Need advice on picking a wedding photographer

[Gibmeister]

I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask but here goes anyway. My son is getting married in October 2004 and they could use some advice on how to go about choosing a wedding photographer. What should they look for and what questions should they ask? Should the shoot be all digital, all film or a combination? Does it matter? If they decide to also do a video should that be a seperate company?

[brunz]

I'm a 30 year veteran so I can give you some ideas. Look at the sample pictures. If he/she doesn't have samples from more than 10 weddings, I would steer away from this person. If all the samples are from one wedding, thats a bad sign (meaning that they haven't done many weddings). References from friends that have used the photographer are the best. I have never advertised in 30 years and I am always busy....past customers will refer you. Most weddings give you some kind of album. Many of the better photographers use ART LEATHER albums . Digital or film? I use both and like them both. I think the colors on my 220 film are usually better than my digitals. Digital cameras have the potential to ruin a wedding if the person is not very careful. I had 30 candids disappear from one card. Luckily they weren't key pictures. I know a lot of people are using digital but I'm not completely sold on it. I can really do some neat things with the digital images however. Ask the photographer if he prints digitals himself or sends them to a lab. Some digital papers start fading in a few months. Epson says they have papers that last 15-100 years according to Wilhelm research but Epson won't guarantee their paper from not fading(sounds fishy to me). Paper printed from film has a pretty good life if kept out of direct sunlight. So, it's your decision. All photographers have risks with film or digital but if the person has a good reputation and has been in photography for 10 years or more, hire them. Don't hire the cheapest guy in town and ask hin/her if they are coming or sending an assistant? Have them put it in writing. Wedding photography is very difficult work and takes a lot of work to become proficient at it. This is a one time event and expect to pay between $1000-2000(US) for good photography. Inexpensive photographers may be selling carpet next week. Low cost means low quality more times than not. Do you want your pictures going to Wal-Mart? I know photographers who take every roll to Wal-Mart. That may be why these guys are so cheap. Do your research and good luck...Brian

[robertwgross]

Some good wedding photographers will offer different packages of service. For example, Package 1 is the cheapest. You get only two hours of shooting at the chapel or otherwise. Film, lab, and print costs are extra. Package 5 may cost $4000, and it covers any shooting at the park before the wedding, at the wedding chapel, later at the reception. Film, lab, and print costs are extra. However, a complete print album is assembled from the shots chosen from proofs. There can be quite a range of services.

Therefore, it is important for the bride and groom to decide well in advance just what kind of wedding they are going to plan. One wedding photographer might do his best work in a large cathedral with 200-foot-wide panoramas. Another one might do his best work at an outdoor wedding on a mountaintop with a justice of the peace and six witnesses.

One groom got me lined up three months in advance of the wedding. He had another local pro lined up to do the "heavy lifting" and formal shots. But then he wanted me to do everything else, inside and outside, reception hall, and informal stuff, to augment what the local pro was going to do. That was a fun assignment.

---Bob Gross---

[brunz]

Video should be a different person. One person can't do a good job on both. I tried it once and never did it again. My video was free and that's about what it was worth.

[robertwgross]

Yes, video, if you do that, should be a different person, but NOT a different photo company. If you have two different photo companies, there could be a bit of "competition" for the best angles. One shooter always gets in the way of the other shooter unless they work for the same company or are allied in some fashion.

---Bob Gross---

[coarphoto]

You know i would pass on the video...spend the extra money on a really good photographer. i don't shoot wedings but it just seems like video doesn't really capture the moment- inevitably a baby will cry or aunt clara will fart really loud etc.. pictures allow you to forget about all of those little things and just remember the good...i might also suggest that you go digital and get hi res images if you can- see if you can get the photog to burn you a cd so that you can manipulate the photos later(greyscale sepiatone etc) whatever you decide get all the film or digital files so the photographer does'nt throw them out like mine did good luck!

[rodbunn]

I'm a wedding photographer and I feel it's important for you to decide how much you are willing to spend on the photography and then look in your area for photographers and see what they can do for you inside your budget. Get "quotes" in writing and see their work. Meet the photog and make sure you like their work AND you like them....
Also, if you have been to a wedding lately ask those people about their photographer and see if they were happy with what they got, what they didn't like, what they would have asked for if they could do it over, etc.

Good luck, Rod

[mwind13]

Congratuations!!

I'm, too, am getting married (this year, though) and have gone through the process of finding a photographer for my wedding.

In addition to the earlier suggestions of looking at portofolios and references, there are other factors to consider...

One thing to look at is the number of assistants that the photographer will use. My wedding is going to have ~100 people attending. I'm using 1 photographer with 1 assistant. Some photographers/companies try to sell packages with 1 photograher w/ 2 or more assistants. This is good is you have a large wedding, but for mine it seemed like overkill.

Another thing is the amount of coverage that the photographer will provide. How many hours are they willing to provide and at what cost? This is important!! Do you want pictures of the bride and groom getting ready or do you only want pictures for the cermenony + reception?

Some wedding photographers are like making formal, posed shots. Others like to minimize the formal and go for candid shots. So you need to know what kinds of pictures you want for the wedding.

Other considerations are:
1. Does the photographer offer wedding books (or boxes)? If not, you will want to buy a photo album and arrange the pictures. Some professionals will print directly on the photo album pages vs making and then arranging the prints in the book.

2. Does the photographer give you the negatives? If not, then you will need to order extra prints through them.

On a side note, the professional that I've hired is VERY opinionated about film vs digital with regards to weddings. He strongly suggests film for the wedding and reception. For engagement photos (which many professionals will offer for free with a wedding package), he prefers digital.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents.

[Rudi]

I might disagree with some things said here, but here goes anyway:

1) I wouldn't worry too much if all the photos are from just the one or two weddings, as long as they are photos that are exceptional, and you really like the guy's style! Who cares if the guy can show you that he has been shooting weddings for 30 years, if he is just average? (There are a LOT of average wedding photogs out there, believe me!). Of course, if he only shows you examples of only one wedding, and can't show you more, maybe you can negotiate price a little firmer, too (AS LONG AS YOU LIKE THEIR WORK).

2) Do NOT make your decision based on price alone! Although price will almost be a component in the final decision, if you have to chose between two photogs, one whose work you absolutely love but who costs $1000 more for the day, and one who's work is OK considering the price, ALWAYS go with the one whose work you love! You will be keeping these photos for a long time, and anything less that what you really wanted in the first place - you won't be happy with! An extra $1000 sounds like a lot, but spread out over a couple of lifetimes (if all goes well, your kids will keep your wedding album as a family keepsake), it is money well spent.

3) Stay away from any photog that won't customise their packages to your personal needs. Most photogs only offer packages to give people an idea of what is available. Since it will be YOUR wedding, the photog should be able to change their packages to suit your circumstances (with an adjustment in price, of course).

4) Do NOT make your decision based on price alone!

5) Do NOT make your decision based on price alone!

and

6) Do NOT make your decision based on price alone!


Hope this helps.

[brunz]

Rudy.....I agree with most of what you say but I still would stay away from a person with few samples. I thought that I was really good after a couple years of wedding photography but I look back and see that I really needed some experience. I would not hire someone with less than 20-30 Weddings and I want to see samples from more than one or two. Experience is very important and there is no substitute for it. Sure, there are poor photographers with a lot of experience but most poor photographers do not last long if they blow someone's wedding pictures. Word of mouth from friends is generally the best source of information. I do $50,000 worth of photography a year(part time) and word of mouth is my only advertisement. I take 200-300 previews in every Wedding. If you are looking for a photographer, ask them how many proofs/previews they are going to take. As a general rule, the more your photographer takes, the better your album will look. I take 10-15 previews of the bride alone. Good luck

[Rudi]

Brunz,

I agree with you in general... BUT... I'd rather have a great photographer that only does wedding under sufferance than an average one that does them for a living every weekend... you know what I'm trying to say, right? :)

I generally show people only a few samples. Why? If they look through tens and hundreds of photos, the photos will all start looking average. I will usually first show them only photos from my last one or two weddings, and see if they like them. I explain to them that ANYONE can collect enough good photos from lots and lots of weddings shot over several years, but that it is important how many good shots a photographer can take at ONLY ONE wedding - theirs! If they are happy with them - of course, they can look at as many more samples as they want! It is their money and their choice, after all.

I also do most of my work word-of-mouth. This is just they way it is in wedding photography, I think. :)

[brunz]

Rudi,

Ideally, a person should look at someones proof book if they use them. I shoot 200-300 pictures at a wedding.This is the best way ,in my opinion, to analyze a photographer. If I saw 5-10... 8x10s from say 10 weddings, I think this is also a good indicator. I just can't accept pictures from one or two weddings unless I see the whole job in a proof book. Would you trust a sub 20 wedding photographer to do your son or daughters wedding?.....No way for me(I actually did most of my son's wedding pictures myself...a friend did the rest).

[Rudi]

I think it's really easy to get 5-10 stunning 8x10's from different weddings over the years, even if you're not all that good!

I've seen it happen locally with a "well-known" wedding photog who seems to disappoint a lot in the recent past (I know because I've picked up some follow-up work because of it). Now, maybe he's just lost track of what the couples want these days (I've only lived in the area for 10 years, and he was well-known even when I first moved here), but isn't that a good enough reason to have a close look at a couple of the photog's *recent* wedding shoots? And in that case, I agree that a look at the proof book is a good idea - but you still don't have to go over 10 weddings or more... I reckon 2 or 3 of the most recent, and if the work is high quality and consistent, the photog should be up to scratch.

BTW, at the last wedding, we (I had one other photog working with me) took over 1500 photos! It was an all-day and no-expenses-spared affair, but we still had a lot of proofs for the couple, even after heavy culling! :eyes

[Gibmeister]

Thanks for the great advice. Exactly what I was looking for. I have passed the information on to my future daughter-in-law.

Gib

[brunz]

Rudi....Maybe in Australia you see a lot of people with 50 dynamite 8x10's but here in the states, a large portfolio is a good indicator. I have yet to see a good portfolio from a poor photographer but maybe I'm more discriminating than most. Recent proof books may be our only common denominator of agreement. I think experience(at least 5 years...preferably more) is a must for a quality wedding photographer. Do you think one can handle people, equipment and the pressures of the day without some needed seasoning? I am not saying that old=good but if one has any brainpower and ability to learn, you should be a better photography now than you were 5 years ago. New photographers, like starting teachers, need a mentor. This is my last comment Rudi, I think the original questioner can sift out enough information to help choose a photographer.
I think we've both been around the block and it seems that we must agree to disagree on some points. By the way, how many years have you been doing weddings? I have about 30 years(maybe 600 weddings)....Brian

[Rudi]

Brian,

On and off for 13 years now, nearly 14... it's how I got started in photography as a source of income. (A favour for a friend that snowballed out of control, of course :) ).

[Photowell]

I find it funny that everyone wants someone that has at lest 5 years experience. How does a person get experience without someone giving him a chance. Maybe some started with 5 years (Ha,Ha) and began in their 6th. year.

Just a thought

[robertwgross]

First, I went in as a photo assistant with a long-time wedding photographer. His reputation got us the jobs, and I got to do some of the goon work. That is one way of getting experience.

---Bob Gross---

[Webster]

Not everyone who gets married can afford to pay a professional photographer. Plenty of couples get hitched on a shoestring budget. Get started in wedding photography by doing favors for friends, and if it snowballs out of control, then you're probably pretty good. If your friends turn immediately into ex-friends, then maybe you should consider some other way to express your photographic talents.

[tenerife]

Thats right Webster. Thats a good way.Thats a way for young photog to go there own way.
I think also CREATIVITY dont needs 5 or 10 years expirience.
Creativity needs young, fresh ideas - also in Wedding-Photography.
We see so many photos from Photog there are going 20 Years there own way - 20 years the same pictucre.
Wedding for Wedding.
And then - there is a young creativy Photog with plenty of ideas -but no clients - becorse he has no expirience...?
Portraits, Wedding-Photography is very personally, and you do not have to see the price - you have to see the personality behind the camera.
Portrait Photography has to do with TRUST.....!!
Give the young creativy a change -
Best regards Klaus