rent the longer lens for a casual backyard wedding.</p>

[savagesax]

Roger, I don't understand what you wish to prove to me. I took 20 minutes of time to look at the chart, but there are no listings of the $750,000 to $1,200,000 printers used at the pro lab I use. My lab uses Kodak, by the way. So based on that lets avoid getting into which printers are better at showdowns. This will turn into a topic similar to which camera company is better, Canon, Sony, or Nikon. No one ever wins.

 

Frankly, I do have to ask you this. Would you rather trust a very slow inkjet printer that costs less than $5000 for the best of the bunch, or a 1 million dollar beast with all of the bells and whistles that offers 238 color corrections at your finger tips? So when you screw up a setting or an exposure the lab will save you.

 

The reality is how much time and how much paper will be wasted getting that perfect print out of using the Epson, compared to the $750,000 printers. It's pretty hard to color correct accurately 400 to 8000 images per wedding, without mistakes, wasting a lot of time and wasted paper, when a lab can do the needed corrections, without paper waste, in about 1 to 2 seconds per print. Just a reminder the cost is only 40 cents per print for a custom professional lab print. The 400 to 8000 images are based on people here on photo.net saying what they average when shooting wedding.

 

If people like Natalie or perhaps yourself enjoy spending hours printing than go for it. It's actually kind of cool having total control over your printing, but the expense for labor, time, paper cost, inkjet refills will result in a much higher cost than 40 cents per print. I would rather make money photographing something, while the lab is busy making my images come to life, so I can sell them with pride. For me is the perfect balance. I'm married to my lab. My fees to the lab last year was over $50,000.

 

If you disagree with me send me an email. I answer all emails.

[roger_smith4]

<p>"Roger, I don't understand what you wish to prove to me. I took 20 minutes of time to look at the chart, but there are no listings of the $750,000 to $1,200,000 printers used at the pro lab I use."<br>

<br /> To clarify the printers I was referring to were Fuji Frontiers. That's what my local pro labs use (Lightjets are similar but for larger sized prints) I think they are closer to $100K than $1 million but I'm not sure as I'm definitely not in the market for one. Anyway, the point was that for longevity according to Wilhelm Imaging Research the Fuji chemicals and paper are better than Kodak but both are signifcantly less archival than modern inkjet prints. The independent Aardenburg testing bears this out on a wider variety of papers (i.e. non-OEM ones) than what Wilhem tests.<br>

Should longevity under display be the only factor? I'd agree and say no. <br>

You can have a workflow where labs do corrections for you, assuming you're willing to pay for their staff time and your time is more valuable than your money.<br>

Personally I just had Frontier-based labs print my images with "no corrections" as I don't want their interpretation of my files. For images larger than 8x12 or so I don't find sending them out to a lab to be more economical than printing at home. <br>

Bob- are you shooting color negative film? I think color correcting hundreds of images is perfectly doable for someone like the original poster who shoots with a DSLR. Lightroom makes it easy to batch corrections and then tweak individual files to taste. With a decent printer profile you shouldn't need to do many reprints (I proof at 4x6 and then print large on my Epson which costs less than $500, not $5000).<br /> <br /> For lots of 4x6 or 5x7 there are very low priced Frontier labs that I've used and I would definitely do that rather than waste time with my own printer. The cheapest get down to around $.11/4x6 print which is hard to beat!<br>

Either path has its pros and cons. Personally, I'd rather not just photograph but also take control of the retouching and printing process, which to me is part of what makes the digital age so exciting- I can have similar capabilities to a full color lab with a basic computer, camera and printer.</p>

[savagesax]

Roger, to answer your question, I've been shooting DSLR since 2001. I started off with the Fuji S2, Nikon lenses. I'm now shooting with Canons, I have 2, 1DsMk3 bodies and a recently converted 20D used for "IF," photography.

 

Our 2 studios had well over 100 weddings last year. We also do a lot of event work and corporate work. This is the reason why my time is so limited.

 

Photoshop is a wonderful program, has a lot of adjustments you can make, but it doesn't match the $1,000,000 printers. I have an assortment of dye sub printers, both brands are Sony and Kodak. They can print an 8X10 in 45 seconds. I also have an Epson inkjet printer, but that sits around collecting dust. It's pretty much useless for production. I still don't like the feel of ink on paper, I prefer the dye-subs printers.

 

For the readers that don't know what a dye sub printer is, it's based on a ribbon, so you don't have to worry about ink running out, finger prints, and the ink jets clogging. I use the dye subs printers for events, such as Holiday parties.

[aimee_pieters]

<p>I don't know that it's so much about the process and the equipment to me. It's more about the results and the responsibility. If I make my own print and I don't like it, I can correct it as many times as I want until I do. BUT I have to do the work and pay for each print. If I don't like the lab's print, THEY do the work and pay for it. This seems to make much more sense to me.<br>

Now, there's the "human nature" issue. When you have to remake and pay for a reprint that you make yourself, it's only human to lower the bar on what's an acceptable print. I've seen it happen in many studios. Then end result is that you wind up producing an overall inferior product.<br>

My opinion? Yes. But I've seen the results. Judge for yourself.....-Aimee</p>