# Bottom feeding wedding photographers should be flogged



## sabbath999 (Dec 3, 2008)

OK... perhaps a few actually can take pictures, but MAN it just turns my stomach to see the crap that some people are paying for.

I have a co-worker who hired a bottom feeder to shoot her wedding... the photographer told her it would be one of her first weddings, and only charged them $400... she gave the girl a CD with her pictures on it, and let the girl do her own prints.

My friend asked if I could "make a few a bit more spiffy" and gave me the CD.

I opened up a picture and my reaction was "wtf? WTF? WTF!"

Here's the EXIF of the first picture I opened: 

Camera Model:	KODAK Z650 ZOOM DIGITAL 
1/15s f/3.0 ISO160 8mm (35mm eq:48mm) 
Exposure Mode:	Auto
White Balance:	Auto
ISO Speed Rating:     160

There was zero post processing done.

I asked the friend of mine if this photographer was just a friend or something, and she said no... the person advertises, goes to bridal shows, etc... and that there are three or four others in the same price range in the area as well.

Wow. WOW.

Since this is a friend of mine, I am going to "spifify" some shots and print up a little album (4x6's) as a Christmas present... but it makes me sick to think that somebody is out there charging people money for this crap.


----------



## Battou (Dec 3, 2008)

Bargain hunters...that is all there is to it.

I've been considering a few rather drastic things when searching for a photog for my wedding but.....that is for another time lol


----------



## stsinner (Dec 3, 2008)

A Kodak EasyShare for a wedding...  LOL  I don't even see a hot shoe on it.


----------



## Big Mike (Dec 3, 2008)

Some places have guys doing dentistry in the street.

Unfortunately, there will always be a market for cheap crap.


----------



## Battou (Dec 3, 2008)

stsinner said:


> Why not a point and shoot without a hot shoe for a wedding?  Are you serious?  Secondly, it's a Kodak.  I've never heard of a serious photographer using a Kodak anything, except paper.



Other than the fact it happened to me, No I wasn't serious, that is why I deleted it, but I guess you beat me to the quote, no biggie :lmao:


----------



## stsinner (Dec 3, 2008)

Battou said:


> Other than the fact it happened to me, No I wasn't serious, that is why I deleted it, but I guess you beat me to the quote, no biggie :lmao:



I deleted it-felt it was only right, since your post was no longer there.  I should have noticed your post count and known that you weren't serious..  No one with 5k posts would ask such a question seriously...  Cheers.


----------



## Battou (Dec 3, 2008)

stsinner said:


> I deleted it-felt it was only right, since your post was no longer there.  I should have noticed your post count and known that you weren't serious..  No one with 5k posts would ask such a question seriously...  Cheers.



No probs


----------



## Monaco (Dec 3, 2008)

That is pretty amazing.I don't understand why people wouldn't want to pay for a quality wedding photographer on a day that holds such great importance to the bride and groom.

I wouldn't even pay my little brother 5 dollars to take pictures of my cats first birthday with a kodak easyshare.

Tisk tisk.


----------



## eyeye (Dec 3, 2008)

On the other hand, my brother and his wife hired the best in the area.  Lots of credentials, big cameras, big portfolio. They paid big money and the photographer half arsed it and the photos are pretty so so.  Sometimes you what you pay for and sometimes you dont.


----------



## UdubBadger (Dec 3, 2008)

I was the best man in my buddies wedding this past summer. He (or I guess his wife) chose to do the cheap craigslist route. The lady wasn't horrible nor terribly expensive at about $300 for the entire day. However, I still brought my camera and did some posed shots for them, along side the craigslist lady in between the ceremony and reception. I can tell you the 30-something pics I took for them all ended up in their photo album, thank you cards and framed on their mantel and walls... I have still yet to see anything the woman shot that looks anything close to semi-professional. She was nice though, she took her CF card to Walmart immediately after the ceremony and had prints to show them during the reception... so much for post processing I guess .


----------



## Alleh Lindquist (Dec 3, 2008)

Yeah it sucks. Not because better photographers lose clients but because it is a huge disservice to someone. Just about anyone can go to a couple friends weddings in the summer outside and get a few nice shots so it can be hard to really shift through the mass number of photographers out their shooting weddings and be able to determine what is really a good deal. I understand that not everyone can afford to pay top dollar so they need to find a deal to even get a photographer but their is a huge difference in hiring say a 3rd year photography student who needs to make some extra cash but will produce good images vs. one of the many people that picked up their camera at Costco not long ago and now have this dream idea of working as a wedding photographer before they even learn how to take good images.


It just goes back to my old rant post about everyone wanting to be a pro. People with almost no skill or photographic knowledge are marketing themselves as professional photographers. I find it to be malicious. Many of them have less than a 10% success rate at creating a decent image putting their photographic skill level more along the lines of luck.


----------



## UdubBadger (Dec 3, 2008)

its funny too... i've always strayed away from doing weddings because I'm still a photo student. I know I can make decent photos, but its like... this is someone's WEDDING, I don't want to be responsible for screwing something up and think they should get the best there possibly is. Maybe if they were saying its either me or their buddy who has a nice point and shoot... I'd know the expectations are low and thus less pressure on me but when it comes to my wedding, I'll be paying out some big bucks for the lucky guy/gal who I deem worthy to take the pics.


----------



## Chiller (Dec 3, 2008)

My daughters wedding...we paid good coin, got a good photographer, and his work was brilliant.  Best I have seen in a long time. :thumbup::thumbup:  He started at 7am,showed up with an assistant and we had our final handshake at midnight.   We have 2 complete printed proof books to go over.   
  At one point in the morning, he said...."so...when are you getting your camera out"(he knew I took snapshots, as it came up in conversation when we first met him)...and he proceeded to let me shoot with him, helping me out. 

 On another note...I have been asked to shoot 4 different weddings, and I have turned down everyone....not even going to touch it.  :er:  .......but I have considered changing my mind on one, when I heard I could be hooked up with a nice blond for the night.


----------



## abraxas (Dec 3, 2008)

sabbath999 said:


> OK... perhaps a few actually can take pictures, but MAN it just turns my stomach to see the crap that some people are paying for....
> ...
> 
> ... somebody is out there charging people money for this crap.



I'd think you'd know about this;

What you're seeing is a niche that suffers from too little competition.

The way I see it, you have at least two choices.

1.     Compete
2.     Do nothing
2a. - Do nothing and ***** about it.


----------



## sabbath999 (Dec 3, 2008)

abraxas said:


> I'd think you'd know about this;
> 
> What you're seeing is a niche that suffers from too little competition.
> 
> ...



I have no desire to compete with them, since I have no desire to get back into the photography business... to be perfectly clear, I don't care one whit whether these people "hurt" the business of good wedding photographers in my area... that is THEIR business problem, not mine.

I just hate seeing people paying hard earned money for crap pictures...


----------



## AngieDoogles (Dec 3, 2008)

I can see both sides of this issue.

If it hadn't been for a friend willing to do me a favor by offering "cheap" work, I would have no wedding photos at all. In all honesty, I've seen much better work, but I am happy to have the photos she took and happy that she was willing to give us those memories. She has since improved greatly (and graduated with a degree in photography), but I think the photos reflect where my hubby and I were at that time...young and poor, but in love and making do. 

We've since had real professional photos and love them, but I still greatly enjoy our wedding album and all that it represents.

I do respect and appreciate professionals, but there was absolutely no way I could have afforded it back then. In my case, the professional wedding photographers didn't lose a client because I couldn't have paid that much anyway, but using an amateur at least allowed me to have photos that I wouldn't have had otherwise.

So there's a different perspective for you.


----------



## Big Mike (Dec 3, 2008)

I don't think anyone has a problem with that scenario.  
But what if you had scraped together $600 to hire a lower end 'pro' photographer, and then got terrible results?  That's the problem.


----------



## AngieDoogles (Dec 3, 2008)

Big Mike said:


> I don't think anyone has a problem with that scenario.
> But what if you had scraped together $600 to hire a lower end 'pro' photographer, and then got terrible results?  That's the problem.



I agree. I would be upset with that.


----------



## sabbath999 (Dec 3, 2008)

Big Mike said:


> I don't think anyone has a problem with that scenario.
> But what if you had scraped together $600 to hire a lower end 'pro' photographer, and then got terrible results?  That's the problem.



Exactly.


----------



## ksmattfish (Dec 3, 2008)

Steak dinners normally run $25 to $250.  What do you expect at the $8 steak restaurant.

A high end Canon or Nikon Speedlight costs $300+.  What do you expect for the $30 Ebay special flash?

If 3 professional mechanics say it's going to be $2000 or $3000 to replace your transmission, do you blindly go with the 4th guy who says he can do it for $500?

Care to buy a Rollex?  I got a whole bunch right here for $25 a pop...  How about a bridge?... swampland?... hedge fund?...

Buyer beware.  Look at a portfolio.  Ask for references.  Shop around.  Don't be a sucker!


----------



## UdubBadger (Dec 3, 2008)

ksmattfish said:


> Steak dinners normally run $25 to $250.  What do you expect at the $8 steak restaurant.
> 
> A high end Canon or Nikon Speedlight costs $300+.  What do you expect for the $30 Ebay special flash?
> 
> ...



I actually think this is where most people FAIL...

wedding plans always seemed rushed and to be honest, people out there think if own a dlsr (be it a Rebel XT or D1s) that you are in some respect "a photographer" (and most people don't know the difference between those 2 cameras). However, it is also true that some of these people are mis-representing themselves, check craigslist... you won't find many links to portfolios on there. Take this place for example (1st listing on craigslist I saw) I apologize in advance if the guy running this is a member on here. http://www.phillipsphotostudio.com/gallery/6114993_jAjnt

they are claiming to be a studio... I dunno but those pics look like crap to me. People are paying not only so called photographers but places calling themselves studios good money because they have a website, even thought the pics don't speak to much talent. I'm a college photo student, I'm pretty confident my pics would be just as good if not most likely superior to these and I doubt I'd even try charging as much as this dude.


----------



## UdubBadger (Dec 3, 2008)

these are pics from a friend of mines wedding... I will expect nothing less when I finally get hitched. (a little on the artsy side but maybe thats just my style)



















heres her website... 
http://www.anneruthmann.com/index2b.php
now compared to the one i just posted above... this is worth the money IMO


----------



## LokiZ (Dec 3, 2008)

When it comes to video I have done a good number of them.  However, they have always been friends or friends of friends who have at least seen my work.  Due to that not being my line of income I am always careful to explain how I am not professional several times over.  That and the fact that since I am not a professional I basically give them my service as a wedding present. 

 However the equipment I use and know how to use... I would put up against the pros who video weddings.  The only thing I would do different if I was in the buisness was to have two or three DCR-VX2100's rather then just one. 

 So I guess in my opinion it can go both ways.  when I video a wedding they get much more then they pay for.  I take off work as needed, I stay longer then most of the photographers (not all) and I work closely with the couple including use of stills as requested.   

 Still I see your point as I can see how some just see the dollar bills in front of their eyes linked to weddings.  And if they have no self respect and lack talent that is an ugly recipe.  And the worst part is you can't go back, weddings are once in a life time.  (Well they are supposed to be anyway)


----------



## sabbath999 (Dec 3, 2008)

UdubBadger said:


> these are pics from a friend of mines wedding...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hey, I can do THAT style...


----------



## JerryPH (Dec 3, 2008)

sabbath999 said:


> ...it makes me sick to think that somebody is out there charging people money for this crap.



No comment, it's all been said and I aired my opinions. 

I just want to share a though... no flogging, some may enjoy that.  I hear caning with a 4-foot piece of bamboo works well, though?

Sabbath, next time I get married, will YOU be my wedding photographer?  Love that stlye.. sheer mastery!


----------



## sabbath999 (Dec 3, 2008)

JerryPH said:


> Sabbath, next time I get married, will YOU be my wedding photographer?  Love that stlye.. sheer mastery!



Do I get to use your D700 for the ceremony?


----------



## Alleh Lindquist (Dec 3, 2008)

UdubBadger said:


> I actually think this is where most people FAIL...
> 
> wedding plans always seemed rushed and to be honest, people out there think if own a dlsr (be it a Rebel XT or D1s) that you are in some respect "a photographer" (and most people don't know the difference between those 2 cameras). However, it is also true that some of these people are mis-representing themselves, check craigslist... you won't find many links to portfolios on there. Take this place for example (1st listing on craigslist I saw) I apologize in advance if the guy running this is a member on here. http://www.phillipsphotostudio.com/gallery/6114993_jAjnt
> 
> they are claiming to be a studio... I dunno but those pics look like crap to me. People are paying not only so called photographers but places calling themselves studios good money because they have a website, even thought the pics don't speak to much talent. I'm a college photo student, I'm pretty confident my pics would be just as good if not most likely superior to these and I doubt I'd even try charging as much as this dude.


 

Haha yeah people like Justin Phillips should stop calling themselves photographers and change it to snap shooter. None of his photos show any sign of photographic skill or knowledge. People like him all over the place. Just a bunch of people with cameras taking crap photos and representing themselves otherwise.


----------



## sabbath999 (Dec 3, 2008)

When somebody who shoots as well as Alleh does says something, people should listen... look at that portfolio Alleh has going on (Fashion & Advertising Photorapher).


----------



## abraxas (Dec 3, 2008)

sabbath999 said:


> When somebody who shoots as well as Alleh does says something, people should listen... look at that portfolio Alleh has going on (Fashion & Advertising Photorapher).



He/she does fair enough work, but the rest is frustrated mean-spirited gibberish.  If I were to learn anything about photography from him/her, it would be by studying the work and disregarding the personality entirely.  He/she has said nothing that has impressed me in any of his/her posts to date.


----------



## UdubBadger (Dec 3, 2008)

uh yeeah... Alleh's portfolio = :king:


----------



## usayit (Dec 3, 2008)

I am a bit confused

Are we angry because someone got paid?
Are we angry because the work is not up to par?

Either way, it was an agreement between the person providing said services and the customer that agreed to them (quality and all).  The only time I would feel angry if someone was mislead or a scammed.

I feel a bit sad when I read this....

There was a time that my wife and I were absolutely broke but we wanted to get married.  We started out ashamed because we could only do so little to impress both sides of the family.  Almost to the point that we seriously considered calling the whole thing off for an elopement.  In 2001 (7 years after we our first date), we pulled off the entire wedding for a bargain basement price of just over $6k.  We jumped over hoops in hopes to do the most un-American thing... not go into debt.  You know what?  It was the best damn wedding anyone could have put together.  A local college string ensemble earned a good tip to take the financial edge off of their education.  A local upstart photographer who lost his equipment in a fire got to shoot at my wedding on borrowed equipment (mine), got a good jumpstart on rebuilding, and I got to keep my negatives.  A local business provided a wonderful 3 room setup for the wedding hall, reception, and a couple nights stay during a rough down time.  They even went out of their way to provide catering that everyone enjoyed (does anyone remember their dinner on their wedding night?).  All those people got a personal shake and thanks from me.... at the end of the night, that is all I could offer.

A couple years later, the pictures were finally printed, dry pressed to board, and matted.  They were placed in a wonderful archival box, separated with fine tissue, and a engraved plaque placed on the front.  They look like they are just lying there waiting to be framed.  I spared no expense on materials for our 2 year anniversary.  Why? because I could now afford it.... I could easily afford a fairly expensive wedding today, but would it have been any more special?  I doubt it.

See that "bottom-feeder" photographer was honest and still provided as promised... that is all anyone can expect.


What's the other choice... no photographer?   because that WAS my "Other choice".


----------



## usayit (Dec 3, 2008)

Just to be clear...

I'm not saying that all of you professional photographers out there are not worth it... because an experienced photographer IS worth it.  I am sure my pictures are not close to the quality that you guys produce.  I've had several financially stable couples ask me to do their weddings.  I usually turn them down and explain that their special day deserves someone who is far more prepared than I.  I usually end up saying that you should get the best you can afford.

I am simply stating that there are couples who simply don't have the funds for your services.....  as well as photographers who just want to make a little money.  You can't blame them for getting together in agreement.


----------



## abraxas (Dec 3, 2008)

To go a step further, does it really matter whether there are pictures or not?  What do you use them for, a shrine?


----------



## UdubBadger (Dec 3, 2008)

usayit said:


> I am a bit confused
> 
> Are we angry because someone got paid?
> Are we angry because the work is not up to par?
> ...



i think it was more along the lines of "people charging professional prices for sub professional work". Especially in a place like Madison where there aren't too many studios around, people think paying $1000 for some dude with a camera and a website is normal when in fact that same $1000 could get someone with 10-15 yrs experience and better skills down in Chicago. I think someone said you get what you pay for which is true, but it seems like people think they can charge less than a pro but shoot crap that your crazy one eyed uncle could have done for a 6 pack of Pabst Blue Ribbon and a lap dance at the bachelor party. I agree there might be a niche for joe schmoe who owns a digital camera and can come by at the time you need him, but of course everyone makes themselves out to be better than they really are and if one guy pays them $1000 then they can justify asking for it over and over.

again as stated above, people just need to be more aware of who they hire and their expectations of the work they want to see. If they don't even have a portfolio then they obviously aren't anything close to being a pro.


----------



## sabbath999 (Dec 4, 2008)

usayit said:


> I am a bit confused
> 
> Are we angry because someone got paid?
> Are we angry because the work is not up to par?



I don't know about WE... I can only speak for me...

I am angry that people are out there using Kodak point & shoots and selling themselves as professional wedding photographers.

The pictures look bad, it makes REAL professional wedding photographers look bad by association (after all, both these bottom feeders and the good ones are "pros"), and the people who paid the money didn't get a good product for their hard earned money.

I am offended that there are multiple people in my area advertising professional services and giving CRAP pictures to their customers.

I don't like seeing people getting ripped off by "pro" wedding photographers ruining pictures of an event that cannot be reshot.


----------



## UdubBadger (Dec 4, 2008)

sabbath999 said:


> I don't know about WE... I can only speak for me...
> 
> I am angry that people are out there using Kodak point & shoots and selling themselves as professional wedding photographers.
> 
> ...



Hey... theres always divorce right?


----------



## craig (Dec 4, 2008)

Yeah well... What are you trying to say here? Not like this is an original thought. Not like this thing doesn't happen all the time. What did these friends expect for $400. That is at least $1,600 cheaper then the going rate. Did they look at the photographers portfolio? 

The people who need to be flogged are the ones that fall into this conundrum. There would be no market for it if retail clients knew the facts before hand. As photographers it is our duty to school the public whenever possible. Bitching at a forum of retail photographers is not really helping matters. Neither is post processing another photographers files. If I was that photographer I would definitely flogg you for touching my files. And let me guess; you gave away your services for a Christmas present. Meanwhile some Photoshop Wizard is going to laugh at your work and say that the photos should have been professionally retouched.  

Love & Bass


----------



## mrodgers (Dec 4, 2008)

Around me with school portraits, there is one photographer who is contracted through ALL the schools.  He makes a killing, lives in a giant house (one of the biggest around), and drives expensive luxury cars.  

I play around with my Fuji superzoom doing portraits of my girls all the time.  Looking at the Walmart 8X10 from their $5 package of my 4 year old and my 7 year old's 8x10 from her $40 package of school portraits, the Walmart photo is a far better photo.  My 4 year old is sharp and in focus, the 7 year old is soft and fuzzy.  

Both 8x10s have since been removed and replaced with candid portraits done on a picnic this past Labor Day that I took and printed from my $200 "point and shoot".  My 2 photos from my cheap camera is probably 10 times better result than what the "photographer's" school photos were, and I don't exactly consider them all that great either based on the quality of the camera used.  We did school portraits in kindergarten and 1st grade.  We are not buying any more school portraits in the future.


----------



## ksmattfish (Dec 4, 2008)

A mid-range DSLR, an assortment of lenses, a good flash, and all the accessories and fixin's = $3000ish

Back-up gear = $3000

Other stuff you need = $1000

Professional software = $1000

A computer that will run it all = at least $1000

Add in assorted costs of running a small business, and it's up to $10,000ish (I'd say my estimates are bare bones low).

$10,000/400 = 25 weddings just to break even on gear and basic business costs, and that's not considering anything like print or album costs, gas, insurance, basic expenses, etc....

If they did a wedding every Saturday they'd make another $10,000.  The gov wants 25%.  Oh boy!!  $7500 for a year of working.  

People can set their prices where ever they want, but the basic definition of professional is that they are actually making money.  If someone hires a "pro" that is really only paying off their gear, then maybe they've actually hired a "hobbyist".


----------



## usayit (Dec 4, 2008)

sabbath999 said:


> I am angry that people are out there using Kodak point & shoots and selling themselves as professional wedding photographers.



Sabbath,

With all due respect, I agree with you on being angry against those unprofessional photographers that sell their services under the disguise of professional work with the intention of scamming a couple out of their hard earned work.  I agree those photographers need to be flogged.  Flogged NOT because they are (and I use the term lightly) wedding photographers of poor quality but because they are scammers and dishonest.

BUT

In the case you brought up.... that does not seem to be the case.  The photographer told them it was her first wedding and only provided CDs with no prints.  Here are words from your original post:



sabbath999 said:


> the photographer told her it would be one of her first weddings, and only charged them $400... she gave the girl a CD with her pictures on it, and let the girl do her own prints.



I feel that your anger is misdirected.  It's not against the "bottom feeding wedding photographer".... after all, they are just trying to make a living and survive (been there done that...  almost lost my home).  There is a market for them.  I think what you are truly angry at are so called scam artists, thieves, and dishonest people of whom some so called photographers do fall under.

With threads/discussions like this, I cannot help but feel that the person I was in 2001 (broke and struggling but very much in love) was not "deserving" of having any photographs taken because I didn't have the thousands of dollars in the bank account.  Its this snobby elitist (not calling anyone here that) mentality that I see everyday that is a real turnoff.


btw... The photographer I hired for my wedding was paid $400 and I lent him my Canon Elan with a Tamron 28-135 f/2.8 Asph plus a Canon Flash.  He managed to borrow a Canon F1/lens/flash from a friend so he can shoot B&W simultaneously.  If he had a point and shoot, I would not have cared.  The point was that our special moment was recorded.  He stayed the entire event.... before ceremony, during, and reception.  I got to keep the negatives.


----------



## usayit (Dec 4, 2008)

mrodgers said:


> Around me with school portraits, there is one photographer who is contracted through ALL the schools.  He makes a killing, lives in a giant house (one of the biggest around), and drives expensive luxury cars.



A large number of the major metropolitan areas' schools districts are subcontracted to a company called LifeTouch.  They are one of the largest photography/portrait companies in the entire US.  The studios in Target, Flash, Babys'Rus and numbers others are all rebranded services coming from lifetouch.  In my immediate area, they are pretty much a monopoly... ranging from newborn daycare to retail to high school pictures.  

What you are observing is the same thing that I and many members of this forum have been saying for years!!!!   Starting a photography business is mostly about BUSINESS not PHOTOGRAPHY.  That fellow you mentioned might not be a better photographer than most but he sure is a better businessman than most.


----------



## UdubBadger (Dec 4, 2008)

ksmattfish said:


> A mid-range DSLR, an assortment of lenses, a good flash, and all the accessories and fixin's = $3000ish
> 
> Back-up gear = $3000
> 
> ...



problem with that is that the people sabbath is referring to (i think) go buy a Rebel XT and kit lens form Best buy for $799 and a cheap $30 1 gig memory card, maybe even some cheap case too. Then they charge $400 per wedding, are pretty much paid off after 2-3 weddings and don't even bother with the rest of the gear, taking their CF cards right to the Walmart or Walgreens kiosk without even thinking about post processing them (unless you consider post processing rotating the picture). You'd also be mistaken if you think these people report what they make to the IRS, most of them have regular jobs M-F. I think the bottom line is its insulting to see that they don't take it as seriously as a lot of other photographers, but because they charge a lot less for low quality they deem that to be ok.


----------



## monkeykoder (Dec 4, 2008)

ksmattfish said:


> A mid-range DSLR, an assortment of lenses, a good flash, and all the accessories and fixin's = $3000ish
> 
> Back-up gear = $3000
> 
> ...



I'd love to think your numbers were a bit on the high side (for a minimal kit) but unless you want to drive yourself crazy switching lenses every 5 sec you'll be at least that (might be possible to get the body+accessories (including lenses) down to $2500 if you're really good).  I decided to check your numbers using adorama as my source If someone wanted me to I could post the kit I was pricing to get my numbers and you can laugh at how minimal it is.

P.S.  I'm pretty sure you could go a little lower on the computer but that is a relatively minor expense in this scheme so I won't go price that out.


----------



## Lacey Anne (Dec 4, 2008)

A lot of so-called photographers today charge for crap. People who care will pay for quality. The others... Well, if they aren't willing to spend the money I guess they get what they pay for.


----------



## Big Mike (Dec 4, 2008)

Part of the problem is that these cheap crappy photographers are spawning others just like them.  In a few courses that I've taken, a good percentage of the students were people (women mostly but I'm not judging) who had been disappointed with their own wedding photos...and figured they could spend a grand on a camera and do it themselves.  

At least the ones I saw were actually taking a class...many don't even go that far.


----------



## ksmattfish (Dec 4, 2008)

Heck, I'm happy that there are people willing to shoot weddings for $400.  It makes me feel a lot less like a hack.  I charge $1900, and I thought I was one of the bottom feeders!


----------



## Alpha (Dec 11, 2008)

$1900? You very nearly are. I wouldn't touch a wedding for less than 3.


----------



## joeymas (Dec 19, 2008)

lol, can you get me this photographer's contact information? I want to pretend to hire him just to see what he is going to say.

That camera is a toy. My 11 year old sports a Nikon (and can use it) lol


----------



## joeymas (Dec 19, 2008)

Ok... before you guys go nutz. Hear me out.

Charging below 800.00 is not so crazy if your business model is set up properly.

I do not consider myself a wedding photographer by far but when I do get talked into them I go for that 800 number and offer an album and one 11x14. but but but... I do a great job with good equipement and post proofs for ordering directly on-line.

After shooting and uploading finished photos, I tend to make an additional 4 or 500.00 profit from prints. Then when all the ordering slows to a stop, I do a follow up call and sell the bride a CD for another 150.00.

The low price is the hook that gets you the job. Then your money is made from the prints


----------



## table1349 (Dec 19, 2008)

Just to clarify a point here, based on the title of this thread, isn't wedding photography its self pretty much an exercise in self flagellation anyway???    :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: 

Ok, enough humor, now back to your regularly scheduled discussion.


----------



## Joves (Dec 19, 2008)

Alpha said:


> $1900? You very nearly are. I wouldn't touch a wedding for less than 3.


 I would touch one for under 50K. Which means I will never do weddings. Granted I could probably shoot a wedding but, since I dont want to the product would look like hell. 
 The lady with the Easyshare made all of her investment + back in one wedding too so, she isnt doing that bad.


----------



## abraxas (Dec 19, 2008)

Hm.  Never did understand why people bother at all. Like some kind of self-petting foolishness or something.  24 years in 3 weeks. Still got the little woman right here. See her just about everyday. If we ever got divorced I wouldn't want the photos of her anyway.  Now the reception, got about 10 shots of us and everybody getting totally ****faced ****ed up. That was fun. No offense, but I don't see a point to wedding photography at all.


----------



## mrodgers (Dec 19, 2008)

I feel the same way about wedding photos.  We paid $600 and we now have $600 of scrap paper sitting somewhere in the closet that we may as well use for grocery shopping lists.

I don't think we've ever looked at them other than when we first got them.

I just found out last night from the wife after talking about wedding photos, we have all the negatives.  The photog gave them to us saying she didn't want them.  I have no idea if we have any sort of release stating that we can reprint or not.


----------



## abraxas (Dec 19, 2008)

mrodgers said:


> ...she didn't want them.  I have no idea if we have any sort of release stating that we can reprint or not.



If you have the negatives, who cares?  If your box/drawer ain't full, print them up, send them out for Christmas cards or if you're a real estate broker, use them on your web site (sorry, I just never seen a broker's picture that was taken within the 20 years that they've published them- or they age faster than Presidents).


----------



## JerryPH (Dec 20, 2008)

gryphonslair99 said:


> Just to clarify a point here, based on the title of this thread, isn't wedding photography its self pretty much an exercise in self flagellation anyway???    :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:



No, I consider it more like group sex... because you are never alone.

Oh, I would shoot it for free... as the 2nd to a good pro photographer!


----------



## dahlstrom (Dec 20, 2008)

Sounds like your friend opted for money over quality.  What did she expect for something so cheap?  Obviously the "photos" weren't worth $400, but that price is considerably lower than what a professional photographer would charge.  Should've been a big warning flag.


----------



## anubis404 (Dec 20, 2008)

The thought of becoming a budget wedding photographer has crossed my mind on occasion, however I do not feel I am ready for various reasons.

-First and foremost, age. No matter how good I am, no one is going to hire a 16 year old wedding photographer. Maybe in another 2-3 years.

-Classes. I haven't as much as set foot in a photography class. I know my pics are good, but I still want to have some cred to advertise with.

-Equipment. A D70s kit, an Sb-600, and a 50mm F1.8 just won't do. I'm going to need a better body to handle the noise (D200-300), a better and longer primary portrait prime (85mm F1.8), and a longer lens (a 70-200ish thing).

-Another couple of years under my belt. I have only been into photography for about a year now, and even though I'm proficient in the basics and slightly more advanced stuff, I still need more experience (this goes with number 1 on the list).


Hopefully, all of the above would be resolved in a couple of years.


----------

