Definitely a big difference. Perhaps my post above was underselling the point. I'd say I was somewhere in between the extremes, but I'd argue there's a bit of a spectrum, albeit with cutoffs.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Wedding Photography, even an option in my case?
- Thread starter TheMasin9
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Definitely a big difference. Perhaps my post above was underselling the point. I'd say I was somewhere in between the extremes, but I'd argue there's a bit of a spectrum, albeit with cutoffs.
Totally agree. It's all about people understanding the difference and making an informed choice. Also, there are things like taxes, insurance, backup equipment, etc. that you are either cheating or skimping on with probably almost all semi-pros.
And profitable, you're right. It's probably not profitable as a legitimate business. And as I learned trying to edit 1200 RAW files on a 1.0 Ghz eMac, it's not even "profitable" as an unpaid hobby. I wanted to shoot myself in the head. Still though, I find the idea of being a bargain basement wedding photographer for people who cannot afford more (and only those people), being very upfront about my abilities and what people would get by paying more with a professional or less with uncle Jimmy means, appealing. Or at least I did until I accidentally left half my gear on a bus.
Yeah...rent, insurance, taxes, etc are all things that contribute to my, and other pros, higher prices. I didn't mention that stuff (because it doesn't apply to the OP's situation) but it's a good point as to why hobbyist can undercut pros. Definitely more stuff to consider if the OP is planning on doing this as a part-time job. True pros shouldn't skimp on any of those things.
By the way, and unpaid hobby can't be profitable by definition : )
If you're being paid and you're shooting at a venue, IMO liability insurance applies no matter what. All it takes is one lawsuit to kill more than your hobby.
Maybe I'm unique in this but I've done two weddings now (with no previous experience) and I loved it! I haven't had that much fun doing any sort of work in a very long time, and I'll do it again when the opportunity arises.
I shot the entire thing (both times)with an 18-50 mm f/2.8, a 50 mm f/1.4 and a 28-200 mm consumer zoom, I also used a GN 120 flash head with a lightsphere diffuser. I got good results and the bride and groom in both instances were pleased as punch with what I did. I got funds to expand my equipment collection and I also got a ton of referrals so the prospects are looking good that I'll be able to do it again soon.
Now I'm not going to tell you either way what to do, but I will say that as long as your boss (and more importantly his fiance) are aware of your experience level and are willing to fund some equipment for rental then why not do this? You said yourself that you have an eye for composition; pair that with some good, fast glass and you're nearly there. It's high pressure for sure, but as long as you feel comfortable with it then you should do it. Just make sure you are OK with being in-charge when it comes time to shoot the posed family portraits. Also shoot as many frames as you can, I did nearly 1,000 in both cases and whittled it down to about 200 for each couple.
SLC
I shot the entire thing (both times)with an 18-50 mm f/2.8, a 50 mm f/1.4 and a 28-200 mm consumer zoom, I also used a GN 120 flash head with a lightsphere diffuser. I got good results and the bride and groom in both instances were pleased as punch with what I did. I got funds to expand my equipment collection and I also got a ton of referrals so the prospects are looking good that I'll be able to do it again soon.
Now I'm not going to tell you either way what to do, but I will say that as long as your boss (and more importantly his fiance) are aware of your experience level and are willing to fund some equipment for rental then why not do this? You said yourself that you have an eye for composition; pair that with some good, fast glass and you're nearly there. It's high pressure for sure, but as long as you feel comfortable with it then you should do it. Just make sure you are OK with being in-charge when it comes time to shoot the posed family portraits. Also shoot as many frames as you can, I did nearly 1,000 in both cases and whittled it down to about 200 for each couple.
SLC
$900 each and I gave them the 200 or so best images edited and cropped, ready for printing. I also shot the photos for their wedding announcements and I made a DVD photo slideshow sync'd to their favorite songs for them to play at the reception.
It was a lot of work, but I loved every minute of it, and I'll do it again soon.
SLC
Cool beans...sounds like they got what they paid for. This is a great way to handle a wedding as a hobbyist...keeping things simple and profitable.
I tend to think that in this kind of situation, if you're honest with yourself, you probably know whether you could do it or not. If you can take a realistic assessment of your own abilities and experience then it should be clear. If you're 100% confident that you'll be proud of the work you do and the couple will be happy, then perhaps you should offer your services. If you have any doubts about what might happen then you should decline.
This guy makes (I assume) more money than you and he still has to go cheap and hire someone (you) who has zero experience? What's up with this guy? Tell him the best way to choose a photographer is to look at his portfolio of work. Then tell him you have no portfolio.
If you do want to get into this field, work as an assistent first or offer to shoot wedding for free for cuples who could not afford a pro. Shooting the boss's wedding for a fee is taking abit of a risk.
When is the wedding? If it's 8 months away, perhaps you could do a few free weddings, as ChrisA suggests for experience first and then reassess and show your boss your newly developed portfolio.
You can talk to the bride, let her know your skill and equipment levels up front all you want- that's not going to guarantee that you're not going to be putting the groom in a bad spot at the other end. Best wedding I ever shot ended with Bridezilla, worst ended with a happy bride.
Both couples got the same speech- the better shots were as good as any 35mm wedding shots I've seen (all my wedding experiences predate my MF and LF days let alone digital) even with every formal shot she asked for (and lemme tell ya, that was a *lot*) she just wasn't happy.
As far as fun goes, if running around for 8-10 hours in a suit trying to get all the right shots and all the relatives in a shot is fun, there's lots of fun out there for you to have!
6th wedding so far. Two more scheduled for May. My girlfriend and I. She does the macro/fine art photography... i do the journalism/story telling side.
I wouldn't trade it for the world. Wedding photography is something that truly fills me with joy and admiration for my craft. It is stressful once you charge someone $1500+ and your gear becomes very important because if it fails, you not only won't get paid, but you may and can be sued. And in that case the bride (the only person that matters) has all the right in the world to sue the pants off of you.
I say do it but let the client know that you are a novice/beginner and doing it more as a favor. Ask for more than $100, do like $300 and give them an iPhoto album and a CD/DVD of their images.
p.s. Make sure that if you do future weddings the biggest mistake that novice photogs make is not investing in their business. When we do weddings we charge the couple about $35 an hour with a max of 7 hours. We WANT to shoot the whole thing unless otherwise told. But a small part of the profit goes into whatever the client wants, and the bulk goes into the "business" for car maintenance, current/future hardware and software, and GEAR.
I wouldn't trade it for the world. Wedding photography is something that truly fills me with joy and admiration for my craft. It is stressful once you charge someone $1500+ and your gear becomes very important because if it fails, you not only won't get paid, but you may and can be sued. And in that case the bride (the only person that matters) has all the right in the world to sue the pants off of you.
I say do it but let the client know that you are a novice/beginner and doing it more as a favor. Ask for more than $100, do like $300 and give them an iPhoto album and a CD/DVD of their images.
p.s. Make sure that if you do future weddings the biggest mistake that novice photogs make is not investing in their business. When we do weddings we charge the couple about $35 an hour with a max of 7 hours. We WANT to shoot the whole thing unless otherwise told. But a small part of the profit goes into whatever the client wants, and the bulk goes into the "business" for car maintenance, current/future hardware and software, and GEAR.
Don't ruin his wedding photos. Don't take the wedding photos if you don't know what you're doing.
Are we still talking about here? Sound more like something for the groom a little later in the day!
I've seen a few threads like this and the thrust always seems to be "you're not capable". I'm assuming this is some sort of semi-subconscious "stay of my patch" from people doing similar jobs worried some young upstart is going to come along and "steal" their work...
Anyway, I disagree. If the person really is rubbish then it might be true, but wedding photography isn't rocket science. It's not taking pictures of your friends vomiting on your camera phone either. It's somewhere in-between, but it's decidedly closer to the latter.
On the other hand, although $1000 isn't a lot in terms of wedding photographers, it may be enough to make you feel bad about taking it from him if you do a decidedly ropey job. I think it's not that he's your supervisor that's an issue, but that you may see him regularly after you've ruined the memories of his 'special day'.
On the other hand, he presumably knows you're not an experienced pro and is offering you the gig for value. He can't legitimately expect a professional job from you. I'm sure 'bridezillas' exist, but they tend to breathe fire before the 'big day', and if they enjoyed the day they'll probably be happy with your wholly unoriginal but competent photos.
You're essentially just replicating the photos friends and family will have shown you a thousand times. You may well find you miss some "moments", but weddings are choreographed so you'll have plenty of "moments" on a plate and it's these "moments" they'll be expecting.
This may all seem like I'm pointing out the excuses you have or the latitude for incompetence there is, but that is the way of most jobs. It's no different from your day job in that respect. If your post read something more along the lines of: "I've just got a lovely new scalpel and I'm thinking of doing a little surgery" the "don't even consider it" responses would be a little more appropriate. I don't think anyone is going to rank the importance of wedding photographs alongside war, poverty and AIDs.
It's all about expectations theirs and yours. You might satisfy theirs but not your own. Might be the other way round. Talking to them about it is the sensible man's choice.
But as you might have guessed I'm a "suck it up and go for it" kinda guy. I think the moral you should take away from this post is this: wedding photography is not rocket science and it's not AIDs.
Wow - in response to the original post.
Yeah, IMO, you need a lot more equipment to do something like that. This summer I'm going to put up an ad in my local paper that I'm doing birthday parties, graduation parties, etc for something like 75-100/hour (I live in a ritzy area), and that's the busiest stuff I would do. And I have a D80, 50mm f/1.4, 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6, 70-200mm f/2.8, and 24-70mm f/2.8. Even then, I still think I'm going to need an extra body to really deserve the dough.
Whoever said above that weddings are a big deal is absolutely right, and 800-1000 is about the starting rate for a professional photography. You gotta have your head glued to your camera for the whole time, and gotta be there for all of it. Beyond that, your shots have to be great stuff. At my cousins wedding, the photographer had no fewer than 2 D2xs strapped around her and was constantly shooting.
I'm sure you're a fine photographer, but you really gotta know what you're doing for an event as chock full of important stuff as a wedding (kiss, best man's toast, the cake, the garter, etc etc etc). I know 1k is tempting, but you gotta pass on this.
Yeah, IMO, you need a lot more equipment to do something like that. This summer I'm going to put up an ad in my local paper that I'm doing birthday parties, graduation parties, etc for something like 75-100/hour (I live in a ritzy area), and that's the busiest stuff I would do. And I have a D80, 50mm f/1.4, 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6, 70-200mm f/2.8, and 24-70mm f/2.8. Even then, I still think I'm going to need an extra body to really deserve the dough.
Whoever said above that weddings are a big deal is absolutely right, and 800-1000 is about the starting rate for a professional photography. You gotta have your head glued to your camera for the whole time, and gotta be there for all of it. Beyond that, your shots have to be great stuff. At my cousins wedding, the photographer had no fewer than 2 D2xs strapped around her and was constantly shooting.
I'm sure you're a fine photographer, but you really gotta know what you're doing for an event as chock full of important stuff as a wedding (kiss, best man's toast, the cake, the garter, etc etc etc). I know 1k is tempting, but you gotta pass on this.
I'm intrigued. Who are these people who might want their wedding done for free, so a novice photographer can get some practice? If a couple want photos at all, they want good photos... even if they're on a budget. If the pix are bad, it's like the wedding never happened.
The traditional route has been to become an assistant to an established photographer. And it's not just the technical side to learn. There are people management skills required to deal with people - calmly but firmly - on an emotion-filled occasion...
Free wedding photography? Check out craigslist. There are probably a bunch of people offering and asking. The key, in my opinion, honesty. Everyone has to clearly understand the risks and limitations.
I put an ad on craigslist explaining my experience (or basically lack thereof) and motivation, etc. And when I talked with the clients, explained in more detail what I could do and what they'd probably be getting if they hired a pro. A lot of people who can't afford to hire someone apparently chose to "hire" a photographer this way, judging by the number of responses I got (I had to turn most down for a variety of reasons). Keep in mind, this wedding might be 10 guests in a bar. The one wedding I did this way, I'm really glad that in the end they also hired a professional. It was way to big and expensive of a wedding to trust to me. And it also took the pressure off. On the other hand, they really loved the pictures I took. On the other other hand, to some degree they were gravy. On the other other other hand, when I gave them my pics, they still hadn't received the pros yet, and they seemed like they would have been satisfied with mine.
Also from the craigslist experience, just because someone's a "professional" doesn't mean they don't suck. One professional studio (small and crappy as it may have been) contacted me through the ad and asked what my rates were and if I'd be available to shoot a wedding that weekend (apparently they'd over-booked or had a photographer drop out or something). They were clearly willing to charge a client for the services of someone they didn't know and stated clearly in my ad am not by any stretch of the imagination a professional. I told them that sounded extremely unethical and I'd be totally unwilling to do that. I checked out their company's site. What crappy crappy pictures, at least to those who know what they're looking for--blown highlights, poor composition, completely interesting shots--and these were the samples they put on their website! And yet, they're charging money and getting clients.
Lastly, Doylem,
That's really overstating it. My wedding was one of the happiest days of my life, and I'd certainly remember and treasure it even if I didn't have any (good) pictures of it. Of course, I'm glad I do, not only for myself but for also for my relatives, friends, and children.
Everyone wants good pictures, but if the tree falls it makes a sound whether anyone's around or not.
I put an ad on craigslist explaining my experience (or basically lack thereof) and motivation, etc. And when I talked with the clients, explained in more detail what I could do and what they'd probably be getting if they hired a pro. A lot of people who can't afford to hire someone apparently chose to "hire" a photographer this way, judging by the number of responses I got (I had to turn most down for a variety of reasons). Keep in mind, this wedding might be 10 guests in a bar. The one wedding I did this way, I'm really glad that in the end they also hired a professional. It was way to big and expensive of a wedding to trust to me. And it also took the pressure off. On the other hand, they really loved the pictures I took. On the other other hand, to some degree they were gravy. On the other other other hand, when I gave them my pics, they still hadn't received the pros yet, and they seemed like they would have been satisfied with mine.
Also from the craigslist experience, just because someone's a "professional" doesn't mean they don't suck. One professional studio (small and crappy as it may have been) contacted me through the ad and asked what my rates were and if I'd be available to shoot a wedding that weekend (apparently they'd over-booked or had a photographer drop out or something). They were clearly willing to charge a client for the services of someone they didn't know and stated clearly in my ad am not by any stretch of the imagination a professional. I told them that sounded extremely unethical and I'd be totally unwilling to do that. I checked out their company's site. What crappy crappy pictures, at least to those who know what they're looking for--blown highlights, poor composition, completely interesting shots--and these were the samples they put on their website! And yet, they're charging money and getting clients.
Lastly, Doylem,
That's really overstating it. My wedding was one of the happiest days of my life, and I'd certainly remember and treasure it even if I didn't have any (good) pictures of it. Of course, I'm glad I do, not only for myself but for also for my relatives, friends, and children.
Everyone wants good pictures, but if the tree falls it makes a sound whether anyone's around or not.
Please don't ruin another wedding! So common already!
We cover photography & videography for weddings professionally. 6 staff photographers & 5 staff videographers.
Craigslist... makes me want to scream.
Any jackass that buys a dSLR and has a tripod thinks they're a wedding photographer. Our rates are on the lower end of professional photography and are even lower when packaged with our videography.
I'm pretty tired of people calling us with the line...
"Why are you charging so much? I have a guy on CL that is willing to shoot my whole wedding for $300. Can you match that?"
If they wanted $300 photography, they SHOULD hire that guy. $300 wouldn't cover even one of our assistant photographers.
They seem to want to leverage amateurs looking for experience against an established company. Whatever. Just tired of fielding those calls.
My 2 cents: people that want to pay the absolute minimum they can AND expect top notch work will NOT be worth the time or effort. PITA.
Develop your portfolio and create a customer base. It'll grow over time and you'll like who you work with. Don't even TRY to compete with the CL low-ballers. Don't allow yourself to be associated with them in ANY way. If the clients can't afford your rates (which should be reasonable), then they can't afford you. Period. They will get what they pay for with the $300 photographer.
p.s.- we've actually edited the footage for couples that went that route for videography and weren't told that the price quoted did not included editing or authoring to DVD. They were handed 3 Mini-DV tapes at the end of the wedding. The coverage was SO bad! 1 camera, crappy audio, amateur hour composition, shots were WAAY too close most of the time, and it was dizzying watching the guy zoom in and out all the time. Had to keyframe it to keep the footage watchable.
DON'T BE THAT GUY!!! Assist a professional if you must. Don't ruin somebody's wedding based on your perceived ability (and lack of experience).
Sorry: Rant over...
We cover photography & videography for weddings professionally. 6 staff photographers & 5 staff videographers.
Craigslist... makes me want to scream.
Any jackass that buys a dSLR and has a tripod thinks they're a wedding photographer. Our rates are on the lower end of professional photography and are even lower when packaged with our videography.
I'm pretty tired of people calling us with the line...
"Why are you charging so much? I have a guy on CL that is willing to shoot my whole wedding for $300. Can you match that?"
If they wanted $300 photography, they SHOULD hire that guy. $300 wouldn't cover even one of our assistant photographers.
They seem to want to leverage amateurs looking for experience against an established company. Whatever. Just tired of fielding those calls.
My 2 cents: people that want to pay the absolute minimum they can AND expect top notch work will NOT be worth the time or effort. PITA.
Develop your portfolio and create a customer base. It'll grow over time and you'll like who you work with. Don't even TRY to compete with the CL low-ballers. Don't allow yourself to be associated with them in ANY way. If the clients can't afford your rates (which should be reasonable), then they can't afford you. Period. They will get what they pay for with the $300 photographer.
p.s.- we've actually edited the footage for couples that went that route for videography and weren't told that the price quoted did not included editing or authoring to DVD. They were handed 3 Mini-DV tapes at the end of the wedding. The coverage was SO bad! 1 camera, crappy audio, amateur hour composition, shots were WAAY too close most of the time, and it was dizzying watching the guy zoom in and out all the time. Had to keyframe it to keep the footage watchable.
DON'T BE THAT GUY!!! Assist a professional if you must. Don't ruin somebody's wedding based on your perceived ability (and lack of experience).
Sorry: Rant over...
You must also tell them that you are not insured as a professional would be. Public liability and professional indemnity insurance are vital. For example, a professional would be liable to re-stage and reshoot the entire wedding, if for some reason they could not supply the images to the standard or volume to which the customers wee expecting. Likewise, if a guest were to trip over your tripod, you the photographer, would be liable to be sued.
This is an area which sets the pros apart from the the keen amateurs.
This is an area which sets the pros apart from the the keen amateurs.
...
I'm pretty tired of people calling us with the line...
"Why are you charging so much? I have a guy on CL that is willing to shoot my whole wedding for $300. Can you match that?"
If they wanted $300 photography, they SHOULD hire that guy. $300 wouldn't cover even one of our assistant photographers.
Precisely. And what these guys don't know is that, when someone accepts $300 for a wedding, the whole industry takes a hit, because consumers will start to expect these prices. Its very damaging at a time when the industry is very fragile anyway.
I've not long finished as a student, but already charge what the low-end pros do for this reason. I don't want to under cut anyone, and take any work away from my fellow photographers. But i only do this because i know, and have proven, that I can match their service and quality.
I'm pretty tired of people calling us with the line...
"Why are you charging so much? I have a guy on CL that is willing to shoot my whole wedding for $300. Can you match that?"
If they wanted $300 photography, they SHOULD hire that guy. $300 wouldn't cover even one of our assistant photographers.
Precisely. And what these guys don't know is that, when someone accepts $300 for a wedding, the whole industry takes a hit, because consumers will start to expect these prices. Its very damaging at a time when the industry is very fragile anyway.
I've not long finished as a student, but already charge what the low-end pros do for this reason. I don't want to under cut anyone, and take any work away from my fellow photographers. But i only do this because i know, and have proven, that I can match their service and quality.
I agree, but the other side of the spectrum is....
Who are you? Who am I? Who is this guy over here? Or there?
I don't want and never will charge a client $300 for a wedding or any job, but at the same time no one in my community really knows my work or my name like that. I have a few trusted clients, businesses, newspapers that would call me to do a particular job for them but for the bride or groom that doesn't know me, or the other guy they just don't know what they are getting into.
To them, the nobody that charges $1500 is just as good as the nobody that charges $1000 or less. WE as photographers have to remember that our work should speak for us, not our prices. There are plenty of white bread Hollywood photographers with money that charge $5000 - $10,000 and their work doesn't justify it, only their community and their demographic.
When a client goes to my website I want them to look at my images and say, "Wow, I want that guy to shoot my wedding because his work is amazing," Not, "I want that guy because of his degree, or the two Canon 5Ds that his mom paid for around his neck."
I want the OP to shoot the wedding, but just tell the client who you are, and remind them that they are hiring a novice shooter that will do his best to capture the wedding effectively, ethically, artistically, and as impartially as possible.
I agree with you're point, and when it comes to it, i need to have belief in my own work, in order to justify various prices. But I do think there is an issue recently, which can be attributed to the falling cost of dSLR's. The first wedding I went to, many of the guests 'out did me' in terms if camera gear. I only had my D70s - although now that has mutated into a D2x. Anyways, my point being, the very value of photography has began to plummet, largely due to people willing to undercut.
Just thought of an interesting analogy.
You could take your car to a full-time mechanic that has credentials, a place of business, steady clients, quality tools, insurance, a full range of services, etc.
Or, you can take your car to a guy who knows how to work on cars, who is going to do it in their back yard on the weekend, and has some old tools or some decent new ones he just got.
Both mechanics may have equally good skills and can show good work that they've done. Which one would you use?
I guess it depends on how important your car is to you and how much you can afford.
You could take your car to a full-time mechanic that has credentials, a place of business, steady clients, quality tools, insurance, a full range of services, etc.
Or, you can take your car to a guy who knows how to work on cars, who is going to do it in their back yard on the weekend, and has some old tools or some decent new ones he just got.
Both mechanics may have equally good skills and can show good work that they've done. Which one would you use?
I guess it depends on how important your car is to you and how much you can afford.
AMEN to both comment (AND THE RANT...)
I am a multi-media professional full time and do weddings on the side. I do both photography and video...one or the other not both at the same time. If both are needed I have a couple of guys I can rely on to shoot video for me with my direction, then I edit the footage.
I studied journalism, photography/photo-journalism, Television news production and video production in college and with some of the top names in photography and video production in the country.
I also worked for one of the largest portrait studios in the country and owned and operated my own studio.
I tell you that to let you know I'm not a weekend hack.
I've been shooting weddings for 25 years.
My first wedding was as an assitant to my partner. He had shot a "few" weddings before we started our company. I was the studio portrait photographer.
My second wedding was as the primary, because my partner didn't show up... (too long of a story.) Needless to say, I was terrified. To make matters worse, the groom was my Mom's boss' brother and the bride was a bridezilla.
I thought I did a pretty good job. The proof book was nice. I got paid for "shooting" the wedding. But, an album and prints were ordered and never picked up or paid for. I used it for several years as part of my portfolio.
After being thrown into the fire, I made it a point from then on to learn as much as I could about wedding photography. And I'm still learning.
To the OP: You have time to learn more before you say you will do this wedding. There are a TON of DVD's out there to rent or buy. (google Gary Fong and Dennis Reggie.)
You may not can learn to anticipate the things that I do over night, but then again, maybe you can.
Don't let anyone tell you you can't do it without trying to find out yourself.
Also, consider renting some equipment instead of buying for your first job.
Good luck and I'm available via a P.M if you have questions.