Weddings... I don't get it.

[RMThompson]

Awesome FLICKR shots man. . .although its hard to concentrate on "form" and "function" and "blah blah blah" when those models are freakin smokin. . .0_0

This one and this and this are tops.

And +1000 on the comments regarding wedding photography. If anything wedding photography offers an opportunity to capture some incredibly emotional shots, staged or otherwise. Sadly, the comments seem to have disuaded one person from getting the service of someone who may well have been able to snap that same emotion, and do so expertly.

Thanks man. You think it's hard you FOR you pay attention to form while looking at them, try shooting them. lol (JK, I do a lot of modeling photos, and I am 100% professional during them)

Not only have the comments possibly convinced her to take money out of the mouth of a photographer and his/her family, but they've showed off the arrogance of certain photographers.

It's pictures man. I don't pretend that Wedding Photos are always going to be art, but damn, can't we try?

I also love the notion that if anyone makes a decent living at something they must be whoring themselves out.

I left this board, and have been lurking mostly, for a few weeks ago because of attitudes like that.

Keep my flickr bookmarked though, I am adding stuff nearly daily!

 

[newrmdmike]

hahaha. jeepnut, your funny.


weddings have been my most rewarding jobs, and my most stressful ones. people who dog wedding photographers clearly never made it far in the industry, or haven't looked at those photographers work outside of weddings. even more likely weddings didn't go that well for them.

there are wedding photogs out there creating stuff nobody here on this forum can come close too, and walk away a minimum of $10,000 richer. (except for maybe jose villa who didn't stick around for long on here) i don't know why so many photogs that think of themselves as "artists" or the photojournalists don't like the idea of wedding photography . . . 1/2 bitter over all the money they never made or something.

 

[Jon, The Elder]

Arrogance abounds. Why the HELL do you think you're so much better than I am?

I have no idea how you got that impression. The OP voiced his experiences and feelings and I, having much the same, agree with him.

If you do not, then state your case rather than accuse another contributor.
We do not know each other, but you seem to have formed a very quick and personal opinion of me, that just might not be too accurate.

You might go back over the entire thread to pick up the overall flavor of what the OP had in mind.

 

[Hertz van Rental]

No, I don't believe this.

I don't believe that the Head of any reputable school would be so disrespectful of another working photographer as to invite him there to present, ostensibly in good faith, and then hold him up as an example of failure.

What you believe is of no interest to me.
It happened.
And he was not held up as an example of failure. He was held up as an example of someone who stopped seeing Photography as the prime motivation of his job and instead had relegated it to second place.
We were there to learn to become Photographers, not businessmen.

As for respect. Respecting someone for earning a living is one thing, but that does not mean I have to respect them for the end product they produce. For every 'good' wedding photographer there is at least one who has ruined someone's special day through sheer incompetence.
If people want to try and earn a living as wedding photographers then that is OK with me. Just don't tell me that I should see them as anything more than service providers.

 

[The_Traveler]

It happened.
And he was not held up as an example of failure. He was held up as an example of someone who stopped seeing Photography as the prime motivation of his job and instead had relegated it to second place.
We were there to learn to become Photographers, not businessmen.

Did he tell the photographer in advance that he was being invited as a 'bad example'?

Nothing I would say be more more illuminating than your example about how real photographers have a higher calling than businessmen.

 

[Alex_B]

well, I did not read all the posts here, but I am happy that I do not do weddings, never thought it to be something I would want to do.

To me it always seemed very stressful and boring at the same time.

 

[sabbath999]

Before I do so I want to preface it with saying that you, Hertz, and the original poster are coming off as extremly arrogant, and quite honestly sound rather mean... but most amazing is that the OP did weddings. Not once, or even twice... but for EIGHT YEARS!

If that is the case then why do you even need to ASK this question? YOU DID IT...what reasons did you have? I bet they are similar to mine. You make it sound like Wedding Photography was part of your "evolution" as a photographer

Well, I can't speak for Hertz, so I will just speak for myself. I am sorry if I sound arogant to you in my post. It was not my intent, but intent and execution are often totally different things.

I did wedding to pay the bills. I did weddings to put my wife through undergraduate and graduate school. When she got done, I quit too.

As to why I asked the question, I did it strictly for the money, as I stated in my post. But... I know there are other reasons, and I wanted to hear them.

You said the following:

I like people, and I really get along with most people... I am friendly, and am not shy to get up and talk in front of a large crowd. I feel this helps me tackling large groups, like you see at weddings.

Moreover, wedding photography is one type of photography that MOST people enjoy. I mean, some people could give a poopie about seeing the most beautiful picture of a wolf lapping water from a still pond at sunset, but most people love their kids getting married and proudly post those pictures on the wall.

So why do I shoot weddings, and hope to do it more in the future? Because I ENJOY IT...

I thank you for posting that... WHY people do it, even with all of the difficulties that both of us know exists. If I had already known your answer, I wouldn't have asked, and I am glad to see your view is here to counterbalance mine. I never said I was right, I just gave my observations from my experience.

You also said:

and you did it for 8 years and hated EVERY MOMENT OF IT? I really feel sorry for you... I can't imagine doing something I hated for 8 years just because the money is good. There are more important things in life buddy.

I was working 60 hours a week on my "day" job, and frankly I can't think of a single thing using my skill set that I could do to make as much money as I made shooting weddings in that amount of time... and on weekends. Sometimes you do what you can to make a living in this world. Wedding photography was something I was good at, I could make money at, and that didn't interfere with my "day" job which I dearly loved but which paid squat. I had a family to take care of, and that means that sometimes we have to do things we don't really want to do work-wise.

If someone wants to feel sorry for me about that, then that's fine. At least I wasn't clerking in a WalMart all weekend long, making a quarter of what I could earn by shooting a wedding.

There ARE more important things in life... like being able to keep my "day" job, where I was actually doing GOOD for the community that I lived in, and paying for my wife's education so that she could become the outstanding college professor that she is today. I did it eight years, because that is how long the goal took to achieve.

Also, I'd like to address this line in the OP's post: "I knew what I was doing, a full set of lights, pro cameras and lenses (Hassy) with backups of everything, liability insurance, etc."

So here we are, always wanting to dispel the myths of photography and you are perpatuating the belief that EQUIPMENT = SKILL.... and yet you go on later on to argue that point with yourself. Silly.

Personally, I'd rather have ONE GOOD photographer with a point and shoot then 3 equipment heavy ones that have no idea what they are doing. I did my wedding with a D50, a few lenses and one flash. Sure, more equipment could've come in handy, but I think the results were good... and it was me or the 10 disposables on the tables for this bride. I'm not trying to pretend that quality equipment is not important, but I think too much emphasis is placed on it, especially in wedding photography. Even with unlimited money my Wedding Kit would only consist of a decent body and bakcup, a wide angle, a fast Prime and a decent zoom, and two/three flashes. I don't see the need for much more."

Respectfully, I was talking about 1983-92... that was a long time ago, and it was an entirely different world. The quality difference between somebody shooting Hassys with pro lenses and somebody shooting 35mm was astronomical. You don't get to crank your ISO up to 1600 with film... I shot 100 ISO film that wasn't even temperature stable (you had to keep the stuff refrigerated. I am not kidding).

I realize that pro equipment doesn't make a good photographer, but in the world of the 1980's it sure helped.

There were no point & shoots of the quality of the cameras today, so somebody showing up with a P&S in 1985 REALLY wouldn't have worked... and even if there were, 35mm film was not adequate to capture the images in a professional way. Yes, there were 35mm wedding photographers who just carried a single flash... but frankly, their work was pretty well across the board awful. The 1985 SLR was not wedding equipment, and I used an SLR at work every day so I am pretty darned sure I know what I am talking about on this one. There was no photoshop, you had to get it right the first time, in the camera... and you also had to shoot with crop lines in mind (different aspect ratios for 5x7, 8x10, 11x14) because you were going to have to mask the negatives (literally, with these funky little cardboard masks).

As far as the dispelling the myths of photography, you can go ahead and call me silly but leave me out of the royal "WE" you use there. I think that professional wedding photographers (i.e. people who get paid to take wedding pictures and who make some and/or all of their income from wedding photography) SHOULD have the best equipment, along with the best skills they can aquire. Equipment may not = skill, but skill plus the best equipment means better pictures for the client... and isn't that what the whole idea of wedding photography is all about? The simple fact is, by and large, better equipment in the hands of a skilled photographer will give you better pictures. The equipment doesn't make up for skill, but to me the obvious answer is to have BOTH.

And lastly, you wrote:

Anyway, go ahead and bash us... the "wedding photogs" consider us "beneath you", but remember, some of us ENJOY doing what we do.

I am not bashing anybody. I just see a LOT of people who have the goal of taking wedding pictures, and I think that since wedding photography is such as small and extremely specialized niche, it is rather difficult (for me at least) to see why such a large number of people want to do it...

I have a lot of respect for the people who do wedding photography well, and who know what they are doing (people who act professional, who have back-up equipment and have back-up arrangements made with other photographers to fill in on an emergency basis, who carry the proper insurance, who use signed contracts with their customers, etc.).

Sorry if you felt like I was disrespecting professional wedding photographers... that certainly wasn't my intent.

 

[RMThompson]

What you believe is of no interest to me.
It happened.
And he was not held up as an example of failure. He was held up as an example of someone who stopped seeing Photography as the prime motivation of his job and instead had relegated it to second place.
We were there to learn to become Photographers, not businessmen.

As for respect. Respecting someone for earning a living is one thing, but that does not mean I have to respect them for the end product they produce. For every 'good' wedding photographer there is at least one who has ruined someone's special day through sheer incompetence.
If people want to try and earn a living as wedding photographers then that is OK with me. Just don't tell me that I should see them as anything more than service providers.

So, this college was teaching that businessmen were evil, and "making money" should be avoided?

For every GOOD art-taking photographer, there are a dozen pretentious, snobby, non-talented hacks who take themselves too seriously. Mind you, I'm not saying that's you, just saying they are out there.

What's wrong with service providers though? You are so elitist it drives me crazy. Is the guy who makes your french fries at McDonald's so beneath you? What about the guy who serves your martinis? What about your mechanic? Your dentist?

All service providers. Something wrong with them? I just don't get that attitude in life. Get off your high horse, and take some good pictures (and then, maybe, post them?), and forget all about me... but remember, the guy who made that camera... he's just a service provider.

 

[Hertz van Rental]

Did he tell the photographer in advance that he was being invited as a 'bad example'?

Nothing I would say be more more illuminating than your example about how real photographers have a higher calling than businessmen.

As is usual, you fail to understand what is being said.
He was not being used as a 'bad' example of anything.
And I did not say that Photography was a 'higher calling' than being a business man. Only that if you are learning to be a photographer then that is what you learn to do.
In the same way that if you are doing Business Studies you are not expected to learn how to be a chef.

If you want to critique my posts then just say and I will put them in the appropriate forum. But then I will take that as being permission to award you the same treatment.

 

[Hertz van Rental]

Get off your high horse

Try taking your own advice.
I did not say there was anything wrong with service providers, nor even suggest it.
I would say that you might think a little before making personal attacks on people for things they haven't said. But I suspect you wouldn't listen.

 

[danalec99]

I do weddings because I enjoy and love doing them. I have a fresh, beautiful and an important (usually once in a lifetime event) story to cover. Everyone is gay (as in happy :mrgreen, dressed up and don't mind the huge fly on the wall. Money is just a small bonus.

As opposed to the general assumption, money from wedding photography is nothing when compared to good commercial jobs, unless you are catering to the high end market.

Wedding photography for years have been the ugly step sister in the "pro" photography world; primarily due to the lack of creativity that wedding photogs employed. Thumb through your mom's or grandmother's wedding albums, book after book, the images were all predictable. f8, potato masher and the Shot List. Not that those are bad, but most were static. Cut off the heads from all the albums, most of the images looked the same.

This changed when people like Dennis Reggie, Joe Buissink, Yervant et all came to the scene. They rewrote the script and have raised the bar. In case anyone's interested, here are few of the known top players in the market. Check out their work. It is no longer the ugly sibling even though photogs in the other areas do not acknowledge it (then again, who cares? :mrgreen: )
A lot of photojournalists have jumped ship and are content with the new satisfying niche. Pulitzer winner Greg Gibson, Josef Isayo and Paul Gero comes to my mind quickly.

As for the zillas. Who said you (as in the general 'you', not anyone in particular) have to deal with them? It's called Pre-Screening. With the first or two phone calls/emails (this is actually the last stage of the filtering process), I can gauge if she's gonna be a zilla material. If it is the case, we part ways. No feelings involved. It's just like they exercise their freedom in choosing a photographer they like. I refuse to endure through a job. Period. It's only one life.
Of course, this is something that one shouldn't pursue if you are going to hate it. But that applies to any occupation.

And as for the newbies plaguing the market, if someone is hiring their cousin because s/he has the latest entry level toy in the market, then they are not my client in the first place. No worries here personally, at all, regarding the 'weekend warriors'. But most of them are directly affecting the photogs who cater to the low income bracket. Undercutting is not good when the 'pro' has to put food on the table, whereas the weekender has a steady job+perks, no matter what.

Dan

 

[tempra]

What a cracking thread!

carry on...

 

[jstuedle]

Well, I have had this little rant here in the recent past. Not that I begrudge any newbi for shooting weddings, but I immensely dislike the whole scene of wedding photography. Like I said, I have posted my little rant already and don't see the need to repeat it. But I recently attended a local club meeting and ran into a couple that work together at a engineering firm. They discovered they both had recently purchased DSLR's, one a XTi and the other a D200. The young man with the 200 didn't know anything about aperture and shutter speeds, didn't know why he would ever change ISO. The young lady could operate the camera as she had "studied the manual for weeks" but neither really understood comp. They wanted to get into the business because "If So-and-So photography could charge $1000,00 for the crap they put out, I know we can do better". I just smiled and thought to myself "Go and knock yourself out honey". Anyway, if you can make money in that segment of the market and not go bonkers, more power to ya.
As an aside, I'm glad I'm not the loan stranger here when it comes to my feelings about weddings. And this thread has been throughly entertaining, at least to my feeble mind. It's memories of the feuds and fights, in laws and outlaws that have kept Cathy and I together and married for 33 years. So for all you guys and gals who want into that mad-house, have fun and I hope you do very well. I suspect that in 5 or 10 years, if you are real good at what you do and stay into photography, we will see a lot of you in a similar thread on a forum somewhere.
And with respect to the PM I recently received, looks like it's more than just three of us.

 

[Stretch Armstrong]

I once had one couple that was separated and on the road to divorce before I got the proof book back to them... we had a sitting so that I could present it to them about 2 weeks after the ceremony (ah, the days of film...) and nobody showed up. I called their house and found out that the bride had thrown the groom out.

Turns out, he had done the "one last time" thing with another woman at the bachelor's party... The moron did it at a party the brides brother was at. Sheesh.

The REALLY bad thing about it (as if that wasn't bad enough) was that the couple had lived together for about 4 years before tying the knot.

Luckily I had payment in advance for the service and the proofs, so although I didn't get any orders (obviously) I at least came out OK on it.

So what you are saying is that my original idea isn't original at all, eh? And, I suppose you feel that divorce photography is beneath you too? Gawd, Sabbath you are so bitter and jaded! :hug::

I guess I will go back to my other idea of Bris Milah photography. I hear the tips are good.:lmao:

 

[Leigh]

=


I agree with this sentiment. There are far too many people shooting weddings with very little skill and for not nearly enough money. I don't care about the level of camera they have...but typically it would indeed be an entry level DSLR (or high end P&S).

It's perfectly fair of them to undercut the market and charge a few hundred dollars...but that does put a strain on the working photographer who can't charge that little and stay in business.

I don't plan on charging low prices...and I have to compete against people who do. This is especially tough while trying to get started...I could go the cheap route...but I choose not to.

I believe you get what you pay for.

Ive got 2 weddings planned for next year. I've never shot a wedding in my entire life, I have explained this to both of the brides yet they still want me to do it. One of them is my cousin and one of them is a girl i went to school with. I explained to them both that i will do the shots but i wont charge them as I obvioulsy would be blagging my way through the whole day. The girl I went to school with has still insisted on paying me for the day and so we agreed on £150.

I thrive on stress and I work so much better under pressure so I'm really looking forward to both of them.

If they want drop dead gorgeous stunning pieces of artwork then obvioulsy, that would come at a price unfortunately thats not something I can give them and I dont try to pretend that I can.

Basically, I believe that whoevers wedding it is, they will only get the standard of photography that they are willing to pay for.

If you are happy to do the shots for free - great! Do it!!
but on the otherhand, If you believe you could charge £1000 for a days work, and you find customers willing to pay it, then even better.


DO WHAT YOU LOVE, AND LOVE WHAT YOU DO!!!!!!!

I work in a contact center on a repair line for a domestic aplliance company. All day long I take abuse from people demanding and engineer to fix their dishwashers. I really want to tell them to stop being so effin lazy and wash up, its not going to kill them and it'll get them off their backside for 20mins. But I cant say that cos i'd lose my job
so i sit there
with my headset on
and take abuse as tho its my fault
and people get really vicious and hurtful and sometimes very personal.
They dont understand that things could be worse and their are more important things in life than the fact they might actually have to wash up for a week.

I thought that was pathetic and yet here we all are arguing the toss over who should shoot weddings, why and for how much.

If you wanna do it - do it! if you dont, then dont!
but for pitys sake lets just get on with what we wanna do and leave everyone else to do the same. What does it matter who shoots what? As long as we're all happy shooting what we shoot, our clients are happy with the results and we're not doing anyone any harm

Thanks for allowing me to rant !!