Pricing Decline for Wedding Packages?

[sapearl]

For those of you who have been shooting weddings and other social events for some time, do you feel that digital has generally LOWERED the cost of the packages that we charge clients in order to stay competitive?

In other words, is it cheaper for the B&G TODAY to purchase wedding photography services as compared to the days when a film wedding was the only alternative?

I live and work in a large Midwest city. The unsubtantiated opinion of one of my competitors is that the price of an average wedding package has dropped from around $4000 to about $2000 in the last couple of years. A big factor in this is the cost of prints and albums. Many of the digital "newcomers" don't offer these services, offering only service and DISK. This will immediately lower the materials cost of doing a job by several hundred dollars. And by not offering a printed album, the opportunity for substantial print costs is also lost.

I was wondering how others felt about this .... Thanks. - Stu

[sblais]

I'm not that old ;) :lol:, but I think that the digital age has brought very good quality cameras to the hands of any average Joe. While it doesn't mean that they can use the equipment in a way that a professional can, it certainly brings many new competitors on the market (before this digital revolution, most P&S had absolutely no zoom, no custom functions, etc).

As you mentioned, prints costs have also been reduced significantly in the past years. Add to the fact that we can now select which picture to print and which one to delete, and there you have it, many people can now shoot a wedding (or think they can).

For myself, I am probably an intruder (if you're a real pro, you'll want to strangle me and I forgive you for that!) in the market of wedding photography. I do it as a part-time job, but I invest a considerable amount of time practicing, learning and improving the quality of my final product (if this can make you feel a bit better about my very small person ;)). If it wasn't for the digital revolution, I would have never entered this market. I am very comfortable with computers and digital technologies (I'm doing a Ph.D. in electrical eng. specializing in signal processing and optics) and the fact that I can now process images easily on my PC is what attracted me to photography in the first place.

[sapearl]

There's no question that better dSLR's have made it possible to compete with output from MF film cameras. Add to that fast, razor sharp autofocus, ETTL and high quality zooms, and many MF cameras fall by the side of the road.

Some print costs have come down a bit, although your better pro labs are still more expensive than Walmart.... but there's a reason for that. ;) But what I'm suggesting here is that a lot of new folks don't offer any prints AT ALL, proofs, enlargements, etc. which cuts cost immediately.

They also don't offer albums either, since that is addtional cost, and takes time to assemble; again, labor and extra effort.

I am not totally anti "pix on a disk". IMHO I just feel that you should make the client pay up front, for the lost print sales that you will never get. "You want a high rez disk? Sure, but that will cost you $xxx.xx extra."

Btw, I have nothing against part-time photographers..... I am one myself, for the past 33 years (network telcom engineer during the week, weekend warrior on my own time :D ) So I understand where you're coming from.



...........the digital age has brought very good quality cameras to the hands of any average Joe. While it doesn't mean that they can use the equipment in a way that a professional can, it certainly brings many new competitors on the market...................

As you mentioned, prints costs have also been reduced significantly in the past years. Add to the fact that we can now select which picture to print and which one to delete, and there you have it, many people can now shoot a wedding (or think they can).

For myself, I am probably an intruder (if you're a real pro, you'll want to strangle me and I forgive you for that!) in the market of wedding photography. I do it as a part-time job, but I invest a considerable amount of time practicing, learning and improving the quality of my final product ........

[sblais]

I also agree with your post that the package prices have come down (my first post diverted from the main subject). What I wanted to mention was that since competition is increasing, prices inevitably have to be reduced to remain competitive. One way to do this without compromising quality is to offer less in wedding packages. How much less? To just a CD with full size image (notice I didn't use high quality ;)).

Processing the images and assembling an album requires a lot of work and, like you pointed out, extra costs. I feel that this work shouldn't be relegated to the couple, but should be done by the photographer. This ensures that an album of great quality is produced in a timely manner (I believe it would take a lot more time for a couple to assemble such an album by themselves, esp. if they only do it in their spare time -- and may end up procrastinating when they find that the progress towards realizing their album is relatively slow). But, it also comes down to the requirements of the B&G. I currently have a package that includes an album. I have yet to find a couple interested in this package. The price is higher with regards to my other packages, but it reflects the cost of the album, the extra prints, etc.

I would like to have more couple interested in my albums. While it's true that I haven't been pushing them actively, my clients, so far, have been more attracted to lower prices and a bit more trouble than higher prices and no trouble at all. Again, this may reflect the market share that I am currently going for. My packages aren't priced very high as I consider myself a newbie to "amateur-professional" photography. And I am looking to get business from couples on a budget. As I am gaining more experience, my prices are increasing and I may find myself looking at a different market share.

But, putting my personal story aside, I think that the work of a photographer should be remunerated according to his talent, his work and also his time (working 12 hours in a row on a wedding day - should charge time and a half after some point! ;)). I agree with you that digital negatives should be priced while taking into account the loss print sales. I personally charge $50 for the digital negatives OF PRINTS ORDERED and $250 for the full negatives (after my first -or second, third...- round of elimination, of course!). And again, my prices are far from professional photographers in my area. In summary, my position is that negatives should be pricey.

Then again, I have seen couples that are not interested in digital negatives, to my big surprise. They still prefer that the photographer do all the work (which is very fine!) and they would pay for a final product. Yet again, this couple didn't chose my package with the album; they receive a substantial number of prints and enlargements. Like I already said, I guess that it really comes down to what the B&G want and how accommodating the photographer wants to be. The demand is changing and, following Darwin's theory, we must adapt in order to survive.

[sapearl]

Good point about the amount of time spent. Now that I've transitioned over from MF film to digital, I spend FAR more time on each job than previously. Likely I am now spending 3 to 4 times more time than when I shot film.

Before, you just send the rolls to the comercial lab and they did all the processing and proofing. You got the negs back, made your picks, marked up a crop card and sent it back to the lab with custom instructions if it needed it.

Now WE are the lab. We do all the initial proof processing and any paper enlargements...... not to mention all the IT work of backing up images to DVD, external hard drives, etc. This was never a consideration before.

If you don't count the PC's and drives, my media (film, processing) costs have dropped considerably. But I now invest far more time in delivering the job.

..............Processing the images and assembling an album requires a lot of work and, like you pointed out, extra costs. I feel that this work shouldn't be relegated to the couple, but should be done by the photographer. This ensures that an album of great quality is produced in a timely manner ...........

[Padawan Dad]

I have noticed, as well as other photographers in my area, a significant drop in prices per package. 25%-50% lower than just 3 or 4 years ago.

I am personally finding that alot more couples are making decissions based more on price and quantity, rather than price and appreciation for my work, or the quality of it.

I have lost a significant amount of work due to cheaper prices. I think that alot more couples are going with the Uncle Joe's of the world with the new rebel XT's... (by the way, nothing wrong with that, in my opinion.)

I think that the digital age is responsible for this. We as photographers eventually will have to find ways to accomodate couples with lower prices and more bang for their buck. If not, prepare to find a new line of work. JMHO.

It saddens me that quality is getting lost in the shuffle. But it is a tell tale of the world we live in today. It just took a little longer to enter into the wedding photography business, which all started with the walmarts, and targets of the world charging $19.99 for a decent sized portrait package.

Does it mean we'll go hungry? I think that we will just have to work much harder, and put alot more on the table.

I know that every area of the world is very different. This observation is strictly limited to my area; so please don't take my opinion as a generalization.

[sapearl]

Well Bill, unfortunately - for many of us - I have to agree with your assessment of things. Your observation is not limited to just your area. This is why I didn't quite my day job 33 years ago :lol: .

Competition is almost always good for the consumer, and the new blood and creative pressure stimulates our ranks too. I realize that wedding photogs have to start out somewhere - I was one of them with my Canon FT QL in 1974 - but we have to be careful of cutrate service at discount prices.

Part of the answer to this is doing a better job at educating the public: "Sure you can get somebody who will cover the day for $300 and give you a couple of disks, but let me show you what some fine prints in a custom assembled album will look like."

Granted, some don't give a fig about bound prints and framed enlargements, and certainly there are those who can't afford this work. But we should always strive to elevate the trade.

I have noticed, as well as other photographers in my area, a significant drop in prices per package. 25%-50% lower than just 3 or 4 years ago...................

I think that the digital age is responsible for this. We as photographers eventually will have to find ways to accomodate couples with lower prices and more bang for their buck. If not, prepare to find a new line of work. JMHO......................Does it mean we'll go hungry? I think that we will just have to work much harder, and put alot more on the table..........This observation is strictly limited to my area; so please don't take my opinion as a generalization.

[cdifoto]

There will always be those that value quality over quantity. There will always be low end shooters offering minimal services, with high end ones offering more. Digital hasn't changed that. Digital (and the internet) has just changed the awareness of it.

[strmrdr]

In my area most of the pros have priced themselves out of the market then wonder why they aren't getting jobs and friends and relatives are doing most of them usualy with camcorders and p&s.

Around here the prices have skyrocketed and the quality went down and they are starting to get more reasonable as more "pros" are going unbooked or out of business.


I was talking to a minister I know and less than 1/2 of the weddings have a pro shooting at them.
The quality of a lot of them is less than stellar.
Back in the day when I shot second shooter at a couple weddings the work a lot of them are doing would have been considered 3rd rate.
I'm shooting my own wedding with family doing the shots I can't do myself.

[Dans_D60]

Market pressures and market value is always changing and in flux. I’m sure you seen the guests taking pictures with their cell phones not to mention an actual camera. You must be able to adapt if you going to be in a competitive business where the rules are always changing.

The wedding business is a multi billion dollar market and it’s growing with no signs of a pullback. We gather and use all the research data we can find to set a reasonable and fair price for our services. For example the Commerce Department in the State of California currently indicates the average wedding costs the bride and groom $37,000. The recommended budget for a professional photographer remains at 10% of the wedding or an average of $3,700. We target just above the median with a goal of $5,000 between the wedding coverage and a flush album design. This year we are above target with averages getting closer to $5,400.

Our fees have generally moved up over the past few years and we will have another price increase at the beginning of 2007. We have no trouble booking weddings and have turned down many more than we book. I’m certainly not saying we are that much better than any other professional in the area. But with so many weddings and so many opportunities, we have found it’s about marketing, selling, and O’ ya, you must deliver an excellent product. About half our business is from strong referrals and price has never been an issue. We do find sometimes a shopper looking for the lowest price and gracefully tell them we are not interested.

Having a superior product will never sell itself. It takes a lot of energy, experimentation, and trials to get a marketing formula that works. We have tried them all from full page magazine ads, local paper ads, Google search engine priority … same for Yahoo, even a local radio ad. We attend local events and sponsor all kinds of charities with raffles for custom portraiture sessions. We always attend WPPI and PPA conventions to get the latest marketing trends. And we look at what is working in other professions and mimic where appropriate.

If you truly feel your photography is bringing value and art for your customers, don’t cheapen it. It may take some doing to get the marketing formula right but never bottom feed for business as it is so easy to drop prices but once you start it almost impossible to bring them back up.

Dan http://www.danpettusphoto.com

[strmrdr]

The last 4 weddings I went too had budgets well under 10k and they are fairly average for my area.
37k is almost 1/2 a house in my area.
The starter packages most places start around $2000 and dont include a book and many prints it just dont fit a 10k budget.

[Padawan Dad]

the Commerce Department in the State of California currently indicates the average wedding costs the bride and groom $37,000.

Damn! Thats the average yearly income in my state! "Average" wedding cost in my state hits at probably 5k-12k max. Maybe I should move and set up business in Cali.

Whats the average family income in CA, were the majority of couples getting hitched can afford a wedding upwards of $40k?

[Padawan Dad]

[quote=strmrdr;2184041]In my area most of the pros have priced themselves out of the market then wonder why they aren't getting jobs.quote]

I am also finding this from a lot of photographers in the New Hampshire and Massachusetts area. I know of two photographers in the state of Massachusetts who have been in business for over 20+ years and only the past year have had to pick-up a second job, for the first time in 20 years, to survive.

[Dans_D60]

Damn! Thats the average yearly income in my state! "Average" wedding cost in my state hits at probably 5k-12k max. Maybe I should move and set up business in Cali.

Whats the average family income in CA, were the majority of couples getting hitched can afford a wedding upwards of $40k?

Hello Bill:

It appears the wedding market in New Hampshire is relativity small compared to California but the average costs are not much different. One free source I use to get figures is “The Wedding Report”. Here is the California link: http://www.theweddingreport.com/wmdb/index.cfm?action=db.viewDetail&type=state&location=06

This is for all California. We live in the San Diego /Orange County area so the average wedding costs are slightly higher. But for the entire state the base figures are impressive:

• California average for the State: $32,160.00
• California number of weddings per year: 213,000
• California market value: Over six billion dollars

This is just one of many research reports we use to set fees and value. Of course competition is important as is market positioning. Again we have targeted just above the median so the numbers from the 213,000 are there and the budget is on the high side of the average.

…Dan http://www.danpettusphoto.com

[sapearl]

Very nice website Dan - you've got some great looking material there. Interesting figures from your state's commerce department. I would expect California to be higher in most areas.

About two years ago I heard a story on NPR about the wedding industry - they figured at that time that the NATIONAL average for the total cost was about $25,000. I could see how places like the west coast, New York, D.C. etc. would be higher though.

I heard an update on that figure a few months ago and they put it closer to $27,000 nationally. The census bureau has a chart showing median income, listed by state at:

http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/4person.html

But I do strongly agree with you - we DO set the bar for price, quality and service. If everybody gives their images away on disk, sets Walmart prices, and doesn't offer prints or albums because "that's way too much work for me, and besides I just like to take pictures..." well then, this is what the public will expect. - Stu

................. For example the Commerce Department in the State of California currently indicates the average wedding costs the bride and groom $37,000. The recommended budget for a professional photographer remains at 10% of the wedding or an average of $3,700. ...................It may take some doing to get the marketing formula right but never bottom feed for business as it is so easy to drop prices but once you start it almost impossible to bring them back up.

Dan http://www.danpettusphoto.com

[sapearl]

Interesting report Dan, thanks for the link. I live in the metropolitan Cleveland area which has not had the greatest of economic times in recent years.

We only show 11,660 weddings as a current figure, with market value of $320,533,400, and an average cost of $27,490 which paces that NATIONAL average.

....... One free source I use to get figures is “The Wedding Report”. Here is the California link: http://www.theweddingreport.com/wmdb/index.cfm?action=db.viewDetail&type=state&location=06

[GCRollo]

There will always be those that value quality over quantity. There will always be low end shooters offering minimal services, with high end ones offering more. Digital hasn't changed that. Digital (and the internet) has just changed the awareness of it.

I totally agree here. There will always a market for each and I guess it all depends on what demographic you chose to market to. If you are truly a quality photographer and go the extra steps beyond just giving the B&G the "Digital Negative" (Which IMHO, I think is cutting your own throat unless you REALLY up charge it... it is your intellectual property after all).. Producing quality albums or Photobooks, the quality conscious B&G will find you.
And if you are this type of Photographer, the budget conscious B&G was never your client to begin with... so it's not "lost business".

[liza]

There will always be those that value quality over quantity. There will always be low end shooters offering minimal services, with high end ones offering more. Digital hasn't changed that. Digital (and the internet) has just changed the awareness of it.

Couldn't have said it better myself. There is still a market for high end wedding shooters. The lowballers cater to an entirely different clientele.

[Padawan Dad]

There will always be those that value quality over quantity. There will always be low end shooters offering minimal services, with high end ones offering more. Digital hasn't changed that. Digital (and the internet) has just changed the awareness of it.

There certainly will indeed always be clients looking for quality. However, the problem that I am seeing is that there are now more clients looking more at quantity than ever before. It's all out of balance.

[Padawan Dad]

The lowballers cater to an entirely different clientele.

Unfortunately they are also setting a new standard in the process.

[liza]

Again, it depends on the clientele to whom one markets. There are many who want the "under $1,000, gimme a CD" package, but probably an equal amount of young, successful professionals who are willing to pay 3 to 10K for wedding photos. It depends entirely to whom one directs their marketing strategies.

[liza]

Unfortunately they are also setting a new standard in the process.

Yes, and judging from their work, it's often one of poor quality and low expectations.

[cdifoto]

There certainly will indeed always be clients looking for quality. However, the problem that I am seeing is that there are now more clients looking more at quantity than ever before. It's all out of balance.

The reason you see more now than before is because you weren't into wedding photography like you are now, so you didn't pay as much attention. You can't honestly tell me you were tracking client behaviors 20 years ago...

It's like the newbie photographer who never noticed other cameras people own and use when out and about before. Now that they're into photography they notice EVERY camera when they're out and about.

I can guarantee you there have always been lowballers, and there have always been high end. They cater to different markets. Always have, always will. You just have to decide who YOU want your clients to be.

[liza]

You just have to decide who YOU want your clients to be.

...And set your pricing and marketing strategies accordingly.

[sapearl]

I completely agree - 20 years ago, the lowballers were the guys with 35mm film cameras who charged just for time and materials, and then gave the physical negs to the client. Meanwhile the middle and higher market shot medium format mamiya, rollei, bronica and Hasselblad, retained the negatives, and provided custom lab prints, in expensive books.

The BIG difference today is that it's now possible for the lowballer to provide wedding coverage, for no more expense than the cost of burning a CD. Any client with a PC has an "enlarger" for at least viewing if not printing these images.

If you got your hands on the negatives two decades ago, you'd still have to go to a lab or at least the drugstore to have the images printed. And unless you had your own darkroom, you couldn't even "look" at them. Also, 20 years ago there were no photo inkjet printers.

So like it or not, today's technology enables the low end photog to be a SUPER lowballer, avoiding the costs of proofing, enlarging and book assembly. And there will always be a segment of the public who will be glad to cater to him. The problem is that part of the public takes the attitude that the rest of us are gouging them, or simply too expensive. They just don't understand the true cost of service and craftsmanship.

.......I can guarantee you there have always been lowballers, and there have always been high end. They cater to different markets. Always have, always will. You just have to decide who YOU want your clients to be.

[Padawan Dad]

The reason you see more now than before is because you weren't into wedding photography like you are now, so you didn't pay as much attention. You can't honestly tell me you were tracking client behaviors 20 years ago...

It's like the newbie photographer who never noticed other cameras people own and use when out and about before. Now that they're into photography they notice EVERY camera when they're out and about.

I can guarantee you there have always been lowballers, and there have always been high end. They cater to different markets. Always have, always will. You just have to decide who YOU want your clients to be.

My family has been in the business for almost 50+ years. I am not new to the fads and changing face of the business.

No one can tell me that digital has not changed the face of wedding photography (world-wide.) All one needs to do is a google search to see the thousands of "new" photographers available, and check out forums with loads of users with threads like: "I'm shooting my first wedding tomorrow, need advice." 10 years ago, there was no where near this much enthusiasm for this art/profession.

I do agree with you pertaining to the statement about deciding what clients you want to cater to, but this poses problems for people like myself in areas were income is low and your product is superior to the average joe wedding photographer. If one can afford to wait for high-end clientel in their area, thats all good and well; the rest of us need to compete in a vastly growing profession.

As I stressed in my past posts in this thread I believe every location is very different. I'm not trying to generalize.

[cdifoto]

I do agree with you pertaining to the statement about deciding what clients you want to cater to, but this poses problems for people like myself in areas were income is low and your product is superior to the average joe wedding photographer.

You have 3 choices:

A) Put in less effort so you can match the prices of Average Joe.
B) Move to a "better" area.
C) Get a day job.

If you're really kicking ass, people will want you.

[sapearl]

I picked door #3 ;) . Fortunately I got a good day job many years ago which helped to finance good equipment. That day job prevented me from "going out of business" when times were slim. They've always come to my door, but in all honesty because of competition, pricing, etc. they've never really BEATEN down my door.

Put in less effort....hmmmm....tempting.....but no. Just couldn't bring myself to dumb down the product after all these years of crafting it. Nonetheless, you make realistic suggestions..... unfortunately...:(

You have 3 choices:

A) Put in less effort so you can match the prices of Average Joe.
B) Move to a "better" area.
C) Get a day job.

If you're really kicking ass, people will want you.

[cdifoto]

Yeah reality isn't always what we want.

[sapearl]

I hear you..... at least with the main job, I can still afford to shoot. Another sad reality is that the value of medium format equipment has really plummetted in the used market...... as I convert more to digital....

Others who have been hurt by this "evolving trend" are the album supply houses.

I picked up an order last Friday from the local company and was discussing the situation with my rep. They are a pretty big national firm and he said their sales have dropped way off in recent years. They supply the covers, page components, mats, frames, etc. that the pros buy when they assemble albums for their clients.

The culprit? According to him, more shooters who are supplying disks in the place of albums. They've scrambled by trying to offer fancy disk cases, but IMHO that's a losing proposition when compared to prior book sales.

Yeah reality isn't always what we want.

[Dans_D60]

My family has been in the business for almost 50+ years. I am not new to the fads and changing face of the business.

No one can tell me that digital has not changed the face of wedding photography (world-wide.) All one needs to do is a google search to see the thousands of "new" photographers available, and check out forums with loads of users with threads like: "I'm shooting my first wedding tomorrow, need advice." 10 years ago, there was no where near this much enthusiasm for this art/profession.



Hi again Bill:
Yes yes yes. Digital photography HAS changed the industry. Digital photography is a classic “disruptive” technology. Just as the PC and the cell phone are disruptive to their former worldwide industries so has digital photography. But that’s not all that bad. Disruption completely changes an industry. And where there is disruption there is opportunities. For sure the IBM Selectric is dead (for X and Y crowd – the Selectric was the gold standard typewriter) but the PC market that replaced the IBM typewriters has surpassed keyboard documentation system sales by a whopping 3000%, and, remember the indestructible telephones from Ma Bell? What happened to that industry? It was simply replaced multi-billion dollar cell phone business.

Remember, the wedding industry is STILL spending $62,000,000,000. … that’s 62 billion dollars annually. Again, disruption = opportunity.

Market Facts:

• $62,000,000,000.00 dollars annually

• 2,000,000,000 weddings annually

• Average in California (my state) = $32,000 each wedding


Market Influences:

• Digital photography replaces film and has “disrupted” the industry

• Digital print processing from the “Marts” at $0.30 for a 4x6

• Anybody with a PC can print pretty good quality with a $200 inkjet printer.

• Everyone owns a digital camera these days.


Old School (those who refuse to accept change)

• Still value the “print” and a so called “negative” be it digital or film.

• Wish the “good old days” of film processing would return.

• Try and compete with “Marts” and the non pros for pricing.


New School (this is our studio’s version … it may not work for you)

• We don’t do individual prints anymore. None nonda nonthing.

• The couple gets all their final images in full resolution on a data DVD.

• We sell our Talent and Service. Cover the day from years of skills practice and academic knowledge. Anyone can buy a Corvette but that doesn’t make them a professional driver like Dale Earnhardt. Anyone can buy a digital camera but that doesn’t make them a professional either.

• We sell custom portraiture … not a print that Uncle Joe can do for five bucks but truly a work that will stand the test of a lifetime … average portraiture customer will spend about $1,200 for two large portraitures (24 x 30 size).

• Exploit what you do best! I’m a computer geek of the maximum dimension. So we exploit the convergence of the digital world with the photography art world. What took days or weeks (or even impossible) with film, I can now do in minutes and we will make the most of that advantage in the new digital market.

• Market market and did I say market. The only way our potential customers know about our services and the differences from Uncle Joe is through market education. I could spend hours discussing what marketing programs have worked and the ones that flop. But I cannot because I’m finishing up another wedding post processing from last evening.


….Dan http://www.danpettusphoto.com

[Padawan Dad]

The couple gets all their final images in full resolution on a data DVD.


I have yet to try this in a package deal. With all due respect, it seems as though it is one step to lower your standards. I generally give out 300-400 printed 4x6 proofs in an album, Traditional print albums (both bridal and parent,) and a print package.

Don't get me wrong, I have thought about making life easier and just giving out DVD's, but I almost feel ashamed doing this... I feel as though I would be giving an inferior product to my clients over what I am offering now.

Perhaps I will test the waters and try a package deal with a DVD. I did at one point offer the digital negs seperately at $599.00, but no one ever went for it. Perhaps in a package it would go over... but then you are singling out the computer iliterates (which there are more than people think.)


Anyone can buy a digital camera but that doesn’t make them a professional either.

Unfortunately we all know this, but most B&G's don't when they are trying to save a buck in hard times.

You have 3 choices:

A) Put in less effort so you can match the prices of Average Joe.
B) Move to a "better" area.
C) Get a day job.

If you're really kicking ass, people will want you.

A) No can do!
B) Not realistic for me at this point.
C) Already had to do this :(

...and really kicking ass!

For me, I really believe it must be an isolated area thing. Money is very tight for people at the moment around here and business has declined in the past year... certainly not enough to close shop and run. But enough to say, "what the hey?"

[staereo]

I strongly agree with everything stated here. But money is being allocated very differently than it used to be. I would be interested to find out how many grooms-to-be dropped 3 months worth of pay on an engagement ring?

I recently read a report showing that a good rule of thumb is to keep your living expenses below 50 percent of your take home. This allows you to save for retirement, college, etc. Try to do that today with housing cost, fuel, heating, electricity, etc today. It is hard if you are not making hand over fist. Last year, my take home was about 40-45k or so. This year it will be less. I can not imagine keeping my living expenses under 22.5k a year, being that I support 3 people including myself. What I'm saying is the money just isn't there to begin with anymore. The masses are being forced out of all of their luxuries, and a decent set of photographs to remember their wedding (as opposed to Uncle Joe's pictures) ends up being one of these luxuries that get's tossed aside.

Add to that, the fact that many couples today already have children going INTO their wedding, and their income is further split, and the ability to afford these luxuries becomes further and further away.

Not to mention, the intuitive technology that has come about in this age of photography has bolstered the abilities of the Uncle Joes out there. I've also noticed, personally, a decline in talent coming out of wedding photographers. It is almost as if the effort isn't even there in many cases.

My best friend had me as his best man in his wedding. It was very short notice, but I brought my camera and some equipment just in case. Clearly as the best man, I couldn't shoot the wedding, but they had already hired a photographer. One I happened to recognize, with dismay. It was a good thing I was there.

-I knew not to follow him around for his images, as a courtesy and out of respect, HOWEVER, this guy ended up following ME around and stealing my shots over my shoulder. (Grr)
-He barged in on the bride, topless, in her underwear for a picture, after being asked not to come in just yet. His excuse was he was going to try and get a candid shot.
-He missed crucial moments, such as the kiss, the rings being put on, etc.. Then he asked the bride and groom to step out of the reception line to recreate the moments for pictures because he missed them.
-He shot off the balcony of the church, but all of the shots were wide angle of the ceremony, let me put it this way, if he wanted to use those images to sell to a magazine, he could do it without releases from anyone in those images. The people were completely unrecognizable, they were so small.
-He asked me if I would give him my images for his gallery so he could have them all in one place. (As in, HIS print ordering storefront, so he could sell them.) He even directed me to his laptop.
-This gentleman shot digital and didn't know what a RAW file was. (Whether or not you shoot RAW, you typically know what it is.) He asked if I was shooting jpeg or tif, and I said RAW. He had no idea what that was.
-He uploaded his images to one of those print ordering services, and thus was DONE with the couple when he left the wedding. No further contact afterwards.
-Images that WERE uploaded were terrible quality. COMPLETE overexposures, underexposures (mind you, black or washed out beyond ability to see.) He had TWO images uploaded with HIS FINGER IN THE WAY OF THE LENS. We all make mistakes, but why not omit those from your presentation?????

Obviously I missed every shot in which I was personally involved in participating in, as the best man. But when I delivered an album to my friend, he was astonished, and his wife was sooo thankful that he had those images, as they could not even find a SINGLE image in all of his that they liked. Not one. They were truely horrendous.

And this man, I know from the area. He happened to shoot images of me when I was in elementary school. So it wasn't inexperience. Just a lack of interest in actually applying himself to his work, or keeping up with the photographic world.

I can't say the average is this bad, but by looking at many of the wedding photographers in my area, the images in their portfolios make me wonder if the weddings they shoot go much different than the gentleman I mention above.

So, when you add up all of the points made in the posts above mine, plus the things in my post, it is clear to see how demand has dropped for wedding photography for the masses, and thus pricing drops accordingly.

Sad, sad state of affairs. One of the more treasured points in our lives should be remembered with all of the glory and artistry it deserves.

Bruce

[Croasdail]

New School (this is our studio’s version … it may not work for you)

• We don’t do individual prints anymore. None nonda nonthing.

• The couple gets all their final images in full resolution on a data DVD

Couldn't disagree more with this statement. A great wedding image doesn't just happen in camera - post processing is just as important. Being a photographer means more then just clicking the shutter - it is the full lifecycle of the image. By outsourcing the second half of the process to the consumer to save time and money, the ultimate image is going to be less. And in this type of business, reputation is a key selling factor. If your just going to click and burn... heck Uncle Joe can do that. That is the new "lets go out of business" model.

There will always be plenty of Wallmart shoppers out there - but you don't compete with Wallmart by trying to outprice Wallmart. Those that will shop there do so for only one reason - price. There are plenty of business that figure out how to survive in the wake of a Wallmart - and this is with service. Don't try to Wallmartize your photo business. Just because Honda and Toyota sell the most cars on price and quality doesn't mean BMW and Mercedes still haven't found a market. Just know your market and find ways to serve it - what ever market that is.

[Dans_D60]

I have yet to try this in a package deal. With all due respect, it seems as though it is one step to lower your standards. I generally give out 300-400 printed 4x6 proofs in an album, Traditional print albums (both bridal and parent,) and a print package.

Don't get me wrong, I have thought about making life easier and just giving out DVD's, but I almost feel ashamed doing this... I feel as though I would be giving an inferior product to my clients over what I am offering now.

Perhaps I will test the waters and try a package deal with a DVD. I did at one point offer the digital negs seperately at $599.00, but no one ever went for it. Perhaps in a package it would go over... but then you are singling out the computer iliterates (which there are more than people think.)


It's me again...

Yep. Completely agree that we certainly do not want to lower standards but actually increase the value of our services:

• As stated earlier … no individual small prints. None. We wanted to change the perception and not look like a K-Mart.

• But they do get their images to share in a “First Edition Magazine Album”. I get these magazine albums produced by Millers LAB. Basically consists of a 10 x 13 Lustre surface photo paper with four or six images per page. Spiral bound and we insert them into a real leather cover. I also produce an individualized cover pager for each bride and groom. We deliver these magazine books in Dan Pettus Photography canvas bag ($6.00) and encase with black logo tissue paper …. Marketing!

http://www.danpettusphoto.com/coverpage.jpg

Our First Edition Magazine books are not the optional flush mount album they will purchase after the wedding. It is basically a replacement for the old style individual 4x6 proof insert books. Why do we do this? It’s different. It allows us to put any ratio image in the book not restricted to 4x6 or 5x5 or 4x5 ratios. It’s elegant. The brides love it. And it costs little more than a bunch of 4x6’s.

• Not being restricted to 4x6 or other ratios really gives these simple proof magazines a look of their own.

• Change the playing field. Ask the question is there really any reason to have individual prints if one can deliver a better product at a reasonable price and when ready to develop a true flush album, not restricted again to any old style format.

• If the bride and groom what to print $0.30 prints for friends and family. By all means do so by using their delivered DVD and go to Costco. I much rather work on a wedding flush album with margins in the several hundreds of dollars than a few extra 4x6 reprints.

Bill: This is just one example of our marketing research that has allowed us to be “different” yet provide a superior product at a fair price.

….Dan http://www.danpettusphoto.com

[Dans_D60]

Couldn't disagree more with this statement. A great wedding image doesn't just happen in camera - post processing is just as important. Being a photographer means more then just clicking the shutter - it is the full lifecycle of the image. By outsourcing the second half of the process to the consumer to save time and money, the ultimate image is going to be less. And in this type of business, reputation is a key selling factor. If your just going to click and burn... heck Uncle Joe can do that. That is the new "lets go out of business" model.

There will always be plenty of Wallmart shoppers out there - but you don't compete with Wallmart by trying to outprice Wallmart. Those that will shop there do so for only one reason - price. There are plenty of business that figure out how to survive in the wake of a Wallmart - and this is with service. Don't try to Wallmartize your photo business. Just because Honda and Toyota sell the most cars on price and quality doesn't mean BMW and Mercedes still haven't found a market. Just know your market and find ways to serve it - what ever market that is.

A slight misunderstanding on what we DO deliver. See my response to Bill on the 4x6 prints and how we found a better new way to provide a physical product but not compete with the Marts.

As far as the data DVD. As stated before nothing leaves our studio without post processing. That is what in part makes us different. The data DVD (or multiple CDs) is the same post processed images the couple receives in the First Edition Magazine (see response to Bill). Each and every image is custom cropped, color corrected, enhanced, filtered, altered, blemish removal, etc. We have this down pat and can get through an entire wedding of 2,000 images to the final 350-400 in about 4-6 hours. Requires computers with a lot of horsepower and a workflow that is tested and works.

…Dan http://www.danpettusphoto.com

[imhotep]

Just thought I'd throw in a client's perspective. I'm not trying to make any blanket statements about wedding photography or the future of the market in general. This is just one person's recent experience.

My wife and I were just recently married this past May. We both agreed that we didn't want to pay for a really expensive photographer, but would rather go the low-budget route and be satisfied with what we got. I acknowledge that this puts us in a certain class of client, not necessarily representative of all, but bear with me.

One way for a low-budget wedding client to end up with really high-end photography services is if they are close friends with a good photographer, or if they have some other unusual connection to one who will do it for free or cut them a really good deal. I've known people who were one or the other. My wife and I however, didn't fall into either category.

Our photographer was someone we didn't know prior to the wedding. We were introduced by a mutual friend. After meeting with the photographer and expressing our wishes as to what we wanted, she agreed to provide us with two copies of digital images. One copy of her unedited RAW files, and another copy of the edited proofs. No prints were included in the deal. We liked this very much, as it would allow us to take possession of all of the photographs in digital form and just print to our heart's content.

The photographer quoted us $500 for this.

What we got back completely blew us away. The photographs were amazing. All very sharp and well composed. Some of them almost confused us because of how well she had blended into the crowd during the ceremony and reception.

I don't mean to go on about this, I just wanted to convey the fullness of the services tha we received for so little money. After taking delivery of our photographs, we tried to send her a second payment to express our gratitude and just how pleased we were. In my mind, she deserved it. The payment was of course turned down.

So, for $500 we received over 200 digital proofs, plus the unedited RAW files. Just one person's experience. But like I said, she wasn't a friend, and there weren't any other special circumstances that should have warranted such an arrangement. I hope it is food for thought, along with the rest of the great ideas being shared on this thread.

[cdifoto]

Few photographers can afford to work that cheap...

[Yella Fella]

makes me wanna quit before im ahead, but i wont

[JMHPhotography]

I have a slightly different take on this. I'm very NEW to wedding photography compared to most people here. But in my short time doing this, I've been looking at many of the wedding photographer's websites and albums and I'm noticing more and more that the problems with declining prices probably has less to do with the actual digital technology and more to do with the dillution of skill and talent. I think that sure, digital photography has made it easier for the uncle Joe's of the world to get into photographing weddings and if they take 1,000 pictures at a wedding, they are bound to get a couple hundred decent photos. That certainly makes it worth the couple's while. But the bottom line is there are still wedding photographers making big money on a per wedding basis, but if you notice, it's the wedding photographers whose work stands out from the rest of ours. It's the Joe Buissink's, Gino Lucadamo's, David Jay's, and Monte Zucker's of the world. As I said... it's not the digital technology, it's the dillution of talent.

[imhotep]

I have a slightly different take on this. I'm very NEW to wedding photography compared to most people here. But in my short time doing this, I've been looking at many of the wedding photographer's websites and albums and I'm noticing more and more that the problems with declining prices probably has less to do with the actual digital technology and more to do with the dillution of skill and talent. I think that sure, digital photography has made it easier for the uncle Joe's of the world to get into photographing weddings and if they take 1,000 pictures at a wedding, they are bound to get a couple hundred decent photos. That certainly makes it worth the couple's while. But the bottom line is there are still wedding photographers making big money on a per wedding basis, but if you notice, it's the wedding photographers whose work stands out from the rest of ours. It's the Joe Buissink's, Gino Lucadamo's, David Jay's, and Monte Zucker's of the world. As I said... it's not the digital technology, it's the dillution of talent.

Well said, and I think you're onto it. The story that I shared above certainly takes into consideration that our photographer isn't at the top of her field.

With that said, maybe you could go a step further with your conclusion about the dillution of talent. Perhaps the wedding photography market is being dilluted with more and more clients who aren't looking for legendary results (like my wife and myself). Perhaps the majority of the client base isn't about the art, but rather the "good-enough" results.

[JMHPhotography]

Well said, and I think you're onto it. The story that I shared above certainly takes into consideration that our photographer isn't at the top of her field.

With that said, maybe you could go a step further with your conclusion about the dillution of talent. Perhaps the wedding photography market is being dilluted with more and more clients who aren't looking for legendary results (like my wife and myself). Perhaps the majority of the client base isn't about the art, but rather the "good-enough" results.

There could be something to that as well. Or perhaps more and more couples are seeing "legendary result" pricing for photographs that really belong in the "good-enough" catagory, and thinking, "hmmm, my cousin takes pictures just as good, so let's ask her to do it..." I think that if the couples would actually get to see some superior work, they'd be able to tell the difference and see why professional wedding photography SHOULD cost more.

I was talking to a potential client just yesterday... well actually it was the groom's mother. But she was telling me that he didn't want to have his reception in a K of C hall, or VFW venue... he wanted the country club feel. He wanted it to be a nice memory since it is only supposed to be a once in a lifetime memory. Did you see what she said???? He wants this "ONCE IN A LIFETIME" event to be memorable so he wants to spend more money on the venue, food, and decor. I asked her what he wanted to spend on photography? She told me that my rates were within his budget. I'm VERY low compared to most people and that's because I consider myself inexperienced and unseasoned... but I'm working on that. Anyway... I asked her this simple question. Why does he want to spend more on food and decor than on his photography? 10 years from now, would that really nice prime rib plate and excellent centerpiece be more memorable than a superior wedding album full of photos that captured the day to perfection? She laughed and agreed with me... she said, I never really thought about it that way, but you're right. And now, I not only have that wedding booked, I've got the groom's mother and father's renewal of vows in 2008 as well. ;)

Oh... and I know I'm sounding a bit elitist here... but I should point out that I know that I'm not even close to being in the same catagory as any of the photographers I mentioned. I know I have a LONG way to go before I could even work along side of them. I would rank my photos among the "good enough" catagory myself. I just know and recognize greatness and that's where I intend to take my craft... I don't know how long it will take before I get there, and knowing myself as I do, I don't know that I'll ever be able to consider myself great.

[Padawan Dad]

Perhaps the wedding photography market is being dilluted with more and more clients who aren't looking for legendary results (like my wife and myself). Perhaps the majority of the client base isn't about the art, but rather the "good-enough" results.

I agree! If you read most threads regarding packages and albums in these forums. Alot of wedding photographers seem to have the opinion that the B&G generally don't have taste enough to design a wedding album; the arguments are usually based on the opinion that the photog. knows what art is, and the B&G really do not. So, a majority of WPhotog's will choose the images to go into an album an assemble it them themselves. Don't really know how this helps the statement that their work is "top notch; that is why B&G's go with me..." but anyway...

This basically states that the clientel really doesn't know what is a good image, and what is not. Of course this is another thread, because it is VERY subjective to every individual.

Bottom line in my area, more clients are looking for bargains these days. If they like your portfolio and your prices, they go with you. If not, they will look through the thousands of other wedding photographers listed in the yellow pages that will cater to their needs.

[JMHPhotography]

I agree! If you read most threads regarding packages and albums in these forums. Alot of wedding photographers seem to have the opinion that the B&G generally don't have taste enough to design a wedding album; the arguments are usually based on the opinion that the photog. knows what art is, and the B&G really do not. So, a majority of WPhotog's will choose the images to go into an album an assemble it them themselves. Don't really know how this helps the statement that their work is "top notch; that is why B&G's go with me..." but anyway...

This basically states that the clientel really doesn't know what is a good image, and what is not. Of course this is another thread, because it is VERY subjective to every individual.

Bottom line in my area, more clients are looking for bargains these days. If they like your portfolio and your prices, they go with you. If not, they will look through the thousands of other wedding photographers listed in the yellow pages that will cater to their needs.

Hey Bill,

Are you going to be at the Bridal Expo in January?

[sapearl]

You got a lot for your money - actually a great deal.

I might consider doing something like that for a very close friend, or relative, or as return consideration for a favor done for me. But there's no way I could do that much work for that little on a regular basis. I'd soon feel like I was cheating myself and leave the business.

Now that you have these very high quality images on disk, what will you do with them? I'm not trying to be negative about your DNG's :lol: , but it's difficult to sit on the couch and pass around the laptop. A 72dpi image will never match the quality of a well finished print. Still, you got yourselves a hekuva' deal..... - Stu

.............So, for $500 we received over 200 digital proofs, plus the unedited RAW files. Just one person's experience. But like I said, she wasn't a friend, and there weren't any other special circumstances that should have warranted such an arrangement. I hope it is food for thought, along with the rest of the great ideas being shared on this thread.

[sapearl]

Excellent post Forkball - I'll have to "borrow" some of your marketing approach for my next client interviews.

Yes, how often do the parents of the B&G spend big bucks on the food and venue to impress the guests, but then skimp on the longer lasting memories of quality photography? :cry:

[Dans_D60]

Excellent post Forkball - I'll have to "borrow" some of your marketing approach for my next client interviews.

Yes, how often do the parents of the B&G spend big bucks on the food and venue to impress the guests, but then skimp on the longer lasting memories of quality photography? :cry:

Agree!

We have been working on a marketing campaign with potential customers called the “3 Y’s”. Why do it?, Why Now?, Why Us? http://www.danpettusphoto.com/carlsbad-wedding-event-photographer/three-y.htm

…Dan http://www.danpettusphoto.com

[imhotep]

We printed our favorites as 8x10s for display in our home. I actually haven't decided which one to enlarge yet (16x20-ish). I say one because of space limitations.

Now that you have these very high quality images on disk, what will you do with them? I'm not trying to be negative about your DNG's :lol: , but it's difficult to sit on the couch and pass around the laptop. A 72dpi image will never match the quality of a well finished print. Still, you got yourselves a hekuva' deal..... - Stu

[JMHPhotography]

Agree!

We have been working on a marketing campaign with potential customers called the “3 Y’s”. Why do it?, Why Now?, Why Us? http://www.danpettusphoto.com/carlsbad-wedding-event-photographer/three-y.htm

…Dan http://www.danpettusphoto.com

Very good... :)

Here's another great quote from a master:

"Isn't it better to spend a little more than you planned, then to find out later on that you didn't spend enough?" - Monte Zucker.

[strmrdr]

Now that you have these very high quality images on disk, what will you do with them? I'm not trying to be negative about your DNG's :lol: , but it's difficult to sit on the couch and pass around the laptop. A 72dpi image will never match the quality of a well finished print. Still, you got yourselves a hekuva' deal..... - Stu

Passing one of these around beats passing a huge stack of 4x6s around anyday,,
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16882604002

Then there is always the web.
The only time I get prints is if I want to hang it on the wall or put it in my wallet.

[sapearl]

That's not the issue - there's no question that a big pile of proofs tossed unceremoniously in box is bulkier than a viewing device. That's why mine are presented albums.

And yes, the web - PBase, Flickr, Smug...etc. - is a great way to share low rez (72dpi) images. My point is that a high quality custom made enlargement will always beat out most client's improperly adjusted monitors.

Passing one of these around beats passing a huge stack of 4x6s around anyday,,
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16882604002

Then there is always the web.
The only time I get prints is if I want to hang it on the wall or put it in my wallet.

[sapearl]

I apologize for not being more thorough in my question.... did you use a commercial pro lab, or run the prints off an inkjet printer?

In your situation, you value the images and made an effort to feature the best images. Most people won't even go that far.

We printed our favorites as 8x10s for display in our home. I actually haven't decided which one to enlarge yet (16x20-ish). I say one because of space limitations.

[imhotep]

I always prefer a locally owned pro lab or Ritz. Lately though, I'm getting more and more proficient with my own PP, and I have access to an HP designjet plotter at work :D. Six inks and 2880dpi on that bad boy. When I'm finally ready to frame a larger print from the wedding, I'll probably plot it out on our nicest paper.

I apologize for not being more thorough in my question.... did you use a commercial pro lab, or run the prints off an inkjet printer?

In your situation, you value the images and made an effort to feature the best images. Most people won't even go that far.

[Dans_D60]

That's not the issue - there's no question that a big pile of proofs tossed unceremoniously in box is bulkier than a viewing device. That's why mine are presented albums.

And yes, the web - PBase, Flickr, Smug...etc. - is a great way to share low rez (72dpi) images. My point is that a high quality custom made enlargement will always beat out most client's improperly adjusted monitors.

For sure a PC (or MAC) monitor will not do justice to good sized enlargement. But I would bet it will be as good if not better than a 4x6 or 5x7 or 4x5. I’m certainly not suggesting a clunky battery operated tablet computer as a replacement for some type of print portfolio. I would suggest a more contemporary approach to the physical presentation of the so-called “proofs”. From my earlier posts, digital photography has disrupted our business (I personally am attempting to take full advantage of that disruption) and almost everyone post processes the so called “proof” now days. So why present our work in the old proof book fashion? I truly think the portfolio magazine is a modern (at least for now!) compromise of having something to hold and share but a fresh look and feel.

We always follow-up with a survey for our couples (mainly the brides) to see what they liked, would want to see improved, if they felt value for our services and so on. To date 100% prefer the magazine album to the standard 4x6 proof book (we started by offering both about two years ago), 100% see good value with the website for friends and family (we keep their site up for one year and currently have over 100 sites live), and most importantly we have 100% satisfaction that we exceed their expectation for value of services performed.

As far as individual enlargements go, we tend not to promote anything smaller than an 11x14 and target 24x30 or larger portraiture. Here a first class LAB that can work with my monitor profile and understand our unique lighting is paramount. We do not show our enlargement customers proofs or images using the web. Sounds a bit counter to all the above but I want the client to see their final candidate images as it would appear in there house. We recently purchased a 50 inch plasma HDTV with a direct DVI connection to a MAC Mini for this purpose (of course this box is use for my football games in between client presentations!). It will accurately display up to 24x30 in true size and ratios. Sitting back 8 feet or so really does show accurate colors and depth. It will never be as good as a print on canvas so we have dozens of samples of canvas prints once they select their favorites for purchase. It really works! Every client has purchased larger and additional canvas prints using this method. And the HDTV TV shows look great!

I rambling on too much … bye .. .Dan http://www.danpettusphoto.com

[sapearl]

Are you discouraging the good old fashioned 5x7's and 8x10's that people like to frame for mantels, and display on on desks? A lot of b&g's like to give out those sizes for friends and family members.

Large portraiture makes for great sales, and I envy your success in this area. But many "reorder wedding purchases" fall in the 5x7 - 8x10 range.

.......................As far as individual enlargements go, we tend not to promote anything smaller than an 11x14 and target 24x30 or larger portraiture. .............. .Dan http://www.danpettusphoto.com

[cwphoto]

Market Facts:

• 2,000,000,000 weddings annually

I don't think so.

[Dans_D60]

Are you discouraging the good old fashioned 5x7's and 8x10's that people like to frame for mantels, and display on on desks? A lot of b&g's like to give out those sizes for friends and family members.

Large portraiture makes for great sales, and I envy your success in this area. But many "reorder wedding purchases" fall in the 5x7 - 8x10 range.

We don’t “discourage”. The customer is “always right”. But we do give choices where it is much easier for the B&G to reprint smaller images on their own. I would include 5x7 or even 8x10 in the small stuff. If they really want us to provide the service, I’m fine with that. But it is not cost-effective either for us or the bride and groom. I will give a price break to a customer that has already paid for our service like a wedding but even with a discount, we really try and stay away from small print orders. That is why the bride and groom get all their final images, fully processed, as part of the wedding day service.

Dan

[Croasdail]

A slight misunderstanding on what we DO deliver. See my response to Bill on the 4x6 prints and how we found a better new way to provide a physical product but not compete with the Marts.

As far as the data DVD. As stated before nothing leaves our studio without post processing. That is what in part makes us different. The data DVD (or multiple CDs) is the same post processed images the couple receives in the First Edition Magazine (see response to Bill). Each and every image is custom cropped, color corrected, enhanced, filtered, altered, blemish removal, etc. We have this down pat and can get through an entire wedding of 2,000 images to the final 350-400 in about 4-6 hours. Requires computers with a lot of horsepower and a workflow that is tested and works.

…Dan http://www.danpettusphoto.com

Ok.. I like the idea. It absolute still seperates you from the mom and pop. Thanks.

[SimonG]

... 2,000,000,000 weddings annually ...
I don't think so.
It does seem high by at least two (and more probablly three) orders of magnitude, no? ;)

[Dans_D60]

It does seem high by at least two (and more probablly three) orders of magnitude, no? ;)

Just by a few billion! The number is two million weddings/year....Dan

[sapearl]

Ah, that's more like it...... was beginning to sound like specs from the Hubble telescope with commentary by Carl Sagan: "Billions and billions." :lol:

Just by a few billion! The number is two million weddings/year....Dan

[sapearl]

Here's an interesting contradiction, with a possible explanation.

Periodically I will have my albums leather bound by Zookbinders in Chicago. They are one of several high quality library bound album firms like others that have been discussed here. I posed the same question to my Zook rep.

Her response was that business has actually INCREASED in the past couple of years for them. Perhaps this is due to superior product and service with attractive pricing? I don't really know. Or perhaps it's the higher quality "cream of the crop" that rises to the top and doesn't usually suffer?

My other supplier sells "you assemble-it-yourself books" which are typically less expensive, and cater to mid tier (myself) and lower end wedding photographers. Maybe that part of the industry has migrated to DISK away from Albums.

........................I picked up an order last Friday from the local company and was discussing the situation with my rep. They are a pretty big national firm and he said their sales have dropped way off in recent years. They supply the covers, page components, mats, frames, etc. that the pros buy when they assemble albums for their clients.

The culprit? According to him, more shooters who are supplying disks in the place of albums. ......

[NickSimcheck]

I, as others I'm sure have previously mentioned - have noticed a decline in wedding photographer prices in the past couple of years.

My sister's wedding in 1997 cost approx $32,000 total, with about $3,500 in photography. One man, MF, 200+/- shots, 75 5X7's and 15 8X10's. That's over 10% of the total wedding cost.

Today, with the average wedding cost of $27,000 was it? and I would guess the photography package similar to my sisters would be $1,500-$2,500. Less then 10% of the total wedding budget.

I feel the Digital era has inspired many people who were previously scared to jump into photography. The thought of something going horriorbly wrong and not knowing it was enough to keep the average Joe from steping into it, but now with Digital every newcomer thinks "Well, I'll just keep checking the LCD and keep shooting untill I get the Chimper"

I also think that people expect more and know less today, then they did a decade ago.

Tough is the life of a wedding photographer.

[Chrisedge]

I spent $2200 on my wedding 10 years ago. She was a spectaular photographer, and shot MF, included the negatives, and that covered the book, and extra 8x10's and I think on 11x16. We choose her based on her talent.

http://members.aol.com/chrisedge/11-10c.jpg

Scan from a pic from 10 years ago, forgive the graininess. Oh, and I live in Orange County, CA. She was from Laguna Beach and had a house overlooking the ocean. So she wasn't broke.

[BLINN]

It is my experienace Stu that if you drop your prices your tell the customers your droping your quality of work....if you work speeks for it self then you will have no problems keeping the same price if not increasing.....good luck all..

[sapearl]

Hello Mike - good seeing you again :D . Yes, I totally agree with that. I never reduce my package prices for exactly the reasons you state, as well as the fact that my pricing is very reasonable to begin with.

What I have been doing in revising my business model is to bump my prices each year a little to allow for inflation and some added materials costs, but then add additional services like better albums, more proofs, extra hours of coverage....

From the vantage of client perception, I've always felt it's better to give MORE SERVICE and/or MORE PRODUCT, within reasonable bounds as opposed to cutting your prices. After all, if you think you're worth less so will they, and you end up in a downward spiral. - Stu

It is my experienace Stu that if you drop your prices your tell the customers your droping your quality of work....if you work speeks for it self then you will have no problems keeping the same price if not increasing.....good luck all..

[MrTED]

Hello Mike - good seeing you again :D . Yes, I totally agree with that. I never reduce my package prices for exactly the reasons you state, as well as the fact that my pricing is very reasonable to begin with.

What I have been doing in revising my business model is to bump my prices each year a little to allow for inflation and some added materials costs, but then add additional services like better albums, more proofs, extra hours of coverage....

From the vantage of client perception, I've always felt it's better to give MORE SERVICE and/or MORE PRODUCT, within reasonable bounds as opposed to cutting your prices. After all, if you think you're worth less so will they, and you end up in a downward spiral. - Stu

Stu has nailed it... I have not been in the industry for years like some of you, but I have found that people are happy to pay more if they feel they are getting more value. You can seel a package for say $2000 with no inclusions, or you can seel another for $3500 with maybe $1000 (at cost) of inclusions, making you an extra $500 for not a lot of extra work.

A perfect example is albums... you design an album for the B&G and include this in the cost of your initial package. Most album suppliers (especially for digital magazine albums) have a duplicate album cost. Try offering two smaller duplicates of the original album as a parents albums, at say $500 each and see them as a part of the package for $500 markup. No extra work as the album is already designed.

This is only one example and before someone jumps on me and says "not all brides would go for this option"... I know, some B&G's you will never be able to sell this option too. Some are just too budget concious. But there is no harm in highlighting this to the parents when chatting to them at the reception or after the wedding while designing the album, you may be surprised at how the parents will chip in for their own albums.

At the end of the day, more money for not much more work.