What is it with everyone thinking they are a wedding photographer???

[mostly sunny]

I belong to another forum. Several people bought top notch cameras and now are getting paid to take pictures. There are a few that I will admit.. take nice pictures, some exceptional.

 

[bigtwinky]

What is really worrying is not just that totally inexperienced photographers are doing a very important job but the reaction on forums when they post results that are average at best everybody drools over them

Thats because most of the people commenting on them are inexperienced photographers as well and probably don't know much better. The people with the experience and knowledge for proper critique are probably staying away from the thread as they dont want to support someone who is taking subpar pictures for pay on someone's important day and not deliverring.

 

[jnm]

if expectations match results and everyone is happy then let them be.

i think a lot of times people on photography forums forget that the world doesn't necessarily care about pictures as much as the users here. sure the free or $500 photog will (hopefully) be outdone by the $2500 one who will be outdone by the $10,000 one. but if someone is perfectly happy with the results from the newbie, even if they clearly could have been better, who are we to say they are wrong or that their wedding was somehow ruined?

 

[fiveoboy01]

This topic has been beat to death and sucks.

Who cares is what I say, MYOFB to both sides of the argument.

 

[mostly sunny]

This topic has been beat to death and sucks.

Who cares is what I say, MYOFB to both sides of the argument.

Can't we all just get along?

 

[Foxman]

I have been shooting for years. Still in a learning curve on the PP stuff with Digital. I have shot 2 weddings for free. I have considered doing some on a limited basis for a small fee in order to help generate a bit of money. Again, though I have been doing this a while and know a little about it. If I had better gear and felt better with the PP I would be more heavy into it. Perhaps once I get the glass I want.

A guy in a truck pulling a lawn mower doesn't make him a landscaper and a guy holding a camera doesn't make him qualified to do weddings.....but both type's exist and some do ok with it. Just don't rip people off by pretending to be something your not. If you tell someone you don't have much experience and they are willing to roll the dice...that's one thing, misleading someone is a whole different scenario. I think blanket statements are hard to defend because generally they don't consider every scenario.

 

[mommy22]

I totally agree with you.

 

[ANDS!]

I love this song.

If someone wants to spend money on someone untested - let them. It's their money. Its on the consumers side to make sure they are educated enough on what to ask, and what to expect. Buyer beware.

As for someone wanting to shoot a wedding and having questions - who cares? They are trying to get experience, and whomever has asked them to shoot, seems to have enough confidence in their talents to say "Yea, I'm willing to take that risk. . ." I mean really, this deserves to be as much an issue as the "why do ppl buy 5D/D300 as their first camera" threads.

 

[iskoos]

Sinjans and especially stamp, I read this thread from top to bottom and till I read your posts I thought everybody would be agreeing with the OP for his post.

I read the post again and again and I really did not understand the point of it.

Why worried about this?
-Is it because pro photographers are losing business due to the kids with DSLRs in their hands stealing business from them?
If so, then let's not worry. This would not happen. If it does, then those loosing business to amateurs would not be pro photgraphers to begin with.
-Is it because newly wed couples feeling horrible after seeing those "what should have been" unforgettable memories were wasted?
If so, then let's not worry again. They should have been aware of the risks.

Why should people feel obligated that they should spend thousands of dollars so their wedding be photographed by pros? What if they don't have the money for it?

My best friend got married a few years ago in Europe and he did not have a budget to hire a photographer (neither a pro nor an amateur). He had to rely on the shots taken by the guests with simple P&S cameras. The result was very sad. There were not even a few good ones to put together a simple album. Now, if I had been there at the time(unfortunately I wasn't) I would have been his photographer (an amateur one), and he would have had some shots that he could have used in the future.
But wait a sec. per some, I am just not qualified to do it because I do not have enough experience and I maybe asking some basic questions.
Why would I not be able to do it? Even if I am getting some money for it, I can do it because I am not forcing the couple to be their photographer. They have the right to ask anyone to photograph their wedding; and I have the right to accept it or not.
But what I won't do is to take some other professionals' place by competing their prices. That, I would never do!..
Other than that, at any time if a friend (or friend of a friend) that cannot afford a pro photographer asked me to do their wedding and wanted to pay me a little for it, I would it. I would just be honest and upfront with them about my skills and if at the end, I(myself) don't like the result, I would not even charge a penny for what I have done.
And heck yeah, I would come here and ask bunch of questions too.
This is a free country. People can do whatever they want as long as they do not bother others/cause damages.
A guy who is holding a gun in his hand cannot act as a police officer because there are certain rules/conditions to be a police officer; you may hurt others. But any person who is holding a DSLR can act as a wedding photographer. He just won't be one just because he is acting so...

 

[Phranquey]

Sinjans and especially stamp, I read this thread from top to bottom and till I read your posts I thought everybody would be agreeing with the OP for his post.

I read the post again and again and I really did not understand the point of it.

Why worried about this?
-Is it because pro photographers are losing business due to the kids with DSLRs in their hands stealing business from them?
If so, then let's not worry. This would not happen. If it does, then those loosing business to amateurs would not be pro photgraphers to begin with.
-Is it because newly wed couples feeling horrible after seeing those "what should have been" unforgettable memories were wasted?
If so, then let's not worry again. They should have been aware of the risks.

Why should people feel obligated that they should spend thousands of dollars so their wedding be photographed by pros? What if they don't have the money for it?

My best friend got married a few years ago in Europe and he did not have a budget to hire a photographer (neither a pro nor an amateur). He had to rely on the shots taken by the guests with simple P&S cameras. The result was very sad. There were not even a few good ones to put together a simple album. Now, if I had been there at the time(unfortunately I wasn't) I would have been his photographer (an amateur one), and he would have had some shots that he could have used in the future.
But wait a sec. per some, I am just not qualified to do it because I do not have enough experience and I maybe asking some basic questions.
Why would I not be able to do it? Even if I am getting some money for it, I can do it because I am not forcing the couple to be their photographer. They have the right to ask anyone to photograph their wedding; and I have the right to accept it or not.
But what I won't do is to take some other professionals' place by competing their prices. That, I would never do!..
Other than that, at any time if a friend (or friend of a friend) that cannot afford a pro photographer asked me to do their wedding and wanted to pay me a little for it, I would it. I would just be honest and upfront with them about my skills and if at the end, I(myself) don't like the result, I would not even charge a penny for what I have done.
And heck yeah, I would come here and ask bunch of questions too.
This is a free country. People can do whatever they want as long as they do not bother others/cause damages.
A guy who is holding a gun in his hand cannot act as a police officer because there are certain rules/conditions to be a police officer; you may hurt others. But any person who is holding a DSLR can act as a wedding photographer. He just won't be one just because he is acting so...

Unfortunately, you didn't cover the one thing that makes the most difference to me...Pride. What pisses me off is seeing people with a 5 month old camera passing themselves off as knowing what they are doing, and then that couple gets a very bad taste for photograpers in general...
I am not a Pro. I consider myself a very serious amateur with almost 25 years behind a camera of one sort or another, and have played second at enough weddings to know that I want nothing to do with them on my own.

I have no problems if someone wants to keep the wedding cheap and is aware of the consequences up front.

 

[Valethar]

For what it's worth, just because someone isn't a 'pro' doesn't mean they suck, which seems to be the average elitist consensus here.

I've seen pictures from alleged professionals that were pure junk, and pictures from self taught casual photographers that looked far better.

I had a friend who hired a 'pro' to take pictures of his wedding about 15 years ago. This guy charged his dad a couple grand to take the pics, so you'd think that they came out great, right?

Not so much. The pics from the guy with the 10 year old Canon and 2 lenses came out much better, according to David and Beth (the friends who got married) and their families. And those pics only cost Dave a few rolls of film.

Just because someone isn't a jedi master caliber photographer doesn't mean they don't have the talent to do the job. It may stroke certain egos the wrong way, but some folks just have a knack that others lack, despite years of experience and education.

Instead of crapping all over everyone because they dare make the attempt, you should be offering constructive advice instead. So far, I've seen far more of the former in this thread than I have the latter.

You should be ashamed of yourselves.

 

[timfrommass]

Statement about base level persons with a camera shooting someones wedding is fair n legitimate.
I couldn't afford a photog when I got married so I asked s fee friends to bring their cameras. I wouldn't pay an amateur to learn his craft at my expense.
Though I did pay for film developing and batteries for my friends.
I cringe every time I read a 'i'm shooting a wedding tomorrow for pay, how do I ...? ' post.
It is a scary prospect!

Wow a lot of people on this forum take stuff pretty darn seriously! This guy actually got what I was saying. If a friend or family member says "hey I'm in a bind, I know you take pretty descent pictures and I can't afford a photographer can you do it for me?" I have no problem with the person saying yes, that makes perfect sense. The guy knows what he's getting into by asking the friend/family member.

I'm not getting "offended" by people on this forum saying they are shooting weddings when they have little to no experience, and I'm surely not trying to defend the market place or w/e.

I just have seen a ton of posts in the few months I've been here where people are legitimately charging people for weddings, or say that they want to get into that business and they really have no clue what they are doing. More power to them if they can get the business, but I feel bad for the people they are shooting who don't know any better. My point is simply this.... WHY do so many people think that they can do it? I'm just trying to understand why photography is so different from most any other professions in that people think they can just pick up gear and do it. As I said you won't see anywhere near as many people trying to charge to make the wedding cake after taking a cake decorating class. Or someone who follows the market offering to charge people for stock advice. My point from the very beginning was really just being curious as to WHY so many people seem to think they can charge for this stuff

-tim

 

[Chris of Arabia]

My guess is that this version of this thread has seen enough action now. As nothing new is now being added, I'll call a halt here.