# Very first wedding, $300 too much or too little?



## Jonathan Schertzer (Jul 30, 2012)

Removed.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 30, 2012)

Well, I'd say you made between 20-25 bucks per hour if you calculate it out that way. You shot for 12 hours and edited for at least 3 I would imagine. It really all depends on your plan and CODB. 

I didn't charge for my first wedding, and I wouldn't have shot that long either unless I was going to get paid... But I also would have checked out early if it was an unpaid gig right when the last event that needs documentation rolls around. The longest wedding I've shot was 10 hours (paid gig). 

It seems to me in the youtube slideshow (I only watched like 30 seconds of it), but the images appeared to be soft or out of focus. There are very few images on your flickr to evaluate sharpness, composition, and the ability to tell a story. 

If you were consistently shooting photos like the first images I saw in the slideshow, I would look for an opportunity to second shoot and not promote yourself as a primary at this point. Not trying to be harsh, just trying to be real.


----------



## tirediron (Jul 30, 2012)

You shouldn't be charging anything.  You should be going to school to learn business which will then give you the knowlege and tools to make the calculations you require to determine what you should charge. No one else can tell you what you should charge; we don't know what your expenses are, what your overhead is, reoccurring costs are...  what I charge has no relevance since all of those factors are different for me than they are for anyone else.  Since you don't have a location displayed in your profile we cannot even begin to guess what typical charges are in your area.


----------



## Jonathan Schertzer (Jul 30, 2012)

I am based out of Southern California, And my question really isn't about the business aspect. I understand business very well, i understand sales margin, cost, expenses. But none of those are my question, my question is about the QUALITY of photography. Obviously expenses Come into play, but you wouldn't pay someone who has only been shooting for a couple weeks(who is really bad at photography) $3,000 to shoot a wedding, because their equipment costs $10,000, and their travel and food is $1,000, Would you? You are forgetting that regardless of expenses, SKILL determines a lot too.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 30, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> I am based out of Southern California, And my question really isn't about the business aspect. I understand business very well, i understand sales margin, cost, expenses. But none of those are my question, my question is about the QUALITY of photography. Obviously expenses Come into play, but you wouldn't pay someone who has only been shooting for a couple weeks(who is really bad at photography) $3,000 to shoot a wedding, because their equipment costs $10,000, and their travel and food is $1,000, Would you? You are forgetting that regardless of expenses, SKILL determines a lot too.



Your question is about the business aspect. Businesses are made to generate income, or money. 

In your position, with your level of experience and your gear, I would not charge for the images you produced. Your first wedding is a learning experience, not a way to make money. Just my thoughts on the subject.


----------



## tirediron (Jul 30, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> I am based out of Southern California, And my question really isn't about the business aspect. I understand business very well, i understand sales margin, cost, expenses. But none of those are my question, my question is about the QUALITY of photography. Obviously expenses Come into play, but you wouldn't pay someone who has only been shooting for a couple weeks(who is really bad at photography) $3,000 to shoot a wedding, because their equipment costs $10,000, and their travel and food is $1,000, Would you? You are forgetting that regardless of expenses, SKILL determines a lot too.


No, actually I'm not forgetting anything.  If you were as conversant with business as you claim to be, than you would know that skill isn't really related to price.  You can either do the job or not.   Granted those that can do a better job often get paid more, but until you have established a base price you can't determine where you should be to start.  With respect to the images you have (and for future reference, you will get a much better response by posting the images in the thread rather than by posting links.  Many of our members are not terribly fond of clicking outside links), I agree with Tyler; they're not really where they need to be.  

You may also want to find a working professional in your area whom you can understudy and/or second-shoot for.  This will give you insight into the technical aspects as well as professional photographic business practices.


----------



## mommyof4qteez (Jul 30, 2012)

I personally think the images overall look really good...I think you sold yourself short..what do you think you are worth?


----------



## shefjr (Jul 30, 2012)

My response is untrained and unprofessional opinion only. I'm not qualified to judge on what is technically right or wrong with your photos unlike the gentlemen above me. Their thoughts I would certainly heed if I were you. They do not respond with trolling answers and are genuinely trying to help you I'm sure. With that said, as someone with an untrained eye, I would have paid more than $300 for your photos. Key word, untrained. Best of luck with whatever you decide.


----------



## Jonathan Schertzer (Jul 31, 2012)

tirediron said:


> Jonathan Schertzer said:
> 
> 
> > I am based out of Southern California, And my question really isn't about the business aspect. I understand business very well, i understand sales margin, cost, expenses. But none of those are my question, my question is about the QUALITY of photography. Obviously expenses Come into play, but you wouldn't pay someone who has only been shooting for a couple weeks(who is really bad at photography) $3,000 to shoot a wedding, because their equipment costs $10,000, and their travel and food is $1,000, Would you? You are forgetting that regardless of expenses, SKILL determines a lot too.
> ...



Okay then, so considering my expenses i'll be charging upwards of $3,000 for my next wedding. Not because i am good or anything but because i want to make a decent sales margin. And understudy/2nd shoot?, why bother? it does't matter if i'm good, This is a business, not an art form. Who cares of the bride is happy with what she paid, along as i can afford my next L lens who cares right? This isn't my day job, nor do i want it to be. But if i can use my camera gear which i have already bought for my own enjoyment and use it to make a little extra cash, whats the harm in that? Maybe my opinion on photography is warped, but i like to think that pleasing people is part of the job. I'd like to think people pay me for my skill, creativity, and style not a percentage of what it costs me to pull out my camera for a couple hours and risking my shutter life.

Oh and the photos are fixed.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 31, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > Jonathan Schertzer said:
> ...



Why did you ask for opinions if you're just going to disagree with acting professionals in the field? 

I don't get it. 

I see your photos are fixed. I also see that you have six photos to show for 12 hours of shooting. With that ratio, you took one acceptable photo every two hours you were there, and that is not a very good ratio. A lot of people buy a camera and think that they can start up shooting professional gigs without any real working photographic knowledge, or what constitutes an aesthetically pleasing image.

Second shooting will generally let you leave with some spending money, depending on the generosity of the primary photographer. This is a great way to learn, and you won't be cheating clients by primary shooting and under delivering. Otherwise, you should be shooting for free until you have a presentable wedding portfolio. If it isn't your day job, you shouldn't be concerned with making as much money as you can. You should be focused on learning the trade and achieving great images. 

You're not going to get very far with that attitude, either.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jul 31, 2012)

If you're not going to pay attention or take some good advice then just stick to charging $300 for weddings.  Your attitude seems to reflect your inexperience. You obviously spent zero time researching what other wedding photographers are charging in your area.  You've been photographing for five years, it means very little if you've been photographing flowers and sunsets.  Having $2500 worth of gear means nothing at all, it could mean you have one ok body and one lens, my guess is a body and a couple of ok lenses.

I love the "watch the whole thing" slide show, why would you even have any just ok photos on there? People don't want just ok, they want great, so charge $300 and then when the people get their "just ok" photos you can say, what do you want for $300, great photos?

Clue the board game that's missing pieces.


----------



## Tony S (Jul 31, 2012)

$300-$85 in expenses = $215 215 divided by 12 hrs = 17.92 per hour not including any post processing time, pre wedding consult, phone calls. Travel and food only $10?? 
Your original post does not ask for only comments on the quality of images, it reads like it's asking about everything since you gave the numbers info. 

Going solely on the quality of the images in this post $300 is a nice token for a bride to pay a friend to shoot a wedding with the camera they brought with them to the wedding. If hiring someone who is looking to do photography as a business, even part time, then they should expect better quality to the images provided. Soft focus and blown highlights are the biggest killers to this set.

More practice and learning should take place before you charge for your next wedding.


----------



## skiboarder72 (Jul 31, 2012)

I charged $750 for my very first wedding I ever shot back in 2006. IMO It says your serious, but learning.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 31, 2012)

skiboarder72 said:


> I charged $750 for my very first wedding I ever shot back in 2006. IMO It says your serious, but learning.



That's not what it says to me.... especially if the images are sub-par! It say that you expect people to pay you for learning stuff that you should have known before ever charging in the first place!


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jul 31, 2012)

I've done three weddings in my life, first two were favours for friends and I didn't charge them. Third one was also for a friend and they offered me $850, I charged them $750. They were all happy.  But it's not my area of expertise and I have a friend that does weddings, so I pass along his name when I get asked.  I'm not going to start playing wedding photographer, inspite of my skills and experience as a photographer, and don't find them difficult to shoot.  I'd rather have someone that is trying to make a living in photography, same as me, do the work.  I'm really sick of all these weekend amateurs that pretend they know what they are doing, taking on paid work without having aquired any of the knowledge past what the owners manual of their camera tells them.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 31, 2012)

imagemaker46 said:


> I've done three weddings in my life, first two were favours for friends and I didn't charge them. Third one was also for a friend and they offered me $850, I charged them $750. They were all happy.  But it's not my area of expertise and I have a friend that does weddings, so I pass along his name when I get asked.  I'm not going to start playing wedding photographer, inspite of my skills and experience as a photographer, and don't find them difficult to shoot.  I'd rather have someone that is trying to make a living in photography, same as me, do the work.  I'm really sick of all these weekend amateurs that pretend they know what they are doing, taking on paid work *without having aquired any of the knowledge past what the owners manual of their camera tells them.*



I think you are assuming a bit much... many of them don't even read their manual, after all!  The Glorious "P" and "A" crowd!    lol!


----------



## PhotoBrody (Jul 31, 2012)

The images are "ok" I'm sure the bride and groom liked them, but other photographers look at them differently. Your flickr says you use a 60D, is that what you shot with? I assume you rented the fisheye, and maybe a telephoto? I wouldn't shoot with a 60D - I would have rented a mkii or iii - or at least a 7D. 60D's are more on the line of Rebels. While image quality is alright, the technical aspects of the 60D aren't on the professional line. I personally like the 50D better. I realize I'm getting off track, but back to your OP - I would've charged a minimum of $500. Without knowing the budget of the bride and groom, you may have been able to get the job done for $750-$1000. I personally try to steer clear of weddings, unless its for someone I know. I enjoy doing model shoots and other print stuff. Having 2 cameras or even 2 shooters for larger weddings I find a must..


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 31, 2012)

Before my wife did ANY paid gigs as a main shooter,  she was an assistant to a local wedding and studio photographer (a friend of the family) and did second shooting. She learned how to take pictures and edit them by example. After that, she still did several friends and family weddings for free before she ever advertised to do photos for money. Maybe you opened your camera box and instantly became a great photographer, but some people put in a lot of time and work for little more than the experience in order to feel like they put out a product worth charging for. Weddings are a different animal altogether, and unless you've been shooting weddings the last five years, i would definitely do at least a few as a second before jumping into calling yourself a wedding pro. Personally,  im still in the "second shooter only" phase, but maybe a main one day. Im not ashamed to say my skill level isn't  enough to be a main photog, its just the level im at right now.


----------



## skiboarder72 (Jul 31, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> Before my wife did ANY paid gigs as a main shooter,  she was an assistant to a local wedding and studio photographer (a friend of the family) and did second shooting. She learned how to take pictures and edit them by example. After that, she still did several friends and family weddings for free before she ever advertised to do photos for money. Maybe you opened your camera box and instantly became a great photographer, but some people put in a lot of time and work for little more than the experience in order to feel like they put out a product worth charging for. Weddings are a different animal altogether, and unless you've been shooting weddings the last five years, i would definitely do at least a few as a second before jumping into calling yourself a wedding pro. Personally,  im still in the "second shooter only" phase, but maybe a main one day. Im not ashamed to say my skill level isn't  enough to be a main photog, its just the level im at right now.



I guess I must have gone a different route. I've actually still never 2nd shot a wedding. Even my very first wedding, I was the main photographer. I guess I just work well under pressure. I had about a year and a half experience shooting at that point though and felt pretty comfortable shooting friends and family members. So I shot their engagement photos, they loved them, and I charged them $750 to shoot their wedding. I invested about half of that into a new lens and flash, and the time to learn how to use it well. Was it risky? Yea. Are couples that only spend $750 on a wedding photographer willing to take a risk. Yes! Long story short it worked out great and I shot 3 of her bridesmaid's weddings the next year, and things just took off from there. 

While going the 2nd shooter route is probably safer I think it teaches you to shoot like everyone else, which in the long run won't get you very far in a very competitive market.


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 31, 2012)

skiboarder72 said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > Before my wife did ANY paid gigs as a main shooter,  she was an assistant to a local wedding and studio photographer (a friend of the family) and did second shooting. She learned how to take pictures and edit them by example. After that, she still did several friends and family weddings for free before she ever advertised to do photos for money. Maybe you opened your camera box and instantly became a great photographer, but some people put in a lot of time and work for little more than the experience in order to feel like they put out a product worth charging for. Weddings are a different animal altogether, and unless you've been shooting weddings the last five years, i would definitely do at least a few as a second before jumping into calling yourself a wedding pro. Personally,  im still in the "second shooter only" phase, but maybe a main one day. Im not ashamed to say my skill level isn't  enough to be a main photog, its just the level im at right now.
> ...



just because you learn under another photographer, doesn't mean that you don't develop your own distinctive shooting style and processing style. It just means that you have the chance to get a hands on learning experience with someone to teach you the basics, and to get more comfortable with the environment and people. 
It also gives you the chance to get paid to learn and practice, and if you have a good main, you can learn a LOT while having a lot of fun doing it. I wasn't trying to draw a blueprint for what everyone should do before they start shooting weddings, I was just sharing OUR experience, which was a good one.


----------



## skiboarder72 (Jul 31, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> skiboarder72 said:
> 
> 
> > pixmedic said:
> ...



Very true. You just run the risk of taking what is comfortable and familiar and adopting that as your own. Just something to watch out with if you do a lot of 2nd shooting. I guess another good idea is to switch up which photographers you 2nd shoot for and take the best parts of each and create your own style.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jul 31, 2012)

PhotoBrody said:


> The images are "ok" I'm sure the bride and groom liked them, but other photographers look at them differently. Your flickr says you use a 60D, is that what you shot with? I assume you rented the fisheye, and maybe a telephoto? I wouldn't shoot with a 60D - I would have rented a mkii or iii - or at least a 7D. 60D's are more on the line of Rebels. While image quality is alright, the technical aspects of the 60D aren't on the professional line. I personally like the 50D better. I realize I'm getting off track, but back to your OP - I would've charged a minimum of $500. Without knowing the budget of the bride and groom, you may have been able to get the job done for $750-$1000. I personally try to steer clear of weddings, unless its for someone I know. I enjoy doing model shoots and other print stuff. Having 2 cameras or even 2 shooters for larger weddings I find a must..



Off topic a bit. Any camera in the hands of a skills professional works, I would have to say that a skilled photographer using a T2i could do a better job than an amateur using a 1Dx  It's not the camera, it's the person behind it.


----------



## skiboarder72 (Jul 31, 2012)

imagemaker46 said:


> PhotoBrody said:
> 
> 
> > The images are "ok" I'm sure the bride and groom liked them, but other photographers look at them differently. Your flickr says you use a 60D, is that what you shot with? I assume you rented the fisheye, and maybe a telephoto? I wouldn't shoot with a 60D - I would have rented a mkii or iii - or at least a 7D. 60D's are more on the line of Rebels. While image quality is alright, the technical aspects of the 60D aren't on the professional line. I personally like the 50D better. I realize I'm getting off track, but back to your OP - I would've charged a minimum of $500. Without knowing the budget of the bride and groom, you may have been able to get the job done for $750-$1000. I personally try to steer clear of weddings, unless its for someone I know. I enjoy doing model shoots and other print stuff. Having 2 cameras or even 2 shooters for larger weddings I find a must..
> ...



Definitely! With a few reservations. Sometimes having the nice prime lenses and high ISO capabilities are absolutely needed, even by a skilled photographer.  When the conditions get tough, the gear can hold back even the best photographers. It's just important to realize that most people are held back by their personal abilities in 90% of situations, not the other way around.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Jul 31, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> tirediron said:
> 
> 
> > Jonathan Schertzer said:
> ...




Maybe next time just ask how you did on the photos. your the only one that can say what you should charge. my costs are diffrent then your costs. I paid my second photogrpher at my first wedding almost as much as you charged for the whole thing.


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Jul 31, 2012)

OP,

Your prices are dictated by what people are willing to pay you, and by what you need to make in profit for it to be worth your time.

Charging $300 for shooting a wedding is the worst possible option. Not only are you under valuing your work, but you're teaching the public that $300 is an acceptable price to pay for wedding photography.

Your pricing structure should be dictated by your COGS and CODB and your desired profit margin. 

Doing it for free would be better. At least that way your thoughtless pricing doesn't negatively affect those of us who charge 10 or 20 times your prices.

And if you think shooting a wedding with $2500 of gear is a big deal then you probably should stop accepting paid clients. I have at least $9k around my waist at every wedding I shoot, and I'm definitely not where I want to be with the gear. Besides, your gear means nothing to your potential clients.

But, from what I gather from your replies to this thread, you have a problem accepting good advice from working pros.


----------



## Jonathan Schertzer (Jul 31, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> Jonathan Schertzer said:
> 
> 
> > tirediron said:
> ...




Because I highly disagree with his opinion, if he had told me "your not quite ready yet", or "at the skill level i don't think your are worth $300" Or even "you suck, don't do weddings" then i would have had no problem taking that into consideration. But to completely bypass what i am asking and smugly tell me to give up shooting and just go to business school is something that bothers me.

And the great majority of the photos i took that day are equivalent to the photos i posted. But i've only posted 6 because i know you guys hate looking through 500 photos at a time. I posted the slide show incase anyone wanted to look through them(and there is a reason i included the good and the bad, if i ONLY included the good, it wouldn't be a fair representation of my work now would it?)

I'm looking for some opinions on my work and an idea of what you think its worth. Yes, business could play a huge part in what i should charge, but at 18 years old i'm not really worried about overhead, my only real concern is to make a little money to keep investing in gear and get the practice that will eventually lead to the place i want to be. 

And as for what people in my area charge, i am located 60miles out of los angeles. Pricing for weddings varies from $1500-$3200(easily). But in my opinion, i'm not on that level where i should be charging that much, i should be charging less because i'm not producing wedding magazine quality work, but that doesn't mean i don't have good work, and it doesn't mean i shouldn't be charging a little bit of money. Especially for the people who can't afford to spend massive amounts of money for photos and that would be perfectly happy with my quality of work.

also, i would't mind being a 2nd shooter at all and its actually what i was looking for, for months but none of the photographers in my area were looking for 2nd shooters, even for free. But then the opportunity came up where the bride looked at my photos and fell in love with them and my style and hired me, knowing that i didn't have experience with wedding photography.


----------



## Jonathan Schertzer (Jul 31, 2012)

jamesbjenkins said:


> OP,
> 
> Your prices are dictated by what people are willing to pay you, and by what you need to make in profit for it to be worth your time.
> 
> ...



I know $2,500 isn't much, i've been in photography long enough to know it isn't much and i really wish i could have like $10,000, like a really good 5d mark ii set up with some good L glass, couple flashes and some pocket wizards. But unfortunately i don't have the income to make any large purchase like that. So i try to make due with what i have, and i produce what i can produce with it. if it is popular opinion that i will take the back seat with shooting weddings. But i think i did okay, and i know everywhere i've showed these photos everyone has loved them, except in this thread.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Jul 31, 2012)

Business plays a huge part in being successful, not a small part.  At 18 years old you have now 5 young teen years under your belt and you're ready to turn pro?  There isn't really a lot wrong with what you posted, and I'm sure your family and friends love what you shoot, but take some time too learn more about the whole business side before attempting a jump into an already saturated wedding market.  

There are a lot of people out there that believe that they are really good enough to make it as professionals, unfortunately they aren't, and they end up learning the hard way.


----------



## Designer (Jul 31, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> This is a slide show of some of the photos, please watch the whole thing, as some photos are good, some are just okay.
> Assuming i were able to consistently create photos like this, what do you think i should be charging?



O.K., I watched the whole thing.  I figure you owe me 5 minutes and 19 seconds, so chew on this:

I didn't see any that were "good", but the whole show consisted of snapshots, most of which were not good.

IMO: if I could only afford $300 for wedding pictures, I would select someone else.

I don't understand why so many shots were converted to monochrome, considering that most didn't need to be converted from color in order to become "better".  Does your camera not autofocus?  Too bad it doesn't auto-compose.  Oh, and you can keep your music, too.


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 31, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> jamesbjenkins said:
> 
> 
> > OP,
> ...



not to sound harsh or anything...but..
showing pictures to friends and family and people that don't know the business is totally different than showing those same pictures to professional photographers who have more picture taking time in than you've been alive. they aren't here commenting on your thread because they like seeing their advice on the internetz. You can either try and benefit from their experiences, or you can do as you like. believe me, noone here will lose any sleep over it either way. When you ask for a professional opinion here, dont get upset when you get a professional answer, for better or for worse.


----------



## Jonathan Schertzer (Jul 31, 2012)

This thread is getting interesting, 

1.We have tirediron telling me that skill does't matter and price should be determined by my own expenses.

2.Some people are saying i sold my self short and deserved more than what i got.

3.Some are saying i don't deserve anything.

4.some people assuming that i just picked up a camera and starting shooting, ignoring that i have actually been shooting for several years and am formally and informally educated with experience as a professional in both freelance and contract. Just never in wedding photography.

5.some people saying something about how i should be shooting with a 7D and not a 60D when they are pretty much identical cameras. the 7d with maybe slightly better noise, and a faster frame rate. 

6. then we have people arguing about whether 2nd shooting or 1st shooting is better. 

So far i've learned that, 

1. None of you can agree on anything
2. many of you make off the wall assumptions that don't make any sense at all 

But i would like to thank jamesbjenkins
for giving me some good advice, your post is something i will think about and is honestly a fair opinion.

i would like to thank *imagemaker46 and skiboarder72 *for defending against the idea that a better camera is some how going to make me a better photographer. Crop sensor has been used in weddings for years, sure having a full frame body would be awesome, sure it will give me better DOF, sure with will give me better iso, sure it will give me higher print quality. But crop has been used for years, and i know a number of professionals working with two 60Ds on their side.

i would also like to thank the people who said my work was good, not very beneficial to my growth as a photographer, but very nice to hear.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jul 31, 2012)

I am not going to lie.  I have shot $300 wedding early in my career.  I was really playing with fire.  No insurance, minimal equipment, no LLC.  It was stupid but luckily the fire didnt go out of control.  The safe thing to do is to get 2nd shooting as many as possible.  Doing primary for $300 = slave labor.  Plus things can really go wrong and they can sue you for large sum of money.  2nd shooting is much better because it is lower stress, you dont have to edit many photos.


----------



## Derrel (Jul 31, 2012)

PhotoBrody said:
			
		

> Your flickr says you use a 60D, is that what you shot with? I assume you rented the fisheye, and maybe a telephoto? I wouldn't shoot with a 60D - I would have rented a mkii or iii - or at least a 7D. 60D's are more on the line of Rebels. While image quality is alright, the technical aspects of the 60D aren't on the professional line. I personally like the 50D better. I realize I'm getting off track, but back to your OP - I would've charged a minimum of $500. Without knowing the budget of the bride and groom, you may have been able to get the job done for $750-$1000. I personally try to steer clear of weddings, unless its for someone I know. I enjoy doing model shoots and other print stuff. Having 2 cameras or even 2 shooters for larger weddings I find a must..



I disagree with this entirely. My current shooting partner uses the Canon 60D. It's a hell of a good camera. Good feel,good finder, good fit and finish, good controls, AMPLE resolution, good color, swing-out LCD of excellent color and sharpness, looks "professional", has great LED display brightness even outdoors at the beach while wearing eyeglasses...I could use a 60D on any number of assignments and feel damned comfortable with it...I dunno... and the SENSOR performance of the 60D...pretty damned good, IMO.

Anyway...$300....uh...seems pretty low. I went to your Flickr pages...it was only a few click in that I realized, hey...this kid has some visual flair and style...he can shoot. How consistently you can shoot I cannot sday, since I only went through the first four pages of your Flickr. In my book, a real photographer can "shoot". Does not matter if he or she is "amateur" or "pro", or "semi-pro". If you pay really careful attention throughout the entire wedding shoot, and really FOCUS on the task at hand, and are constantly evaluating your entire photographic effort and performance (like....say..failing to verify that you are shooting flash pics at 1/200 second or slower indoors, and not at 1/400 second and *black-banding them all*!!!) you ought to be okay shooting a wedding. Just do not screw up! Ideally, you would have a backup shooter to help you CYA. With a d-slr it's almost inexcusable to mess up an entire sequence at a wedding and NOT know about it, right then and there.

But, uh, $300. Hmmm....seems kinda low.


----------



## Jonathan Schertzer (Jul 31, 2012)

No, being harsh doesn't hurt me i'll grow from it. but i still have no idea what to do, Should i give up on shooting weddings?, some people are telling me i should continue and some are telling me i should quit. well which one is it? if i am really that bad at wedding photography then i will take a back seat, but so far no one can agree. 

and i didn't mean family and friends, i mean't other photographers all over.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jul 31, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> But crop has been used for years, and i know a number of professionals working with two 60Ds on their side.



Then they are not as professional as you think.  I agree that you can make good photos with 60D.. but if they are really pros, they would have bought a full frame.  Even a 5D classic is only $800.  I have seen people rock 1 full frame and 1 crop.  Doing weddings with 2 crops is stupid especially if you have the capital to buy full frames.


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 31, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> No, being harsh doesn't hurt me i'll grow from it. but i still have no idea what to do, Should i give up on shooting weddings?, some people are telling me i should continue and some are telling me i should quit. well which one is it? if i am really that bad at wedding photography then i will take a back seat, but so far no one can agree.
> 
> and i didn't mean family and friends, i mean't other photographers all over.



HELLS NO don't give up shooting weddings if that's what you want to do. 
Take what advice you feel is appropriate/useful and throw the rest out. 
Just remember that some techniques work well for some, not so well for others. 
my best advice is to take everyone's advice into consideration, try them, and use what works for you and don't worry about the rest. 
Just don't discount other peoples advice based on your personal views. as a photographer, you have to be flexible with your ideas and creativity. especially at weddings.


----------



## Derrel (Jul 31, 2012)

I'd be willing to have a shoot-out pitting my 5D against a Canon 60D..and I know which camera would kick ass. How do I know? I sat through a half-day's worth of images shot with MY 5D and my partner's 60D..and the 60D....kicked its butt in difficult dynamic range scenarios with INCREDIBLY BETTER, smarter, more color-aware light metering and better image processing...and that was shot..last week.

For the beginner, or a guy shooting a lot of flash photos...the old, color-blind Canon 5D and 5D-II are darkhorses in the race against fully color-aware Nikons and the few,newer Canon's that have color-aware, more-capable light metering and flash metering...

If you have a lot of skill, the 5D Classic and 5D-II bodies are "okay"...but their light-metering is rather primitive and dumb for run-n-gun compared against Nikons and the NEWEST Canon's that can actually "tell" what the hell they are being aimed at...the 5D series models 1 and 2 are for EXPERIENCED SHOOTERS, and need a good deal of user-intervention. Stick with your 60D.


----------



## Jonathan Schertzer (Jul 31, 2012)

Thank you derrel, you are so far the only one making any sense. and i'm not just saying that because you are nice. This is a quality reply and I paid very close attention to what i was doing, and no lie, I made SURE i was shooting at 1/200th, specifically so that i wouldn't black band, and most of the time i bounced if off my hand to get just enough fill light. I know photography pretty well, and i think this wedding shows it, i mean it was thew most unorganized, off the wall wedding where i didn't even have a car to to travel between the brides house, chapel, cocktail party, and reception. This whole job was as photojournalistic as it gets, no prior planning or anything. My job was to just basically follow everyone and somehow create good shots on the fly without being at the location beforehand, every shot you see i took literally milliseconds seconds to find the lighting, composition, angle, and exposure/flash settings. And before anyone goes off about how i should have been prepared, i didn't have the chance, the bride and groom literally contacted me a couple of days prior to the wedding with very little detail about where it would be.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Jul 31, 2012)

Are you fully insured? Are you registered with the state, and paying federal taxes? if yes, then go for it and hope you don't mess up.  If you answered no to any of those maybe step back, find work second shooting and learn the business side of things so you have a better chance of not finding yourself in court or having the irs or your local state nocking on your door wanting money.

I dont beleive the earlier poster was saying you should quit photogrpahy and go into business, he was saying take business classes so you know how to properly run a photography business. Most professionals will tell you that they have seen a lot of talented photographers fail because they lacked business knowledge, and have seen averge photographers do great because they were excellent at business. it's just as big a skill if not bigger then pushing the button on your camera. Heck I know a local business here in my town that has been going for 5 years now and growing every year and they take really average photos. worse then me and I don't consider myself great by any means. But they have the busienss skill to succeed.


As for your costs of doing business, you do have overhead, but you just dont think you do.   gas, wear and tear on your car, phone calls, computer and programs to run you editing software, photo gear, insurance, your time, you are worth something arn't you? all of that adds up. The costs are there, your just not figuring them in. Not to mention just starting out your going to have a lot less paid shoots then someone who has been doing it for awhile. So you need to recoup those expenses on less shoots then someone else.  For a $300 wedding when you sit down and figure all actual costs you were probalby making maybe 10 bucks an hour.


----------



## Derrel (Jul 31, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> Thank you derrel, you are so far the only one making any sense. and i'm not just saying that because you are nice. This is a quality reply and I paid very close attention to what i was doing, and no lie, I made SURE i was shooting at 1/200th, specifically so that i wouldn't black band, and most of the time i bounced if off my hand to get just enough fill light. I know photography pretty well, and i think this wedding shows it, i mean it was thew most unorganized, off the wall wedding where i didn't even have a car to to travel between the brides house, chapel, cocktail party, and reception. This whole job was as photojournalistic as it gets, no prior planning or anything. My job was to just basically follow everyone and somehow create good shots on the fly without being at the location beforehand, every shot you see i took literally milliseconds seconds to find the lighting, composition, angle, and exposure/flash settings. And before anyone goes off about how i should have been prepared, i didn't have the chance, the bride and groom literally contacted me a couple of days prior to the wedding with very little detail about where it would be.



I shot my FIRST wedding, a civil ceremony in judge's chambers, when I was 13 years old, with a 35mm Russian-made film SLR and a 58mm f/2 lens and the then-hot,new 200 ISO color print film from Kodak!!!!!!! I shot my last wedding in 2010 with a Canon 5D-II and 24-105 L zoom on a beautiful, bright August day as the "Uncle Derrel" shooter, for my lovely niece Rebecca and her husband Jake. The lighting was absolutely blinding and horrible, and was so danged bright, I wore my SUNGLASSES while shooting. Her three PAYED shooters all used crop-body Nikons. We all got good shots. In between my first wedding and my most-recent I have had to shoot funerals, press conferences, Pac-10 track and field, Pac 10 basketball,high school football,basketball,track and field, soccer, wrestling,maternity, studio portraiture, travel,vacation, hobby, and family portraiture, as well as some abstracts and fine art, and payed newspaper sports assignments. *From 1973 to 2011, I never owned a camera as all-around good as or capable as the 60D.*


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 31, 2012)

12sndsgood said:


> Are you fully insured? Are you registered with the state, and paying federal taxes? if yes, then go for it and hope you don't mess up.  If you answered no to any of those maybe step back, find work second shooting and learn the business side of things so you have a better chance of not finding yourself in court or having the irs or your local state nocking on your door wanting money.
> 
> I dont beleive the earlier poster was saying you should quit photogrpahy and go into business, he was saying take business classes so you know how to properly run a photography business. Most professionals will tell you that they have seen a lot of talented photographers fail because they lacked business knowledge, and have seen averge photographers do great because they were excellent at business. it's just as big a skill if not bigger then pushing the button on your camera. Heck I know a local business here in my town that has been going for 5 years now and growing every year and they take really average photos. worse then me and I don't consider myself great by any means. But they have the busienss skill to succeed.
> 
> ...



hell, $10 an hour is better than EMT-basics start at in florida...When i started as an EMT I only got $9 an hour...BEFORE taxes.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Jul 31, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> 12sndsgood said:
> 
> 
> > Are you fully insured? Are you registered with the state, and paying federal taxes? if yes, then go for it and hope you don't mess up. If you answered no to any of those maybe step back, find work second shooting and learn the business side of things so you have a better chance of not finding yourself in court or having the irs or your local state nocking on your door wanting money.
> ...




well I didnt bring taxes into that. once you take that out.....


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 31, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> Because I highly disagree with his opinion, if he had told me "your not quite ready yet", or "at the skill level i don't think your are worth $300" Or even "you suck, don't do weddings" then i would have had no problem taking that into consideration. But to completely bypass what i am asking and smugly tell me to give up shooting and just go to business school is something that bothers me.



I told you that you're not ready yet, and to second shoot. Nothing smug about it, nothing about taking business classes either. It clearly just wasn't what you wanted to hear. It seems to me you'd rather have your ego stroked, but whatever. 



> And the great majority of the photos i took that day are equivalent to the photos i posted. But i've only posted 6 because i know you guys hate looking through 500 photos at a time. I posted the slide show incase anyone wanted to look through them(and there is a reason i included the good and the bad, if i ONLY included the good, it wouldn't be a fair representation of my work now would it?)



You SHOULD only be showing your "good" shots. The bad shots should be confined to your hard drive and not seen by the client or anyone for that matter. As far as anyone else is concerned, the bad photos don't exist. Putting them out on the internet is just going to make you look like a sub-par photographer. That was a bad move, but probably on par with charging $300. Show me just your GOOD shots, and that will be an accurate representation of your skill level. After all, good shots to you, may not be good shots in the eyes of someone who's shot weddings before. 



> I'm looking for some opinions on my work and an idea of what you think its worth. Yes, business could play a huge part in what i should charge, but at 18 years old i'm not really worried about overhead, my only real concern is to make a little money to keep investing in gear and get the practice that will eventually lead to the place i want to be.



Then I would suggest you look for second shooter gigs. Seriously. Do it. 



> And as for what people in my area charge, i am located 60miles out of los angeles. Pricing for weddings varies from $1500-$3200(easily). But in my opinion, i'm not on that level where i should be charging that much, i should be charging less because i'm not producing wedding magazine quality work, but that doesn't mean i don't have good work, and it doesn't mean i shouldn't be charging a little bit of money. Especially for the people who can't afford to spend massive amounts of money for photos and that would be perfectly happy with my quality of work.



This video is extremely relevant to the discussion at hand: 








> also, i would't mind being a 2nd shooter at all and its actually what i was looking for, for months but none of the photographers in my area were looking for 2nd shooters, even for free. But then the opportunity came up where the bride looked at my photos and fell in love with them and my style and hired me, knowing that i didn't have experience with wedding photography.



Put an ad out on craigslist that you're looking to second shoot. Network with local photographers. You don't need to be shooting a wedding every weekend. It's also not your primary source of income. To avoid a lawsuit and potential loss of your livelihood, I would strongly suggest that you hold out on charging until you have more experience.


----------



## jwbryson1 (Jul 31, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> This video is extremely relevant to the discussion at hand:




This video confuses me.  Clearly, the defendant was behind the 8 ball on her knowledge of the lenses she uses, but her "off the top" knowledge should not be the point--the point should be the quality of the results.  We saw a few bad shots and some bad PS stuff, but I think the Judge was a bit over the top for purposes of sensationalizing this issue for television.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 31, 2012)

jwbryson1 said:
			
		

> This video confuses me.  Clearly, the defendant was behind the 8 ball on her knowledge of the lenses she uses, but her "off the top" knowledge should not be the point--the point should be the quality of the results.  We saw a few bad shots and some bad PS stuff, but I think the Judge was a bit over the top for purposes of sensationalizing this issue for television.



I disagree. When a judge in a court case has more photographic knowledge than the defendant, that's generally a sign of failure. I don't think it was terribly sensationalized. They shot a wedding with entry level gear and kit lenses.


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 31, 2012)

jwbryson1 said:


> o hey tyler said:
> 
> 
> > This video is extremely relevant to the discussion at hand:
> ...



of course...it IS television. that's kinda his thing. its like any of the judges on TV. its all sensationalism.


----------



## ghache (Jul 31, 2012)

To the one who says don't charge well, **** hem because with the images you showed, you clearly undersold yourself.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 31, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> So far i've learned that,
> 
> 1. None of you can agree on anything
> 2. many of you make off the wall assumptions that don't make any sense at all



We have all levels of experience, knowledge and education here. The only way to know how worthwhile an "Attaboy" is.. is to get to know that individual, and to check out their "work" and see if it is "much better" or "much worse" than yours.

The "Much Worse" crowd will almost always tell you how great they think your shots are, with no meaningful suggestions (almost like family and clients)... 

 The "much better" will either: 

1. Not say anything at all
2. Make some suggestions on how to improve
3. ignore you if you are perceived as arrogant, and convinced you are so good you don't need help.

Of course.. there are other things that could be said.. but these are the extremes. All advice comes from the giver's perspective... some are knowledgeable, some aren't! It is really up to you to determine what is worthwhile, and what isn't.


----------



## skiboarder72 (Jul 31, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> We have all levels of experience, knowledge and education here. The only way to know how worthwhile an "Attaboy" is.. is to get to know that individual, and to check out their "work" and see if it is "much better" or "much worse" than yours.
> 
> The "Much Worse" crowd will almost always tell you how great they think your shots are, with no meaningful suggestions (almost like family and clients)...
> 
> ...



So true... people really need to keep this in mind when asking for feedback


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 31, 2012)

ghache said:
			
		

> To the one who says don't charge well, **** hem because with the images you showed, you clearly undersold yourself.



No, ghache. **** you. 

How do you judge a wedding accurately off six images? Especially a 12 hour wedding?


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jul 31, 2012)

IMO, these 6 photos aren't that strong... but I am just a dad with a camera.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 31, 2012)

Schwettylens said:
			
		

> IMO, these 6 photos aren't that strong... but I am just a dad with a camera.



We are both just Facebook fauxtographers.


----------



## skiboarder72 (Jul 31, 2012)

At our yearly South Carolina Association of Wedding Photographers contest we have a "wedding day" category where you are only allowed to enter in 8 images that tell the story of a wedding day. It's difficult, but definitely can be done. You can check the results here from this past year's judging: 2011 Winners


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 31, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> IMO, these 6 photos aren't that strong... but I am just a dad with a camera.



ULTIMATE dad with a camera... get it right!


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Jul 31, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> Okay then, so considering my expenses i'll be charging upwards of $3,000 for my next wedding. Not because i am good or anything but because i want to make a decent sales margin. And understudy/2nd shoot?, why bother? it does't matter if i'm good, This is a business, not an art form. Who cares of the bride is happy with what she paid, along as i can afford my next L lens who cares right? This isn't my day job, nor do i want it to be. *But if i can use my camera gear which i have already bought for my own enjoyment and use it to make a little extra cash, whats the harm in that? *Maybe my opinion on photography is warped, but i like to think that pleasing people is part of the job. I'd like to think people pay me for my skill, creativity, and style not a percentage of what it costs me to pull out my camera for a couple hours and risking my shutter life.
> 
> Oh and the photos are fixed.



Ruining people's memories of the most important day of their life. That's the harm in it. 



skiboarder72 said:


> I charged $750 for my very first wedding I ever shot back in 2006. *IMO It says your serious, but learning*.



Are you serious? This comes off as totally arrogant and misinformed. You shouldn't be LEARNING if you're charging somebody $750 to take photographs of an extremely important event of their lives (maybe the most important). You need to re-examine your thinking, because it is severely flawed. 



PhotoBrody said:


> The images are "ok" I'm sure the bride and groom liked them, but other photographers look at them differently. Your flickr says you use a 60D, is that what you shot with? I assume you rented the fisheye, and maybe a telephoto? I wouldn't shoot with a 60D - I would have rented a mkii or iii - or at least a 7D. 60D's are more on the line of Rebels. While image quality is alright, the technical aspects of the 60D aren't on the professional line. I personally like the 50D better. I realize I'm getting off track, but back to your OP - I would've charged a minimum of $500. Without knowing the budget of the bride and groom, you may have been able to get the job done for $750-$1000. I personally try to steer clear of weddings, unless its for someone I know. I enjoy doing model shoots and other print stuff. Having 2 cameras or even 2 shooters for larger weddings I find a must..



No.

You're just plain wrong. The 60d and 7d have the same APS-C sensor, and the 60d (released late 2010) is actually NEWER than the 7d (mid 2009). Have you actually used a 60d or are you just talking out of your @$$???

I own it and have shot 50,000 frames on it, and to me, you sound like you don't know what the hell you're talking about. The resolving power of the 60d 18MP APS-C sensor is actually extremely high, and has everything to do with the glass in front of it. At higher ISO's, both the 7d and 60d will suffer pretty much equally, where you'll find the benefit of the high ISO in full frame. 



skiboarder72 said:


> I guess I must have gone a different route. I've actually still never 2nd shot a wedding. Even my very first wedding, I was the main photographer. I guess I just work well under pressure. I had about a year and a half experience shooting at that point though and felt pretty comfortable shooting friends and family members. So I shot their engagement photos, they loved them, and I charged them $750 to shoot their wedding. I invested about half of that into a new lens and flash, and the time to learn how to use it well. Was it risky? Yea. Are couples that only spend $750 on a wedding photographer willing to take a risk. Yes! Long story short it worked out great and I shot 3 of her bridesmaid's weddings the next year, and things just took off from there.
> 
> *While going the 2nd shooter route is probably safer I think it teaches you to shoot like everyone else, which in the long run won't get you very far in a very competitive market*.




No.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 31, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I hope to someday be as good a Facebook Fauxtographer as you are, Tyler!    lol!


(hmmm... was that a compliment.. or an insult?)


----------



## Designer (Jul 31, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> ...everywhere i've showed these photos everyone has loved them, except in this thread.



Sometimes people don't want to hurt your feelings.  How about a blind test?  Send the photos to some professional wedding photographers, using someone else's return e-mail address.  Don't include your name.  Ask for honest opinions from the pros.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jul 31, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> o hey tyler said:
> 
> 
> > Schwettylens said:
> ...



I don't see how I could take it any other way than a compliment.


----------



## skiboarder72 (Jul 31, 2012)

Rotanimod said:


> skiboarder72 said:
> 
> 
> > I charged $750 for my very first wedding I ever shot back in 2006. *IMO It says your serious, but learning*.
> ...



I've been shooting weddings for 6 years professionally and I STILL learn something at every wedding I shoot. I don't think I ever want to stop learning. 

Charging a number like that says that you have a least some confidence in what you do and it explains that while your not a experienced professional, that your time is still value able. 

Also, just because I'm learning doesn't necessarily mean the photos are going to come out looking like some wacked out experiment. The photos came out great, and she (and others) apparently thought so otherwise I wouldn't have shot 3 of her bridesmaid's weddings the next year!


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jul 31, 2012)

^^^^  good wedding photographer  ^^^^^


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Jul 31, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> We have all levels of experience, knowledge and education here. The only way to know how worthwhile an "Attaboy" is.. is to get to know that individual, and to check out their "work" and see if it is "much better" or "much worse" than yours.
> 
> The "Much Worse" crowd will almost always tell you how great they think your shots are, with no meaningful suggestions (almost like family and clients)...
> 
> ...



This is SO true. This statement should be required reading for every schmuck that thinks they're ready to "go pro". The comments of your family / friends mean nothing. It's like a politician's campaign speech... sounds nice, but completely void of substance.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Jul 31, 2012)

skiboarder72 said:


> Rotanimod said:
> 
> 
> > skiboarder72 said:
> ...



First, I never said you can't learn while shooting, no matter how experienced you are it is a given that you will continue to learn.

The way you made your story sound in context of this thread (I've read EVERY post) is that you jumped into main shooting, with no second shooting experience. In fact, you've gone so far as to explicitly state you have an aversion to second shooting for some strange reasons I don't agree with. You priced yourself at $750 citing "IMO it says your serious, but learning". This is flawed thinking, in my opinion. To me this language implies that you weren't good enough at the time to be charging this much, and comes off a bit arrogant.

Let's go back in time to that first wedding. Where you are now (I've looked at your website, and you do good work) is irrelevant to what I'm talking about. Have you ever considered that maybe you were a bit lucky the photos came out great? Ever thought of that? What if you'd encountered conditions that only an experienced professional would've been suited to handle? Or, perhaps, only conditions you would have been ready for if you had second shooting experience under your belt?

Why should someone else be paying for you to learn?

Maybe if you'd stated it differently, I wouldn't take issue. But I also strongly disagree with your thoughts that second shooting is not important.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Jul 31, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> ^^^^  good wedding photographer  ^^^^^



Nevermind.


----------



## pixmedic (Jul 31, 2012)

oh Lordy...I can see the mods hovering over the thread-lock button already.
I think we are setting records for most threads locked lately.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jul 31, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> oh Lordy...I can see the mods hovering over the thread-lock button already.
> I think we are setting records f*or most threads locked lately.*



and they aren't even my FAULT! WOW!  How strange is that?  lol!


----------



## AJev (Jul 31, 2012)

Camera type and technical ability aside, I think an important part about shooting weddings that hasn't really been discussed is whether or not you truly enjoy weddings and want to shoot them.  

On your FLICKR account, you have a wide variety -  urban, landscape, expressive, family, self, but all of it has basically the same feel.  For example, your skateboarding shots are great, as are your landscapes, and all look to be processed the same but the wedding samples you provided look as though 5 or 6 different people shot them.  In your FLICKR, I see very good examples of sound composition, Cup of Bokeh, seriously, that is awesome and I love it, but your compositions seem weaker in the wedding samples.  I know this is your first wedding and you said you were shooting mostly on the fly but it could be something else too, perhaps lack of interest beyond the technical challenge?

This is just my opinion but I think people expect to feel some type of emotion when looking at wedding photographs, they want to see a story, feel as though they are there. If you can accomplish that, then you can consider yourself a wedding photograph and charge accordingly.  After watching your slideshow and viewing your samples, I didn't really feel anything.  Sure you had some nice shots in the slideshow that were technically sound and some very pretty ones as well, but there were many that were sub par that never should have been included - by including them, it ruined the mood of the series, almost as though we get excited to see a good one and then let down by a lesser one.

Again, this is my personal opinion but I think someone who wants to be a wedding photographer should truly like weddings and respect the sentiment behind them.  They should genuinely want to capture the emotions that are seen on what could be the most important day in a person's life.  A wedding photographer should know that while it gets crazy sometimes, they might need to get everyone in line (not literally) for certain shots that a bride will want to have later - they should know the key sentiments to capture, regardless of the chaos going on around them.  If you don't truly have all of this in you, then you owe it to the Bride and Groom to respectfully decline and refer them to someone else, after all, you can't re-shoot a wedding.

If your heart and mind are truly in it, then go for it but your samples so far don't suggest that you still have a ways to go. Also, CODB aside, only you can put a value on your art.  If a bride sees your work (again, you should have a signature style) and likes your work - she will pay for it whether it is $300 or $3000.  What myself and other people here value it at is irrelevant (IMO), it is what a bride wants that matters and what she is willing to spend for it.  What you may want to do is start out low while you learn and increase by a certain amount every 3-5 weddings you shoot.  Keep in mind that for each client, the photographers who are charging more are probably producing between 800-2000 QUALITY images per 10 hour wedding - if you aren't, then you should remain at a lower rate until you are.

Again, just my opinion.


----------



## Jonathan Schertzer (Jul 31, 2012)

AJev said:


> Camera type and technical ability aside, I think an important part about shooting weddings that hasn't really been discussed is whether or not you truly enjoy weddings and want to shoot them.
> 
> On your FLICKR account, you have a wide variety -  urban, landscape, expressive, family, self, but all of it has basically the same feel.  For example, your skateboarding shots are great, as are your landscapes, and all look to be processed the same but the wedding samples you provided look as though 5 or 6 different people shot them.  In your FLICKR, I see very good examples of sound composition, Cup of Bokeh, seriously, that is awesome and I love it, but your compositions seem weaker in the wedding samples.  I know this is your first wedding and you said you were shooting mostly on the fly but it could be something else too, perhaps lack of interest beyond the technical challenge?
> 
> ...



Perfectly sound and reasonable response, not condescending, Arrogant, or just completely angry for some reason. 
This reply give me some things to think about, some consideration to do, and ultimately something to grow from. 

And i feel like i do like wedding photography, while it was very hard to stay onto of everything, Especially with a super hectic unorganized wedding. But it was a lot of fun.

I think my problem was that i asked a question, i should have just said "I got $1000 for this wedding, and these are the shots" and i probably would  have gotten a couple people say "those are nice" and some people say " you need a little improving" but because i asked a question, i lit the fire under a bunch of very angry, short tempered, "professional" photographers who couldn't think of anything better to say than "i hate it when people try to play "pro photographer" "

But i guess people just like to hold themselves in the highest regard. 

Anyway, thank you for your response and thanks to everyone else who skipped the insults, assumptions, and their perceived self worth  and gave me an honest opinion whether good or bad.

and the result is that i am going to hold off on professional jobs and try to find some jobs as a 2nd shooter where ever i can.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 1, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> AJev said:
> 
> 
> > Camera type and technical ability aside, I think an important part about shooting weddings that hasn't really been discussed is whether or not you truly enjoy weddings and want to shoot them.
> ...



The problem was that you asked a question that we see all the time!  Usually by somebody that got their camera ( low end entry consumer  model, one bad kit lens, and no additional flash or gear (except maybe a  grip since it "looks PRO")) two months ago at Best Buy... and hung up a  shingle! They usually use *AUTO* or *P* mode (*P*rofessional  Mode).. and have no concept of DOF, decent exposure, composition,  etc.... and they talk about how "EXPENSIVE" their gear was! lol!

There are some here very sensitive to that.. me included! 

Does that help with understanding?


----------



## Robin Usagani (Aug 1, 2012)

Dude.. I use A mode as in Awesome.

Seriously.. I use 90% A mode.


----------



## o hey tyler (Aug 1, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> Dude.. I use A mode as in Awesome.
> 
> Seriously.. I use 90% A mode.



I use A-DEP mode. It decides the depth of field for you.


----------



## ghache (Aug 1, 2012)

o hey tyler said:


> ghache said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




hey be nice!


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 1, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> Dude.. I use A mode as in Awesome.
> 
> Seriously.. I use 90% A mode.



Ooops.. brain fart typo! AUTO!!! AUTO!! And I know fer damn sure you don't use that!!!!


----------



## Robin Usagani (Aug 1, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> > Dude.. I use A mode as in Awesome.
> ...



You are wrong again.. I use auto when I hand someone the camera because it is too hard to teach them how to use the back button focus LMAO


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 1, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Schwettylens said:
> ...



Ah sed YOU.. not the dimbulb YOU is handing the camera too!   Your jest trying to pick a fight cuz you iz jealous of my awesome Macro skills!  lol!


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Aug 1, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> The problem was that you asked a question that we see all the time!  Usually by somebody that got their camera ( low end entry consumer  model, one bad kit lens, and no additional flash or gear (except maybe a  grip since it "looks PRO")) two months ago at Best Buy... and hung up a  shingle! They usually use *AUTO* or *P* mode (*P*rofessional  Mode).. and have no concept of DOF, decent exposure, composition,  etc.... and they talk about how "EXPENSIVE" their gear was! lol!
> 
> There are some here very sensitive to that.. me included!
> 
> Does that help with understanding?



Man, you hit the nail on the head with this one. There's nothing more insulting and frustrating than to see one of these dime a dozen Facebook Fauxtographers who fit the exact description you gave.

Thank God the people who are cheap or ignorant enough to hire them are "clients" I want nothing to do with.

OP, if you haven't figured it out by now, those of us who have spent 5 figures on gear and thousands of hours honing our craft are a wee bit protective of the reputation of our industry. Honestly, I can't for the life of me figure out why some state or local government hasn't decided to regulate the professional activities of people that want to call themselves photographers...

Maybe I should start a new thread.


----------



## cgipson1 (Aug 1, 2012)

jamesbjenkins said:


> Honestly, I can't for the life of me figure out why some state or local government hasn't decided to regulate the professional activities of people that want to call themselves photographers...
> 
> *Maybe I should start a new thread.*



Been there, done that, started fights!!!


----------



## Designer (Aug 1, 2012)

I can't for the life of me figure out why this thread is still alive.


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Aug 1, 2012)

Designer said:


> I can't for the life of me figure out why this thread is still alive.



Yeah, why does anyone waste their time on threads like this one?

I can deal with the first couple answers but when the OP tells us he knows better, well then...


----------



## Karloz (Aug 1, 2012)

The first wedding was the most difficult one for me to get. and I remember well the confusion I had experienced and still do actually over the pricing aspect . I charge what I feel comfortable charging. Initially it was not very much. Now I chnage more becuse I am comfortable and people are paying what I ask - I will put m,y prices up next year as my skill and experience grow.

By the way you have done a great job - keep it up.


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Aug 1, 2012)

Karloz said:


> I charge what I feel comfortable charging.



Unless your "comfort" is driven by a clearly defined business plan, and an analysis of your COGS, CODB and desired profit margin, your "comfort" is completely subjective and ambiguous and therefore worthless.


----------



## mjhoward (Aug 1, 2012)

Designer said:


> I can't for the life of me figure out why this thread is still alive.



Because most members of this forum care more about drama than photography.


----------



## Jonathan Schertzer (Aug 1, 2012)

cgipson1 said:


> Jonathan Schertzer said:
> 
> 
> > AJev said:
> ...



That makes sense, however has nothing to do with me. I have a *VERY* firm understanding of photography concepts Especially Considering my length of shooting time, formal education in photography, informal education in photography, the quality of my work, and the past experience working professionally in the skateboarding industry.

Also, i shoot in auto mode, as well as AP, TV, and even program all the time, and i really hope "professionals" do too, While at this point in my photographic career i can pretty much guess the exposure in any given room/situation that doesn't  mean i need to prove how "professional" i am but constantly shooting in manual.

I swear some of the points you guys bring up in this thread are just a joke. While some of you have given good answers most of you are just spewing out nonsense. For those of you who think i am not listening, i am and i've decided to take your advice and take up 2nd shooting for a while, also i've even decided to take a couple business classes at my community college because what the hell.

i think some of you are confusing "professionalism" with the ability egotistically make cut downs thats have no substance. Because you have more of less "made it" as a professional. Especially with just complete idiocy like:

"your not "professional" because you shoot with a 60D, professionals shoot with 5d mark iis"
"your not "professional" because you use Auto"
"your not "professional" because you didn't 2nd shoot first"
"Your not "professional" because you equipment doesn't cost 10grand" 

I'd like you too really take a look at those phrases and really realize how stupid they sound because those words, right there, came out of YOUR mouths.


----------



## c.cloudwalker (Aug 1, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Jonathan Schertzer said:
> ...



You are so fooking good, why are you asking what we thing?


----------



## manaheim (Aug 1, 2012)

Who let cloudwalker out of Arkham?


----------



## 12sndsgood (Aug 1, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> > Jonathan Schertzer said:
> ...




almost as stupid as "was $300 bucks to much".

wether you can work a camera great or not won't really matter if you don't know the business side. I would think if you were working profesionally in the skateboard industry you would know how to charge for your time by now.


----------



## Jonathan Schertzer (Aug 1, 2012)

CORRECT!, my question of is 300 too much was stupid, but i don't claim to be a "Professional". 
and skateboarding is contract, not freelance. Big difference.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Aug 1, 2012)

there is a diffrence, but when you signed the contract did you just blindy agree, or did you look at it and decided it was something you could live with and actually be making money on. you problaby looked at it, decided this was good for you and agreed. at least I hope you did. 

your first post said I carry $2500 worth of gear.  me reading that took it as you saying, I have this expensive gear so that should factor into my costs. when really it doesnt as someone else pointed out that $2500 isnt that much. it was really not a factor but it came off as you boasting like you had big gear. so the responces came according to how they viewed what you were saying. and then when a few people told you that you base your price off of the cost of doing business(CODB)  you somewhat responded back with a snotty attitue, or at least that was how most people preceived it.  so when someone sees a good responce and then sees someone give what they percieve as a snotty reply they arn't going to be nice to you.


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Aug 1, 2012)

Jonathan Schertzer said:


> CORRECT!, my question of is 300 too much was stupid, but i don't claim to be a "Professional".
> and skateboarding is contract, not freelance. Big difference.



Hate to break it to you, Junior, but by the very definition of the word, the moment you accept payment for services rendered (or agreed to be rendered), you are presenting yourself as a professional.

All these other ambiguous definition based on gear or second shooting or other nonsense are just semantic blah-dee-blah that insecure people try to use to elevate themselves by pushing others down.

Simple: by the purest definition of the word, if someone pays you to do something, you are acting as a professional _________.

If you don't want that responsibility, then stop soliciting or accepting clients until you are ready.


----------

