lindsay_dobson
-
Posts
534 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by lindsay_dobson
-
-
<p>I haven't had a chance to read the whole thread but I will respond to Joe Morris. Joe - when did you last shoot film and digital side-by-side? On a cursory level we can reproduce the look of certain film types, at least to an extent (and whether we feel we have reproduced that on digital will largely depend on our experience with both, and how discerning we are). But whenever I shoot film I am always struck by how different the results are. Of course there are still clients who like the thought of having their wedding committed to film, just as there are many customers out there who will pay a premium to purchase a chair carved using traditional methods, over a mass produced 'equivalent'. Ask any cabinetmaker or antique dealer.</p>
<p>And you are very wrong that a photographer's style and working methods are always dictated by their customers. That should never be the case (unless you occupy a market level where creativity is not a requirement). At the higher end of the market or the niche end of the market, that is unworkable. A bride goes to a photographer because the style of that photographer resonates with her particular sense of aesthetic. Then there are brides who simply shop on price. A bride wanting a disc containing 500 images is hardly going to approach a niche film photographer who will be giving her 30 prints hand mounted, and provided in a hand carved box.</p>
<p>If a bride comes to me wanting a vintage themed shoot, with faded and tinted processing, then I know I am not the photographer for her. That is not me failing to cater to my customers. Quite the contrary - if you're in business as a photographer you need to understand who your key clients are, and you market your offerings to them. Not the other way round.</p>
<p>I know several photographers who routinely produce weddings on film for their customers. They have no shortage of clients, they understand those clients, and they know where to find them. And vice versa. If Daniel fails in his venture, and it has nothing to do with his 'gimmick' and everything to do with his failure to understand and market that sector.</p>
-
<p>Yes, it's much improved actually, I was quite impressed when I tested it. That said, I hardly ever need to use C-AF. At the end of the day it's about whether it works for you, not anyone else, given what you shoot and how you prefer to do things. If this is the one overriding feature which has to be cutting edge then the newer leading DSLRs geared towards sports shooters will be better - at a massive price and weight premium. I think it might be best for you to just hire the EM1 and the kind of lens you're most likely to favour, and do some testing.</p>
-
<p>They are beautiful Harold - I especially like the fungi, thanks for posting those links.</p>
-
<p>The new EM1 firmware (out this week I think) is said to be a major upgrade and improves C-AF.</p>
-
<p>Hi Mary, for me at least, the switch to micro four thirds for all of my work has been fantastic. I don't feel I have lost out anywhere now that there are some top notch professional grade fast zooms and ultrafast primes available. But we are all different, and you are doing the right thing in appraising your needs before making the switch. </p>
<p>Re: tracking focus - it is not (yet) on par with a professional DSLR. I don't bother using it, just as I would very rarely use it on my DSLRs. However it is important to examine how, why, and where tracking focus might be important to <em>you</em>. For example, if most of your work is sports photography or birds in flight, then accurate tracking focus can make your life easier. The overriding feature I need for a lot of my work is very fast and accurate autofocus - the EM1 in particular is blazing in this regard and it will grab pretty much anything. Over the years my habit has usually been to simply ride the shutter button keeping autofocus on my subject and then firing off my frames when I need to - for me at least, this is proving to be as accurate and as intuitive as anything else, and serves me well - but if you've grown used to using tracking focus and if you prefer to use tracking focus most of the time, then you will need to readapt if you do switch to the EM1. I was shooting some catwalk recently with my Canon system, and I'll shoot the odd show with my shutter-button-riding autofocus, and the odd show using continuous focus. Overall, there is a slight edge in keeper rate with the former method, but the continuous method requires less effort. </p>
<p>At the end of the day it's a question of weighing up the advantages and disadvantages of changing systems - and whether these differences well be negative or positive for you. For me, there have been far more positives than negatives from downscaling - for example I can always have a great camera and a couple of lenses with me wherever I go and I will hardly feel the weight. I can also shoot longer assignments, and stay on my feet more. That was simply impossible in my DSLR-only days, and as a result I did very little personal work, and as a consequence I gathered very little stock and very little competition imagery - and I had far less practice in a number of situations. Downscaling has transformed all of that and I've also developed an interest in street photography which is so much easier with a small camera. But if you are exclusively a sports and bird photographer, and if you're not shooting too often, and if you're not on your feet or walking around a location for hours at a time - then there may be no need for you to change systems at all if you can manage the weight of your current one.</p>
-
<p>That's correct Kenneth, I find the Olympus bodies and Olympus and Panasonic lenses are fantastic for nature and wildlife. I also get a huge amount of use out of the Panasonic 100-300 given the incredible magnification that gives - way beyond anything I could carry (or afford) for my full frame setup (which I have all but abandoned now unless I'm shooting at a specific Canon sponsored event - and the weight of it just about kills me). I also use Olympus Micro 4/3 for all of my other work - portraiture and commercial. </p>
-
<p>We get asked this occasionally and my response has been set out in a blog article (which largely reiterates what has already been said here): http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/finding-the-right-photographer/</p>
<p>We can do what we can to educate clients but these days we do face the mindset that photographers are all the same and all that is needed is a fancy camera. Going by the rising number of complaints against photographers which have popped up on this forum over the years, you would think that common sense would prevail - but it's surprisingly rare. On a couple of occasions this season I have been approached by couples who are dissatisfied with their wedding photography - these are couples with a healthy budget (and quite a bit of general intellect) who felt it was not necessary to spend much on the pictures, and who have been left with poor results which they hope can be 'rescued' after the fact. And if the pictures can't be rescued, then they are expecting advice on how to pursue a claim against the photographer - with little heed to the fact that they instructed somebody inexperienced, cheap, and uninsured. Unfortunately it can be a matter of informing the couple but they have received exactly what they paid for.</p>
-
<p>Marc, can I respectfully ask you not to label me (as cynical) - you know nothing about me and I would not take it upon myself to chastise you for your own thoughts and opinions.</p>
<p>The figures are irrefutable, we know that around half of Western marriages will fail - that is not cynicism, that is a fact. We can go on to consider the reasons why they might fail, it isn't rocket science.</p>
<p>I know an awful lot of wedding photographers and a great many of them will agree that a sizeable proportion of the weddings they are involved with could most certainly fall into the "charade" category. We will at times wonder what on earth has brought those couples together and we can also wonder how long things might last. Once again, this is supported by statistics. If the weddings you photograph are exempt from failure then I will not argue with you, but it is not always the case. I will also add that one does not have to be an all-out supporter of marriage in order to photograph weddings - any more than you need to be a parent in order to successfully photograph children, or affiliated to a given group in order to undertake a commission for them.</p>
<p>If not poorly matched, many couples are clearly overspending on their event and some of those will then seek to find ways to claw back that expenditure - of course that is a charade. It is not (and should not be) a requirement that a couple hosts a lavish bash beyond their means in order to enter into a formal partnership. You'll see over expenditure across the socio-economic board.</p>
<p> </p>
-
<p>I have no idea why Marc chose to take a personal swipe at me, but I am quite sure he will understand why a response was in order.</p>
<p>Michael, I would disagree with the view that there is no money to be made on budget weddings. A great many photographers can leverage this end of the market quite effectively. The service is a low investment one and generally the standard of the photography can be anything from poor to quite good, which the client will generally expect and understand. The product itself is most usually a collection of photographs with only very basic edits which are then burned to digital media and everything can be done and dusted in a few hours - no viewings, no album design etc.</p>
<p>I know some excellent and fairly expensive wedding photographers who are running at a loss simply because the time investment and product investment is too high when placed against the number of clients they can realistically take on - which may mean their pricing needs to be higher, or their product reduced somewhat. Handing over the kitchen sink can be costly. In other words, ensuring there is balance between time and product is key.</p>
<p>Whilst the number of people getting married has dropped as a percentage of the whole, the population has probably grown somewhat in the last couple of decades so perhaps overall numbers of couples getting married may not have changed much. In that regard, I don't think there's any significant shortage of couples. But what I have seen couples who are spending less which I think is due to the higher cost of living nowadays.</p>
-
<p>Marc said:<strong> "As to the cynical reflections on Marriage as an institution, my observations are that a least some of this has come from the self absorbed and entitled generations who think societal ties are something one does by posting on a social site rather than actually interacting with-in a society."</strong><br>
<br>
That is clearly aimed at me. <br>
<br>
What a indictment of people who simply have a different view to your own - one that may well be based on reality rather than rose tinted idealism. Marc - not everybody comes from a close background, or has a close family, or has parents with a stable marriage, or blindly upholds traditional values which often fit poorly with the world we live in today. We know very well that around half of all marriages will fail - that is a simple fact. <br>
<br>
I will also add that you don't need to go through the stress and expense of a wedding in order to make a commitment to someone. Just because a wedding ring is absent doesn't mean that a given individual spends all of their time on Facebook and is therefore socially irresponsible as you clearly suggest. Nor is it mandatory to to be married before founding a family. These days the cost of living is arguably higher than it used to be and so more and more couples (and if applicable their families) would rather put that money towards a home, or necessities. Your judgement has a righteous ring to it which is quite unnecessary.<br>
<br>
</p>
-
<p>Hi Michael, for some reason people are still placed under the most ridiculous social pressure to get married. Although better than it was 30 years ago, most relationships are still considered almost invalid unless the participants have been through a marriage ceremony. So although there has been a decline in marriage (there are at least some people wisely waking up to the fact that it isn't mandatory) I don't think there is going to be any crash in marriage numbers and we will still see plenty of brides and grooms in decades to come. I don't think it's going to have a huge impact on wedding photographers, at least not in our lifetime.</p>
<p>Speaking personally, I cannot see the mentality in spending huge sums of money on one day - whilst there are some economic and tax advantages to marriage, the rest of the rationale is hard to fathom. You do not need to go through that charade in order to make a commitment to someone. There is no longer any particular stigma attached to having a family "out of wedlock" nor is there anything wrong with living together. There is also ample evidence to suggest that marriage is not always an emotionally healthy arrangement and the demise of around half of all marriages in the Western world does support that. But centuries of pressure and conditioning are hard to shake off.</p>
-
<p>Dear Videographer,<br>
Many thanks for your offer of £500. For information, our current rates stand at £1650 for wedding coverage of approximately 8 hours and the full collection of photographs on disk (with no hard product). This fee includes the pre-wedding Administration and consultations, the photography itself, reasonable time in transit, and the post wedding phase entailing editing, processing, retouching, proofing, and finally product delivery. On average it takes anything from 45-70 hours to fully administer and deliver the average wedding.<br>
Your project entails approximately 3 times the effort and hours described above, however since we are engaged with the same client I am happy to discount the full fee by 30%. Therefore my rate for carrying out the work as set out will be £3465.<br>
Kind regards,<br>
xxxx</p>
<p>You have to take into account the fact that for the huge amount of time you are involved with this wedding you are obviously not available to other wedding clients - you're going to miss out on probably two other weddings if you take this job, given the amount of preparation and post-work. Not to mention if the various family groups require albums and other products.<br>
If they are so insultingly cheap then obviously they are not going to pay anything like a reasonable rate - they are not going to get a professional photographer but may get somebody gullible who dabbles. </p>
-
<p>Steve - that is correct, there is provision under section 84a of the Copyright act, and that refers to the rights of privacy where photography has been commissioned for "private and domestic purposes". A wedding would of course fall into that category, but as I have said your client in this case (as would be the case in any similar event) would be the bride and groom and they are acting as "event controllers". In this situation, in order for the images to be published, they would need to give their consent and also make those in attendance aware that professional photography is taking place. This is normally very obvious at a wedding, and therefore the guests realise that they will be photographed and that the photographs are likely to be published in a number of ways. This is what is meant by "informed consent" or "implied consent". Either would be adequate where a wedding is concerned (in our jurisdiction).</p>
<p>However, as you said in your addendum, the discussion is not necessarily about the legalities - and that would raise the question of how any one photographer would act should a guest later request that any published photographs are taken down. The reasoning behind that does not fall into commercial use, but rather the fact that the guest feels their privacy has in some way been breached. Whilst legally it has not (in the UK) the photographer would then make a decision as to whether or not to remove the offending pictures. I hope that clarifies things - for the record, this is based on direct information given to me by a very experienced legal adviser. </p>
-
<p>I understand that US law appears to be under discussion in this thread and in fact it is largely based upon the English law. There are therefore broad similarities, however as John has said in the US there can be variance, usually by State. Here in the UK there are (currently) no legal issues with posting images of wedding guests (and their children) on your commercial website - providing that you are acting in accordance with a wedding couple or "event organiser" who have in turn made it known to their guests that a photographer will be in attendance. In fact it is a normal presumption that a wedding will be photographed professionally, and that those present will be in a number of the photographs, and that they will be displayed in a manner which will allow guests and non-attendants access after the fact.</p>
<p>In this day and age it is a given that such photographs are shared online, usually publicly, and this would be considered appropriate usage - so in attending the event guests are offering their implied consent to such usage. If guests do not wish to be photographed then the alternative is to absent themselves from all areas where photography is taking place, or else to stay at home. </p>
-
1
-
-
<p>Wade, to answer your question, the one thing which would be going through my head would be "what if?": </p>
<p>What if the bride is running late? How will that impact upon the timeline and the photography? You will be blamed for these missed shots.<br>
What if there is an overenthusiastic Uncle Bob present who keeps getting in your way - how will you manage that? You will be blamed if he ruins your pictures, but never mind, the couple can have his instead.<br>
What if the bride wants to chat to her friends and doesn't want to come outside for the couple portraits? You will be blamed if these special pictures are missing.<br>
What if it rains all day?<br>
What if you get sick the day before the wedding - do you have someone suitably experienced who could stand in for you?<br>
What if you fail to deliver the kind of photographs the couple are expecting?</p>
<p>There are an awful lot of wedding newbies who have come to the forum wanting to be told what's what after they have agreed to photograph somebody's big day. Mostly they are woefully under-prepared in both experience, equipment, and the all-important contracts and other legalities It is understandable that the more experienced contributors here will point that out to them, whilst pointing out the possible consequences if things go wrong. Because that isn't what the newcomer wants to hear, we're told we're being unkind. Nothing could be further from the truth in fact. The main problem is that many people run before they can walk, or crawl even. Of course we all have to start somewhere, but before photographing any wedding we have to be prepared, and that means doing an awful lot of research, and making absolutely sure that we have set the couple's expectations accordingly. That means documenting everything from the number of hours you will attend, to how long it will take to deliver the pictures or finished products. It is also worth documenting your experience level. A wedding contract is a little different to other photography contracts so if I were you I would do some research on that as well, if you haven't already. Good luck and I hope it goes well for you. Please come back and let us know how it went, that can be helpful for others who are preparing for their first wedding. </p>
-
<p>I'll preface this by saying that I haven't had time to read this thread in its entirety, so I apologies if I have missed something. I saw it mentioned that this situation may be UK-based so on that basis I will offer some advice.</p>
<p>It appears that the OP enlisted a friend to photograph the wedding, considering that a friend's word would be binding and that no formal agreement would be required. Most of us here know that it doesn't matter who we are dealing with - a written contract (even a basic one) is very important. But as has been said, hopefully there is sufficient evidence within e-mails to support the complaint. So long as there is some documentary proof of the agreement, you should be okay.</p>
<p>It is inexcusable for somebody to accept money, and to fail to supply what has been agreed, or else to fail to refund the money paid. In some cases court action becomes inevitable, however in order to put yourself in the best possible position it's important to follow what is known as a pre-action protocol. This demonstrates to the Judge that you have tried all reasonable means to recover your goods or your money.</p>
<p>First of all write a proper letter setting out once again what was agreed, and describe your complaint. Decide what you want (the photos or a refund) and give the photographer 14 days to respond. If she fails to do so write another letter (send these by recorded delivery) saying that you will be forced to consider legal action if you do not receive restitution within seven days. If that does not elicit a response then you will need to construct a Letter Before Action. This letter once again sets out your grievance but it also makes it clear that it is a final demand and if you do not receive what is required the next thing you will do is start court proceedings. Remind the photographer that once you start proceedings she is then likely to become liable for certain costs (such as court fees, your travel fees and any costs she may incur in attending or seeking legal advice which will not be claimable in Small Claims Court).</p>
<p>If you are in England or Wales you can fill in the Small Claims Track forms online, if you wish to have a refund from the photographer then you can fill in a money claim. There are modest fees for this. Courts will often recommend that you take part in mediation - I would encourage you to do this (even though you may not want to) because it shows a willingness to settle the problem yourself, if you can.</p>
<p>Do not even think about going to the press if you intend to follow action in court - which in my opinion is the correct route given that the small claims track is fairly simple and will not cost you very much at all. As it is, the photography world is a small one, and word will get around if this photographer has indeed behaved as described. </p>
-
<p>"IMO the insurance for you, in this situation, is largely a red herring. I can count on one hand the number of times I've been asked for proof, and those were all at uber-snobby hotels... I highly doubt that it'll be relevant given the context. And as long as you aren't being paid, your liability is minimal."<br>
<br>
If there is any indication or suggestion that you are there as the "official photographer" with an agreement between yourself and the bride and groom (no matter how casual or friendly), paid or not, then it is quite possible you could be held directly liable for any loss or damage to people or property. You would not need a specific written contract in order to fall into this category.</p>
<p> </p>
-
<p>Hi Tonio, I haven't had a chance to read all the replies you have had so far so apologies if I go over everything which has already been said. I know this may sound simplistic, but the key thing in choosing any system is to assess if it has the performance attributes you require. I am of course talking about elements other than IQ, because I think the IQ of today's modern mirrorless systems is not in question. So by performance I am talking about focus speed and accuracy, ruggedness, lens ecosystem etc.</p>
<p>Your discussion does also appear to be centring around Fuji. I have used or owned many of the Fuji X system cameras and I would personally not consider them well-suited to wedding photography as a single system, due to autofocus failings in low light and general speed. Your keeper rate will not, in my opinion, be high enough to adequately and confidently cover you, no matter how carefully you apply good technique. This also can be a concern when subjects are moving, even fairly slowly. These caveats also apply to the new Sony A7 system, I am not at all impressed with its autofocus in anything other than good light. Nor can Manual focus save the day, given the speed with which one has to react at times. And of course the lens choices must be weighed up. But if your weddings take place in very good light that that does give you more options.</p>
<p>I too love my original X100, but it has quite limited and fairly specific uses, alongside another system. In other words I would say that if you continue to undertake paid wedding photography then I think moving entirely over to Fuji would not be a good move. I also have the most recent firmware, and although it does improve things somewhat, it's not quite there yet. </p>
<p>I do shoot almost entirely with a mirrorless system now (I still have my Canon full frame ensemble but don't seem to need it) but not Fuji. I demand speed and very good optics and thus far only one manufacturer appears to deliver on that front. However another thing to consider will be handling and ergonomics, not every system is well suited to every user. And as Dick has said, 38MP is ludicrous for weddings - we were managing beautifully not long ago on 10 MP and still creating big prints. </p>
<p>I think you have summed it up well when you said you have not had the guts to use one of these things at critical moments - you have got to be able to use your equipment with absolute confidence. Of course what I say is simply my personal opinion and your feelings may be quite different, I think you will need to find a way to get the camera you're considering into your hands before making a commitment. I'm not saying they're not great for some things, it just depends on what and how you shoot. For example my X100 comes out when I need absolute silence and a very high X sync speed. But it is fairly useless when I need to work very quickly, or when I find myself in low light needing critical focus.</p>
-
<p>Hi Bob, whilst some of those ideas might be workable in some localities, it appears the figures you've quoted represent 'turnover' and not <em>profit</em>. In fact once you factor in your fixed costs per job, and add your variable costs per job (travel, printing, postage costs, the prints etc, make-up artists, the cut the host will take, assistant etc) it can in fact be very difficult if not impossible at times to meet your margin. Whilst there is always the hope that clients will purchase more than the bottom line, it can end up being a very costly waste of your time unfortunately. Event photography has suffered hugely here in the UK due to declining price points and fewer and fewer customers making a purchase - and those who do will often complain about having to spend £15 on a professionally printed and mounted photograph. Whilst they are good ideas on the surface there does need to be cautious approach in my opinion.</p>
<p>I will say however that photographing certain events on an informal basis can be a very good idea because there are indirect benefits in the form of socially driven networking - this is something I have done many times (at auto club gatherings for instance where there are likely to be plenty of like-minded and well-heeled attendees who will then find their way to one's website - I am already 'one of them' so there is no ice to break) - the key thing is that you minimise your own overhead and you are not tied to somebody else's terms. There are plenty of social activities which could help to get you some relevant exposure.</p>
<p>Aligning yourself with the right charity is, in my opinion, more satisfying and probably much more lucrative than trying to eke out some profit at events (where people have already spent money getting there, buy a ticket, and dressing up). If you choose your charity wisely you can form a good relationship. For example what sort of people will most charities encounter? People who are making donations of course - in other words people who have a disposable income and are generous in their mindset. The charity can reward high donors with one of your beautifully presented gift vouchers where they obtain a complimentary shoot and a complimentary desk print. Alternatively they can offer the voucher at 50% of its usual cost, and the charity sells it and keeps the proceeds. There is no obligation on the client to spend any more once they go through your doors, but given the type of people which you have obviously <em>targeted</em>, it is in fact very likely that they will. </p>
<p>Whilst I appreciate there will be geographical and cultural differences, in the UK business networking groups tend to have a generally poor reputation for being of benefit to photographers. They tend to favour business to business networking rather than business to client situations. There is also a great deal of pressure placed upon members to bring in leads for other members, which again in a business to customer environment can be extremely difficult for a photographer to do. You're generally tied by their terms into attending the weekly meetings (mostly to exchange leads) or your membership can be terminated if you fail to do so - for photographers who can't work regular hours that is another downside. I am a great believer in organic networking rather than something which is structured and based on lead generation, which is the basis of most of the networking groups I have looked at.</p>
<p>I think the best way for wedding photographers to increase their income is to improve their services and ensure they stay abreast with the times we live in, and most importantly can set themselves apart from their competitors. I cannot stress that enough.</p>
<p>Forming affiliations with local photographers may not be something many wedding photographers are prepared to do, but it can be extremely helpful. We all get assignments which we can't take on, perhaps because the client's budget doesn't align with our product, or perhaps because we are already committed on that day - there is great benefit to passing on these customers and some photographers are able to do so and gain a financial reward which makes the benefit quantifiable rather than perceived.</p>
<p>I'm a great believer in diversification, but only if the profits make it worthwhile. In that respect commercial photography or offering tuition to newer photographers can be better. If you have particular expertise in certain areas then writing features for the better-known photography journals can also add to your income stream in a very useful way.</p>
-
<p>Thank you for the kind words Ralph. I will add that I feel there are real advantages to embarking on one's photography business later in life. I was 40 before I had the means to even consider doing this full-time, but more importantly I had a considerable amount of life experience on which to draw. That included a reasonable knowledge of the business world, a fairly well rounded grasp of human nature, and less of the starry eyed stuff which could be a perilous motivator for the young. Before giving up the day job, I spent two years setting up my office and business systems, and researching my products and my market. I was of course also building a credible portfolio. In other words, I didn't launch my business until the main things were in place. Even so, the more involved I became the more I realised that there was so much more to do, but I was very glad I had at least put the groundwork down before taking the plunge. There are far too many photographers out there who will try and run before they can walk, and these are the ones who usually fail.</p>
<p>Greg has given a very honest and very comprehensive review of the main reasons why one can fail, and that will be useful for newcomers to read. I am also a believer in working as a photographer part-time while one is learning about the tougher side of the industry. In fact there is also a good argument for staying part-time, in many cases.</p>
<p>Greg mentioned that "there will always be someone who can do a better job for less money". Not necessarily, I would rephrase that as "there will always be someone who can do the job differently". And this is why I keep going on about the need to be unique, and how vital it is to stand out from the others. If you have some unique selling points then not only will that help you to appeal to your clients, you will also have more appeal to your marketing partners and the media. I always tell my students to write a list called "what do I have, that my competitors don't have?". If they can't think of anything current, then I encourage them to think about what steps they might be able to take both now and in the future to fulfil that objective. And I do not mean things like "I am cheaper than everyone else".<br>
<br>
Writing a business plan can sound incredibly tedious, and in reality it doesn't have to be reams of charts and boring data. But I think it's vital that anyone thinking of setting up a photography business (or indeed any business) prepares a document setting out exactly what has been spent to date, and what will need to be spent over the coming three years; capital assets and depreciation, IT needs, marketing costs, insurances, training etc etc. Against this must be realistic targets of how much business can be brought in, together with an appraisal of how much must be earned from each client in terms of charges and profit. This is hypothetical without a marketing plan since you cannot have one without the other. I would then recommend staring at both those documents every day for several months because unless the contents are set in the forefront of your mind, one can continue to make poor decisions.<br>
<br>
There is also much to be said for diversification. I would preface this with the need to be very good at one particular discipline first, but it's quite commonplace for excellent wedding photographers to also undertake portraiture and commercial photography. I have very little involvement in weddings these days, and what I do is based on portraits, including animal portraits, corporate portraiture, training and mentoring, and writing articles for photography magazines and journals. This can all add to your repertoire and income stream. And once again, it can become another unique selling point.</p>
-
<p>Here in the UK around 80% of photography businesses will fail within two years. Generally speaking it takes up to 5 years to turn a profit. You do need a means of surviving throughout that period. From what I've seen there are several key reasons for failing. One is poor planning and a poor understanding of both marketing and accounting. I can think of countless photographers who have failed because they were very poor at working out their true overheads and consequently very poor at understanding how much they would need to charge and earn in order to meet those costs and to generate profit. Concurrent with this, and crucially, is an understanding of the target client group and their motivators. There are plenty of low cost high-volume wedding photographers who are successful, just as there are high cost high-value photographers. They succeed because they understand business even more than they understand the art of photography.</p>
<p>There is little point going into business if you're going to sit in the same hole as everyone else - if you can differentiate yourself and stand out from the crowd in some way then you will greatly increase your chances of survival. The voice which shouts the loudest is the one which tends to be heard. The grey middleground is the worst place to be.</p>
<p>In response to a prior comment, suggesting that technology has made it feasible for anyone to enter the wedding photography market - yes, anyone can enter the market. But very few will manage to stay there - and that has nothing to do with equipment. I have an oven and a frying pan, they were quite expensive, but I sure as hell can't cook. I can't think of many people who would pay to eat my food. The poorly skilled shooters out there very rarely last, they either fade away or else they realise that they need to polish up their act. They may even have a couple of legal actions against them along the way if they're charging for a genuinely below par product. I highly doubt any of them are making a profit. </p>
-
<p>Guys, this is a WIND UP. It is pretty amusing and of course very indicative of how newcomers often view the wedding industry. </p>
-
<p>Pete, I took your advice and I did contact Prophoto and they were very helpful. With respect to the "line 143" error they took a look at the code and something looked a bit fishy, so they patched it, and that has got rid of that particular error. They also reinstalled some other code for me and recommended that I disable plug-ins and then reintroduce the plug-ins one by one. So it's a question of keeping an eye on things, although I am none the wiser as to why the problem started happening in the first place, it's very odd.</p>
-
<p>This could be a car crash waiting to happen. The fact you are not being paid is completely immaterial, you will be viewed as "the wedding photographer" and there will be every expectation that you will provide a good if not professional set of photographs. No doubt your friend has seen some nice landscape photos in your gallery and believes (like many members of the public) that you can photograph anything. I won't have to tell you that landscape skills and wedding photography skills are wildly different. At the very least, you will need suitable experience of photographing people which will include understanding lighting and posing, including group photographs and couple photographs as well as all the various details. You will also have to cope with fast changing situations throughout the celebrations and consequently you will be juggling your settings and working with different light temperatures and intensities.</p>
<p>Then there is the wedding itself, you will need to get to grips with all of the different elements of an Indian wedding so that you don't accidentally miss key moments. I can tell you that photographing a normal wedding for about eight hours is gruelling enough, most photographers can hardly move the next day. But you have 12 days to contend with - I presume you are very fit physically. Then of course you have all of the thousands of images to download, back up, edit and process, and proof and deliver. The fact these people are your friends is potentially even worse - friends tend to expect even more from you. You will need a contract of some sort or at least a list of mutual obligations and a non-expectation clause stating your inexperience - to be valid your hosts will need to offer you something in return (such as a meal, it doesn't have to be money). </p>
<p>In short, they are expecting you to travel to another country, work your backside off for 12 days, then continue working for however many weeks it takes to prepare and deliver the final product. Make sure they understand this, most members of the public think your job is done with just a few clicks of the shutter.</p>
<p>I don't feel that the notion of taking an experienced assistant is viable, given that an experienced wedding photographer will of course charge for their time, and over 12 days that will cost a small fortune. Presumably that is why your friend has had the bright idea of involving you instead.</p>
Wedding and Family Photography Contract Templates
in Wedding & Event
Posted
Hi Clare. I'm a full-time pro in England and hopefully I'll add to the excellent advice already given by William. I would strongly advise you not undertake any kind of ‘work’ without at least a basic set of Terms in place, and you are playing with fire if you do not have Liability insurance and in the case of weddings, Professional Indemnity insurance as well.
To be effective, a Contract does not need to be written by a legal professional. But it does need to be ‘fair and reasonable’ if tested in a court of law. As has been mentioned, laws can vary in Scotland and I am referring to the laws of England and Wales.
Some photographers have fairly basic contracts and others have much fuller terms of business which contain quite detailed pieces of information. I fall into the latter category since I like my clients to be as well informed as possible. It also makes it abundantly easier when questions are raised to simply refer the customer back to ‘Clause xx’.
Wedding photography contracts do exist as templates and these are available through the leading long established photography institutions such as the MPA (Master Photographers Association), SWPP (Society of Wedding and Portrait Photographers) and the BIPP (British Institute of Professional Photography). I am a Fellow of the latter two and I would recommend anyone starting out as a professional wedding photographer to consider a membership of one of these three bodies. Benefits include a legal helpline and in the case of the SWPP (not sure about the MPA) an active and incredibly helpful members forum which is a minefield of business information and support.
It's prudent to cover the following in your Contract/Terms:
Although I’m now almost entirely a portrait photographer my Terms of Business cover all of those things in sufficient detail for the client to have a good plain English understanding of how the photography process works.
Your Standard Operating Procedures are your own office documents setting out your process for things like complaints, copyright infringements, dealing with venues etc. Remember there is little point providing a contract if you are not prepared to enforce it should you have to do. Clients do not have the right to rewrite or amend your terms as they see fit.
Perhaps the hardest thing for many photographers is the ability to say ‘no’ when pushed - and in wedding photography you will probably be pushed a great deal.
There is nothing wrong with reviewing the contracts of other established photographers you know, providing they cover the key points I've mentioned. Most professional wedding photography contracts are very similar. The important thing is to understand how or if the clauses therein apply to your own business and if some of those clauses are even relevant to you. You may even need to add clauses, depending on how you do things.
Regarding the laws of England and Wales, and Copyright, there is a wealth of information on my blog (the one with the garland logo) in the For Photographers section, or you can use the search facility.