| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/21/2006 10:03:03 AM · #1 |
I've been asked to act as a "secondary" photographer at a co-workers wedding. This will be the second time I have been asked to do this, but this time is a little more formal and will be a paid shoot. The first time was for a friend, and they only wanted a few candids of the groomsmen only. The groom was a good friend so I did this for free to help him out as well as gain a little experience. I have my first "real" wedding gig next summer so I'm trying to get as much practical experience as possible without having full responsibility for the wedding. I do however have a couple of questions regarding proper etiquette.
1.) I do not want to offend the "primary" photographer whom I do not know. I have asked the bride to check with him to make sure it's OK to have a secondary photographer. Should I contact the main photographer in advance to discuss the event? For example, when the best opportunity for me to sneak in and grab some candids would be so that I can work around his schedule, etc. Or, since I am being paid and could be considered an independent photographer... Is it better for me to not contact the other photographer and just work around/with him on the day of the wedding?
2.) How much should I charge? I plan on using the photos in my portfolio (with the brides permission of course), and it is good experience for me. I want to be reasonable, but she has seen my work and was very impressed. I do not want to establish a reputation of being the "cheap" guy who takes good pictures. This is beginning to lay the basic groundwork for a career I'm trying to launch so it's a delicate balancing act.
Much input needed and appreciated.
PS: My ultimate goal for photography is to focus on maternity and newborn photography and use landscape print sales as a source of some income. I realize I'll need to pay bills too, so I am going to do weddings for now to help make ends meet as I focus on my more "artistic" endeavors.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2006 10:08:50 AM · #2 |
Hummm this one could be interesting. Read the contract from the other photog. It may not allow any other "pro" photogs and sometimes even limits amateur or friend photogs. I've found that in a wedding one photog needs to be in-charge, even if the second is part of the same company.
I may suggest that someone from the bride or groom side let the photog know that you will be calling and coordinating. UNLESS you act more like a friend helping them out then just try to stay out of his way or ask him if he needs any help setting things up.
Sounds like fun, enjoy it, don't stress too much but have a good look at the contract. |
|
|
|
06/21/2006 10:17:44 AM · #3 |
This is the clause from my contract, most photographers have a similar one in theirs:
1. Exclusive Photographer. The Photographer shall be the exclusive photographer retained by the client for the purpose of photographing the wedding. Family and friends of the client shall be permitted to photograph the wedding as long as they shall not interfere with the Photographer’s duties and do not photograph poses arranged by the Photographer.
In a nutshell, family and friends can take pics, no problem, however, you are have been asked to do would be strictly prohibited. They cannot hire you or ask you to shoot, it would be breach of contract and the photographer would have every right to withhold his services. A little harsh but that is the crude reality.
June
|
|
|
|
06/21/2006 10:25:25 AM · #4 |
| I am not a wedding photographer (nor do I play one on tv) but I would think that once your bride and groom have approved it with the first photog, it certainly wouldn't hurt to give him a call. Wedding photographer circuits are generally somewhat small and especially if you're just starting out, it'd be much better to be known as the guy who is willing to make an effort to work well with others rather than the guy who got in the way and was a pain in the ass. I'm not saying that you'd be a pain in the ass, just that it would be nice gesture to act interested. |
|
|
|
06/21/2006 10:31:14 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by Chiqui:
This is the clause from my contract, most photographers have a similar one in theirs:
1. Exclusive Photographer. The Photographer shall be the exclusive photographer retained by the client for the purpose of photographing the wedding. Family and friends of the client shall be permitted to photograph the wedding as long as they shall not interfere with the Photographer’s duties and do not photograph poses arranged by the Photographer.
In a nutshell, family and friends can take pics, no problem, however, you are have been asked to do would be strictly prohibited. They cannot hire you or ask you to shoot, it would be breach of contract and the photographer would have every right to withhold his services. A little harsh but that is the crude reality.
June |
Ummm, how do you actually plan to enforce this? How would you know that the other photographer is getting paid and not just an overzealous friend/relative with a lot of nice photo gear?
Technically, you could just leave in the middle of the wedding, but that would pretty much kill any hope of future business from anyone who hears about it in association with your name. You could also confront the other photog, but what if he has a similar agreement? Are you going to call up your lawyers and have a little arbitration session between the ceremony and the reception?
Those clauses are useful pretty much as warnings only, but from a practical standpoint, trying to enforce them is another matter. You will plant the seed of a poison tree if you enforce that, should you try.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2006 10:38:39 AM · #6 |
I didn't say I would walk out, I am just saying that I would have the legal right to. To be honest, if a client knows the terms of the contract and then goes and violates them, I don't really want their business! It is unethical for the client to do this and for the OP, it would be unethical to get started this way. If you really want to be a wedding photographer then contact a pro in your area and offer to assist and eventually second shoot for/with him. If the bride talked to the photographer and he said it was ok, and then you called him just to make sure, then by all means shoot. However, before you post anything on your website, make sure the original photographer is OK with it.
I am looking at this from the pro photographer's point of view of course, so I am biased. I am not trying to be a bitch but prints from this second photographer could considerably affect the print sales of the pro and that is just not fair. If the bride wanted a second photographer then she should have arranged that with her main photographer.
June
edit: typo
Message edited by author 2006-06-21 10:40:19.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2006 10:40:48 AM · #7 |
Hmmm... pretty interesting responses and it confirms some of my fears. I doubt he has an exclusivity clause, but I suppose it's possible. I know what they are paying him and it's pretty doggone cheap (roughly 1/4 what we paid our wedding photographer) so I'm guessing he's either doing this part time or is just getting started like me. He's not doing her bridal portrait so he is somewhat flexible in sharing responsibilities. I do know that wedding photographer circles are small and can be very territorial. The last thing I want to do is get on the bad side of someone who might be able to provide referrals further down the road. Is it safe to assume that if there is no exclusivity clause, then I should have the bride inform the photographer of her intentions and then contact the other photographer to establish a good working relationship?
Assuming it is possible to proceed, then what should I charge? She's paying the primary photographer $500 (which is a dirt cheap IMHO).
|
|
|
|
06/21/2006 10:50:36 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by Chiqui:
I am looking at this from the pro photographer's point of view of course, so I am biased. I am not trying to be a bitch but prints from this second photographer could considerably affect the print sales of the pro and that is just not fair. If the bride wanted a second photographer then she should have arranged that with her main photographer.
|
I completely understand your point of view and in fact share it. That's why I was concerned about proper etiquette and the feasibility of even doing this. The last wedding I shot a few candids for the groom and a few shots during the reception. I didn't get any shots during the ceremony since I wasn't the primary photographer and I didn't want to step on any toes. This was done at no charge so technically I was just an "overzealous friend with nice equipment". It turned out to be a disaster because the so-called professional photographer did not get any decent shots. It turns out he was a friend of the brides mother and did a horrible job. The only shots of the wedding that the bride liked were the few candids I took. Since I wasn't willing to step on the toes of the "professional", I didn't take any ceremony or formal portraits. End result... they had zero usable formal shots or ceremony shots. I ended up with a referral (the upcoming wedding) which puts me where I am now.
I agree that the "best" place to start is to assist with a local photographer and shoot second, the problem is I live in a relatively small area where wedding photographers are very "territorial". I hope to establish myself as a more "artistic" photographer that does unconventional shots. I'm willing to go slow for now so I can rely on word-of-mouth and shooting for friends/co-workers as I ramp up my experience and portfolio. It will be very difficult for me to get in with an established "pro".
|
|
|
|
06/21/2006 11:07:38 AM · #9 |
Lee, I used to think the same way but believe it or not, there are many pros out there who are willing to help newcomers. I am only just starting out as well and even though I have 3 weddings of my own booked so far, I am assisting a pro here in London. For now I am doing nothing but carrying his bag and looking after equipment and just generally helping him out but it is great experience. I have a wedding with him this friday where he is letting me shoot and use any images I take for my website and other forms of self promotion. It won't be easy and it won't be quick, you have to prove yourself, but finding a pro to work with really is the best idea.
June
PS. I used to think I didn't need to work with no stinking pro but I sure am glad I have!
Message edited by author 2006-06-21 11:08:16.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2006 11:23:14 AM · #10 |
Originally posted by Chiqui:
PS. I used to think I didn't need to work with no stinking pro but I sure am glad I have! |
LOL... that's part of it too. ;-)
edit to add
UPDATE: The bride has not signed a contract with the photographer yet and has only recently "sort-of" decided who she is going to use so she is not sure about the exclusivity clause. Her step-mom is going to call me to discuss some specifics... heck, I might end up with the whole sha-bang now. I'm not sure how I feel about that.
Message edited by author 2006-06-21 11:25:44.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2006 11:34:45 AM · #11 |
| I started out as a secondary photographer at a couple of weddings and experienced no problems with the pros. However, I did not shoot any of the formal wedding shots - I left that to the pro. I shot candids at both the wedding and reception. The "pro" photographer is usually busy getting all the required formal shots and doesn't have time for a lot of candids. The candids, however, are usually the favorites of the bride and groom. It's great experience for you. I'm now hired as the "pro", but I always have a second photographer with me to help out with the candids. |
|
|
|
06/21/2006 11:45:26 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by Chiqui:
This is the clause from my contract, most photographers have a similar one in theirs:
1. Exclusive Photographer. The Photographer shall be the exclusive photographer retained by the client for the purpose of photographing the wedding. Family and friends of the client shall be permitted to photograph the wedding as long as they shall not interfere with the Photographer’s duties and do not photograph poses arranged by the Photographer.
In a nutshell, family and friends can take pics, no problem, however, you are have been asked to do would be strictly prohibited. They cannot hire you or ask you to shoot, it would be breach of contract and the photographer would have every right to withhold his services. A little harsh but that is the crude reality.
June |
Ummm, how do you actually plan to enforce this? How would you know that the other photographer is getting paid and not just an overzealous friend/relative with a lot of nice photo gear?
Technically, you could just leave in the middle of the wedding, but that would pretty much kill any hope of future business from anyone who hears about it in association with your name. You could also confront the other photog, but what if he has a similar agreement? Are you going to call up your lawyers and have a little arbitration session between the ceremony and the reception?
Those clauses are useful pretty much as warnings only, but from a practical standpoint, trying to enforce them is another matter. You will plant the seed of a poison tree if you enforce that, should you try. |
I just had a wedding Saturday and had them sign a contract with something close to what June(chique) and typed. When my lighting is set up no one is allowed to take pictures. One person did and I told him it was in the contract, no photographs while lighting is up. The crowd went silent but he stopped taking pictures. I think it is a total direspect to even think about taking pictures while the posing is going on with the lighting and all. |
|
|
|
06/21/2006 12:04:13 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Chiqui:
I didn't say I would walk out, I am just saying that I would have the legal right to. To be honest, if a client knows the terms of the contract and then goes and violates them, I don't really want their business! It is unethical for the client to do this and for the OP, it would be unethical to get started this way. If you really want to be a wedding photographer then contact a pro in your area and offer to assist and eventually second shoot for/with him. If the bride talked to the photographer and he said it was ok, and then you called him just to make sure, then by all means shoot. However, before you post anything on your website, make sure the original photographer is OK with it.
I am looking at this from the pro photographer's point of view of course, so I am biased. I am not trying to be a bitch but prints from this second photographer could considerably affect the print sales of the pro and that is just not fair. If the bride wanted a second photographer then she should have arranged that with her main photographer.
June
edit: typo |
I'm not saying you should or shouldn't have such a clause, but, if you try to enforce it or do something beyond simply asking people to not interfere, like get in "beloved Uncle Frank's" face about it, you may do more harm to your business than good. The story that will spread like wildfire will not have any mention of such clause, only that the photog was "difficult" to deal with.
I agree that it's in bad taste to snipe shots over the pro's shoulder, but in the end, there's really not much that you can do about it if they ignore your warning. The best thing I have found is to sic the MOB on them, assuming you took the wise step of making her your ally. A good wedding planner can serve the same role too though usually they are not quite as vicious towards the offending party.
Throwing a snit-fit or taking your stuff and going home will not serve anyone's interests.
As far as being a paid 2nd shooter at a wedding who is not on the payroll of the main photographer, I'd want to make sure that it was OK with the main photographer and if they are doing formals, offer to help (move lights or whatever), but put down your camera. As for ceremony shots and at the reception, just try to stay out of each other's way.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2006 01:04:22 PM · #14 |
After the bride calls the othr photog and it looks like it is ok, call him and offer your assistance. If you are both getting paid, combine it and split it as long as the original does not take a pay cut. Who knows you might like the guy and you can start assisting each other. Many weddings (most) need two photos or at least two camera. I went to one where the photog was the only one and spent far much too time changing lenses and adjusting his camera setings. Two photogs or at least two cameras is a must.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2006 01:16:55 PM · #15 |
As you have stated your friend "lost" their chance at wedding pics. There is no second chance. If they want to hire this other guy for $500 and you, and they apparntly don't trust his abilities, they should skip you both and pool that money and hire one 'real' photographer. (nothing against you on this).
You seem to have a lot of 'cheap' friends, or perhaps poor ones - regardless they all have little regard for photography or they'd get photogs that would deliver good pics. (be it from being wise or spending the money needed).
Back to your original question - I shot a wedding as a 'guest' - the b&g both said i could, knowing why and what i'd do with the pics. the main photog knew (so i was told). he was an asshole at the ceremony, he yelled- loudly - and the brides grandmother and brother, told his asst to 'step on those other people taking pics if they get in your way' (again, loud enough to be heard by everyone there). After the wedding 1/3 of the formal posed were missing from the proofs, and teh proofs were to be in a proof album, but were handed over loose with the album and he told the bride "you can put them in there yourself" and they were 2 weeks late in getting even that - and it took 5 calls make it happen at all. THEN another girl whose wedding i shot for my protfolio earlier last year, turns out to be this photogs neighbor - and he sees pics on my website of her (and "his" poses of the the wedding i was at that i shot) and he starts badmouthing me to her, threatening to sue me...all kinds of BS. I see him a couple of times (his asst worked with me) and neither he nore the asst say word one, good or bad.
i felt bad for the bride, so i made her an album as a gift and gave her pics on CD. She ordered 2 more albums for christmas gifts...and man does she badmouth that photog.
SOOOOO, beware. hard feelings are sure to be created from this arrangement.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2006 01:31:59 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
As you have stated your friend "lost" their chance at wedding pics. There is no second chance. If they want to hire this other guy for $500 and you, and they apparntly don't trust his abilities, they should skip you both and pool that money and hire one 'real' photographer. (nothing against you on this).
...
SOOOOO, beware. hard feelings are sure to be created from this arrangement. |
Yeah, I felt terrible about my friends losing their opportunity to get good wedding shots, especially when I KNEW I could've gotten what they wanted. I was certainly not going to try to "horn in" on the formal/posed shots... in fact, I left for the reception and didn't even stick around for the formals. I would hate it if someone was jumping in on my formal shots so I wasn't going to do this to the "pro". My main function was to get some good candids of the groom and that's what I did. I stayed out of the way of the "pro" and only did my candids when he wasn't around. For the upcoming wedding, the bride is using a different photographer (mainly because she didn't know I did weddings until a week ago). She really liked the candids I did for the other wedding (the bride was a friend of hers) so she has commissioned me to do some shots like the ones I did for her friend. This would be candids only and I have zero intention of even being around for the formals. I just have such a bad taste in my mouth from my previous experience where the bride was in tears because her so-called pro botched her entire wedding. It was so bad that they used one of the candids I shot for their wedding announcement (without my permission, but that's a horse of a different color). I guess the point I'm making is that I have no intention of interfering with the professional. He'll probably see me, but I will not get in his way at all. The bride is checking on exclusivity, and if he has an exclusivity clause, then all of this is moot anyway since I will not violate that contract and shoot. If there is no exclusivity, then I will contact the photographer and state my intentions (candids only) and make sure he is OK with this arrangement.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2006 01:36:54 PM · #17 |
I know I'm gonna get blasted for this...and perhaps a bit off topic. But I think that there has to be a happy medium between the photog and the guests trying to take their own pics. A professional photographer who is confident in their skill and whose pictures back that confidence up should let the guests gets some shots too. The photog is being paid by the couple and the couple WILL purchase their photos from the photog...unless the photog screws them up.
I echo the 'bad word of mouth' theory. Sometimes letting 'beloved Uncle Frank' get a shot will go farther than not letting him. Is his print going to be the one the couple buys, no...is Uncle Frank going to buy a print from the photog, in my little corner of the world- not likely. So I've seen it best where the photog gets his shot and lets others get some too....a new respect is immediately formed. No Uncle Frank's interfering with the photog's shot.
At my boyfriends daughters wedding, this photog was such a jerk. totally protecting his pics and not allowing any other shots. I saw him take inventory of the surrounding people with cameras and I will say he most purposely stepped into every one of my shots. The only posed shot he did of the bride and her parents were with both parents in the pose. So later I posed the bride, groom and her father separately...the photog saw this and ran from the other side of the room, in front of me to get this shot that HE missed. I'll tell you we had an exchange of words...something along the lines of 'you didn't let me get any of your poses so you're not getting mine!"
|
|
|
|
06/21/2006 02:06:44 PM · #18 |
I think a "secondary photog's" primary responsibiliy is to cover the ground left open by the "pro" for example: the bride is walking up the aisle and if the pro is shooting from the front he cannot possibly get a shot of her from the back without distraction. But a beautiful shot of the bride with her train stretched out behind her is in almost every wedding album... The pro is shooting the bride as she enters- the SP gets a shot of the grooms face when he sees her... The pro shoots the couple doing something (you pick) and the SP gets the reactions of the crowd.... On and on. No stepping on toes- just the bi-product of one person not being able to be in two places at the same time. As for the "posed" shots, consider leaving these solely to the pro or arranging something before hand as you suggested. If this is not agreeable- consider heading to the reception for some candids of the guests. Just a thought or two.
Message edited by author 2006-06-21 14:07:32. |
|
|
|
06/21/2006 06:46:36 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by dassilem:
I know I'm gonna get blasted for this...and perhaps a bit off topic. But I think that there has to be a happy medium between the photog and the guests trying to take their own pics. A professional photographer who is confident in their skill and whose pictures back that confidence up should let the guests gets some shots too. The photog is being paid by the couple and the couple WILL purchase their photos from the photog...unless the photog screws them up.
|
I disagree. People will choose non pro prints over pro ones if they are cheap, it's just the nature of things. While the couple MAY buy prints from the photographer as opposed to the free ones, family members won't and the paid pro will therefore lose reprint sales.
June
|
|
|
|
06/21/2006 06:52:19 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by dassilem:
I know I'm gonna get blasted for this...and perhaps a bit off topic. But I think that there has to be a happy medium between the photog and the guests trying to take their own pics. A professional photographer who is confident in their skill and whose pictures back that confidence up should let the guests gets some shots too. The photog is being paid by the couple and the couple WILL purchase their photos from the photog...unless the photog screws them up.
|
Photographers can be confident in their skill by knowing what they need to do in order to take a good shot. This can include ensuring that other people's flashes aren't going off at the same time theirs are or that they aren't wasting the limited amount of time they have for formal pictures asking grandma to back up out of the photo or tripping over the people who are standing over their backs.
I do think there needs to be a happy medium but the things that people do with their cameras at weddings is amazing. You really have to be stern almost to the point of meanness to literally get people off your back sometimes. |
|
|
|
06/21/2006 07:12:35 PM · #21 |
Lee...I swear it is like you are my clone or something! I was in the exact same situation, right down to the friends not having good professional pics and preferring my candid shots. I have taken candids at several weddings (two of these I was in the weddings, so I couldn't very well be the photographer too) and have had no problems with working with the pros. However, I approached it the same way as you and never tried to take a shot the pro had set up or interfere in any way.
I have just started doing weddings on my own. My first was about a month ago now. I have an exclusivity clause in the contract...but I also let people take some shots during the set ups. I just let them know that they shouldn't take shots while I was taking them. I am very new to this, but for the most part I don't think the couple will get their prints from grandma's camera, I could be wrong...but I don't think so.
As for how much to charge...I don't think you can ask for more than the primary photog...but I am not sure what to recommend either. For my first couple of weddings I only charged $550, but that was just for me to take the pictures and for online proofs. I have been struggling with when to raise my rates, and what to raise them to. It seems to be a fine line to me. I mean I can't ask for what the established photogs get...people will laugh. At the same time I don't want to get a rep as a bargain basement photog either. |
|
|
|
06/21/2006 07:20:16 PM · #22 |
i shot a wedding this weekend and i can't begin to describe how frustrating it was to have lots of people trying to take photos all at the same time as me and to have a videographer constantly stepping into a shot just as i got everything set up. unfortunately, it was for family and a freebie so there wasn't much i could do about it.
i think it would be a good idea to contact the primary photographer and tell him that the bride asked you to take pics, too. just explain to him/her that you know what you're doing and you won't be in the way and will only concentrate on the photos he can't get. i would want the same courtesy if i was the primary photog.
|
|
