"how to lower your wedding costs.."

Started May 22, 2009 | Discussions thread
PhotoFredy Regular Member • Posts: 233

shacharm wrote:

Yep. And soon enough (if not already) you would find ads on
Craigslist soliciting photographers to 'come shoot our wedding for
free, and you can enjoy the buffet (in small prints: AFTER all the
guests leave)'.

I think this is one good reason for using Fear & Doubt marketing
techniques.We don't shoot weddings (by choice), but if we did - we
would gladly look up and publish some statistics that I'm sure are
plentiful, about the number of lawsuits against "professional"
photographers for screwing up weddings.

You pay peanuts - you get monkeys. Period.

-- hide signature --

It's funny how the overzealous and some old timers are so easily offended by the emerging "talent". There is no question that "you get what you pay for" is true for the most part. However, all these analogies about plumbers, mechanics, and other trades are just plain irrelevant. No, I would not let a budding mechanic work on my car, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't let him change a tire or the oil. Just like I wouldn't give my $50k wedding to a student unless I had no regard for the quality of the results. Now, if my wedding consists of 50 guests and a $5k budget, I'm not going to double my budget just to hire a "great" photographer. In that case, I would certainly consider a student or less-experienced person with a half-way decent portfolio. Photography as a whole is not easy, but taking pictures is not exactly rocket science. With today's equipment, as long as your composition is good you will likely get good results. Creativity can only help. I will admit, I would never hire anyone who has NEVER done a wedding as there are certain events and moments that you have to anticipate. This is why being an assistant for a few weddings is the most practical way to get experience if weddings are to be your niche.

You guys that act like photography gods are simply justifying gouging unsuspecting clients. A friend of mine recently hired a pro and paid $2k (that was a discount) for about 5 hours of coverage with no prints - just a CD of all pictures with about 30 "retouches" - RIDICULOUS. The ONE guy had ONE D300, Tamron lens, and SB-800. Now, I'm not saying that this combo won't do the job, but my point is that many amateurs and students have at least the same gear. The results were pretty good, but there was nothing special there for what they charged. They originally wanted $3500. The upper end of the wedding market (big budget and celebrity) are really lucky because those clients have "only the best" syndrome and they can get away with outrageous fees.

I will likely get flamed, but my main and original point is that emerging talent does have a place in the market. There is way more supply of photogs than there is demand, so you should not be surprised at how prices have dropped. In the old days photogs could get away with $5k weddings because it was a difficult trade to master. Now, all you need is a recent body, a couple of lenses, flash, few accessories, and Photoshop. This might make you a photographer, but not necessarily a good one.

This was not meant to be offensive, but I have met so many "pros" with really bad attitudes. The more they charge the more bitter they seem. If you are a great photog and you charge a lot, AND if you keep things in perspective and are not full of yourself, my apologies - seriously.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow