Wedding Photography: 0-60

[Robin Usagani]

well.. I didnt do it that fast to do my 1st wedding ...but yeah.. I am one of those people. BUT I never lied about my experience!! But really.. if some seasoned pro want to do the $400 wedding.. go right ahead. I just want to build up my portfolio .

 

[12sndsgood]

47 days 7 hours and 37 minutes. giver or take a few minutes.

 

[MohaimenK]

well.. I didnt do it that fast to do my 1st wedding ...but yeah.. I am one of those people. BUT I never lied about my experience!! But really.. if some seasoned pro want to do the $400 wedding.. go right ahead. I just want to build up my portfolio .

That's right man! As long as you're honest about your work. Even offered to do free wedding and ended up getting like $200-$300 for them. They liked the photos but of course I was disappointed as a photographer. I needed to learn much more before I do it. So I took some break and I am ready to do it again come Spring.

But yeah, not everyone has $3000 to pay out of their pocket. Although the national average for 2010 is $3500 according to what I heard a few months ago on the radio about this topic.

You can be the greatest landscape photographer but crash hard doing weddings. It really depends on the photographer. You must have eyes for things. You want to be able to catch the moments. Nobody can teach you that but yourself. You can see some ideas but when you're on the field you're on your own.

So yeah, there's no time limit. It all depends on the photographer, from one to another.

 

[Tbini87]

Others have already mentioned that it really depends on the person. A few years back I was told that I would never make my local Junior College tennis team since I had only a year and a half of tennis experience. However, with 6 months of hard work and training I made the team and was a starter for the squad. Having played soccer, baseball, football, and basketball since I was a kid and having plenty of natural talent obviously helped. Being a quick learner and incredibly dedicated also helped. I think someone with some talent and a willingness to learn could become a good photog pretty quickly (within 6 months maybe not, within a year sounds possible to me).

However, just like in tennis, photogs are CONSTANTLY learning and being a half decent photog after a year doesn't mean that they have everything figured out. I am still learning tons about tennis every time I play.

 

[Derrel]

Monday - buy camera
Tuesday - charge camera batteries
Wednesday take pictures - charge flash
Thursday - learn flash photography
Friday - rest for Saturday's big day
Saturday - You are a PRO!
Sunday - you edit the 2000-4000 random images you've taken and you start your edit. :coffee:

Buy my 5 steps to becoming the best wedding photographer for only $29.99 and I'll give you a TPF discount of $10 which gives is a lifetime offer of only $19.99!

This theory didn't work for me but it just may work for you. Buy the DVD and find out!

Awesome post Mo! Gotta' hand it to you for your insightful analysis and step-by-step directions. You have surely launched a thousand ships on the way to the edge of the oceans...you know, Where There Be Monsters Here...

 

[RauschPhotography]

A friend had recently inquired me about being a primary shooter for her coworker's wedding in May '11... Declined that offer. I personally couldn't commit on a specific date, especially working at another studio, not having a full frame camera (debatable if it's necessary), and not having enough fast lenses and my own lighting to do the best job possible. Had mentioned I would still be happy to do some second-shooting if the situation had come, but I just didn't feel comfortable. Weddings can be a lot of stress, especially if you're primary shooting--there's no need to go in from zero to sixty unless you really feel comfortable with every situation that could arise!

 

[Robin Usagani]

Here is mine.. the first one is always the sweetest. This is after 4 months owning the camera.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...um-photo-gallery/220602-my-first-wedding.html

 

[white]

What do you think is a reasonable timeframe to go from newbie/basic level of understanding to shooting weddings professionally?

Depends on when their friends get married, and how good their taste is.

 

[blazerj]

Also, don't forget, much of a wedding photographer's work and income comes from albums and the touching up of photos, so you would have to learn that as well.

 

[MohaimenK]

Also, don't forget, much of a wedding photographer's work and income comes from albums and the touching up of photos, so you would have to learn that as well.

not always. lots of successful photographers often either hire a photo editing guy or outsource it. I know I would if it came to that point.

 

[knightracersi]

You have to factor in the other side of the equation too.

The B&G willing to pay an inexperience, ill equiped shooter, because their budget precludes hiring someone that has the right equipment, knows cold how to use it effectively, and has the after shoot skills to put it all together.

Exactly my point.... I had someone offer me $500 cash, free dinner, free bar, and their honey moon suite for my wife and I to shoot a wedding, plus travel expenses. I told them I don't know the first thing about wedding photography... they didn't care. They just want someone to take pictures and don't want to spend $2,000 to have it done.

There is aboslutly no reason someone couldn't go out and buy an SLR, put a Craigs list add out there and be a wedding photographer by the weekend.

Was this an open invitation to get really drunk and take pictures? hmmm

 

[pwrstrk02]

my outcome on the thery. buy on monday, shoot on tuesday, PP on wed-thu-fri, and then throw the camara out the window because i cant do PP.

 

[Vinny]

I don't think there is a time frame but as was said it is an individual's learning curve. But that learning curve has to include mastering what to do in all aspects of photography for shooting weddings. The photographer should know what to do for all lighting conditions, have vision to see what is distracting vs visually appealing, know how to use his/her equipment including equipment for "studio" photography and have the PP down pat. IMO this would take a while. My opinion is that this is a special day for the couple and the photography aspect is an important part of it.

If your new, inexperienced and honest about it and the couple still wants you I think it's a good idea to do some reading or research. Years ago I was asked by several friends to supplement the paid photographer since I had a 35mm camera and flash; for me, it was an interesting experience but I wasn't the primary photographer.

I also think that being a professional means not using crop sensor DSLRs and consumer grade lenses. If your intention is to make money as a photographer then buy professional grade equipment. If you spend the money at the beginning of your career then you'll pay it off as you get jobs and hopefully have an edge over your competition to get the jobs to pay it off.

I've noticed a lot of threads where people ask about wedding photography, where they have some grand illusions that they're going to buy a nice camera and then go out and make a couple thousand dollars on a Saturday.

Although these threads are a lot of fun to watch unfold, I want your opinion:

What do you think is a reasonable timeframe to go from newbie/basic level of understanding to shooting weddings professionally?

Obviously there are a lot of variables. But let's say a newbie has all of the needed equipment and a desire to learn. Couple of years? Three or four? More?

Just seems like some people have grand illusions. Maybe it's good to aim high, but it seems some people really lack a sense of reality with photography...

 

[flea77]

I also think that being a professional means not using crop sensor DSLRs and consumer grade lenses. If your intention is to make money as a photographer then buy professional grade equipment. If you spend the money at the beginning of your career then you'll pay it off as you get jobs and hopefully have an edge over your competition to get the jobs to pay it off.

There is a problem right there IMHO. Crop sensor or full frame, doesn't matter if it gets the job done. If I need something that crop can't deliver I quit messing with digital toys and bring out the large format film.

To each their own but the moral here is that you buy what you need to get the job done RIGHT. That could be a point and shoot, it could be a Nikon D80, or a Nikon D300, or a Nikon D3s. Doesn't matter if it delivers professional quality results to the client.

Allan

 

[Vinny]

What is "gets the job done" - is that just good enough? So a professional photographer shows up at your door carrying a point and shoot along with his/her phone which has a camera and they'll get the job done. Except for possibly a few really talented photographers I would think it wouldn't work too well. Everything I have read even going back to my film days has pretty much stated that larger sensors and film give better images.

I also think that being a professional means not using crop sensor DSLRs and consumer grade lenses. If your intention is to make money as a photographer then buy professional grade equipment. If you spend the money at the beginning of your career then you'll pay it off as you get jobs and hopefully have an edge over your competition to get the jobs to pay it off.

There is a problem right there IMHO. Crop sensor or full frame, doesn't matter if it gets the job done. If I need something that crop can't deliver I quit messing with digital toys and bring out the large format film.

To each their own but the moral here is that you buy what you need to get the job done RIGHT. That could be a point and shoot, it could be a Nikon D80, or a Nikon D300, or a Nikon D3s. Doesn't matter if it delivers professional quality results to the client.

Allan