| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/23/2015 06:18:54 PM · #26 |
| *sitting back with a glass of Chilean red* ahhhh, DPC....love how the simplest thread twists and turns into another animal entirely :-) All I can say at this point is I am kinda sad that this guy is leaving the business. He went to college for it and has obviously heavily invested in it, but in this day and age I can't say I blame him. |
|
|
|
01/23/2015 07:14:03 PM · #27 |
I think this is a highly relevant discussion for anyone in the photo biz. Or ANY biz, really. It's sad only when we fail to see inevitable changes as obstacles rather than opportunities.
Just think of digital cameras. When they first came out, film photographers were divided into the "sky is falling" and "cool new tool". And let's face it: most of us would not be considering a career in this racket if we had to deal with film. I know I wouldn't. Besides, all the software has turned US into "DJ/photographers". The camera gear is cheaper, and we don't even need a big studio. Just composit your subject into any location you or your client wants. Anyone SERIOUSLY considering a career in photography should know, or at least understand, how to shoot for composites. Which is why I could never understand the abhorrence of our "expert" rule set. What better place to learn and practice than here???
With innovation comes ease, and of course, competition. Stay relevant or die. |
|
|
|
01/23/2015 10:57:48 PM · #28 |
Goodness gracious... where is Art and his popcorn when you need him. The next thing you know, people will complain about all the guests and family members that use their camera phones to take pictures at the weddings. :D
I bet you that a list could be created that shows how many "other" jobs some photographers have started doing, along with taking pictures over the years (decades?). There are always going to be someone that is going to be cheaper and more innovative than the next person (and people willing to take advantage of them)... it's all part of doing what it takes to make a living.
It is good conversational fodder for the forums though.
Mike
Message edited by author 2015-01-23 22:58:20.
|
|
|
|
01/23/2015 11:34:58 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by tanguera:
...I could never understand the abhorrence of our "expert" rule set. What better place to learn and practice than here??? |
Well, Worth1000 specializes (or did) in that type of thing ... |
|
|
|
01/24/2015 07:16:36 AM · #30 |
Originally posted by snaffles:
All I can say at this point is I am kinda sad that this guy is leaving the business. He went to college for it and has obviously heavily invested in it, but in this day and age I can't say I blame him. |
I'm guessing he never took any business or marketing classes.
|
|
|
|
01/24/2015 10:53:28 AM · #31 |
As someone with a day job which pays the bills but wouldn't mind having some extra money, and experience with news photography but only 2 weddings, I think $500 for a day's work sounds pretty fair.
From quick perusal of the local Craigslist it seems like there are a few photographers who shoot weddings from $650 and up; pretty sure I could deliver what folks paying that much would expect.
Considering giving it a shot. Although the lawsuit news articles are disheartening - remember reading about a guy in Seattle who shot a wedding for a lawyer and bride and the lawyer decided to try to screw him, the photographer ended up 'winning' with thousands of dollars in court costs. |
|
|
|
01/24/2015 07:46:38 PM · #32 |
$500 for a 10 hour wedding day, no way that rate will work for someone trying to make a living.
A10 hr wedding day
Around 40 hrs to edit photos (I spent ~5 hrs editing 30 senior photos, although admittedly I need to get faster)
At least one meeting with client beforehand
So you're making $10 per hour, and you haven't purchased liability insurance, health insurance, or accounted for any equipment costs yet.
Sure it's workable to build a portfolio, or for fun, but certainly not a workable business model even in the cheap/rural area I live in.
Message edited by author 2015-01-24 19:48:34. |
|
|
|
01/24/2015 11:08:08 PM · #33 |
Do you really think that someone that is only charging $500 is really going to be shooting 10 hours and do very much, if any, editing at all? Those that charge low amounts (like on Craig's List) spend maybe 3 hours, do a machine gun photo shoot (and call it "candid" pictures), saves it to a CD and walks away with the money. For someone that doesn't count their time in the equation and would normally work a minimum wage job or a bit higher, it's great money. A few of those each weekend and it's a pretty good extra or substance making income. Most of it is probably not reported on taxes, so they can still qualify for food stamps. No, they aren't going to get rich, but there are a lot of people that can live on $1500 to $2000 a weekend if they can do 3 to 4 jobs a week.
Film kept a lot of the low ballers away because you still had to pay for film and processing, but with digital and cheap digital cameras, the cost of doing a wedding is very minimal to someone. Of course, people don't realize that because everything is digital now, most won't have them or won't be able to read the digital images in 10 years or so. At least paper pictures had a chance to survive for decades in shoe boxes in the closet or attic, but CDs won't be so lucky.
Mike
|
|
|
|
01/24/2015 11:21:04 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by MikeJ:
Do you really think that someone that is only charging $500 is really going to be shooting 10 hours and do very much, if any, editing at all? |
Probably not. Most of them from the ads I've seen will just provide a CD like you said. Several years ago I charged less than that to shoot the wedding of a guy I worked with, gave them the CF card with 300 or so shots, at least 20 solid print-and-frame quality ones which I culled and put in a different folder from the outtakes. Right/wrong/indifferent? I don't really know. They were happy with the good ones, but she also liked some of the outtakes even with some technical issues so I did some photoshop work on some of those. Maybe 4 hours worth, on top of the maybe 8 hours I was there.
Originally posted by MikeJ:
there are a lot of people that can live on $1500 to $2000 a weekend if they can do 3 to 4 jobs a week. |
I'd say so - that's between $72k and $96k per year. Easily enough for a $300k house with a 30 year mortgage and a car payment, plus assorted bills.
Originally posted by MikeJ:
most won't have them or won't be able to read the digital images in 10 years or so. At least paper pictures had a chance to survive for decades in shoe boxes in the closet or attic, but CDs won't be so lucky. |
I agree with you here - CD-R's and especially CD-RW's have not been very reliable in my experience. Hard drives and flash media, on the other hand, not to mention cloud storage...
|
|
|
|
01/26/2015 08:44:14 AM · #35 |
Originally posted by MadMan2k:
Originally posted by MikeJ:
Do you really think that someone that is only charging $500 is really going to be shooting 10 hours and do very much, if any, editing at all? |
Probably not. Most of them from the ads I've seen will just provide a CD like you said. Several years ago I charged less than that to shoot the wedding of a guy I worked with, gave them the CF card with 300 or so shots, at least 20 solid print-and-frame quality ones which I culled and put in a different folder from the outtakes. Right/wrong/indifferent? I don't really know. They were happy with the good ones, but she also liked some of the outtakes even with some technical issues so I did some photoshop work on some of those. Maybe 4 hours worth, on top of the maybe 8 hours I was there.
Originally posted by MikeJ:
there are a lot of people that can live on $1500 to $2000 a weekend if they can do 3 to 4 jobs a week. |
I'd say so - that's between $72k and $96k per year. Easily enough for a $300k house with a 30 year mortgage and a car payment, plus assorted bills.
|
Don't forget taxes, both federal and state sales tax (plus state income tax in some states). Liability insurance + insurance for your equipment.... and other business expenses! It quickly becomes a lot less.
Photography is my full time job and I couldn't handle 3-4 shoots per week plus a wedding every weekend. No way, the quality would suffer tremendously.
|
|
|
|
01/26/2015 09:32:37 AM · #36 |
Originally posted by elsapo:
I've seen one or two DJ's offer photography and/or photobooth services, usually it's a partner/spouse who takes the photos. Maybe the friends of the wedding photographer didn't like his work/style even for cheap and that was a good excuse? (doesn't sound like there was a contract either!)... or they didn't care about quality pics and went for the even cheaper option haha
There are so many potential clients out there (and only so many clients you can book a month) that I don't see other local photographers, or DJs hehe, as competition. All about word of mouth referrals and raising prices as your work improves (which leads to clients who want high quality work and don't mind paying for it). |
I suppose every market is different. Around here it is the opposite. So many photographers and so little clients to go around. There is a whole range of people offering services from "the person who just got a new DSLR for Christmas and put a post on facebook that they are open for business" to some really really talented people. And that is in less than a square mile of where I live. I feel I have some talent and a good eye for it. I think I could even give most of those really talented people a run for their money if I wanted to put the time into it. But it just seems like I would have to put way too much work into it to get to where I want to be. And besides photogs hours are really awful. I like my nights and weekends to myself ;)
I agree with mike and the others. The market will determine what is needed and wanted. We have to change to accommodate it or set ourselves so far above it that it won't matter anyway. I just don't have the time right now to do that. |
|
|
|
01/26/2015 10:01:49 AM · #37 |
Originally posted by sjhuls:
Originally posted by elsapo:
I've seen one or two DJ's offer photography and/or photobooth services, usually it's a partner/spouse who takes the photos. Maybe the friends of the wedding photographer didn't like his work/style even for cheap and that was a good excuse? (doesn't sound like there was a contract either!)... or they didn't care about quality pics and went for the even cheaper option haha
There are so many potential clients out there (and only so many clients you can book a month) that I don't see other local photographers, or DJs hehe, as competition. All about word of mouth referrals and raising prices as your work improves (which leads to clients who want high quality work and don't mind paying for it). |
I suppose every market is different. Around here it is the opposite. So many photographers and so little clients to go around. There is a whole range of people offering services from "the person who just got a new DSLR for Christmas and put a post on facebook that they are open for business" to some really really talented people. And that is in less than a square mile of where I live. I feel I have some talent and a good eye for it. I think I could even give most of those really talented people a run for their money if I wanted to put the time into it. But it just seems like I would have to put way too much work into it to get to where I want to be. And besides photogs hours are really awful. I like my nights and weekends to myself ;)
I agree with mike and the others. The market will determine what is needed and wanted. We have to change to accommodate it or set ourselves so far above it that it won't matter anyway. I just don't have the time right now to do that. |
You are right! My town is in the suburbs but its growing so fast, we have 3 high schools and talks of adding more. It's very hard to build a photo business, it took me a couple of years of jumping in and only dedicating to that to finally take off. As far as my photography times, I love it, I work for myself so set my own schedule (and vacations when I need them). That said I have to edit all day and I don't have a family to take care of. |
|
|
|
01/26/2015 03:23:34 PM · #38 |
Just on a final note...@  Mike, the guy whose gear I bought did have a decent business going. Then they began having kids, and meanwhile the Facebook Fauxtog movement began to pick up steam. From what I gather his wife was still in school at the time too, so I can well imagine anyone in any business suddenly facing a whole lot of pressure to provide more with all these extras coming into the pic that weren't there before.
And a few final notes from the last wedding I attended. Red and I decided to shoot the wedding of one of his ex-gf's for free and give them the pics as our wedding gift. Despite the fact that Red was a very accomplished wedding photog, the couple decided to go ahead and hire someone who was a friend of the groom's.
He seemed to do a decent enough job, but I later learned from the bride that all the hired 'tog did was send them a disk of unedited RAW images - sounds like he hadn't even chimped through them. I can't say if Red ever got his pics to her, though I saw some of them and knew that they were very good. I think the only images they actually have, which were actually edited, are mine. Very sad. |
|
|
|
01/26/2015 05:36:28 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by MikeJ:
The next thing you know, people will complain about all the guests and family members that use their camera phones to take pictures at the weddings. :D |
The unplugged wedding is gaining a lot of traction, and a decent marketing tool.
Pricing is always variable, and it has to reflect the budget, but I like to ask prospective clients how much they pay their lawyer or the automobile mechanic on an hourly basis. You can get your legal advice and contracts written up very cheaply on line at LegalZoom, and you could pay to have your transmission worked on by a teenager who fixes cars in his parent's driveway; but when you do, you have to expect a difference in the resulting quality of the work performed.
When you spent $2000 on a wedding cake ($12-15 a slice per guest around here), and yet you don't have that much for a photographer....well I bet that you had an aunt who could have baked up a nice enough cake from Betty Crocker for less than the price you budgeted for photography, and the only reason to spend the big bucks on a cake is for the "wow" factor and a few years later the only thing you will have to remind you of it will be the pictures that you want to get done as cheaply as possible. |
|
|
|
01/27/2015 10:43:37 PM · #40 |
But when their freezer dies 15 years after the wedding and it defrosts, they will find that slice of (slightly petrified and fuzzy) cake they saved to remember their wedding. Hopefully they didn't save the slice that had the price tag on it to remind them how much it cost. :D
I can relate to that picture. My very first wedding was at the main chapel on Rhine Main AFB, Germany (the base was on the other side of the Frankfurt airport) in 1976. It was a decent size wedding for a young military couple and I was up in the balcony getting a wide angle shot of the lower area and the strained glass windows. I didn't notice at the time but later when I got the picture back from the lab I used in the States I found that there were at least 6 other people in the group below taking pictures and one taking a video. Since this was well before cell phone cameras and small pocket digital, they were all 35mm film cameras (I assume the video was 8mm). I still have an 8x10 of that picture and a few others from that wedding too. Those were the fun days whee I had very little competition from those with 35mm cameras since I shot with a RB67 system. I use to find it ammusing when someone seeing me with my camera, would come up with a camera bag almost as big as the one I used for my RB67, 3 lenses, several film backs, a Polaroid back, flash system, dozen of boxes of 220 film, and all a number of other odds and ends and pull out their small 35mm camera and not much else. I guess they were hoping to grow into the bag. :D I did envy those with the very silent Leica cameras though. I did a few weddings in old German churches where the minister said no photography during the prayer part of the vows. There were a few real Kodak moments I really wish I could have gotten from the back of the church but with the very loud KA-Chunk of the RB, I wasn't going to take one. If I had one of the Leica cameras that were virtually silent I would have taken a few without disturbing the ceremony at that point. I'm sure a lot of those that have done weddings have similar stories like that though.
Besides weddings, another area that really got taken over by the inexperienced and cheap (or free) crowd is children and bay photography. Just about every mother that started taking pictures of their baby and children started taking them for friends and family too... and they had the advantage of being able to relate to other mothers, something the normal professional baby and child photographer didn't have a hope of. I have to admit though, that I've seen a lot of mothers pick up a camera for the first time take some really great pictures and grow it into a very good business, long after their kids were grown.
Mike
|
|
|
|
01/27/2015 11:02:58 PM · #41 |
Everybody's path is different. Some people spend a lifetime perfecting their craft and get nowhere, and others pick up the camera on a lark and in a few months have a brilliant career. The minute we start comparing ourselves to other people, their choices, and their success, we're sunk. Sure, we can be inspired, get ideas from others, but the minute we start judging and wanting to shut down change and innovation, we're sunk.
The desire people have of wanting "it" cheaper has been around since a second option was available - for anything. |
|
|
|
01/28/2015 07:06:36 AM · #42 |
| maybe professional photographers need a price fixing union that will put up an inflatable rat in front of wedding venues that have couples who hire "fauxtogs". |
|
|
|
01/28/2015 08:35:03 AM · #43 |
As a father of two girls I am predicting (and hoping and praying) that wedding traditions are changing. The days where only a big, expensive, flashy wedding is acceptable may be numbered. Weddings are kind of weird anyway, right?
Creating a unique experience for the guests and a memory for the couple is important. But I get the feeling, the ghastly cake, dress, and other costs will be scrutinized more carefully. We were not given a blank check from our parents for our wedding - really it was mostly just us paying for it. So we trimmed costs where we could. And to this day, people tell me it was one of the best weddings they have ever attended.
Edit: And for the record, I had 2 friends DJ the songs which I had prepared on an ipod (on the existing speaker system on the boat) and hired a friend to do the photography for essentially nothing. I still feel kinda bad for not really paying him much, but it was his first time and he said the free food was enough =) I do agree that photographers should be more costly than the dress, the cake, the flowers, and whatever.
DId I mention my wife bought a beautiful dress for 60$? Rage against the machine, folks.
Message edited by author 2015-01-28 08:43:47. |
|
|
|
01/28/2015 08:51:36 AM · #44 |
This is a great idea.
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
The unplugged wedding is gaining a lot of traction, and a decent marketing tool.
|
|
|
|
|
01/28/2015 09:36:07 AM · #45 |
That is what I had at my wedding was a unplugged wedding, we had signs up and it was in the bullitins, it was nice and peaceful and it was actually nice to see people enjoying our special day and our photographer doing their job.
For our cake we made a sheet cake for everyone, then I made a 3 tier cake (fake) of two layers and then made one real layer for us to cut and eat... I made everything including my flowers.. my cost less than $2000.. my dress was $100.. main cost was the photographer, the rest was reception food and drink costs LOL
Message edited by author 2015-01-28 09:36:57. |
|
|
|
01/28/2015 09:51:24 AM · #46 |
for my wedding my wife spent $2000 on her dress and we cheaped out on the photography. the dress is in a landfill somewhere and we have not very good wedding pics.
getting vows rewed this summer, the dress is $60 and i'm spending much, much more on a photoshoot. and screw the cake, no one eats it anyway. |
|
|
|
01/28/2015 11:21:21 AM · #47 |
Originally posted by Mike:
screw the cake, no one eats it anyway. |
LOL! Good thing this isn't a cake-makers site... |
|
|
|
01/28/2015 11:27:57 AM · #48 |
| I've photographed about 70 weddings in a professional capacity now and i've come to the conclusion that the most important thing on the day is a free bar. |
|
|
|
01/28/2015 12:03:48 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by rooum:
I've photographed about 70 weddings in a professional capacity now and i've come to the conclusion that the most important thing on the day is a free bar. |
i went to a dry wedding once without advance notice it was dry. horrible time. luckily the groom's sister (and rest of wedding party) had planned ahead and stocked her car (without the bride's consent). i think more people were partying in the parking lot than in the reception hall, including the groom.
|
|
|
|
01/28/2015 12:09:26 PM · #50 |
edit: straying to far off topic =o
Message edited by author 2015-01-28 12:20:35. |
|
