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

[cgipson1]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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.

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.

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]

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]

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.

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]

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.

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.

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]

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]

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.

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.

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.

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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.

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.

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.