Guests with cameras at wedding and posting on facebook

[hugh_j.]

<blockquote>

<p>Let's face it, since the beginning of the digital age photography has become anyone's game. The days of the superstar photographers are numbered.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Actually you have that backwards. "Superstar" photographers who are literate in the art of photography (not just the technical) and are also brilliant businesspeople don't have, and have never had, anything to worry about. If anyone's days are numbered, it's the hacks who thought they could hide behind expensive gear and technical knowledge and call themselves "photographers." They were never the real superstars, and being superseded by amateurs with high-end dSLRs is no loss to the professional world.</p>

[RaymondC]

<p>I'm only with the camera club and not into portraiture nor events, I'm into scapes and travel. </p>

<p>I think like any other job, you just need to adjust to it. You need to get on with people that you don't get along with in an office. I'm not into events b/c it's more public and you shoot on the fly, little planning involved from the prev week or day. If the moment arise you need to take it. I've read that portraiture, you are just the photographer and let the family and guest do what they do, you are there to capture the scene naturally without being a landmark. </p>

<p>At uni events, we've hired a professional photographer who does weddings and graduations and balls. He sets up his backdrop and his lights up and he does walk around etc .. taking pictures. He had no issues, even taking the person's point and shoot and behind his own backdrop and studio lights (!). </p>

<p>If they are a nuisance, have a polite word to them. But serious are you gonna ban family cameras. Like grandma or nephews carrying a point and shoot. If I were the family, I rather get another photographer..... Many friends don't even bother downsizing images, they just send email with full size out. They just amateurs and if they knew how to many of them couldn't be bothered.....</p>

[brian_m.1]

<p>I am not sure what people mean by "getting in the way"? What I have seen is that people take advantage of a certain setting already in place and shoot away. The pro should set aside a room or an area for their own group shots. It will be clear to to others that this area is off limits. The pro should never have to compete for attention with other photographers, or people would be looking every which way. Very annoying.</p>

[marc_felber1]

<p>That's too bad if you don't like it. If it was my wedding I would allow anyone who at my wedding to take as many as they like and even have a face book page posted for everyone to upload to save on the cost of ordering offical prints. Wedding photography is a dying breed because of digial photography. You should look at other areas to explore besides doing weddings like proms, etc. Just to many guest walking around with pro-consumer cameras. I even brought a Canon Ellan to my brothers wedding to take photos and there was nothing the photographer can do about.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Marc -</p>

<p>I could not disagree with you more...In fact I would say the opposite is true - wedding photography is being taken to new heights because of digital.</p>

<p>If I were your "paid" photographer for your wedding and you announced that your guests could take, post and sell all the photos they wanted to from your wedding - I'd seriously question why you even were bothering to have me around in the first place and then probably proceed to do what my contract requires and no more.</p>

<p>The other point about selling prints - Many photographers - myself included - don't even count on selling a single print from most of the weddings we do. We include a DVD of images in our package and provide that along with a print release to the client. Of course there are those who do rely on print sales, but they are fewer and fewer.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[dloringphotos]

<p>I was recently at a wedding where a guest essentially "photo-crashed" the wedding. He was an invited guest. He is a DJ by trade and apparently takes photos at events he DJs (don't ask me how). To self-promote, he photographs at weddings he is invited to and then quickly sends the photos to the bride and groom and offers the purchase of those photos at a very low price. He also left his business cards on a few reception tables at the wedding I believe.<br>

Very tacky and in my opinion and inappropriate. I knew the hired photographer at the wedding and spoke with him about it as the evening went on. He had the reaction that many have stated above: "he was using a kit lens with a kit DSLR with a pop-up flash. If his photos are better than mine, then I need to get better. Otherwise, it will just help the bride and groom to understand why they paid me $$ to shoot their wedding."</p>

[cl_wood]

<p>I've been on both sides. As a guest, I'll bring my camera but I try to be careful & respectful of the hired photographer - not using my flash, not getting in their way & holding my camera in down while they're taking a photo to avoid anyone inadvertantly staring at my camera. Most of the pro's seem to appreciate this & even have been extra nice to make time for me to shoot. In one case, it worked out well that I took the same shots since the "pro"s photos came out terrible. It was a cousin's wedding and after the family got the photos back, they came to me and asked if I had any good shots. I didn't think mine were that great until I saw the ones they'd paid for - I gave them a CD will all my shots after that! So as a guest, I don't mind getting the same shots as the pro - I would never sell or market them as my own, but just in case of equipment failure or other problem with the pro's photos, then there are some pictures of the event. I mostly take them as personal mementos & to improve my own technique.<br>

I've also been on the paid side and have to agree with some of the other posters, it's not the amateur photo enthusiasts that cause problems - they're usually more aware of what the pro has to deal with. In my experience, it's the aunts/grandmom/extended family with point-and-shoots, either moving to close & blocking my shot or calling out to a member of the wedding party. I'm short (5'3") & female so even with the gear I can't get the intimidation factor. But I can be vocal & have resorted to waving with my free hand above my head, then taking the shot.<br>

As for print sales, I don't think you can fight Facebook & the digital age, but I also don't think it would make significant inroads on revenue. The primary revenue source is the bride/groom (and possibly their parents). A few other family members (grandparents,etc) might buy prints but in my experience, the majority of the guests never had any intention of buying pro prints - before digital, they just did without photos. I do think that Facebook puts more pressure on the pros to get their proofs uploaded to a viewing website quickly; because you'd rather have that traffic & word of mouth coming to see your photos of the wedding.</p>

[scrivyscriv]

<p>Have had two of these situations happen to my wife and me at two different weddings. The first time, the b&g made a preemptive strike and announced that I was shooting the formals, please let me work, and everyone could take a shot after I worked each group pose.</p><p><br></p><p>The second was not so nice. One of the guests brought a Canon 40D with a 70-300 or something and was popup-flashing lots of *ahem* "creative" shots while I was trying to work. At the getaway, the bride snapped and yelled at her - told her to let the professional photographers do their job and to get out of the way. Have to admit, it was pretty satisfying - most guests are really cool about taking pics, at least the ones with P&S cameras. They have camera awe when they see my gear, and either ask "how much did your camera cost," or "bet that camera takes some really good pictures huh" or some such.. But that kind of guest never interrupts or gets in front of me.</p><p><br></p><p>Oh and Facebook - I'm in the younger generation and integrating my business with Facebook has been clean and extremely simple. My timeline looks like this: Wedding guests upload their images, B&G are tagged by guests, everyone comments, B&G receive their image files from me ready for Facebook uploading, B&G post said images, everyone comments and the previous images are forgotten (unless one is just really really good).There is a big enough distinction in the images that I have never really worried about it.</p>

[fuccisphotos]

<p>I found a great way to handle the throngs of "other photographers" is to say to everyone, I'm going to set up the shot. I will take my shot first. I need everyone to NOT take a photo then because your flash can ruin my photo. Or make people look the wrong way and you don't want the bride and groom to get bad photos right? Then I will ask that everyone hold that pose so that after I have gotten my shot the rest of the photographers can get theirs. This seems to satisfy them. You have to make sure though that it doesn't become too long a time between shots with 80 people saying ok now my camera, now my camera, look this way, etc. If it is tending towards that, remind them that the Bride and Groom only have so much time for formal shots and if you will be posting the shots online for viewing, remind them that they'll be able to see them online and buy prints as well. It can be a great marketing opportunity. Good luck!</p>

[fotografz]

<p>Loosen up, it's a fact of life and actually part of the modern wedding celebration. Some of it actually makes for good pro photos as part of your coverage.</p>

<p>People that think this is the end of wedding photography are using old think. Just think it through with a modern slant. Opportunities abound!</p>

<p>Actually, I steal more group shots than guests do. If I see a group forming at the reception so a friend can shoot with their P&S, I step up and gregariously suggest they join their friends to complete the group and take the shot. It goes from a competing shot, to being a priceless one for that group of pals or family ... and a potential print sale to everyone in that group. BTW, this is an excellent hunting ground for a second shooter looking to score points with his or her boss : -)</p>

<p>People taking a photo of the B&G are a similar target. If they are taking the photo they can't be IN the photo. Step -up and put them in the photo and guess who will want a print of that? </p>

<p>Facebook and the like are BIG opportunities to reach a lot of people with your website that are potential future clients. Think about it, most of the client's friends are there and many are single. Pick 30 or 40 of your best shots (I use Lightroom Quick Collection to segregate them ), Quickly put them on your hosting site, or your Smug Mug site and put a link to it on the client's Facebook page. Tell them to come back in a week or so and there'll be more. Traffic, and repeat traffic.</p>

<p>Most of the time formals are not taken with the entire guest list there. Guest move on to the reception and you are left with the wedding party and family ... who are in the photos so they can't be taking pictures. The few that do take photos then are important people, so I help rather than hinder them. If your lighting isn't better than some P&S then it's your problem, not theirs.</p>

<p>Point is ... think WITH the trends, not against them. </p>

<p> </p>

[rogerjporter]

<p>This is relevant, although the uncle (literally) had a Panasonic of some sort and shot video the whole night. the groom is a jazz musician, and hand picked his wedding band out of all his friends, and the bride's brother is an opera singer. When i pitched video at my client meeting (which i do not do myself, but of course have a preferred vendor) they said that they weren't interested, which seemed sad knowing they were going to have awesome music. In walks the uncle, asks if i was going to shoot video, to which i replied sadly "no", and before i knew it he had much of the evening preserved on video (It was an LX 3 or 4, so i'm sure the video will look nice). I was glad he was there, because he captured the motion and music of the evening that i knew still pics would not. </p>