Wedding Photographers, Please Help.

[TBAM]

In regards to going nuts at the OP because he clearly has no idea, and is going to be shooting a wedding. I'm not sure about America, but here in Oz, Weddings are a lot more casual most of the time.

Just like most things, there are varying degrees of service you can employ for a given situation. This couple has chosen to employ a beginner who has just purchased a new camera to be their photographer. Which is both their choice and their folly should the shots not be to their liking.

I don't see why we instantly jump at the photographer who may be in over his head, but was asked by the bridge and groom nonetheless, instead of waiting for further information.

It's like going nuts at a Datsun car because someone chose to purchase it, when the owner could have purchased a mercedese benz. "you shouldn't have let them buy you, you should have told them to buy a mercedez".

All in all, i think in these wedding photo topics, more blame needs to be placed on the employers rather than the employee. Yeah.

 

[dEARlEADER]

All in all, i think in these wedding photo topics, more blame needs to be placed on the employers rather than the employee. Yeah.

don't blame the employers.... blame the government!

 

[Chewbecca]

don't blame the employers.... blame the government!

Damn straight.

 

[AmandaM]

While I agree with you in an abstract sense, the OP is asking about a wedding portrait session, which is a totally different thing than the wedding itself. No need to get super pissed off when it's not needed-- there's threads enough for legitimate rage.

I was thinking the same thing. I am assuming a wedding portrait session is some time other than the actual wedding. No big deal, if the pictures suck they can do it over again. (Of course, I'm also assuming that the OP has informed his friends of his level of experience as well!)

Yall are pretty darn harsh. I know I'm a newb, but I've been lurking and reading here almost everyday for the last month or two. Weren't you all inexeperienced at some point? Or did you just come straight out of the womb knowing everything about photography?

 

[JerryPH]

While I agree with you in an abstract sense, the OP is asking about a wedding portrait session, which is a totally different thing than the wedding itself. No need to get super pissed off when it's not needed-- there's threads enough for legitimate rage.

Oh, but I am not angry at all, just really sad for the 2 people whom the day is really about and who are for sure going to get hosed on the level of quality of pictures they are going to get... vs what they deserve.

The fact is, if there was a pro or experienced photographer there at the church or event doing the wedding properly, it would be foolish to think that he would be everywhere BUT the wedding portrait session, so what is our friend above trying to accomplish there, horn in on the time reserved for the pro?

People in the industry have a name for that kind of person... they're called "Uncle Bobs" or "MWAC" (mothers with a camera)... people with dSLRs and no skills to speak of and they come in and make the job of the pros that much harder.

Really, I am not mad, just frustrated more than anything else... I just wish the light bulb would illuminate for some people.

 

[JerryPH]

Yall are pretty darn harsh. I know I'm a newb, but I've been lurking and reading here almost everyday for the last month or two. Weren't you all inexeperienced at some point? Or did you just come straight out of the womb knowing everything about photography?

I *still* am nowhere near where I want to be, and would never DREAM to do a wedding alone without the presence of a professional (I've mentored with and ghosted a professional photographer at 4 weddings now, I *know* what it takes to be a good wedding photographer in the REAL world, not fantasizing about the glamor of the day and in reality screwing up someone's memories they have to live with for the rest of their lives). You see, it is not about YOU, its about the couple and what THEY deserve!

We all started out from the same place... ZERO knowledge. The difference is that some people want to reach level 10, but are going around shooting weddings at level 1 or 2 as a primary or main/only photographer, where they have absolutely NO business being. Again, its not about the photographer, its about the COUPLE getting married and what THEY deserve. And what they deserve is CERTAINLY someone more than a person (as nice as they may be), that has no clue about what they are doing, photographically speaking and anyone asking about what aperture to use... most definitely falls under this category!

Oh, and I am from Canada... we don't come out of the womb with expert photography skills... everyone knows that we all come out with hockey skates on, hence why most all the best hockey players in the world are Canadians... lol

 

[AmandaM]

I totally understand what you're saying Jerry. And I actually agree. I see a lot of people with websites in my area offering wedding photography with no real experience! When I get married, finding the photographer is going to be the hardest part... cause I am going to be PICKY!

However, I do like to give people the benefit of the doubt. And in this situation, I would love for the OP to explain things a little more before chastizing him about ruining someone's special day. A portrait and a wedding shoot are very different.

 

[JerryPH]

Amanda, can I assume that you are able to cook a good meal? What if I told you that I was about to cook the entire meal at your wedding for everyone... but, oh... could you tell me exactly how much salt to put in everything, please? Forget the fact that you do not even know WHAT I am going to cook, would not knowing something as basic as that scare you into saying "no thanks, we'll find a real chef for my wedding day, thanks!"?

Get the reference?

This is what is happening here. Our friend the OP doesn't know how much salt to use... lol.

 

[Synnove]

I have had friends ask me to take their wedding photographs but I only agree to take candids and make sure they are also hiring a professional to do their pictures. I have a good idea of how to compose a photo but am not skilled enough and do not have the right equipment to shoot a wedding.

As long as the couple knows what their getting into, the end product is their choice. I hope they aren't thinking that they'll get the same quality photos from a free shoot though. It's certainly a case of 'you get what you pay for'.

 

[ksmattfish]

I don't see why we instantly jump at the photographer who may be in over his head...

It's an internet phenomenon. Somebody comes along and posts "My friends can't afford, or aren't willing to pay for a professional wedding photog. They've asked me to do it for a couple of hundred bucks." And then it's followed by dozens of posts claiming it'll be the end of the world!!!!

Guess what? THEY DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR A PRO, AND PROS DON"T WORK FOR FREE (or next to free). There are two options left: no photos, or get a friend/family amateur photographer to do it. Is an inexperienced, $400 photog the same as an experienced $2000 photog? Nope, but the couple isn't willing to spend $2000. Chances are if they are legal marrying age they understand the concept of "You get what you pay for" by now.

I was paid $350 to shoot my first wedding for friends. I hadn't even been to a wedding as a guest in years, let alone ever had anything to do with wedding photography. It went great. The only mistake was that I really should've asked for more money. The couple liked the photos a lot, they showed them around, and my phone started ringing. Eventually I quit the day job, and now I've got 300+ wedding under my belt as the primary shooter (only one as second shooter, and that came much later).

Occasionally I hear pros ***** about "Uncle Bobs" and "Moms with cameras". All I have to say is that if these people are truly their competition they've got serious problems. Chances are they followed the school of thought that says expensive gear = pro, and they are getting beat out by amateurs with more exciting portfolios.

 

[JerryPH]

Occasionally I hear pros ***** about "Uncle Bobs" and "Moms with cameras". All I have to say is that if these people are truly their competition they've got serious problems.

I would not be one of those, first I am not pro, but I have sat and watched a poor pro trying to do her job when 3-4 family members with P&S are yelling at the couple to get their attention, look their way or physically try to change the arrangement to suit their needs instead of the pro.

It was hell. She spent more time trying to get the people settled down than getting the shot and it wasted a lot of time, added stress to the subjects and to herself. Eventually, the best man told them all to calm down and let the "paid professional" do her job and things went smoother.

In the end, there is no question who is better qualified to get the shot, however there is a question of often if they are able to or left to do their jobs. That's part of the wedding scene today, I guess. Everyone wants to be Ashton Kutcher... lol.

 

[ksmattfish]

...a poor pro trying to do her job when 3-4 family members with P&S are yelling at the couple to get their attention, look their way or physically try to change the arrangement to suit their needs instead of the pro.

It was hell. She spent more time trying to get the people settled down than getting the shot and it wasted a lot of time, added stress to the subjects and to herself. Eventually, the best man told them all to calm down and let the "paid professional" do her job and things went smoother.

Sounds like the "pro" couldn't handle the job to me, because that's pretty much the job description for wedding photographer. Possibly she was really an "Aunt Jane"? The pro should have taken charge (possibly weeks before the wedding in planning), not the best man, because it's gonna happen again, and again, and again on the Saturday after that, and that best man isn't going to be there to bail them out next time. As they say, if you can't stand the heat....

Everyone wants to be Ashton Kutcher... lol.

Exactly, don't blame Uncle Bob. It's Canon and Nikon that have spent billions convincing everyone all that matters is the gear.

 

[chrisburke]

wow this is funny... i'm still not going to give any of my thoughts, because Jerry and I think the same way on this... and I give a HUGE LOL at "everyone wants to be Ashton Kutcher" and I guess now they all want to be Avril Lavinge too (canon commercials)

 

[Chewbecca]

wow this is funny... i'm still not going to give any of my thoughts, because Jerry and I think the same way on this... and I give a HUGE LOL at "everyone wants to be Ashton Kutcher" and I guess now they all want to be Avril Lavinge too (canon commercials)

Avril Lavigne (or whatever) is doing Canon commercials now???
Couldn't these companies AT LEAST pick people with TALENT to star in their commercials?
Crazy.

 

[chrisburke]

no kidding like ashton, she has commercials for the P&S and the DSLR

http://www.youtube.com/results?sear...lavigne&search_type=&aq=6&oq=canon+commercial