Weddings? who needs them?


johnriley

Link Posted 02/12/2013 - 22:55
The "you've got a good camera, you could take our wedding photos, it'll be good experience for you" means "you have an invite to the wedding but instead of enjoying yourself we'd like you to work all day for free and then spend hours/days afterwards making the images good for us" - happens all the time I'm sure!
Best regards, John

ChrisA

Link Posted 02/12/2013 - 23:22
johnriley wrote:
The "you've got a good camera, you could take our wedding photos

Even worse is, "You take great pictures, we've bought this video camera, would you video our wedding?"

I started off saying "er, no", but then I had this great idea which worked out really well. I said that it would be great if the vid was passed around amongst all the guests for some random candid stuff. Some of the footage was quite good, and I didn't even have to edit it myself.

I got credit for the idea, and did about 2% of the work. Result!
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.
Last Edited by ChrisA on 02/12/2013 - 23:25

johnriley

Link Posted 02/12/2013 - 23:24
That would truly be even worse. Sometimes it's good to say no....
Best regards, John

Crossed-up

Link Posted 03/12/2013 - 00:25
link
My Images
K1 II|K3|DA10-17|DA*16-50|FA31|DA*50-135|DA*200|DA*300|Sigma 150-500

geordie01

Link Posted 03/12/2013 - 07:40
I often quote for a job and get the the go ahead only to get a phone call or more rudely a text saying that a friend of a relative or a lad down the street can do it a bit cheaper and they will use them instead.More times than not I get asked to go and put it right after the bodge job they turned out which usually costs more in the long run by the time they have replaced the ceiling that the water has brought down and I always have a good laugh.Now that is not to bad when it is only a bathroom suite or similar but on what is supposed to be a girls most important day to scrimp on the photographer who is going to record it is madness and I think you may have the last laugh here Ken and the worst part is that it cannot be fixed afterwards.I have seen the results of a "my mate has a camera wedding" and it was not good.There is no substitute for experience and expertise and the right tools for the job and these cost.

gartmore

Link Posted 03/12/2013 - 08:39
Interesting post, Stuey.

This isn't about money though that would still have to be paid. This is really about untenable working situation. You can't have two photographers trying to pose groups; you would never get through it all and I'm certainly not having files printed and the album designed by someone I don't know.

I started doing weddings, for a living, in 1976 and lost count of how many a long time ago. There were five photographers at the studio and occasionally we would shoot two each on busy Saturdays. The most complex one I remember was a double wedding with identical twin sisters, get your head around the logistics of that one! There were 150 guests and three of us.

For someone to suggest one photographer can cover 280 guests is just insane.

I'll keep you posted
Ken
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -

techno-terminator

Link Posted 03/12/2013 - 09:42
After all - common courtesy is involved here.

Ken was asked to do it - and he agreed , and then the bride , on the 'advice' given by the banqueting manager of the hotel , starts to change what had been arranged by the photographer.

It's akin to the Chef being given instructions as to how to organise his kitchen and crew to do the catering by the photographer or the make up artist for the Bride.

Leave the pro to do his job - he knows what he's doing .

Would you ask an obstetrician to do neurosurgery ?
let the education continue

proud owner of a couple of cameras and a few bits and bobs

Gamka

Link Posted 03/12/2013 - 10:22
The opposite happened to me once.

I was asked to do a wedding for a family friend - and was happy to do so for a reasonable price but they finally decided to use a "pro" at significantly more for the ceremony and immediate small reception.

Was I put out? Not really ... and I was still asked to do the evening reception. The "pro" then took some of my images for use in the main albums.

Smeggypants

Link Posted 03/12/2013 - 11:00
gartmore wrote:
I've just pulled out of a £2000 (for the photos) wedding at five weeks notice on getting an email from the bride, whose family I have known for many years, where she tells me that the banqueting manager of the hotel told her she doesnt need two photographers for 280 guests, her pal is a photographer who could be second shooter and her dad knows someone who can make the prints and the album. My reply:

Dear ____,

If you have a friend that is capable of doing it then go for that, clearly Gaynor the banqeting manager knows more about wedding photography than I do. This really isnt something that I want to be involved in since I've been photographing weddings since 1976 and I frankly can't be bothered this sort of amatuerish approach.

Best wishes

I think you've done the right thing. Life's too short to battle the "know it all" mentality of these insecure suit types using any excuse to boost their self esteem by crowing fraudulent expertise.
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283

tyronet2000

Link Posted 03/12/2013 - 11:35
Have you noticed, all the guests at a wedding who have taken a camera along tend to get at least one photo where 'That Hat' intrudes into the shot. Why don't you see it until after the click?
Regards
Stan

PPG

Don

Link Posted 03/12/2013 - 15:10
techno-terminator wrote:
After all - common courtesy is involved here.

Ken was asked to do it - and he agreed , and then the bride , on the 'advice' given by the banqueting manager of the hotel , starts to change what had been arranged by the photographer.

It's akin to the Chef being given instructions as to how to organise his kitchen and crew to do the catering by the photographer or the make up artist for the Bride.

Leave the pro to do his job - he knows what he's doing .

Would you ask an obstetrician to do neurosurgery ?

I can think of a few people that I'd send to a proctologist to get their heads examined…
Fired many shots. Didn't kill anything.
Last Edited by Don on 03/12/2013 - 15:10

fatspider

Link Posted 04/12/2013 - 01:38
I've done a few weddings, I suppose that makes me a pro

But I'd never dream of charging for one or muscle a pro out of a shoot.
All mine have been for close family who know I'm not a pro and are just happy to have some good quality snaps from someone who knows how to use a camera, I was asked a few month back if I wanted to shoot "a friend of a friend of a friends wedding" (and be paid) I said I would love to have done it....but I was busy that day

I do feel for wedding togs though, the digital age has made every tom dick and harry with a DSLR a budding wedding photographer, I went to a friends wedding several years back and one of the bridesmaids was doing the photography using a Canon 350D with a kit lens and the most unstable tripod I have ever seen. I got an email a couple of weeks later asking if I'd taken any good pics myself
My Names Alan, and I'm a lensaholic.
My PPG link
My Flckr link

johnha

Link Posted 04/12/2013 - 02:32
techno-terminator wrote:
Ken was asked to do it - and he agreed , and then the bride , on the 'advice' given by the banqueting manager of the hotel , starts to change what had been arranged by the photographer.

I'm tempted to suggest the 'banquet' would therefore be so lavish (read 'expensive') that persuading the bride to drop a photographer would make up for the difference - but I won't as I don't know the facts...

I've shot one wedding for a mate as a favour for gratis (which I was happy to do) but otherwise have seen good and bad wedding pros.

On one occasion I was told by the 'pro' I wasn't allowed to take any photos of the happy couple drinking Champagne in the vintage car as he had 'exclusive rights' to that shot (I was tempted to point out that if he couldn't get a better shot with his 'blad than I could with my SFXn & 50/1.7 he was probably in the wrong business).

On another occasion I turned up to a mates wedding with my Bronica SQ-B, sending the official pro using 35mm gear, white. I've seen the official pro so engrossed with his 'complimentary' wedding lunch that he's forgotten he was there to photograph the event and one demanding a night's stay at the venue because he couldn't possibly be expected to drive home afterwards.

As already mentioned, the arrival of DSLRs seems to have made many 'photographers' think they can shoot weddings and hand out a CD at the end of the day. There are also loads of courses with fake weddings so 'togs can build up a 'portfolio' showing examples of their 'work'.

I was once lucky enough to attend a seminar given by a wedding pro, the hour of his time gave me the most inspiration I've experienced related to photography - but I still wouldn't want to do it as a day job.
PPG Flickr

bwlchmawr

Link Posted 04/12/2013 - 07:50
johnriley wrote:
The "you've got a good camera, you could take our wedding photos, it'll be good experience for you" means "you have an invite to the wedding but instead of enjoying yourself we'd like you to work all day for free and then spend hours/days afterwards making the images good for us" - happens all the time I'm sure!

It happened to me... twice. I politely declined, exlaining that the ability to take a few snaps on holiday, mainly of the landscape variety, did not qualify me for a wedding assignment.

I've a friend who is a professional photographer and who has more or less been driven out of business due to the decline in wedding business which was for years his main source of income.

The phenomenon of "Uncle George has a good camera, he's offered to do the photos" has, at least at the lower end of the market, affected the trade.
Best wishes,

Andrew

"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference.  All of them can record what you are seeing.  But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050 http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05

walkeja

Link Posted 06/12/2013 - 11:16
gartmore wrote:
What on earth does that mean?

You live in Glasgow and you don't know what that means? Pull the other one. it's got bells on.
Pentax K1-ii and MZ6
Pentax Lenses 28-80 F, 300 DA*, 80-200 F, 35 F2.4 AL, M50 F1.7, 28-105 DFA, 20 F4 SMC
ONE UNITED Member
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.