Low budget wedding - an idea

[richardj7]

I know a lot of you have discussed this at length. You know the brides who only have $600.00 for wedding photos. Last night a thought crossed my mind. It's based on a few premises:

• If you can't beat them, join them.
• It's not the equipment, but the photographer who makes work of art photography.
• Revenues, including profits allow to pay salary, amortization of equipment, its upkeep, update, repairs, etc.
• Shooting RAW can increase to as much as 3 times more time to the wedding process than the wedding day itself.
• A lot don't want albums. They want "high rez" files they can reproduce themselves and save on the profit that the photographer would make. With me so far?

Here's the deal. Imagine the scene. First hours of the wedding. THE photographer, the PRO - the one that everyone is expecting, the one they hope will be on time, because the bride just realized how IMPORTANT it is to capture all that is going on around her. She's seen your portfolio - you know those fantastic photos you worked on for hours in Photoshop? She wants it all, and then some.

"C'mon big guy - make sure you capture EVERYTHING." She's thinking that shots are cheap, anyway, because she's going to get it all on CD for her to pick and choose. All that for the bargained price of $600.00 from preparation to bouquet throwing. Her budget is very limited, she said. She can't afford more than that. You, of course, understand, and being a soft heart, you contribute to her happiness by accepting the job. Someone's got to do it.

So you arrive on the scene with apparently nothing in your hands: no bag, no monopod nor tripod, no reflector, no assistant. Nada. You look like an invited guest.

However, you're full of energy, smiling, take charge kind of guy (or gal). You make everyone feel at ease. They enthusiastically follow your directives. Electricity is in the air. You can cut it with a knife. Okay, don't get electrocuted.

Then, almost like a magic move, out of nowhere you whip out your Point & Shoot from your shirt pocket, and take the shots. "C'mon, a little more smiling for this second one...OK, one more for luck, just to make sure no one closed their eyes. Mom get closer to dad. Dad kiss Missy's cheek. Now, that's a shot!"

You continue using your P&S throughout the day - candids, posed shots, group shots - color, B&W, Sepia, maybe a little movie clip when they exchange vows (as long as it fits to no more than a DVD, you're game).

In my case, besides a 1d MKII, I've got a Canon G7 where I can put my 580EX flash for full e-TTL. Hey, I'm a nice guy. I'll put it on. With he LS, or Flip-it - I'm set for light. Does not matter if the only thing people see is the Tupperware or the flash, 3 times bigger above than the hidden G7 below. Hey, I'm the PRO photographer for the day. I must know what I'm doing.

So, at one point the B&G come to see you, a little concerned about you're using the type of camera that the guests use. They're concerned about the high rez CD. So you answer:
"I'm using a Canon G7 - 10MP, sRGB - lab and web ready. And you'll get your High Rez shots even today with some black & white, sepia, wide angle, close shots, and a little movie clip of your vows, before I leave, ready to print. You'll only have to crop for size. Isn't that great? You won't have to wait! That's what you wanted, no?"

So, at the end of the day. You burn the cards onto CD/DVD, and collect the balance of money before you leave (you of course had told them to bring the balance at the wedding).

Think of it. No more sore shoulders or tennis wrists. No more postprocessing and time not paid. No more guests asking you questions about your big camera. Reduce chances of theft. No equipment in the trunk of your car. No one is intimidated because of size of camera. You fit right in with the guests. Other advantages:

• Equipment amortization is faster on a $500.00 camera than on $10,000.00 worth, especially on $600.00 weddings.
• You can easily afford a back-up camera. Worse come to worst, you bring cards, and borrow the P&S shoots from the guests for an unlimited supply of P&S throughout the day. And, you at least get one guest out of the way to capture that unique shot. (Someone read this suggestion on another forum, and suggested that I use the throw-away cameras left for guests on the table - Now, there's a better idea...http://digitalphotographers.infopop.cc/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

At the end of the day, you go home, relax. Mission accomplished. Well, maybe you choose one or two good shots for your online portfolio.

Once the B&G see your work, they can them warmly recommend you on The Knot or elsewhere. "Hey, gang, you gotta hire this photographer. Look at his pictures. They're fabulous! And, he's not expensive, either. We recommend him highly!"

Hey, this may be a revolution! Think of it. Read the premises, above, again. If you have other suggestions, just let 'em rip.

[picturecrazy]

hmmm, that sounds like it could be fun to do.....

but it sure will hurt your chances of getting more bookings and building your business to move into high-end weddings...

[RobKirkwood]

My new mobile phone has a 3 megapixel camera (and a flash!) ...so we're going to shoot weddings with 2 of these. ;)

Rob

[rhys]

I've been wondering about doing Daguerrotype wedding portraits - whether there'd be a market for them.

[coreypolis]

good luck with that ;)

[picturecrazy]

well, you know, I remember a thread many months back where the pro photographer showed up with some olympus point and shoot and the sample picture was underexposed, really noisy, and soft... and this was the scaled down web version!

It's happened more often than it should have I'm sure.

[GertS]

Honestly, I spend much less time with adjusting raw files that the pictures look nice than I did before with Jpeg.

You have even less work with post processing shooting film, as the lab does it for you. What about this idea? Saves even more. ;) Cameras are cheaper too, best would be a Minox, you as real undercover photographer. Resolution is ok too. :lol:

If you have a 1D Mark II, as you mentioned in your message, you should know that Jpeg is the weak point of this camera, but shooting RAW, it's brilliant.

If you are looking for quick and easy money, sell it and get a second G7 with 2 more MPixel, as many will look down on "only" 8 MPixel. But I want to see your pictures at available light, no flash allowed or possible, and ISO >= 400. :lol:

[GertS]

I've been wondering about doing Daguerrotype wedding portraits - whether there'd be a market for them.


Go for

http://www.whattheduck.net/

and check WTD 47 in the archive. I attach it too. :lol:

[sapearl]

You're serious about this? No PP, just cut and run? Or maybe I haven't had enough coffee yet today and missed the joke.....:rolleyes:

[coreypolis]

you can go into biz with this guy: http://andypark.com/

[richardj7]

Yeah. Even with two G7, you'd still have two free hands, so you could carry and extra flash on stand in church (maybe two) to compensate for the poor high ISO of the G7 (from 400 up, actually). Use flash in church. Besides, there are not too many sellers (photos chosen) in church to make an album. Light other situations with 2 flashes, one on camera, the other remote. That would work. No flash allowed? Tough luck...:) If you have to shoot at 1200 ISO or higher, you'd have to use Noise Ninja, Neat Image or other to remove the noise - more processing work.

As far as post-processing RAW. Let's say you spend overall 1 minute per file on average: downloading, making a safe copy, sorting, opening some to check focus, doing color balancing on several and exposure tweaking, then batching the others with that recipe, (some, you could spend as much as 45 minutes for skin and other corrections and special effect in Photoshop). After all, you don't want to show poor work by simply giving high rez or low rez files: it's your reputation.

Whatever corrections you made, you make another safe copy, because you don't want to go through that again. Then, maybe batching the bunch to low resolution to put on your Web site or burn a CD. More time.

Let's say you only have 600 files to go through and transform. At only 1 minute average per file, that represents 10 hours of work. What about if you have 800 or a 1,000 files (12 - 20 hours)? E-mail exchanges, phone calls,further meetings with the bride, delivery. Add that to the wedding day. Are you charging enough?

Coming back to film would be a good idea. Let the lab do the work. You can still get a CD burned when having the film developped. Twelve to twenty rolls of 120, Hasselblad. Lab on Monday morning. Decently corrected proofs on Thursday. Delivery on Friday. Orders a week or two afterwards. Back to lab with order. Pick-up, check, have redone if not good. Then, photos in album, delivery. Final payment. The good old days. Yeah...:)

[sapearl]

OK - I get the joke..... now you're hitting me below the Hasselblad.:lol:

[richardj7]

I wish I never sold my Hasselblad...sigh! I still have a Yashika-Mat and a Canon EOS A2, though.

[sapearl]

I still have one 'blad left (503cw) and my Mamiya C330.... but the lab cost for processing and scanning, not to mention the new/clunky workflow of mixing film with digital for a wedding is really cost and time prohibitive.

Cost of MF film, the 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 neg scan, plus cost of the proof.... I was up around $1.37/shot - OUCH! :cry: in spite of using the finest lenses in the world. Now with my own PS processing I'm at about 30 cents per proof. When you consider the math and the functionality of all the autofocus stuff and digital workflow..... the transition was inevitable.

I wish I never sold my Hasselblad...sigh! I still have a Yashika-Mat and a Canon EOS A2, though.

[cosworth]

I know a lot of you have discussed this at length. You know the brides who only have $600.00 for wedding photos.......


I see that you are from Quebec. I sell to Quebecois all day long. I perosnally don't think it's a photography issue, I think it's a culture "thing". The only people that ever complain about my pricing are persons from said Province. I'm not sure what photography is veiwed as there, hobby, for fun, illegitimate profession etc but I think that Quebecers in general need to understand the cost of doing business for proper photography.

If we do as you suggest, then people will never see quality work and will never pay for it. I'd rather turn down a cheap as heck bride and tell her to get uncle Jean-Marc to shoot it with his 3mp P&S than compromise my/our profession.

That being said, Quebecois love having their picture taken compared to Americans who ask if it's legal to take their picture or "what are you doing with those photographs".

I recenlty had a Delata ailines pilot call me up and say he wanted a $600 package for his wedding on the beach. I told him I cna give him a $600 package but that he wouldn't like it. Knowing pilots' penchant for precision....

Know you market, know your customers. If they can only afford $600, then maybe give them a $600 package like you suggest, at peril.

[picturecrazy]

you can go into biz with this guy: http://andypark.com/

holy smokes, is this guy for real? His webpage looks like 10 pages of what you'd see for discount furniture marketing. I looked at his galleries and they look like something I could do on my 5 year old Canon A40 P&S.

[richardj7]

Cosworth, you're right, I believe it's a culture thing. We're the most taxed province in Canada (sales as well as income taxes). People love Costco, Dollarama, Wal-Mart for bargains. We're friendly and open-minded people.

Once in a while, I have fun referring local photographers to sites such as Denis Reggie, Mike Colon, Joe Buisinck, and even David Jay who charge between $6,000 and $50,000 for a wedding, as well as a slew of other photographers in the US, and some in Toronto (richer province), also. I have a friend in LA who just started doing events and weddings, and I wish I were there with the experience that I have, and her contacts. Eddy Murphy daughter's birthday party as an example. A week later, a sweet sixteen $50,000 party. A month after that, a $120,000 party. She got me mad when she told me she charged $1,000.00 for the last one. Jeesh!!! Anyways, she's networking and making good contacts.

There is a mentality here, even from photographers, that claim, "You can't charge those prices, here." They're wrong. There is a niche market. Just have to get in. Besides, you need not limit yourself to the province. You can get weddings from outside the province - internationaly even, if you position yourself well with a distinctive style.

Turks & Caicos. Must be warmer than here, in Montreal...:)

[codex0]

I've been wondering about doing Daguerrotype wedding portraits - whether there'd be a market for them.

I'd doubt it... Using the becquerel (safer) process, you'd be looking at three minutes exposure time at f/2.8 in direct sunlight... Daguerreotypes also have a tendency to exaggerate lines and wrinkles in the face, seemingly adding 20 years or so to the apparrent age of the subjects. It would be a great thing to produce, but I think it would be difficult to consistently deliver for couples, having gone through the process a few times. There are a number of things that can go wrong, and you generally can't tell until afterwards whether your image turned out well or not.

Just my 2 cents. :)

[rhys]

I'd doubt it... Using the becquerel (safer) process, you'd be looking at three minutes exposure time at f/2.8 in direct sunlight... Daguerreotypes also have a tendency to exaggerate lines and wrinkles in the face, seemingly adding 20 years or so to the apparrent age of the subjects. It would be a great thing to produce, but I think it would be difficult to consistently deliver for couples, having gone through the process a few times. There are a number of things that can go wrong, and you generally can't tell until afterwards whether your image turned out well or not.

Just my 2 cents. :)

Hmm... That had me thinking... How about making a print on one's printer of the B&G then using some photo-etching solution - used by PCB makers - to etch the image into copper/silver/whatever? That way there'd be the equivalent of a Daguerrotype with a lot less mess and it could be taken with a dSLR or a 35mm camera.

[codex0]

Hmm... That had me thinking... How about making a print on one's printer of the B&G then using some photo-etching solution - used by PCB makers - to etch the image into copper/silver/whatever? That way there'd be the equivalent of a Daguerrotype with a lot less mess and it could be taken with a dSLR or a 35mm camera.

Perhaps. I think it'd actually be a lot closer to a photogravure (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photogravure). I suppose you could always make a copy daguerreotype of an image, but that would probably take quite a while. It would probably take care of the problem with reactivity to ultraviolet light.

[Banbert]

At a typical wedding (certainly the ones Ive been to recently) there will be a dozen people with point and shoots and half a dozen with DSLR's of some kind all happy to give their photos to the happy couple who invited them to the wedding, why bother paying someone you dont know to come and do pretty much the same.

[goforphoto]

Sounds better than showing up with three (yes three) photographers all 3 shooting for over 8 hours capturing 4,000 images then post processing each and every one of them. Last wedding I did that's what my group brought to the plate.

[Wilt]

Cosworth, you're right, I believe it's a culture thing. We're the most taxed province in Canada (sales as well as income taxes).

You're in the most taxed nation within Canada now, aren't you?

[sapearl]

Well, as I've posted before I cannot imagine subjecting a bride and goom to that many images.

I'll assume that you are good photographers and produce quality work, but there HAS to be some duplication within those 4000 pictures. Don't you edit for your best images before presenting the package to the client?

Sounds better than showing up with three (yes three) photographers all 3 shooting for over 8 hours capturing 4,000 images then post processing each and every one of them. Last wedding I did that's what my group brought to the plate.

[jessiper]

Sounds better than showing up with three (yes three) photographers all 3 shooting for over 8 hours capturing 4,000 images then post processing each and every one of them. Last wedding I did that's what my group brought to the plate.

Holy cow! That's a lot of images. Why does there need to be 3 photographers?

[goforphoto]

This particular bride wanted shots of every last person that came to the blessed event, so we split into three sections one shot guest, one shot bride, one shot groom. I admit it is over kill but the bride gets what the bride wants. Most of the shot were of the reception, they tossed a big party after the wedding that went on into the night/morning.

[sapearl]

Yes, the customer is (almost :rolleyes: ) always right. I certainly hope that you charged appropriately for your extremely high level of service.

How big of an album package are they getting, or are they the kind of client who just wants the largest quantity of images possible for their money on a couple of disks?

This particular bride wanted shots of every last person that came to the blessed event, so we split into three sections one shot guest, one shot bride, one shot groom. I admit it is over kill but the bride gets what the bride wants. Most of the shot were of the reception, they tossed a big party after the wedding that went on into the night/morning.

[goforphoto]

30 8x10, 100 4x6, as well as a deck of 15 cd's and a dvd of the highlight images, every image was listed by time stamp so she could see exactly what was going on at any given time through out the day. She was creating a scrap book of the wedding along with getting prints for an album Plus she planned on giving family and friends shots also. This bride was extremely nice to work with so we did go through extra pains to give her what she was looking for.

[jessiper]

This particular bride wanted shots of every last person that came to the blessed event, so we split into three sections one shot guest, one shot bride, one shot groom. I admit it is over kill but the bride gets what the bride wants. Most of the shot were of the reception, they tossed a big party after the wedding that went on into the night/morning.

Did she tell you this beforehand? It's "funny" when couple's hire you for your style, your 'eye,' then ask you to do all these things that you wouldn't normally do. I'm not sure what I would've done. I know the photographer I used to shoot for would have said 'no, I don't do that.' It's good to give them what they want, but then why didn't they hire a completely traditional photographer? It's like the say, 'I like what you do, but for my wedding can you do something completely different?' Anyway, sorry to butt in.

[jessiper]

This bride was extremely nice to work with so we did go through extra pains to give her what she was looking for.

It does make all the difference when they're nice back.

[liza]

If their budget was only $600, I wouldn't do the wedding. Budget brides are a pain to deal with.

[Claire]

Sounds better than showing up with three (yes three) photographers all 3 shooting for over 8 hours capturing 4,000 images then post processing each and every one of them. Last wedding I did that's what my group brought to the plate.

Bloody 'ell. That's a lot of pictures! My parents went to my cousin's wedding in Thailand. There were a few 100 guests & 5-6 pro's. They told me there was one guy who spent majority of the evening only shooting formals.