beginning wedding photographer's curriculum

[picturesque]

<p>John--as I said above, the reason that developing artistic skills seems so shrouded in mystery (in photography and wedding photography) is because one's artistic path is a personal path, so there is no one, true path. Plus the obvious tendency to talk about technical stuff, because it is easier to talk about technical stuff.</p>

[john_walsh7]

<p>Thanks Nadine , I see what you are saying. William thanks for the link , fantastic stuff as you say. </p>

[neilambrose]

<blockquote>

<p>...to be answered " its all about the marketing "... just does not seem right.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It's not all about the marketing, but it is a critically important component. No point in being a good photographer if you can't support yourself long enough to become a great photographer. Art and commerce are not exclusive of each other.</p>

<p>I'd prefer the curriculum to stress artistic development because it's a necessary component of defining a product. If you don't have a product people want to buy, or if your product is identical to the next person's, then success will be difficult no matter how skilled your marketing. Having a personal vision that you can believe in - and that others can identify - is a huge part of anyone's differentiation as a photographer.</p>

<p>But if you don't know how to take that vision to market, or price it effectively so that you can run an efficient business with sustained growth, then the end point will certainly be failure. Good pictures don't usually make money by themselves.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>There is so much technical information knocking around and being pushed that one would think that's what it took.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>People tend to focus in on the technical dimensions because the barrier to entry is low. Photography isn't complicated, and most people can become an expert in a technical dimension very quickly. A quick learner can become proficient in using off-camera lighting, for example, in about two days. But it could take years for them to develop their vision to the point where their pictures are interesting.</p>

<p>Hence people tend to spend a lot of time on the easy question of how to use a camera, rather than the much harder question of where to point it.</p>

[john_walsh7]

<p>Neil, I think we are saying the same thing which is that the product must be <em>worth</em> selling and that a technical knowledge in itself doesnt produce it. There is a thread in the wedding forum by a photographer who is thinking of giving up because of the saturation in the market too. Here in Spain there is a massive market for photography classes, i doubt it will be long before the guests themselves are producing technically good pictures hence the bar has to be raised beyond the technicals. My black and white development teacher says one things that rings out in my ears now " John today there are more cameras than ever but fewer photographers ".</p>

[William Michael]

<blockquote>

<p>People tend to focus in on the technical dimensions because the barrier to entry is low . . .</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That’s tough . . .</p>

<p>. . . as well as Maths and Science and Applied Arts, I also got reasonable marks at school for Art and Music . . . it was just when the Photography Teacher at College ripped up my first assignment picture in front of the class deeming it "Rubbish" and stating: “What a waste of time . . . you will never be a Photographer’ s [deleted] [deleted] . . .<br>

. . . then I just decided to focus on all the technical stuff.</p>

<p>***</p>

<p>No – I was light hearted about Neil’s comment re the “technical barrier to entry is low”</p>

<p>The point about my story (it is true) is that often “artistic learning” is an ego trip for the teacher, rather than an instruction for the student – and that can have an effect also.</p>

<p>The other point I make is that learning the technical details (the “rules” if you will) can be done easily – I agree. But there are <strong>two more elements</strong> next down the line to making an image:<br>

The first is knowing <strong>when the use</strong> a particular technical skill or a particular piece of theoretical knowledge - and the second is <strong>to use it quickly</strong>, without even thinking about it.<br>

Most great artists, are very good technicians, but they don’t think about it - they just “do” the technical bit. </p>

<p>WW</p>

[john_walsh7]

<p>William, I can sympathise with your story , I must admit at this point I dismiss many images on technical grounds but already the key element in Neils suggestion is for me to study great photographers which is as Nadine suggested a person experience. At best I think a structure for doing so , perhaps a book or two on photographic appreciation might be in order for me too. I have optical prints of a lantern launching festival I love , my father turned around and said " its a shame there is so much darkness in the photo , im sure you will do better next time" .. I replied " I would hope to attract a client who gets this photo " but it still stung a little.</p>

[lindsay_dobson]

<p>I met a student earlier this year who believes that her penchant for <em>artista</em> transcends the boring necessities of technical application and understanding, and the business world is similarly trivial because her work will no doubt appeal to an elite niche market who will pay whatever she asks. This young lady is living at home with Mum and Dad, and has yet to experience the world of mortgages, rents, and utility bills. I've not seen her provide a single merchantable piece of work, and indeed she felt that I didn't 'get' her work. She doesn't want to assist with anyone, because all the photographers she's seen produce, in her opinion, ordinary stuff which has no appeal to her artistic inclinations. I wish her luck, it sounds like she has an interesting and fulfilling hobby, one where 'commercial compromise' has no place. Let's hope Mum and Dad remain easy-going.</p>

<p>And on a point John raised - Danzel, don't elicit the opinions of friends and family, get your work critiqued by experienced professionals, I think this might have been mentioned already but join a photographic society (I think it's WPPI in your neck of the woods) and make the most of the seminars and training they likely offer.</p>

<p> </p>

[john_walsh7]

<p>Takes all kinds to make the world go around i suppose , im sure there are arrogant photographers producing technically excellent but lifeless pictures too. I do agree that friends and family are not the best critics of photographs , nor was Williams teacher in high school by the sounds of things .. but by the same token I would imagine in any sector as soon as you step outside the mould you are likely to draw criticism too and there is the danger of applauding and producing the same type of work. </p>

[William Michael]

<p>My College Photography Teacher AND a few Relatives taught me lessons with their opinions, "critiques" and random comments.<br>

I just think as we live and <em>if</em> we grow, it is a good idea to listen to <strong>all</strong> input and critique <strong>from every avenue</strong>: . . . but just take a little time to establish the reasons for the comments and the knowledge and experience behind them. <br>

So I would add to Danzel's list of studies: "People Studies 101 - sorting the wheat from the chaff"<br>

That subject is good for Photography and for Business, too</p>

<p>WW</p>

 

[gregory_c]

<p>Dave Wilson narrowed it down with my comments in (paragraphs)<br /><em>1. People skills, dealing with crisis, stress management. --- (</em>happens at atleast 1/2 weddings<em>)</em><br /><em>2. Basics of business and marketing, being dependable and consistant --- (</em>got to be a salesman<em>)</em><br /><em>3. Basics of shooting, equipment, exposure, fill-flash, fill-flash, fill-flash--- (</em>no flash<em>, </em>don't shoot on auto, buy a hand held light meter & use it<em>)</em><br /><em>4. Being prepared in other ways, food, drink, vehicle, tape, pins, pens, diapers --- (</em>stuff happens<em>)</em><br /><em>5. Posing formals, this is still important even for PJ shooters.---- (</em>had friend not happy with wedding photos because they were "gimmicky" & altered )<br /><em>6. Post work and marketing post work, follow up for repeat customers. ----(</em>that is where the future money is made)<br />7. credit card to buy needed equipment including backup equipment</p>

[fotografz]

<p>A few random thoughts on this subject, and the sub-plot that John Walsh introduced.</p>

<p>Quite a few people who get into this business do so because other everyday people respond to their non-wedding photography. We all like praise, and love to seek approval or delight from others ... what little kid isn't proud when Mom puts their scribbles on the refrigerator door? </p>

<p>The trouble with that in this day of advanced, "think for you" cameras, is that there are thousands and thousands of kids, and the 'fridge door is plastered 20 deep with scribbles.</p>

<p>In essence I agree with Neil Ambrose ... there are two very important aspects needed to be successful which I define differently than most others do ... <strong>1) A constant hunger to best your own mediocrity ... and, 2) Overcoming the tyranny of business.</strong></p>

<p><strong>1</strong>) In my lifetime of associations with really good writers, cinematographers, painters, graphic designers, as well as photographers ... I've noted a common thread ... <em><strong>they are all dissatisfied with what they are producing</strong></em>. Any glimmer of self-satisfaction is short lived, and then it's back to the search. To an artist, the term "mediocrity" is a moving target that they define, not someone else. While there are exceptions to the rule, generally do not confuse egotistical rants and smug self assurance as being a fact that the developing artist believes themselves. So, the lesson here is question yourself relentlessly ... if you are on cruise control, you are actually going backwards. </p>

<p><strong>2) <em>I call it the "Tyranny of business" because that endeavor tends to be counter intuitive to the artistic nature.</em></strong> Art and commerce are not mutually exclusive ... but it is not easy balancing the two. I think that independent Wedding and Portrait photographers have it a bit harder than many other artistic outlets. Art directors and designers generally work for firms that employ business people to do that part. Commercial photographers often have reps and business managers. Cinematographers often work with-in a production company. Counting on the consuming public to decipher your "great art" is a fool's errand ... the amount of people that can do that is miniscule. Marketing is what does that job however you define "marketing". The lesson here is that if you do not have a head for business, you will be out of business eventually ... to avoid that requires a discipline not many have ... thus the huge turn-over in this business ... even really good photographers fall prey to this, while lesser photographers flourish. </p>

<p><strong>To John Walsh:</strong> my best advice for developing one's art is to associate with other artists. I once read a book titled "Geniuses Together" that explored the relationships between great artistic minds. It is not without merit to remember that artistic "movements" and great leaps forward where the product of group interaction or "schools of" more often than not. The "Impressionists" and Post Impressionists" hung out together ... Picasso and Braque worked side-by-side ...even personal rivalries fueled movements forward. IMO, nothing replaces personal interaction ... not reading, not internet give and take, not really even seminars. All of those are fine up to a point, but pale in comparison to direct interaction. If you are an island, then it is by choice. If there is a will, you will find a way.</p>

<p>For example, my best friend is someone who I happened to strike up a conversation with on an obscure gear oriented internet forum ... only to discover that we lived in the same area, so we went shooting one day. While he is a photographer, he is not a Wedding Photographer ... he is originally from Russia and thinks completely differently than I do ... what a revelation it is to discuss art with him since he opens new avenues that never occurred to me, as I do for him.</p>

<p>I also have a mentor ... a very big time shooter in NYC that opened my eyes about relentless self improvement ... he is younger than I am, but is also more experienced in applying art to commerce. Oddly, I also met him through a gear related incident ... my Leica dealer took me to his Gramercy Park studio and introduced us. </p>

<p> </p>

[ted_suss]

<p>Join a local guild or organization. Check out PPA, FastTrack, PUG, SmugMug, etc. Lots of good, pertinent education and wonderful networking opportunities....-TED :-)</p>

[emma_lillypad]

<p><blockquote>I came to the forum tonight looking for the "composition" section or perhaps it was called the " art of photography " etc but all I found was all the technical stuff... yes the technical stuff is important but none of it makes pictures... you do.. any training you can find in composition, understanding why people react to photographs , how to generate a response with composition would probably be just as valuable as all the technical stuff.. Im talking of course beyond the rule of thirds and golden points etc. Incidentally I couldnt find anything here dedicated to refining the process of seeing the picture before pressing the shutter but I am of the growing belief that its more important than the technicals ( and photoshop ) , which is a given in terms of bar to entry.</blockquote></p>

<p>John...I was in much the same place as you when I started out six years ago, and the answer I can categorically give you is this... Forums are great for bouncing in and out of when you have a problem you need to fix, lets face it, we will all eventually come across the same problems, wether it be a dodgy memory card, a lens that wont function, a problematical client etc etc, but the flip side and the one you should excericse caution with, is that some people cannot see past the technicals, this isnt necessarily a bad thing, or a wrong thing, Photography is subjective of course, some enjoy the technical side, whilst others maybe like you see more artistic value in the pictorial, and why not? Cappa wouldnt have been cappa had he entered a forum for critique, his images were far from technical, and of course he was in the throes of war whilst photographing, but he also photographed friends and family, you only need look at some of the work he did with Picasso, the portraits of Pablo, his wife and child were not technical and Cappa at this point had every chance to adjust his settings to make it perfect, but the images, my GOD they are just stunning. My advice for what it is worth, use the Forums to creep in and out of for the odd question, they are a valuable source, keep doing what you are doing despite of and because of the comments you receive but don't feel that a 'Forum' just because a majority speaks the same language , is the correct way to be a Photographer.<br>

I have a lot of time for Photographers who step out of the box with their Art, it takes courage it takes passion and it WILL pay off eventually, if you dont believe me, look at the masters who still are the masters , cappa Jean lou sieff, henri cartier bresson they still to this day , with all their technical flaws, reign supreme.</p>

[john_walsh7]

<p>Thank you Emma and Marc i think you get where I am driving at. I took a break from forums and photograhpy for a few days although I did think about this post a little and its implications for me. Regardless of the subject matter and having reviewed countless portfolios of wedding photographers in particular I realised that in many cases the photographs are the same executed to a varying degree of technical excellence. I dont knock it but it does seem that somebody looking at the wedding photography genre now could easily be funnelled into doing the shoes on the chair with the rings in the ashtray type thing , then the bend over backwards fake kissing , or of course the line up and say cheese stuff. The nemisis of that does not have to be dark , out of focus and blurred. I think trying to turn a bad picture into something artistic after the fact and its still a bad picture.. Then there are a few who stand out , the images do not appear heavily processed and in some cases as you say Emma are not even technically excellent but they jump out of the page. I went to see an exhibition of a photojournalists photographs ( speaking of War ) , Tim Hetherington.. a genuis with the camera , his stuff from Afghanistan is great. Some of the photographs suffer from camera shake but they get to the heart of the matter and overcome the technicals, he won awards for pictures taken on a Rolliflex MF film camera older than he was ( in 2007 ) ..So i think for me its a case of balancing the two. <br>

Marc, I am actively trying to assist photographers of merit here in Spain, its uphill work but I am slowly getting there ( I mean just to hold lights competition is that fierce or they prefer to work alone ) . I also thank you for your subsequent comments. </p>