Wedding photographer explains the reasons behind 'unrealistic' prices: Digital Photography Review

I have been working as a professional photographer for over 30 years and I have seen a lot of changes to our profession especially in the last 10. But the fact remains that we will please a lot of the people a lot of the time and many people all of the time but there will be the occasional customer that thinks that no matter what we charge for our services it is too much. To really grasp this just sell a few things on eBay and see how the perception of value varies from buyer to buyer. As has been pointed out in this section there are photographers worth thousands and other who aren't. It is simply intangible and the value of that photographer is in the eye of the beholder. The hype or publicity surrounding the photog can also inflate perceived value. Do you want a Porsche or a VW? Do you want Joe Buissink or Ron Smith? Who is Ron Smith?? That's the point. They may or may not give you the same skill level or final product but there is a huge difference in what they charge.

0 upvotes

THAT is considred an EXCELLENT response??? It's kaka. The photographer deducts RENT and nearly everything else on the planet from the $50,000 earned in four months to justify charging $2500 for shooting a wedding!!

You don't get to deduct rent because EVERYBODY has a housing cost. it is not intrinsic to wedding photographers, dopey.

Then the photographer wasted $400 month on a leased vehicle. My 1995 Villager costs ZERO per month and gets me around just fine, including a sunroof, digital gauges, leather seats and more. The insurance is just about nothing because given the small worth of the car I only buy liability.

Enough already. Whoever called the response excellent is living in dreamland. I am a photographer, having worked for a newspaper, an insurance company and done freelance.

But making $50,000 in four months is a LOT, given 8 more months to earn money). Our angry "insulted" photographer is being a twit. Just admit gouging because you can, and get on with your day, Nikki.

1 upvote

Totally agree with you. The photographer is living in la la land. One of those new age lease everything, corporate minded types. The woman should be able to find a photographer that is good and for a decent price. As for the comment on Indonesia, if people keep pricing themselves out of the country, maybe that isn't a bad idea.

0 upvotes

Why don't U plan u're wedding outside the States, like Indonesia 4 example, we have great number of talented photographers too, amazing spots, great accommodations, you named it we got it, also for god d@mn3d reasonable price too. ^__^

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I have a big investment in my *pro* equipmen, back-up equipment & software. I have to advertise to attract clients ... in a very competitive environment. I work like a dog April, May, June, Sept & Oct. I have very little work, November thrugh Feb. & I've lowered my prices f/the past three years to stay competitive. Doesn't sound like the job f/everyone. But I love what I do. And I've remained friends (& get referrals) f/many previous brides.

Yes, some charge (in this area) starting prices of $1,500 to $1,800. But I'm below that (entry point) this year. As are a # of my pro friends.

Some pros have egos & will not touch a wedding below $2k. They are really hurting in this market. You have to do what is necessary to keep your business solid.

It isn't a job f/everyone. You have to have a very calm personality & know the technology inside & out. The best photographers are creative -&- have the technical expertise. But you won't get rich doing (only) wedding photography.

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

The real question is why do wedding photography? The photographer works like a dog, shells out a lot of money and puts up with various amounts of stressed out temperaments all for a fairly measly return. There are other kinds of commercial photography which pay more with less stress - advertising, editorial and fashion just to name three. It's been a while since I made a living with commercial photography but it was well known that wedding photography was at the bottom of the heap. My most lucrative gig was construction progress, I forget it's real name. Photographing construction of an office building floor by floor until it was finished. 3-4 hours a day, all you needed was a camera and one lens and the pay was good.

0 upvotes

OK, let's talk about a "fair" minimum.
$1000: 40 hrs post processing at a minimum X $25 Hr (I took 1500 total
shots at the last weddding I shot - post processing down to the
best and then editing took a lot more that 40 Hrs - but hey,
maybe I'm just slow)
$400: Day of Wedding 8 hrs (usually a lot longer) time and planning time
with Bride and groom (often several planning meetings)
$200: Fuel costs for the above at a minimum
$200: All in equipment amortization
$200: $200 miscellaneous business related expenses

Provide the DVD to the bride and let her take the photos elsewhere to get them printed at her leisure. If the Photographer does the printing - that can easily eat up the remaining $1000 in paper and ink and additional time to print and present the album.

actual hrly wage for the Photographer - ~$25 hr. This is not an exhorbitant wage.

1 upvote

The flaw in the photographer're reply is in the first paragraph
" Wedding season only last about 4 months here, so I photograph an average of 20 weddings per year"
And then shows how they have try to survive on the money made IN THOSE 4 MONTHS. What are they doing the OTHER 8 months of the year? By Nikki's argument, sitting around watching tele... maybe go fishing...

Maybe Nikki should find other (interesting, rewarding) work for the rest of the year, and then the photography session prices would be realistic for the time, materials, equipment and skill put into them.

To turn it around - lets say you take your camera in for a service and the guy is like "well you know, these days the cameras are so reliable... only get a couple in a year for repair now.. got bills.. and rent... and all that fancy computer analysis stuff out back... so that will be $9,000 repair cost - can pick it up tomorrow if you like... "

Just saying how even the reply looks to the other side...

0 upvotes

ok, 760 replies I should have figured someone had made this point..
I just believe Nikki sunk her case in the opening line. If she had said "it takes a skilled professional 10 days with very expensive equipment to produce your album" and maybe if she really wanted to go into detail, show annual costs for gear/infrastructure divide to get daily overhead costings then show she was just a "reasonable" wage for those 10 days (given she is an professional artist/craftsman).

0 upvotes

Valid point.

But people seem to forget that market sets prices. Let's take your example with a serviceman - it could technically happen in a small town if someone was foolish enough to open a full-fledged service center there. But people would not pay such price and it would went out of business. As for wedding photographers - people agree to pay their prices, so maybe it is justified.

If people suddenly refuse to pay $3000 per wedding but only $1000 what would happen? Photogs would just cut expenses - like using cheaper cameras, bringing not two FF DSLRs but one APS-C and a compact to backup, do less postprocessing, etc.

But people seem to be happy to spend big bucks for commercial-grade photography of their event - it is their call. Actually prices are not that much - just imagine what would fashion-grade photography cost with all those medium-format cameras, professional lighting, etc?

0 upvotes

Hey, if she likes the way I shoot and her wedding fits into my Summer schedule (I have a couple of shows and four festivals planned), I'd do her wedding for free, if she took care of visa, travel, accommodation and expenses for the trip to the wedding + 3 days in Seattle, for me and my assistant (whom I'd pay out of my own pocket)....

And I'm quite serious on that! :)

But to be fair I must mention that I'm based in Moscow, Russia.

4 upvotes

As more people get into digital photography, the market gets flooded with lowered expectations of what it should cost, as the bride who set off this thread so emotionally expressed.

There's room to carp with Nikki about this or that exact cost, but her point was, to make a living she has x in sunk and, x in ongoing costs, and a level of profit needed to make it worth it. Merlin Mann just did a great podcast called "The Hidden Cost is the True Cost" (http://5by5.tv/b2w/52). Worth it if you are trying to make a living making images.

The dilemma is that too many are vying to serve a shrinking customer base able to afford the true cost. And the irony is that established pros are finding it more lucrative to serve the growing ranks of amateurs/enthusiasts and pro-photographer wannabes than they can make off prints. When you can make more selling "How to Become a Pro" than you can off stock photography sales you know there has been a fundamental change in the business.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

0 upvotes

Lets look at it from a different perspective.
My plumber charges $80/hr a car shop asks 50-120/hr + parts. Why is it so strange if a photographer requests a similar rate?
8hr wedding plus travel and equipment check, maybe 10hrs. Post processing 3-20hrs ....
Lets say 20hrs x $80 = $1600 + album in the lower price range $350 x your mark up. $3000 might seem a little high for some areas and not for others. As already mentioned you get what you pay for, sometimes. But the point is, if you have to make a living, pay insurance, rent and you don't just do it for fun you need to charge some money. The response was not perfect but still made a point in my opinion.

2 upvotes

part of the problem is that maybe 25% at best deserve the money. I'd say out of all the wedding photos I've seen friends share, only 1 in 4 would I recommend to a friend. They all cost around $3000 plus or minus a few hundred. The bad photographers give a bad name to those who have done their work to deserve to charge $3000+ for a wedding.

0 upvotes

A set of good wedding photos is priceless - provided the photographer is really good at it.

There are hundreds of thousands of so-called "Wedding Photographers" in this world, but good ones are a rare breed.

I paid S$1,600.00 to engage a wedding photographer for my son's wedding in Singapore last year. This is a middle of the range price.

The result: Very dissappointing: Out of focus shots; people get chopped into half shots; people without head shots; group photos where peoples' legs get chopped off, etc..

People looking for wedding photographers please take note:
1. Get good references, which is rather difficult.
2. Do not believe in the photographers' portfolio as advertised. In actual performance, it is usually not wysiwyg.
3. Unless you want to splurge $100K for a famous photographer, its best to get a few friends to shoot with good P&S cameras. You may be happier with the results.

Comment edited 13 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Classic. Pretty comical. Everyone jumping all over the photog and the customer.

Get real.

The average cost of a wedding in the USA is NOT $30,000.00 (this is a flawed figure "The Knot" came up with and advertises and many like to quote)

Frontier in Oregon sells me a 25D/25U megabit internet connection for $45 a month.

"Professional level" services cost money to provide. More overhead than "GWC" or "Uncle Bob" have. Is it $2000-10,000.00 worth of service? Maybe yes, maybe no. There are some VERY AMAZING shooters out there.

The reality is that photos are not required. Professional photos are optional. Lastly under many "normal conditions" most modern P&S cameras will produce perfectly acceptable 'snap shots' of just about anything.

If you forget to install your CF card during a studio shoot you can simply reschedule it, not so with a wedding. So yes indeed the word "wedding" requires a different level of service.

0 upvotes

Craigslist? Well, I’m no pro but I would shy away from a wedding photographer posting on that ‘garage sale’ website.

1 upvote

it just must really suck for her to have to do real work during the off season. ever wonder what your elementry teacher did in the summer? or howabout those farmers? weird its almost like alot of careers involve having two kinds of seasonal jobs. i guess some people get off their high horse and do some other work when their main seson is over. not her, just a couple portrates. and choosing to lease instead of finance! lol

0 upvotes

For commercial editing, I bill @ $340/hour. Hmmmm...what would that be for a days worth of post???.....plus location hours? Forget what my equipment or marketing costs are. What is MY TIME worth?!

Anything less than $3000 is charity...or a gift...or a lesson (Personally, I hate weddings and wouldn't even consider one for under $4K...it simply isn't worth my time or stress). My advice for The Bride is to buy a point-n-shoot with a fast fixed lens (Samsung TL500) or a reasonable DSLR with a fast zoom (24-70/2.8) and get her brother to "get'r'done" (in RAW, of course). She can then spend as many hours as she needs until she learns to develop a print, or facebook image, that meets her expectations. In terms of dollars, that's definitely less than $3K.

3 upvotes

Pretty stupid posts from both sides. Bride wants to get everything and pay nothing. Photographer justifies the price by the cost of equipment and lease rather than the quality of the product offered (that is do nothing, take much money). The balance sheet is full of crude flaws. Any low-cost accountant or even student can easily prove this.

0 upvotes

She would really flip out if she new how much I spent on my wedding photographer and I thought I got a pretty good deal!

...Perhaps it takes being a photographer to understand what you're actually paying for.

2 upvotes

And the post not try to rip the bride off,
is trying to tell truth.
if try rip the bride off, it could be much a worse article.
and i dun think Nikki will put her name and source of her.
we are trying to explain we are not a person just have an EOS / D series.
sure the quality is what we support our rate always instead of others,
but what Nikki told was more 90% true and what we need to do,
and most people dun understood so
what make they have such concept.

0 upvotes

Saw all related links and some of respond here,
I am a Wedding photographer,
i saw some respond are so negative to Nikki,
and i dun think so, and they should try to quit their job, and be a wedding photographer,
all of those cost are USED TO BE, if stand on our shoes.
blog, internet, ads, etc, even you not agree becoz you not experienced,
i ever can't sleep before a wedding, the stress.
We edit long time becoz we try to make images perfect
(dun talk me about photo skills and some of client dislike BW photos as we need complete the demand of market and client taste)
if you ever met some clients, they TOTALLY misunderstand why we do behind and cost behind so Nikki said such to tell the truth.
Most of wedding photog avoid to tell becoz they afraid to against feeling of clients.
but our cost and stress sometimes are really SUCH LIKE A FILM DIRECTOR.
and she mention 99% true things like Backup, Equipment Damage insure,
Equipment support(like Mac, Adobe), it's not a NON-PRO could understood.

1 upvote

30% tax should be deducted from the income reduced(!) by the direct costs. Car, equipment, studio (house and garage), shoes, phone, internet are used during the whole year rather than only 20 days. Need more mistakes?

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

wow... the link has a virus!!! (ESET picked it up)

0 upvotes

ha. $3000 is CHEAP. What most wedding photographers don't admit is that their price includes pain and suffering from having to deal with brides like this one. Give me a break. One of the highest stress level jobs and MUCH more than just taking a bunch of photos and editing them.

Any budget photographer who takes her as a client will quickly learn their lesson.

Comment edited 8 seconds after posting

3 upvotes

Amen

0 upvotes

I think it's hard to judge who is right and wrong because there is some missing information on the bride's part and some half-truths on the photogs part.

What exactly is the bride looking for?
--Is it 10 hours of coverage, prints, and a fancy album?
--Or is it 6 hours of coverage and jpeg files?
--What exactly is "decently priced" and "exceptional"?

Shooting a wedding is tough and stressful, but post processing takes the most time, especially if you are building an album. An Art Leather album, plus quality prints costs $500 alone, not to mention the time involved.

The photographer is also producing some half truths. Besides overestimating her expenses, she is comparing everything against shooting 20 weddings a year. Her cash flow would be much different if she shot 30 weddings a year.

0 upvotes

This craigslist post is pathetic. It has no logical or sensible substance. In wedding photography just as everywhere else, the market determines the price and most importantly the value. You get what you pay for! You can find shooters that will take a lot less than $3k for a wedding, but it comes with shortfalls in service and the product quality. Some people can’t accept this “rational phenomenon”. You establish your budget and go from there. Same way you buy a car. If you can’t afford a brand new BMW you buy a used Ford.

5 upvotes

Exactly. You can find a photographer to shoot your wedding for $100 or $10,000. Set your budget and you'll get what you pay for. No one is entitled to BMW just because they want one. You gotta pay for it.

3 upvotes

Same $200-500 price range, they get a basic edited video (all important parts, extra junk trimmed. Nice dvd menu, key events indexed, classical music here and there, appropriate transitions).
Again, delivered in a week-maybe two if there's a bit of editing or color correction. Key? At the reception and other free moments, go around and get everyone's blessings to the couple to include.
Easy, simple- templated photo or video shoots for weddings that don't take Weeks to edit or deliver, stay in budget- and practically guarantees happy faces because you tell and show them straight up front what you will do (show past shoots or dvds).
Another cheap key?
Take shots of the wedding that work as the cover and back of the dvd. Whip up a nice layout using classical fonts- print on glossy photo paper and glossy DVD lables- and deliver 5 copies. Charge $5-10 for more copies.
Amazing-but that's what has kept my poorer clients happy over the years.

1 upvote

Get many happy smiles from those on a budget, never get a compliant since i make sure they know what they are buying. All of the traditional poses and must have photos are by the book, so they know beforehand to play nice since i tell them I'll make sure to get all the basics first, but only if you make sure your family cooperates fully. Then, breeze through that followed by hours of fun photos and photos on the spot.
Have done videos as well. Pretty much equipment is the $800 range hd camcorder, batteries, sd cards or hdv tape (once again, tape is the only medium tested to last many decades).
Pc editing can be done on Premiere elements or sony movie cheap, but sony vegas video can brinv more power to the table if you want to do more.
Again, setup is even easier than photos since most are tripoded shots. Nobody wants handheld motion sickness from their wedding video.

0 upvotes

Never know what the top end photographers spend their money on, but on the low end, it's easy.
$500 or less for a 4/3rds or dslr, $200 or less for a slr (film still is the only storage medium readable many decades later). Nice fast short zoom lens.
Targeting the low end-$200-500 for the full day. Typically 6-9 hours of shooting. I tell them the get all the good images, they can print however many they want at Walmart cheap (and on Fuji crystal archive).
Week after wedding, fast push through Lightroom/Gimp as needed for color correction (no idea why people overspend on Photoshop), then tossing out the bad photos. Finally delivery of DVD in one week.

0 upvotes

It's not hard for the expenses to get quite high. If you have a shoot every weekend for $500, that's only 26K annually before expenses. After transportation, equipment, insurance, advertising... you're not making much.

1 upvote

Poor photographer needs to work 20 days (during 4 months) per year to be able to live for the rest of the year. My support for Ms. Wagner for the hardships of life.

3 upvotes

Welecome to China!

0 upvotes

depeche mode knows how to spell, ok?

0 upvotes

Yeah for the life of me I don't get the $15k in taxes on $50k gross ... just her expenses alone she's listed would make her tax bill $nil
I smell BS

2 upvotes

Oh yeah one other thing. If she's right about all her expenses then all but 7k of her 50k income is effectively taxable since you can deduct business expenses .s I realize the tax situation is insane but I really doubt anyone pays $15k of taxes for a business that makes $7k of profits.

2 upvotes

the numbers in the response are very odd.

1) 15k taxes on 50k income is a 30% average tax rate that seems high
2) It appears that the photographer lives in the same place she processes her photos so unless she would otherwise live in a box under an overpass she really can't count that $7200
3) unless she only uses the car for business she really can't count the full $7200 car expense
4) i suspect the fraction of the time the photographer shoots weddings vs the time she wears those shoes is pretty small.
5) I have no idea why she pays 2500 a year for high speed internet. I'd suspect something more like 50-100 a month
6) the equipment cost is reasonable but when you add it up it's $11,300. Amortized over 24 weddings/year and 5 years that's $94/wedding.

On the other hand she is effectively charging ~$100/hr which is what you pay an automechanic who has a much higher overhead.

As a potential father of 3 brides I can assure you I won't pay $3k/wedding for photographers.

1 upvote

As a few other commenters have mentioned, you can pay less than $3000, but someone charging less is likely doing it part time, which means they either hate doing it, or are bad at it. To run a consistently profitable, successful business, you have to charge a certain amount. Photographers who charge $1000 from Craigslist have very little experience (I was that person for a while; you only charge less when you are worried about your own ability), and thus are much more of a gamble. Considering the photography is the only piece that really lives on beyond that day, knowing that you will get beautiful photos is usually worth paying what it takes.

I'm sure the actual cost to remove a gallbladder is very little, but when you have to have something done right, you have to be willing to pay for it. You could probably get your cavity filled for next to nothing, but I'm going to pay the person who actually knows how to do it properly.

0 upvotes

Why do you assume someone doing it part time, either hates it, or is bad at it? How do you know they don't rely on wedding shoots for their main income, and just do weddings for the love of the occasion at weekends?

People do actually do things for the passion, not just for the greed. I should know, I spent many years in the games industry, working for nothing at times... not because I was bad, but because the job satisfaction, was greater than the financial rewards.

That's where all the arguments fall over, because you presume cheap = bad. When in fact, there is plenty of evidence, that expensive does not always equal good. Paying a photographer $10,000, doesn't guarantee you to get one 10 times better than one charging $1,000. But you might get a $10,000 photographer, who thinks they're 10 times better... but isn't.

1 upvote

Very good point on the Part time. As in any profession - there is competition. I shoot because I love it, but do it part time because I make a lot more in my "Real" job. I take a lot longer in "post Prod" because I care to only put out a quality product. My clients usually love the end product - and I make the cost somewhat dependent on how fast they want the pictures. I can, but usually do not actually print the pictures, I provide a DVD. They can then print or post the photos online as they wish. The few I've printed, I charge per print and make less than minimum wage if you factor in time and cost of materials. But often they choose to get the DVD.

0 upvotes

Divorce photography would be much more interesting and less pastiche.

2 upvotes

I see it in black and white.
Seriously, a lot of people paying a fortune to the lawers for divorce and there should be a market for this kind of photos.

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

I have worked for different studios. sometimes how studios set there prices could be considered price fixing. but also if you do not price yourself at a level the market expects then people wont even look at you.

For me on an 8 hr wedding. it take about 3 hrs to pick the photos 5 hr to basic edit and 15 hr to fully edit photos and put together a wedding album (45min a page) add 5 hr for rebuilding album pages that the bride does not like - total 35 hr

equipment upgrade, business license, phone, ads, promotional material, etc are all placed in my per hr wadge. So about $8 an hr is added. (based on my average hrs photographing per year (i do more than just weddings))

so for all jobs it my hr wage + $8 per hr + off-site editing wage per hr + $8 an hr + product cost (album, DVD, etc) = under 1.5k for most weddings

Bottom line (for me is) this studio is using a part time business, to justify full time business expenditures (and the studio does more than just weddings.)

0 upvotes

The complainant has no point sat all. There ARE cheaper services and they can hire them. They are spending $15,000 already. That's their choice. If they want the assurance of decent pix of the event, then they pay a decent amount of money. If they want cheaper cover, they can get it, and it will be good for what it is. They aren’t just paying the photog for time on the day, they are paying for experience, expertise, and yes, dammit, just for being available.

I was /in business/ as a professional photog. Most to the comments I see here are from people who clearly have /never/ been in business for themselves. They have no idea of the overheads involved nor of the variability of demand. It's feast or famine. As a sole operator pro you might not get a wedding every weekend -- /regardless of your pricing/. When you do get a job, the person hiring you has to pay for that down time too.

That's the nature of small business -- ALL small business. And that's what this is all about.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

5 upvotes

Perhaps some cheaper photographers have read her post, but unfortunately "it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests".

2 upvotes

many well thought responses here. while i feel the photog ought to be paid a low hourly rate as i feel the job has easy entry, the photog who has references might command more per hour! i thought i was creating pretty good images with my point & shoot camera as viewed on my computer until i saw the images from a new APS-C machine i'd acquired. understanding i have little photog experience, my visual sense for image composing artistry is intuitive. how many photogs have a portfolio of their best work, have high quality equipment, yet are generally lousy in composing images? how would an agreement for results bonus operate?

0 upvotes

Assuming that there is no interference, the free market dictates that the price of photography will shift based on market demands. The problem is that this whiner doesn't want just any photographer. She wants an "amazing" photographer, which is not the same as someone who just shows up with a camera and "takes tons of photos and edits them." I'm sure there's someone in her area who's willing to work for what she's willing to pay, but she's excluding those people while also trying to control the price of what she wants. That's bad economics!

2 upvotes

We're talking about WEDDINGS! of course there is interference! The whole industry is set up to trap men into paying WAY more than they think is reasonable for overpriced services.

The penalty for objecting is to be swiftly convicted (without trial) of NOT loving your fiance!

Wedding planners and caterers use this "leverage" the most, but there just isn't any way for ANY service provider to offer ANY wedding service without having the "don't love me" gun aimed directly at the customer.

3 upvotes

The wedding industry is pretty much like real estate. Realtors persuade people to pay the most they can "afford," at maximum leverage. Wedding planners (or the imperative that "everyone does it") persuade people to exhaust their savings on an event. The net result is to leave the budget so tight or under-margined as to compound the risks of distress, default, divorce, and foreclosure.

Plenty of friends might take decent pictures of a new couple for free, but heaven (or is it hell?) forbids that. No, the couple is advised to coax monetary gifts from the guests to help defray the daunting expenses of the venue, the band, the DJ, the caterer, the limo, the clothing, the videographer, the photographer, and even the clergy, who have to eat too.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting

1 upvote

$3000 Will depend on the Wedding Package. Majority of wedding photographers of todays era spent huge amount of peny in buying Top of the line gears. There is no Pro Photographer that wants any equipments die when the big event comes. That will reflect to your reputation as Pro Photographer. Perhaps let me explain to her the Math.

Nikon D3s Full Frame Camera(Body): $5199.95
Nikon D700 Full Frame Camera(Body): $2699.95
AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8: $1999.95
AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8: $2399.95
SB-910 AF Speed Light: $549.95 x (2)
MB-D10 Battery Grip: $334.00
MB-D00 Battery Grip: $219.00
El-En15 Battery (2): $145.00
Remote Triger(2) : $180.00
Profoto D1 Air: $ 350.00
Profoto DIY Beauty Dish: $70
MacBook Pro Core i7: $2499.95
Western Digital My Book Essential 2T: $130.00
Creative Suite 5: $199.99
Adobe Lightroom 3: $89.99
LowePro Stealth Reporter: $180.00
Etc: $200
Rough Total: $17997.63

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

0 upvotes

With that amount how long will it take before you get the returns of investment? Time, Skills, Post Proccessing and Album Prints not yet included. The Photographer must get atlease 5 potential clients for the 1 year just to get the returns for the equipments and gears alone. You add the tax, expenses and other financial needs in a daily basis. In the span of 4-6 years you'll have to upgrade otherwise your outdated. Significantly You studied photography to make peny for living. I doubt if a Pro Photographer will earn that much with in the span 4-6 years. And by the way Videography is not yet included in the service.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

You as Pro Photographer can somtimes lower the rates of a wedding package only to your Limit. It's for the client to take it or leave it anyways it's not your lost. DSLR camera unit has actuations that counts the life span of it. In a given event will probably shoot no less than a thuosand photos to choose the best ones. Whoever do photography business that quotes below $1500 per client will be bankcrupt unless you as a photographer get clients per month then thats Quantity vs High Service Rates.

1 upvote

So a D3s is required for wedding photography now ?? I think you are doing the same mistake as the original poster. You inflate the expenses which dont look good.

Jakob

0 upvotes

No It's just an example my friend. Infact I only use D80 + D90 + Sigma 17-70mm and Sigma 70-200mm on both f/2.8. The D3s and D700 is just my dream camera. But as you know Camera is really expensive and other photography tools are really expensive. Well perhaps you know aswell the quality of images you can have from a full frame cam? I also owned entry level cams before I've shifted to D80/90 and it was really a big difference. I'm not tallking about pixels here but rather the husstle of editing pictures from an entry level cam to a mid range cam. Most of the clients wants the pictures burned to dvd same day after the wedding co'z they are excited posting it to Facebook or other social networking sites so you gotta be fast otherwise they'll have a bad impression that you can't even deliver "Straight From Camera" images and your just relying from photoshop. It's a bad remark hearing it from a client. They might even ask "Are you a professional photographer or just an editor?

0 upvotes

Yes Its true that you can also obtain high quality shots from an entry level cam. But i'll assure you that you'll spent the time sitting down to your computer editing your shot. For example a shot requires ISO 600 and above with an aperture of f/8 and ofcourse fast shutter speed of 1/200-250 sec to avoid blurry images. This is my common settings I use for a church wedding. As we all know churches have low-light environment. If your camera has the ISO-Noise reduction feature just like the D90 your images will end up grainy. As you'll end up editing just to remove the grainy stuff in an image. Bottom line is your buying top of the line stuff cause you dont want to be embarrass from your client and how much more if they sue you for not delivering your best co'z you fail to do you job specially if it's a signed contract. Yes there is a saying that " It's with the Spear, It's with the Indian " but how long will it applicable in a business like Wedding Photography.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

I started as a Small Scale and Low Profile Wedding Photographer. Budget will hurt you at the start but when you aim big it's rewarding and your experienced will let know the requirements of being successful. At first my rates was very low then my first DSLR gave up in 2 years. To continue my part time business I applied for Financial Assistance with my credit card. I realized at the end that it shouldn't be like that. If I have increase my rates ealier I should have enough money to maintain it or upgrade. That's the main thing there why you should increase your rates because at any given time and out of no where your equipments might fail you and yet you haven't get back the money you spent with your gears.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Correction Typo graphical error: If your camera has no ISO-Noise reduction feature just like the D90 your images will end up grainy. Then you'll end up editing just to remove the grainy stuff into an image. Bottom line is your buying top of the line stuff cause you dont want to be embarrass from your client and how much more if they sue you for not delivering your best co'z you fail to do your job specially if it's a signed contract. Yes there is a saying that " It's not with the Spear, It's with the Indian " but how long will it applicable in a business like Wedding Photography.

0 upvotes

Simple example of the need for the latest gear/software.

Software upgrade is $500 and will save you at least 5 min a day.
Over 1 year, that's over 20 hours... If you make $50/hr, that's $1000 of lost work time.

Add together all the little time saving things such as a better low light camera, faster lenses, the best software, faster computer.... and you could be looking at a huge amount of time savings and a substantial increase in productivity.

0 upvotes

Some people can't pay $3k total for a wedding, which is why many simply don't wed, even in conservative communities. It would make more sense to encourage people to get "hitched" for a modest sum. Any exhorbitant oulays should be for anniversaries. Silver, gold, and diamond anniversaries offer more subjects for photographers anyway: kids, grandkids, friends, etc.

Meanwhile, it's probably true that 70% or more of young couples can't pay enough to compensate a pro for the costs of time, equipment, and so forth. If they can't recruit a friend to take some nice shots, some clever person should invent a "fast-fette" McMarry franchise, where $100 will get you pronounced wed, photographed, and registered. Another alternative would be group weddings, which would later engender anniversaries on the scale of class reunions. Those would be a nice opp for photographers!

0 upvotes

She DOES have a point in someway's just hear me out.

Some people are poor and 3000$ is a no way in hell for them.

Here is what Photographers SHOULD consider:

Some photographers I Know of manage to do 3 weddings in the same day.

Photographers REALLY need to consider:

Are they low, middle or high income family?
Is it going to be 1000 people or 100?
Do I have to travel 10 miles or 1000 miles?

And calculate based on that not do a "standard" price that can't be changed at all.

As someone who has NEVER made 2000$ in a month in his lifetime and in fact was making 1500$(before 37% taxes) before he lost his job I must say I understand her pain.

Example in my country photographers rent a large area, bring they're own equipment and computers & offer free x-mas photography for the less fortunate.

& we are talking about professional photographers.
So honestly I think photographers who do weddings could show a little flexibility every now & then.

*gets ready for hate msg's*

1 upvote

I know photographers who do 3 weddings in a day as well.
They usually cover the very cheap end of the market and have a very quick 30 shots at the registry office then images on a disk.

That is far different from the 8-10-12 hour coverage shooting in wildly varying conditions and having the skill to control the light, location and the people well.

There is certainly room for both, but increasingly the bride who can only afford the cheapest coverage is complaining because they can't afford the high end photographer and worse still, place no value on it.

There is also the issue that the low budget weddings frequently seem to have a greater chance of meeting Bridezilla who will be difficult throughout.

Life is just too short to deal with those types of people.

4 upvotes

Well the one I know of goes to the wedding ceremony in church, photographs, then goes to the next wedding and when he has done all three he gomes home to edit the photographs (he also does video sometimes as well for those who want that)

0 upvotes

I live in Brazil and understand your point of view. But the point is, that you do not need to taunt photographers that offer their sevice for 3,000$ or more, but this is exactly what this bride did. I'm one of those that offer the "Small Package" - Only register the ceremony and take some pictures in front of the church and hand them the "raw-material" on a DVD for the money they can pay. But there is no way to do a 3,000$ service for 200$. And this is what the brides letter proposes.

3 upvotes

I am sorry but any photographer shooting 3 weddings in one day is clearly giving a very low level of service so this is not comparable to what you will get from hiring a pro for the day. I often spend 12 to 15 hours shooting on one wedding so that is of course going to cost more.

3 upvotes

No what you don't understand is that in MY country wedding photography is not the same as in yours.

Here the wedding photographers ONLY photograph in the church then after a day of photographing 2-3 wedding ceremony's they go home and spend the week editing the photographs &/or the videos until the next weekend when they do the same thing again for some other couple's.

The only time's that a professional photographer is is when they are exchanging wovs and kissing the bride and that stuff. the after party is a completely different tradition here.

The wedding photographers NEVER go into the "after party"
they ONLY show up for church to photograph them kissing and walking down the isle and so on.

And he IS a professional this guy is just one example I'm talking of many I know of.

0 upvotes

I do and the my colleagues as well do We offer a wide range of prices and services as (as you say) not all can afford 3K. That's simply good business sense.

0 upvotes

What a load of complete rubbish!!

Just enjoy your wedding day and use that which you've got between your ears to remember it.

2 upvotes

Occupy wedding photographers.

0 upvotes

I am not sure if I can agree with the math on the CL reply...your equipment costs are paid for by other clients through the year. However, how much is a wedding image to you when it is probably one, if not, the most important day in your life? a million bucks....until you get the divorce, then zero.

A good wedding photographer is worth more than $3K.

0 upvotes

I am just sick of people keep saying things like how much is it worth when you have only once? Every moment of our life is only going to happen once.

I am only going to reply to your post for the first time once. Does it mean I would to take out a spell checker to make sure it is perfect? Nope.

2 upvotes

I'm not buying that. As someone who has been married twice (and used friends, not pros as photographers) I can say the meaning of the photographs diminishes with time. If you get divorced (and 50% of us do, those photographs become fodder for the trash can. It's also a mistake to think that the best possible cameras and lenses are necessary because the average person can't tell the difference between photographs taken with a $6000 full frame with a $2000 lens and a $600 entry level DSLR with a kit lens. I attended a wedding a couple years ago and took some shots for my own enjoyment at the wedding and the reception. The pro's had the expensive equipment (there were 2 of them) While I had my consumer grade DSLR and a couple of inexpensive lenses (along with 40 years experience as a serious amateur). The Bride and Groom liked my photos better and wondered why they hired a pro.

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

Life is tough and in this economy fewer and fewer people can afford expensive photographers. Your choices will be try to cut prices and costs or go out of business. Crying about it will get you nowhere.

0 upvotes

Digital made photography even cheaper! It had brought upon lots of people from all walks of life into the business. It diluted the pay scale. Ask any real pros out there how much are they getting paid per photo compared to just a few years back? Any Joe and Jane with a EOS or a D3/D700 etc.. can work on contract. Sanctioned professional events are full of them. Sometimes, they paid their own expense to fly out there only to be told, someone else got the job! I saw many of these faces; mostly they tell me oh well it's a holiday. Yeah, but how many holidays can you afford not getting paid enough? It's tough making a living in photography unless you have some business smarts. Unfortunately, there are many talented and non-talented photographers out there who undercharge and eventually run themselves out of business. It happens all the time in many decades I've been in the photo business. So this is not something new. Craiglist is.

1 upvote

She has a valid point. What is $3000 worth of pictures that will last a lifetime compared to $30000 worth of wedding ring, wedding gown, catering, garden venue & decorations etc. that will be gone in a day (except for the ring). Wedding budget should be calculated as a whole and at least 10% should be allocated for your photo or video to cherished the moment. OR you can skip and save the 10% and keep your wedding day in your rightful mind. Maybe your friends, relatives, children and grandchildren etc are just not interested to to know about your wedding or how they came about into this world.

3 upvotes

Obsolete math. It's not about setting aside 10% of your wedding budget.

THe overwhelming feeling coming from the pros here is that they're actually ANGRY at their customers for wanting competitive pricing.

You've got consider the market rate for services, and the cost of alternatives (such as doing it yourself, or hiring a talented amateur)

It's become clear from watching this thread develop that there are 2 polarized viewpoints on that the two views are irreconcilable. The pros will never give in, and will always be bitter. And the consumers will always question why industry insists on overcharging.

3 upvotes

It's not overcharging. It's pricing to survive. You may be lucky and get a great shooter for $500, but at that price there will be no backup, no insurance, maybe no experience and no comebacks when they turn out badly, or the car broke down etc.

3 upvotes

One commenter said it right: If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys.

If you think wedding photography is easy, go for it. If you've never tried it I think you'd see that it is extremely demanding and you must be able to capture a "moment" because it is literally there for just an instant and then it's gone.

I think it's almost like people complaining that a basketball player who gets paid millions makes way too much, because they too can shoot and make a basket, and have done it before a few times!

6 upvotes

That's not what the "photographer" is saying though. If she'd said her quality was worth the money, people would judge on that. Instead she is inflating overheads, for 20 jobs a year, so people are judging on that.

2 upvotes

Give me a break. As any trade its difficult for the amateur. Its a profession, once you master it its not difficult. Off course its demanding, many jobs are. Yep days will be long, after the editing there is time to rest and with a 3k pricetag there will be time to rest.
I find it a bit funny that a lot of posters here really try to inflate the role of the photographer as the "artist" . You get the feeling that the central person in a wedding is in fact the "arty photographer". Second and third place propably goes to the bride and groom, that is just the natural order of things ;0).

Come on not every wedding photographer is an artist, some are good some great and some mediocre, its like any trade.

Jakob

1 upvote

One of my friend was too cheap to pay any money for a professional photographer. He asked me to help shoot pictures at his wedding, at the end of the day, he didn't appreciate the hard work. I was shooting pictures starting at 7AM -1AM.

I'm not a professional, just an amateur who loves shooting pictures in his spare time.

1 upvote

It has nothing to do with how easy it is. It has to do with what people can afford and are willing to pay. Get used to it because the economy is not what it used to be. You are going to find fewer and fewer people willing to pay the big bucks out of pure necessity. What is going to happen is there will be a few big time photographers hired by wealthy clients willing to pay the big bucks while the rest will be fighting for the low cost crumbs that are left. The vast majority of wedding photographers will be part timers with day jobs to make ends meet. The easy times are over.

1 upvote

It's really odd to see this on dpreview which is a website centered on reviews of photographic equipment.

2 upvotes

What they are fishing for is ad impressions and clicks, and they struck gold on this one. Expect more of this distraction now that this one was such a huge success.

2 upvotes

It would be nice if people would stop telling DP Review what it OUGHT to be. Like the specimens who get angry every time someone posts an actual photograph here.

It is what it is.

2 upvotes

I do wish however they did reviews on video as well.
And I feel like they could have done another comparison between the super zooms again as I think the last comparison was back in 2010 or 2009.

Dpreview I like overall the forums however I do not like the layout but the forums are really helpful.

Just my opinion.
I hope dpreview continues to become bigger and better each year.

1 upvote

sorry i am absolutely on the bride side. Sorry but 3k is a high price. Now off course if you are wanting the most spectacular photographer you have to pay the prize, no doubt about it, free market. BUT if 3k is supposed to be the "normal" rate and you then get this reply that in all honesty is a bit rich.

Sorry the season is "4 months", very well that might be but I dont think its reasonably to assume that you can base your entire income on that and put your prices accordingly. Well its a free world. If anyone will pay 3k for a wedding photograper be my guest. I applaud those who can charge rates like that, honestly. BUT trying to argue that that price is more than fair, and almost getting to the point that it actually is almost a bad deal for the photographer is a bit pathetic.

Sorry I dont find that response very compelling or convincing. She could shoot 3 weedings a month, use a week on each and lay in the sun the rest of the time with a 9k income. Thats quite ok, come on.....

J

5 upvotes

The latest U.S. Economic Board claims the average wedding costs $28,760. Asking roughly 10% to capture the day for generations is not over the top. We start at $3K as the base bottom and go way up from there. Plenty of business. Booked two yesterday and meeting with another today. I will book her. The thought that $9K a month super high considering a gross margin of 30-40% is the U.S. average on wedding photography is truly not my desire or wanted lifestyle.

2 upvotes

you must be kiddin...... How much the price of the photographer is has NO relation to what the event costs, that is a very flawed argument. I would like to see the photograper charging 100 usd documenting a 1000 usd birthday party.

I can see the good busyness in documenting events that are expensive and has a lot of emotions involved, a great catalyst for the argument "well you want the very best" on that special day right. Its a good way to drown a big bill in an even bigger one.

Kudos for running a good company, I have no problems with that what so ever. I would do so if I could. That is just not what this is all about. What does provoke me here is the kind of slight offended response from the photographer. Her calculation of expenses are severely flawed and the whole response seems to be based on a slightly offended attitude, "how dare they question my prices".

J

1 upvote

One of the industries that seem to weather the recession or any economic hardship is the wedding industry. It's wise not to ignore the fact and most photographers during their transition time will dabble into weddings. $3000 is fair considering that you are buying a piece of memory and art and to cover certain business expenses.

The author of the Craiglist post assumes that photographers are employees that gets a steady paycheque. She is probably an employee of a company. And this is the fallacy between people who are used to get paid twice a week or once a month, because that income is stable as long as you hold that job. A self-employed photographer (which is what Nikki is) does not have the luxury of a monthly guaranteed pay cheque. The only guaranteed monthly expense are her bills.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

3 upvotes

Hi

Again I dont find your arguments impressive.

Now calling it "memory product" or even "art" is to inflate the role of the photographer quite a bit. Off course there are photographers out there who will produce something close to art and they will be abble to have a high price tag going along with it. BUT its not at all diferent to carpenters, mechanics or any other trade. MOST will be pure bread and butter photographers, its a proffesion and they will hopefully deliver a pro result. Calling it art and using that as a argument for a especially high price is just to inflated an argument to me.

Now regarding not having a stable income is not really the problem of the customer. Its called having a busyness and there are pros and cons to that. Again NOT different to a garage owner, a carpenter or any other person having a small busyness living of their trade. Its not unique. Having enough flow of customers is off course the responsibility of the photographer.

Jakob

1 upvote

I think if you're one of the best photographer out there, you can charge what you want.

My friend is one of the best videographer in the world and he charge $10K per wedding. Actually, if you want his service you better book him at least 1 year in advance.

1 upvote

Pretty trivial information. Off course he can. Steven Spielberg also does that, George Cloney even so

Thats hardly the core of the debate.

Jakob

0 upvotes

Jakob,

The beauty of the free market is that it naturally sets the price. If $3000 is too much, you'll won't pay it, but that's what today's market is willing to bear. What we are debating here is simply the "VALUE" we place on things we buy. Price consummates value. Some people are happy with a Ford Focus, but some people value a Ferrari. Both takes you from point A to B. There is no sense in this debate, because that's exactly we are discussing. Why isn't a Ferrari priced the same as a Ford Focus when both of them have 4 wheels and an engine?

Mostly photographers working full time have a business plan and a credit line. A stable income is important because you need to have the ability to ABSORB the inflation cost to a certain extent of running a business without passing it to your clients. If you raise prices, you'll loose clients. If you don't raise prices, you'll risk going bankrupt!
I suspect most people run a part time business with a day job to support expenses.

1 upvote

I've shot weddings professionally, but opted not to as a career. Nikki's response registered as mere high-pricing rationalization, and I do feel that professional wedding photographers have a great deal of room to lower their general pricing to a level that isn't so easily labeled as abusive.

True, the CL bride ignores the skill required to produce truly good results. But many wedding photographers charge those high rates for cookie-cutter shots that are merely framed correctly, exposed and lit properly, and delivered in a slick package.

She also mis-described the time involved. Adding 4-8 hours (pre-wedding) to Nikki's 28-35 hour estimate, $3000 for a full work-week is less egregious, though still quite expensive.

Finally, Nikki's listed expenses dwindle when averaged across the many jobs that actually pay for them. Her $200 second-photographer day-rate speaks volumes for how much she values the talent portion of the charge, and seriously undermines her argument.

1 upvote

he he that 200 dollar extra shooter caught my eye as well. Its just so fantastically hypocritical. She wants the big dollar, but have no problem actually paying another photographer very little. That tells the story quite precisely.

The argument about the way she lists expenses is also flawed. Does she really expect that 20 jobs a year should by her a car ?

1 upvote

In regards to $200 for the second photographer: The entire "shooting talent" (I'm counting "editing talent" as separate, because it is done later and possibly by a different person) portion of a wedding, when you break down all the business inputs, is about 20 percent. The second shooter typically only takes supplemental shots and is not operating on the same level as the primary talent, even if equally skilled (which they usually aren't), because there are clear primary/secondary duties at most key moments. Overall the second photographer does less, takes the less important shots, (typically) brings less experience, and (typically) has little and/or inferior equipment, often borrowing from the primary photographer. When you take all that into account, $200 to the second is very fair in many instances. Also, seconds almost never edit, as the primary will do all their editing for them.

0 upvotes

And back to your point about a full work week, that is exactly what it is. On the first page of this thread I made the point that a wedding generates about five days of work. So take expenses out of $600/day and you are left with somewhere between $180 to $300 per day--a reasonable middle class salary, not one that is excessive or will make you rich. It is true that price is set more by demand than by cost inputs, so what you see happening is overall quality declining in the market due to downward price pressure laid on by the recession. If people are not willing to pay what good photography costs, then overall quality in the market will decline to inexperienced newbies with Rebels and awful kit zooms who will burn out and drop from the market when they see how pointless it is to be lowest bidder, only to be replaced by the next. So sell higher or don't sell at all. I know one guy who makes a living as low bidder, and his work is awful and he offshores his editing. Not good.

0 upvotes

Hey

You are right that there is propably a weeks work in a weeding, I guess it depends a lot on what you buy and the photographer in question. You also have a point about the second photographer who off course often is learning at the same time.

I dont agree that 2/3 are expenses, ceartainly not in the US it might be different in many european countries though. The cost of gear s not that high. Really a 5d mark II, with a mark I as backup and 3-4 great lenses, a couple of flash, umbrellas, laptop, cards and disks are all you need. Actually many trades like mechanics, carpenters etc are at least and propably more expensive to work in. In the digital era cost of systems are reasonable especially photography. Once you have the gear it can be used for many years, glass does not go obsolete and DLSR now have a quality that will last many years.

Again her "expense" calculation is severely flawed as pointed out by many

2 upvotes

I dont have ANY problem with ANYONE making a great and fat living of being a photographer. I would love to do that.

What I object against is depicting a picture that a weeding photographer charging a rather good price for her work victimizes herself trying to the degree shown here.

If you make a good income be proud and say " yep I am that great", dont try to convince me that you can hardly survive on 3k per job, please....

1 upvote

	Sigma DP1m Feb 8, 2012
	Sigma DP2m Feb 8, 2012
	Sigma SD1m Feb 8, 2012
	Olympus OM-D E-M5 Feb 8, 2012
	Olympus SZ-31MR iHS Feb 8, 2012
	Olympus TG-820 iHS Feb 8, 2012
	Pentax Optio WG-2 Feb 7, 2012
	Pentax Optio WG-2 GPS Feb 7, 2012
	Canon PowerShot A1300 Feb 7, 2012
	Canon PowerShot A2300 Feb 7, 2012
	Canon PowerShot A2400 IS Feb 7, 2012
	Canon PowerShot A3400 IS Feb 7, 2012
	Canon PowerShot A4000 IS Feb 7, 2012
	Canon PowerShot A810 Feb 7, 2012
	Canon PowerShot D20 Feb 7, 2012
	Canon PowerShot ELPH 320 HS (IXUS 240 HS) Feb 7, 2012
	Canon PowerShot ELPH 530 HS (IXUS 510 HS) Feb 7, 2012
	Canon PowerShot SX240 HS Feb 7, 2012
	Canon PowerShot SX260 HS Feb 7, 2012
	Nikon D800 Feb 7, 2012
	Nikon D800E Feb 7, 2012

First impressions of the E-M5	132
16MP is enough	118
Canon Rumors CLAIMS this is the final specs.	115
D800 misses the mark for me	106
Would you buy a 22MP 5D MKIII?	94
How do you use 61 AF points?	82
Your camera progression	67
D700 / D800 High ISO Compared	64
Overexposed Flower girl for Retouch	59
Has Sony admitted EVF is inferior to OVF?	58
Pen with built in EVF or OM-D?	54
Does the E-M5's lack of built-in flash bother you?	54
Some reasons why Canon is not doomed	53
Details, details, details. FZ150 19 images	53
Linsday Dobson yestarday X10 review	50
Usability of current EVFs in the dark	49
Why does Nikon even bother making such large ...	44
What's you're most useful lens and why?	44
B&H Sony 50's Soon	43
OK, so who's gonna' snag this baby after they ...	43

Your email address:
Your name:

Wedding photographer explains the reasons behind 'unrealistic' prices

Comments