2nd Shooter Agreement/Terms?

[amonline]

I was just wondering what you guys' terms are with your second shooter. Do you pay them? If so, what's the going rate? Are you covering their use of images through your contract? Etc, etc...

Any info you can lend would be nice. I have a partner that I want to utilize this spring and am just trying to see what's customary. Thanks!

[stathunter]

Allow them to tag along, carry your stuff, take fantastic pictures, clean your eqipment and only when they deliver the pictures in a format that is reasonable pay them $20 for gas and a Tim Horton's gift certificate.

[LightUser]

Anytime I help a certain fellow pro when he needs it, he pays me $200.00 to set up his lights, take them down and also 2nd. shoot with him and give him the images and he lets me use them for my portfolio and he sells and gets the money so he makes sure we both benefit.

[amonline]

I'd like to hear more guys!

LightUser, you're pretty much right in line with my thinking. While I'm gearing up to use a partner, he will be doing the same for me and I'm just looking ahead at what's fair to the both of us when backing each other. What you stated is exactly what I had in mind. So, I'm guessing his contract covers usage of "all" wedding images for personal use? (ie: portfolio)

[nikonthree]

In my experience, a second shooter paid between 125-200 flat fee, manages equipment, and shoots.

Shots are property of the principle photographer, usable for second shooter's portfolio and website (everyone wins this way as the second shooter will strive for better shots, so he/she can use them for themselves)

BTW- There was a pretty good/recent thread going on the DWF about this subject, you might look there for input as well

[gateruner]

In my experience, a second shooter paid between 125-200 flat fee, manages equipment, and shoots.

Shots are property of the principle photographer, usable for second shooter's portfolio and website (everyone wins this way as the second shooter will strive for better shots, so he/she can use them for themselves)

This is exactly how we work. However, we add that the second has to wait 30 days before posting any images anywhere just to keep the B & G from seeing them somewhere other than our site by some odd chance. I dont think it is to much to ask.

[John Mireles]

I always pay my second shooter/assistant. I always work with a second and have a regular crew that I work with. Our studio retains the copyright to all images although we do allow the second to use images for non-competing purposes.

For the legal implications of hiring an assistant/second shooter, you can check out http://photographerstoolkit.com/Resources.html. I have an article on associates and assistants posted there.

There's also a contract for assistants/second shooters and another for independent contractors. If you don't specify that you own the copyright to the images, your second shooter will own the copyright and could technically create problems unless you resolve them beforehand in writing. A good second shooter contract is actually far more complicated than a standard wedding contract since there are so many more issues to deal with such as copyright, noncompete, taxes, etc. Unlike a wedding client, you may deal with a second over many times and they'll have intimate knowledge of your business. Best to think ahead and protect yourself.

John

[notapro]

I always pay my second shooter/assistant. I always work with a second and have a regular crew that I work with. Our studio retains the copyright to all images although we do allow the second to use images for non-competing purposes.

For the legal implications of hiring an assistant/second shooter, you can check out http://photographerstoolkit.com/Resources.html. I have an article on associates and assistants posted there.

There's also a contract for assistants/second shooters and another for independent contractors. If you don't specify that you own the copyright to the images, your second shooter will own the copyright and could technically create problems unless you resolve them beforehand in writing. A good second shooter contract is actually far more complicated than a standard wedding contract since there are so many more issues to deal with such as copyright, noncompete, taxes, etc. Unlike a wedding client, you may deal with a second over many times and they'll have intimate knowledge of your business. Best to think ahead and protect yourself.

John

Just curious how you define "non-competing purposes" Would that include his/her own portfolio or website as these are marketing tools? If so, do you pay them more than the ~$200 that I understand to be the norm?

I think it would be difficult for me to agree to those terms as a second. I would want to own the copyright on my images, and I'd expect the to be paid a fairly high price for that. Do most people have this type or agreement with their seconds?

[Big Mike]

I may be doing some second shooting with an established pro in my area. We just did one, as a trial, and it went well. I think we agreed upon a price that is around $33 per hour, based on a 15 hour wedding job. The photos are theirs, to use and sell etc, but I'd have to ask again, if I would be allowed to use them for my own promotion. I think she said that, in the past, they didn't allow that (or they paid less) but I think we can come up with an agreement that is satisfactory to everyone. I think the idea of not posting them before the client gets then, is a good one. I would even add a logo, label or watermark, to specify that I took the photo while working for their company.

[notapro]

I may be doing some second shooting with an established pro in my area. We just did one, as a trial, and it went well. I think we agreed upon a price that is around $33 per hour, based on a 15 hour wedding job. The photos are theirs, to use and sell etc, but I'd have to ask again, if I would be allowed to use them for my own promotion. I think she said that, in the past, they didn't allow that (or they paid less) but I think we can come up with an agreement that is satisfactory to everyone. I think the idea of not posting them before the client gets then, is a good one. I would even add a logo, label or watermark, to specify that I took the photo while working for their company.

I always assumed that in most cases the second held the copyright and could use them for their portfolio, etc. I do see the potential problem that the hiring company is facing with seconds possibly undercutting their prices and selling to the couples, but I would hope for a middle ground.

[Big Mike]

Well, if someone did go behind the primary photographer's back like that...not only would it be extremely bad practice...but it would probably be career suicide.

I think what someone would be worried about is more the image side of it. As an established pro, you don't necessarily want images of your wedding clients, being splashed around by another photographer...especially if you had anything to do with the photos in question.

[thebrewer]

I always assumed that in most cases the second held the copyright and could use them for their portfolio, etc. I do see the potential problem that the hiring company is facing with seconds possibly undercutting their prices and selling to the couples, but I would hope for a middle ground.

A second shooter may have little no rights to the photos depending on the agreement (which you should have in writing) or payment arrangement.

Do a quick google search on 'work for hire' and photo. (I am not a lawyer)

Your agreement should clear these things up before you shoot or hire a second shooter.

[liza]

The second shooter ideally uses his/her own equipment and while they may use the images for their portfolio, I retain copyright since it's a work for hire situation. They earn $100 for the day. My assistant (aka my son) earns $50 for the day to tend to the equipment.

[bcap]

The main photog usually likes to have lots of photos taken of them, so make sure you do that.

[stathunter]

Bryan is the Robin-- of batman and robin ---of second shooters from what I understand. Go Bryan.........go bryan........go bryan. :)

[bcap]

*Batman theme song*

[Toogy]

LOL!!

[notapro]

I got un-lazy and went and looked at John's site and I think it indicates that his seconds and associates are not able to use their photos for their portfolio. Couple other interesting reads over there BTW. Amonline, there is some interesting stuff about the difference betwen seconds and associates that may apply to you since you're both pro photographers, but I'm not sure.

Looks like most everyone else lets their seconds use theirs for the portfolio, though, so that is encouraging. I'd hate to spend my whole day schlepping, get paid $100 and go home with nothing. I'd rather get paid nothing and have something to show for it, even without the copyright.

And, of course, I do realize that any second shooters primary responsibility is to take photos of the main. duh... everyone knows that. Why else would there be one "Pictures of Toogy" thread for each wedding he does?

[thebrewer]

And, of course, I do realize that any second shooters primary responsibility is to take photos of the main. duh... everyone knows that. Why else would there be one "Pictures of Toogy" thread for each wedding he does?

Don't make me spill my beer on my laptop!

[John Mireles]

Just curious how you define "non-competing purposes" Would that include his/her own portfolio or website as these are marketing tools? If so, do you pay them more than the ~$200 that I understand to be the norm? I usually pay my assisants between $250 to $400 for weddings. I usually use the same one or two guys throughout the year and they're not doing their own weddings outside of my studio.

Regardless, I don't want my second shooter, should he go out on his own, to use images from my wedding in a way that's going to cause confusion out in the marketplace. If I come up with a killer shot and use it in my website and then my assistant comes up with a similar shot and uses it in their ad, how is that going to look to a potential client who sees the image in two places? They'll probably begin to wonder who really shot that or who was working for whom? I don't want any potential cause for confusion or questions.

The other thing that's important is to have sufficient control over the use of the images so that there's never a concern over my ability to deliver to my clients. A work for hire agreement pretty much ensures that I have that control. If you work without a contract, the second could try and assert their copyright and stop the studio from using the images.

Everyone is different and every relationship is different. If you don't mind your second shooter using images from your weddings on his website or ads, then give them permission. What the www.PhotographersToolkit.com associates contract does is give you the right to control that. Better to have that right and then decide what to do with it than not than suffer the consequences should things go south. Once a second shooter is out on his/her own, they're not going to care much for your business and could well stir up trouble. I've been around long enough to see this happen many times to various studios and photographers.

I think it would be difficult for me to agree to those terms as a second. I would want to own the copyright on my images, and I'd expect the to be paid a fairly high price for that. Do most people have this type or agreement with their seconds? As I said, every situation is different. Most photographers have no agreement in place. (Then when things go wrong, they get on the various photography forums and ask about what to do. The horse is usually out of the barn at that point.)

John

[notapro]

Once a second shooter is out on his/her own, they're not going to care much for your business and could well stir up trouble. I've been around long enough to see this happen many times to various studios and photographers.



John


That is a truly sad reality. Thanks for the rest of the explanation as well. I do understand what you mean about having similar photos. I guess I'm just naive and it never occurs to me the things that people might do. :confused:

[John Mireles]

That is a truly sad reality. Thanks for the rest of the explanation as well. I do understand what you mean about having similar photos. I guess I'm just naive and it never occurs to me the things that people might do. :confused:I was talking to a local photographer the other day. He was bringing in another photographer to shoot with his studio. He had this guy helping him with shoots and getting him all set to book weddings. They'd worked out pricing and made all sorts of plans.

In the middle of all this, he starts to hear from his clients that they've booked the other guy directly. Turns out, the other guy decided to just set up shop on his own. The second took all the images that he shot with the photographer, his pricing and knowledge of how to get things set up and just applied it to his own business. Because there was no agreement between the two of them, there was nothing the photographer could do.

Basically, the photographer walked him through the process of getting started at no charge and now can't even use the images from the weddings that they shot together because he doesn't want clients to be confused about who shot what especially since the other guy isn't exactly telling the truth about how he shot the images.

That's why my contract places the rights with the hiring studio so that the studio can decide what rights and under what circumstances those rights can be licensed back to the second shooter. Better to be in control than screwed.

John

[Ronald S. Jr.]

I have a standard second for when I might need him, and he's on my level. He gets 20% of the net profit. If I get $2500 for a wedding, he gets $500, etc. He gets/brings his own gear, and tends to do what I ask, but he's not a slave. He shoots with me, not below me.

[MrsOpie]

I would pay a 2nd shooter $150 for the event and thats with them using my equipment and compact flash cards. Then I have to process all of those images. I would also retain copyright to the images since its my equipment and I'm doing the processing. If it was the 2nd shooters equipment and he/she did the processing then its a different story.

[trantz]

if you actually need the assistant, pay them 150 or 200, but if they want to come and build their portfolio, get experience, cover their gas and food.

[notapro]

if you actually need the assistant, pay them 150 or 200, but if they want to come and build their portfolio, get experience, cover their gas and food.

As someone who would like to be an second, I agree with this. If I asked you to let me come along for the learning and portfolio-building, then I'd do it for free.

If you are making more money by having a second shooter either because there is an additional charge or because providing the coverage that makes you worth your fee wouldn't be possible without a 2nd, then I'd want to be paid a reasonable portion of your fee. If you're making money off of me, I want to make money off of me too.

In either case, if you want me to lug your gear and fetch things, I'd want to be paid.

[bcap]

I agree with Amanda and trantz.

If the 2nd shooter is doing it for experience/portfolio work, then, yeah, gas can be taken care of by the main shooter as a "thank you", but if the main is hiring (looking for) a 2nd shooter with the purpose of offering a higher package, I think there should be paid compensation.

[amonline]

I don't agree with the "gas only" thought. I think its courteous to pay what the time/talent is worth. Now, if the shooter has no experience or lacks top quality demonstrative skills, the amount should be discussed and negotiated based on that
premise. Regardless, I think both the main and assistant photogs should be courteous, respectful and professional with each other. This includes paying a second for their time. What is paid is completely up to the employing photographer. I wouldn't screw my assistant photographer like that. I'm smart enough to know offering gas only would chance my losing his service and force me to find another. At the same time, I lose much of what I've been teaching and receiving to help on my work.

[bcap]

Amonline - I think you missed the point.

We were saying that if the 2nd shooter was contacting main photogs saying "Hey, I want to expand my portfolio/get some experience, can I 2nd shoot with you?", then, only gas should be covered.

Whereas if the main photog is LOOKING for a 2nd shooter, they should be paying.

See the difference?

[amonline]

On, yes - I agree with that for sure. Sorry if I missed that.

[bcap]

On, yes - I agree with that for sure. Sorry if I missed that.

It's cool :) Glad we agree!

[kona77]

tends to do what I ask, but he's not a slave. He shoots with me, not below me.

That seems the most professional approach I have seen yet as well as John Mirele's.

Great info.

Thanks

[UNDRCOVR]

how bout if a photographer asks u to come along and be an assistant and shoot with them.. do u interpret this as the previous or the latter?

that's the predicament i'm in.. i was asked to help out and we didn't discuss any $$ issues or copyright.. am i screwed?

my understanding would be that i get paid, but am not so sure if they failed to mention any $$$ issues..

yikes :???:

t

Amonline - I think you missed the point.

We were saying that if the 2nd shooter was contacting main photogs saying "Hey, I want to expand my portfolio/get some experience, can I 2nd shoot with you?", then, only gas should be covered.

Whereas if the main photog is LOOKING for a 2nd shooter, they should be paying.

See the difference?

[bcap]

If he asked you to come out and shoot that means that he is "hiring" you. I would expect to get paid a little.

[Coastwatch203]

Ok, so there I was, a huge event booked, (hundred's of people & several location's type event) - to photog! - needed a second bad !!!.,,,
This up and coming photog from a local camera club had been in contact with me for several months, asking for an opportunity to 2nd shoot.
Id seen her landscape work and I was impressed, - nice, well composed, nice light control, DOF control, great stuff, ... so I said ok.

Not being a tight ass i offered her $500.00 for the day. (a $4,000.00 job, but Id get landed with all the PP, printing etc, so I thought my offer to her was fair, and yes I said anything she took she could use for self promotion - after a 30day wait.
At landscape picture's she was great, but all the indoor, church shots, etc, she took on AV,!!@#@!!!!#@# - dragged the shutter and blurred the lot!

Outside she forgot to change ISO & appature, from her 'open' indoor setting to stop down to compensate for bright daylight - and blew highlights everywhere.
Most of what she handed to me at the end of the day i couldn't use.
I was surprised, Id seen great stuff from this girl!

My lesson learned,,,,,,,
1) Just cause someone can produce nice "one off" landscape portfolio piccys that they have had no pressure to produce, ie, they've had lotsa time to think about the shot,compose,check speeds, apps etc, eat a sandwitch, take the shot...blah blah - doesn't mean they will be able to think on their feet and be able to change settings quickly during an indoor - outdoor shoot!

2) "Warning Will Robinson!!" - Don't let my experience scare off anyone from an untried 2nd Shooter when needed. Just be sure and walk them inside and outside during their interview, "What are your settings now??" hmmmm?? bright Sun, inside poor light,,, etc etc, beware that someone great at one - off shots may have probs in a fast moving pressure environment needing "fast thinkin situational awareness regarding the shooting conditions "
Oh I will use her as a second again, - even though her piccys were crap this time,- the comments i received on her interpersonal skills with people and groups at the event were outstanding!
- That to me is worth the time I will now put into her to ensure next outcome is a keeper!......
- Beware fellow Photogs! Put on a second, but never "assume they will get it right!"
Be prepared to put in some time and ensure a result beforehand!
Cheers,
Mark

[UNDRCOVR]

hey, upon talking to the photographer, she was under the impression that i wanted experience, so she offered.. and so no $$ :( upon thinking about it, i offered to go ahead and assist for experience only.. we'll see what she says.. and how things go

t

If he asked you to come out and shoot that means that he is "hiring" you. I would expect to get paid a little.

[UNDRCOVR]

oh wow..

sounds like a lesson well learnt.. but glad to hear that you have the decency to continue with her.. i'm sure that she felt terrible and has learnt a HUGE amount since..

all the best for the future with ur 2ic

t

Ok, so there I was, a huge event booked, (hundred's of people & several location's type event) - to photog! - needed a second bad !!!.,,,
This up and coming photog from a local camera club had been in contact with me for several months, asking for an opportunity to 2nd shoot.
Id seen her landscape work and I was impressed, - nice, well composed, nice light control, DOF control, great stuff, ... so I said ok.

Not being a tight ass i offered her $500.00 for the day. (a $4,000.00 job, but Id get landed with all the PP, printing etc, so I thought my offer to her was fair, and yes I said anything she took she could use for self promotion - after a 30day wait.
At landscape picture's she was great, but all the indoor, church shots, etc, she took on AV,!!@#@!!!!#@# - dragged the shutter and blurred the lot!

Outside she forgot to change ISO & appature, from her 'open' indoor setting to stop down to compensate for bright daylight - and blew highlights everywhere.
Most of what she handed to me at the end of the day i couldn't use.
I was surprised, Id seen great stuff from this girl!

My lesson learned,,,,,,,
1) Just cause someone can produce nice "one off" landscape portfolio piccys that they have had no pressure to produce, ie, they've had lotsa time to think about the shot,compose,check speeds, apps etc, eat a sandwitch, take the shot...blah blah - doesn't mean they will be able to think on their feet and be able to change settings quickly during an indoor - outdoor shoot!

2) "Warning Will Robinson!!" - Don't let my experience scare off anyone from an untried 2nd Shooter when needed. Just be sure and walk them inside and outside during their interview, "What are your settings now??" hmmmm?? bright Sun, inside poor light,,, etc etc, beware that someone great at one - off shots may have probs in a fast moving pressure environment needing "fast thinkin situational awareness regarding the shooting conditions "
Oh I will use her as a second again, - even though her piccys were crap this time,- the comments i received on her interpersonal skills with people and groups at the event were outstanding!
- That to me is worth the time I will now put into her to ensure next outcome is a keeper!......
- Beware fellow Photogs! Put on a second, but never "assume they will get it right!"
Be prepared to put in some time and ensure a result beforehand!
Cheers,
Mark

[Dorman]

Gotta agree with BCap 100%

[razyl]

Some really good points on this thread...nice work :)

As a couple of people have mentioned, when thinking of payment for a second shooter I'd add in the time costs of the processing the extra shots. I had a second shooter for around 8 hours at a wedding and being a newbie they went nuts and took 1500 shots to my 800!! Took me hours to go through them....thankfully there were some good ones in amongst it all :)

As some have mentioned, my feeling is you shouldn't allow second shooters to use the images taken for their portfolios. I mean, all new photographers want experience and portfolio shots so they can set up business themselves, so by allowing them this use of the images we're feeding the competition!!! I don't hold anything against new photographers but for me wedding photography is a serious business and I cant think of any market where existing businesses help out potential competition....usually the complete opposite.

[notapro]

Some really good points on this thread...nice work :)

As a couple of people have mentioned, when thinking of payment for a second shooter I'd add in the time costs of the processing the extra shots. I had a second shooter for around 8 hours at a wedding and being a newbie they went nuts and took 1500 shots to my 800!! Took me hours to go through them....thankfully there were some good ones in amongst it all :)

As some have mentioned, my feeling is you shouldn't allow second shooters to use the images taken for their portfolios. I mean, all new photographers want experience and portfolio shots so they can set up business themselves, so by allowing them this use of the images we're feeding the competition!!! I don't hold anything against new photographers but for me wedding photography is a serious business and I cant think of any market where existing businesses help out potential competition....usually the complete opposite.

If you aren't trying to help out a new photographer, and therefore probably aren't giving them any advice or tips throughout the day, before or after, and by the sounds of it, are in fact likely guarding your "secrets" then I'd hope you pay them very well. Hired work without perks should be compensated accordingly.

Do you tell them when you hire them that you view them as competition and not only have no intentions of helping them out but intend to do the complete opposite?

You couldn't pay me enough to work for someone with that attitude.

[amonline]

my feeling is you shouldn't allow second shooters to use the images taken for their portfolios. ...by allowing them this use of the images we're feeding the competition!!! I don't hold anything against new photographers but for me wedding photography is a serious business and I cant think of any market where existing businesses help out potential competition....usually the complete opposite.
That's a terrible attitude. If you handle the situation and relationship correctly, it could bring far more reward than "alienating" the competition. The only thing that may spread about you then is your attitude. I know one guy that couples won't touch because he's more of a phuror than fotografer. :lol:

I will say that I have a technique to handle this all in a nice manner though. I only hire 2nd's from a different county/city. ;)

[nikonthree]

If you aren't trying to help out a new photographer, and therefore probably aren't giving them any advice or tips throughout the day, before or after, and by the sounds of it, are in fact likely guarding your "secrets" then I'd hope you pay them very well. Hired work without perks should be compensated accordingly.

Do you tell them when you hire them that you view them as competition and not only have no intentions of helping them out but intend to do the complete opposite?

You couldn't pay me enough to work for someone with that attitude.
Very good points and questions!

I agree with notapro and wonder the same.

[razyl]

Actually, I don't have a terrible attitude, but I think I have good business sense. I do pay very well for the work (definitely not just money for gas) and I am quite happy to (and I do) help them out. But let's be realistic as well as warm and fuzzy: photography is a business (at least it is for me) and you need to establish certain things in a business to ensure it keeps putting food on the table for you each week.

I don't alienate people, not my clients nor hired help... I don't know about where you guys live, but around here the competition is quite strong. Some photographers (primarily newbies) offer dirt cheap packages that will seem very good to a lot a of clients.....especially if they have a great range of portfolio shots.

You couldn't pay me enough to work for someone with that attitude.

But you would work for nothing to build up a portfolio to then start your own business right? Everyone does. I get an email every week from new photographers keen to get experience or "help me out" for no pay. Is my "attitude" worse than theirs if the only reason they have for working for me is to later be the competition?

[razyl]

Add to the above all the issues that John Mireles makes about exisiting or potential clients seeing similar photos and I think you have a strong case for not allowing a second photographer to use images from a wedding you book in their portfolio.

[Alexajlex]

If you aren't trying to help out a new photographer, and therefore probably aren't giving them any advice or tips throughout the day, before or after, and by the sounds of it, are in fact likely guarding your "secrets" then I'd hope you pay them very well. Hired work without perks should be compensated accordingly.

Do you tell them when you hire them that you view them as competition and not only have no intentions of helping them out but intend to do the complete opposite?

You couldn't pay me enough to work for someone with that attitude.

+10000 agreement

I think that this system will build resentment and not friendship. The 2nd could go on a become successful and actively try to undercut your prices because of the harsh treatment.

[Alexajlex]

Add to the above all the issues that John Mireles makes about exisiting or potential clients seeing similar photos and I think you have a strong case for not allowing a second photographer to use images from a wedding you book in their portfolio.

At this point I'm wondering what is there for the 2nd to gain from a relationship like this.

After all if the 2nd is not going to get much from this partnership besides a really small amount of money I think they'd be better off doing a wedding alone for a cheap rate.

The cheapest wedding I've seen in my area that was done by a photog who had no wedding experience was $500 US.
Without a doubt that beats the 2nd shooter rate that most people would pay for an inexperienced 2nd shooter.
Clearly it would be more advantageous of the newbie photog to go do a wedding alone rather than to be a 2nd where he will not learn much (or make much $$$)

[notapro]

Actually, I don't have a terrible attitude, but I think I have good business sense. I do pay very well for the work (definitely not just money for gas) and I am quite happy to (and I do) help them out. But let's be realistic as well as warm and fuzzy: photography is a business (at least it is for me) and you need to establish certain things in a business to ensure it keeps putting food on the table for you each week.

I don't alienate people, not my clients nor hired help... I don't know about where you guys live, but around here the competition is quite strong. Some photographers (primarily newbies) offer dirt cheap packages that will seem very good to a lot a of clients.....especially if they have a great range of portfolio shots.



But you would work for nothing to build up a portfolio to then start your own business right? Everyone does. I get an email every week from new photographers keen to get experience or "help me out" for no pay. Is my "attitude" worse than theirs if the only reason they have for working for me is to later be the competition?

Yes, I would rather work for free for someone who is going to teach me something than work for someone who, quite frankly, likely won't help me improve and if I do, I'd be afraid will eventually stab me in the back.

I honestly hope that you do tell people your attitude - that they will eventually be competition and you feel you'd be remiss to help them get there. Otherwise, it sounds like you're taking advantage of cheap labour.

I just don't understand why if you don't want to be dealing with inexperienced photographers and helping them out, you don't just hire people with proven skill and pay a little more. You say you're paying well already.

And for the record, mentoring is actually very common in most professional industries.

[John Mireles]

At this point I'm wondering what is there for the 2nd to gain from a relationship like this.Knowledge. Plain and simple. Anyone can buy the tools to do the job, but how do you learn the business and how to use the tools of the job?

I've got many years worth of experience doing everything from high end weddings to high end, national advertising jobs. I guarantee that the value of the knowledge that someone new working for me will gain will be far greater than whatever money I pay them.

Granted, I do pay my assistants a fair rate. As valuable as knowledge is, the bills do need to get paid. So, it's a balance.

John

[twofruitz]

This is an interesting thread.

I think people have alot of different assumptions as to what a second shooter is, some people see it as a "kid" trying to learn and be a gear caddie for the pro on the day. Others see it as a hired second photographer to get the shots that the pro could miss, meaning the quality is as good, or slightly less the what the pro can achieve.

For most I think its pretty obvious what kind of person your are getting and they should be paid and treated accordingly.

I am starting out, however i have all the gear i need, but would still have extremely happy to work for free with a photographer to get a feel for the industry and get a few portfolio snaps to help later in life.

Seems like no one wants free help these days, i cant even offer services for $0.00.

[amonline]

Seems like no one wants free help these days, i cant even offer services for $0.00.
Offering your services for free usually stamps "newb" on your forehead. If you are a good photographer, you should be approaching it from a slightly different angle of "would you like some help for a very low cost because I simply love to shoot and can help you out with lots of great images for a minimal investment." This will tell the photographer you love photography and would like to become a friend that helps out first and foremost. Let's face it, a lot of wedding photogs do not have the time to babysit and teach during a contract. I think gaining knowledge is 50/50 reliant on your own instinct to question at the right time and be very observant without being a nuisance. Any photographer would be hesitant of someone who walks in and says "I'm building my portfolio", "I'm looking for instruction" or "I'm getting into the business." ;)

[John Mireles]

Seems like no one wants free help these days, i cant even offer services for $0.00.Well, you can offer, but that doesn't mean that anyone will take you up on that. I get a lot of requests from people wanting to work for me. Most of them come in the form of a mass email that gets sent out to a bunch of photographers. Those go directly in the trash.

Others want to come in and assist me on a wedding or two. That ain't gonna happen either. The number one rule that I give assistants is "Don't f*** up my shoot." If I allow some untried photographer to shoot a wedding with me, I have no guarantee that they won't violate my cardinal rule. Training someone in the middle of a wedding is not an option either. Besides, what's in it for me? I let some unskilled, inexperienced photography mess up my wedding shoot and then leave? Oh yeah, sign me up.

Where I do work with new photographers is as interns. They work for a set period of time - usually ten weeks - at no charge. During that time, they learn how I work and gain ever-increasing responsibility. They can start with simple test shoots, then portrait shoots and eventually weddings. They learn the business and the technical. At the end of that, if I like them, I can bring them on as a paid assistant. If not, they'll have real world training the likes of which you can't pay for.

Few though are willing to make that commitment. Most just want to jump in, see what I do and bail. Sorry folks, that ain't the way it works.

John

[Alexajlex]

Knowledge. Plain and simple. Anyone can buy the tools to do the job, but how do you learn the business and how to use the tools of the job?

I've got many years worth of experience doing everything from high end weddings to high end, national advertising jobs. I guarantee that the value of the knowledge that someone new working for me will gain will be far greater than whatever money I pay them.

Granted, I do pay my assistants a fair rate. As valuable as knowledge is, the bills do need to get paid. So, it's a balance.

John


John,

In this situation I feel that razyl, based on his statements, feels that every 2nd is a potential competitor. This makes me believe that the 2nd may not get that much input. After all some people seem to be reluctant to help someone who will be a competitor in the future. I formulated my response based on the situation at hand and the way razyl feels about the relationship with the 2nd.

[Alexajlex]

If I was in the position of being a 2nd:
Like anything I'd have to see some work of the main did to be sure I'm learning from someone who really knows their stuff.
After all there are multiple avenues of learning such as DVDs from other famous photogs like Doug Gordon and many others.

Now some will say that there is no substitute for real life experience.
True and let me know when a main will let a 2nd be the main photog to get real world experience. I would say most likely it won't happen or if in the remote case that it does it will be after many sessions as a 2nd.
The problem is most mains see 2nds as a one time deal. This is the norm in my area. There is no long term commitment.

So by being a 2nd you get to observe and learn how the main works but you don't have hands on experience as a main.
I value this type or experience but not that much higher than a DVD.
My reasons are practical:

1) You can't stop the main during the formals and ask him a million questions about lighting or other aspects of the shoot. You can pause a DVD and take test shots and watch again the segment and practice until you get it right.
2)Chances of working with the same main as a 2nd on multiple shoots are a bit low. If you don't see or do something a lot of times you will forget it. Practice makes perfect. Again you can practice by learning material from a book or DVD as many times as you want.
3)Weddings are fast paced events. How much information can you retain as a 2nd when you are trying to get as many shots of your own as possible and the whole event is flying by at the speed of light.
4)Does the main have a concrete plan for training the 2nd?Some do and most don't or have one but they are too busy with the wedding to have time to explain it.
5)What are you really training for? With hands on work as a 2nd and only brief observational glimpses of the main I'd say you are training to be a 2nd a bit more than a main.

Most mains do not commit to the same 2nd for multiple gigs.
So now the 2nd goes to another main which may do things differently.
Now he started with one system from one main and he is switching to another system from another main.

I know everyone would agree that if you are new the best way is to learn the trade from one main under one system. Once you learned it you can change it or make your own style.
I feel that the majority of mains do not operate on this system. Those great mains that do are hard to find.

[notapro]

Well, you can offer, but that doesn't mean that anyone will take you up on that. I get a lot of requests from people wanting to work for me. Most of them come in the form of a mass email that gets sent out to a bunch of photographers. Those go directly in the trash.

Others want to come in and assist me on a wedding or two. That ain't gonna happen either. The number one rule that I give assistants is "Don't f*** up my shoot." If I allow some untried photographer to shoot a wedding with me, I have no guarantee that they won't violate my cardinal rule. Training someone in the middle of a wedding is not an option either. Besides, what's in it for me? I let some unskilled, inexperienced photography mess up my wedding shoot and then leave? Oh yeah, sign me up.

Where I do work with new photographers is as interns. They work for a set period of time - usually ten weeks - at no charge. During that time, they learn how I work and gain ever-increasing responsibility. They can start with simple test shoots, then portrait shoots and eventually weddings. They learn the business and the technical. At the end of that, if I like them, I can bring them on as a paid assistant. If not, they'll have real world training the likes of which you can't pay for.

Few though are willing to make that commitment. Most just want to jump in, see what I do and bail. Sorry folks, that ain't the way it works.

John


I love this approach, and to work with someone truly talented, I would definitely make that commitment. It sounds like you are willing to work with people with very little experience as long as they start in the right place, and I think that is generous of you. I would never expect a pro to take me on as a second without seeing a portfolio of portrait work at least. Assistant maybe. I mean, if you just want me to carry your stuff around, I can do that.



John,

In this situation I feel that razyl, based on his statements, feels that every 2nd is a potential competitor. This makes me believe that the 2nd may not get that much input. After all some people seem to be reluctant to help someone who will be a competitor in the future. I formulated my response based on the situation at hand and the way razyl feels about the relationship with the 2nd.

I thought the same thing, but to be honest, looking back at his first post in this thread, maybe I was having a cranky day cause it wasn't that bad. I still think he is wrong that you don't see mentoring in other professions, and I don't agree with his attitude, but I suppose everybody in business approaches competition differently.

[smtp722]

All this talk of 2nd shooting, i'm actually looking for an established photographer looking to hire a 2nd shooter. I've been shooting pics for a while now but lately been wanting to build my own business in it. I'm looking for someone i can learn from as well help. I am not looking to get much compensation, if anything. It's more important for me that i gain experience, learn, and be able to build my business portfolio. So if there is a photographer out there with a gracious heart to give me an opportunity, i would be very grateful! I am very keen and very creative. PM me if you'd like to see some work.

thanks everyone!

[strmrdr]

Well, you can offer, but that doesn't mean that anyone will take you up on that. I get a lot of requests from people wanting to work for me. Most of them come in the form of a mass email that gets sent out to a bunch of photographers. Those go directly in the trash.

Others want to come in and assist me on a wedding or two. That ain't gonna happen either. The number one rule that I give assistants is "Don't f*** up my shoot." If I allow some untried photographer to shoot a wedding with me, I have no guarantee that they won't violate my cardinal rule. Training someone in the middle of a wedding is not an option either. Besides, what's in it for me? I let some unskilled, inexperienced photography mess up my wedding shoot and then leave? Oh yeah, sign me up.

Where I do work with new photographers is as interns. They work for a set period of time - usually ten weeks - at no charge. During that time, they learn how I work and gain ever-increasing responsibility. They can start with simple test shoots, then portrait shoots and eventually weddings. They learn the business and the technical. At the end of that, if I like them, I can bring them on as a paid assistant. If not, they'll have real world training the likes of which you can't pay for.

Few though are willing to make that commitment. Most just want to jump in, see what I do and bail. Sorry folks, that ain't the way it works.

John

That is exactly what I did a long time ago.
I did a bunch of back room stuff until we were comfortable with each other for free, well he bought lunch most days.
I was good enough that he took me along on paid jobs after a few weeks and I did get paid for that but not a lot.
After a couple months I second shot for him and a few different photogs that he recommended me too at a rate that would be the equivalent of well above whats being talked about here.
It helped that they knew I wasn't going to do it full time and compete with them.

They would call me a few weeks to a few months in advance, I'd show up and they would give me a handful of film, I'd shoot it and give it back and most of the time never saw the results.

edit: one thing I wanted too add I think the climate is a lot different now, back then it was an old boys club and once you were in and proved you were willing too work hard to produce good work you got taken care off.
Where today its more everyone out for themselves.

[smtp722]

Well, you can offer, but that doesn't mean that anyone will take you up on that. I get a lot of requests from people wanting to work for me. Most of them come in the form of a mass email that gets sent out to a bunch of photographers. Those go directly in the trash.

Others want to come in and assist me on a wedding or two. That ain't gonna happen either. The number one rule that I give assistants is "Don't f*** up my shoot." If I allow some untried photographer to shoot a wedding with me, I have no guarantee that they won't violate my cardinal rule. Training someone in the middle of a wedding is not an option either. Besides, what's in it for me? I let some unskilled, inexperienced photography mess up my wedding shoot and then leave? Oh yeah, sign me up.

Where I do work with new photographers is as interns. They work for a set period of time - usually ten weeks - at no charge. During that time, they learn how I work and gain ever-increasing responsibility. They can start with simple test shoots, then portrait shoots and eventually weddings. They learn the business and the technical. At the end of that, if I like them, I can bring them on as a paid assistant. If not, they'll have real world training the likes of which you can't pay for.

Few though are willing to make that commitment. Most just want to jump in, see what I do and bail. Sorry folks, that ain't the way it works.

John

John,
You sound very confident, i'd love to see your portfolio. Do you have a website?

[amonline]

John,
You sound very confident, i'd love to see your portfolio. Do you have a website?
http://www.johnmireles.com/
You'll like his contact form. :D

[John Mireles]

Sure, I've got a few:

www.johnmireles.com
www.rimrockworkshops.com
www.ventanaphotography.com
www.ventanakids.com
www.mirelesblog.com
www.PhotographersToolkit.com
www.alternativelandscape.com

That ought to keep you busy for a little while. ;)

John

[smtp722]

Sure, I've got a few:

www.johnmireles.com (http://www.johnmireles.com)
www.rimrockworkshops.com (http://www.rimrockworkshops.com)
www.ventanaphotography.com (http://www.ventanaphotography.com)
www.ventanakids.com (http://www.ventanakids.com)
www.mirelesblog.com (http://www.mirelesblog.com)
www.PhotographersToolkit.com (http://www.PhotographersToolkit.com)
www.alternativelandscape.com (http://www.alternativelandscape.com)

That ought to keep you busy for a little while. ;)

John

thank you so much for sharing. i must say that your inanimate pictures blow me away but your wedding and kids....is missing the wow factor, needs work.. :oops: sorry, just being honest..and my opinion.

[amonline]

thank you so much for sharing. i must say that your inanimate pictures blow me away but your wedding and kids....is missing the wow factor, needs work.. :oops: sorry, just being honest..and my opinion.
Na, there's lots of great stuff in there... you gotta dig through it though. You could have not seen it all in that short period of time. ;)

[smtp722]

Na, there's lots of great stuff in there... you gotta dig through it though. You could have not seen it all in that short period of time. ;)

www.johnmireles.com (http://www.johnmireles.com/) - Checked
www.rimrockworkshops.com (http://www.rimrockworkshops.com/) - Checked - was interested in the workshop even before i checked the wedding site
www.ventanaphotography.com (http://www.ventanaphotography.com/) - Checked
www.ventanakids.com (http://www.ventanakids.com/) - Checked
www.mirelesblog.com (http://www.mirelesblog.com/) - didn't check because blog
www.PhotographersToolkit.com (http://www.photographerstoolkit.com/) - did check earlier from signature, other ppl's work?
www.alternativelandscape.com (http://www.alternativelandscape.com) - Checked

you must be a john mireles fan :lol: . don't get me wrong, john seems to know what he's doing. i would definitely take the workshop if dates worked for me. i just think his strong points lie in inanimate things. i did peruse thru the entire sites, and if i've got to dig deep to be wowed, then it's not that 'wow' is it? :o
i guess some of the cropping was a bit too slanted for me, like the market one and the guy taking off the wife's garter...not sure if that's his style...style is a bit stale..wedding photography is about the heart, passion. at first glance, it seems that john must be a head type photographer and not heart. i'm saying this not to insult but to help. so don't be mad, john!

[smtp722]

Na, there's lots of great stuff in there... you gotta dig through it though. You could have not seen it all in that short period of time. ;)

i want to see your work now :lol:

[John Mireles]

it seems that john must be a head type photographer and not heart. You can like the work or not - that's your perogative. But to say that I'm a head type not a heart type is to get it all wrong. My head runs the business, but my heart is in my photography.

Anyhow, to bring this back to the point of this topic, I was asked to post my web site because one of my responses seemed very "confident." Regardless of what one may think of my work, I don't just talk the talk. I'm fortunate to have clients who value my work enough to hire me for dream jobs and pay me handsomely in the process.

When it comes to second shooters or assistants working with me, they may have the benefit of working with me on $100k ad shoots, $250,000 weddings or going to the homes of some of the wealthiest people in the world. In any transaction, there must be an exchange of value for value for the exchange to be successful. My point is that learning from others with more experience does have a lot of value and that in and of itself can be worth second shooting - for the right person of course.

John

[amonline]

i want to see your work now :lol:
Sorry pal, I only swapped to digital this past year and do not have enough for a website just yet. Besides, you seem to just be trolling for stuff to talk negative about.

[smtp722]

I'm not at all. I only picked on John because i was taken aback by his 'confidence' here so i was VERY curious to see what type of work he produced to allow oneself to talk this way. That's all.

You forgot i did say his inanimate pics are awesome. I thought i was being helpful to share that maybe his weddings may need a lil of work. isn't this the forum to come to improve your pics? but yah, ultimately, take it with a grain of salt, but i wasn't trying to be rude bout his work.

[amonline]

Sorry I misunderstood... that post just didn't come across very nicely I guess. I'd say John has the right to be confident. ;)

[smtp722]

Sorry I misunderstood... that post just didn't come across very nicely I guess. I'd say John has the right to be confident. ;)

i guess it came out as nicely as some of his remarks about 2nd shooters. ;)

[John Mireles]

Sorry pal, I only swapped to digital this past year and do not have enough for a website just yet. Besides, you seem to just be trolling for stuff to talk negative about.Posting online is a funny thing. Instead of an attitude of "thanks for sharing," what I see a lot of is "i'm gonna take him down a notch." Unfortunately, that doesn't encourage folks to post more in the future.

John

[amonline]

Posting online is a funny thing. Instead of an attitude of "thanks for sharing," what I see a lot of is "i'm gonna take him down a notch." Unfortunately, that doesn't encourage folks to post more in the future.

John
I couldn't have said that better. :)

[John Mireles]

I'm not at all. I only picked on John because i was taken aback by his 'confidence' here so i was VERY curious to see what type of work he produced to allow oneself to talk this way. That's all. I don't understand this... Why would you "pick on" anyone who is trying to share knowledge with others? I never attacked anyone nor did I brag (or say anything for that matter) about the quality of my work.

True, after 17 years in the business, I am very confident in my experience and in the knowledge that I can share with others. In my posts though I expressed my desire to be fair and pay well. And for that you want to write something for the express purpose of being hurtful?

Never forget that it's much easier to tear something apart than it is to build it. It's also much easier to build something with help from others. In tearing others down, you'll only keep yourself down as well.

John

[kona77]

John,

Please don't let one knucklehead damper your will to help others here. I thought you earlier post to 2nd shooters was spot on and it is a pitty I live on the East Coast because I would of been very interested in working with you.

Apparently some do not know what is takes to be an intern in the legal or medical field as compared to being a 2nd shooter. When one comments on my own photos many times I just consider the source and I take their comments with a grain of salt.

Keep up the good work and the advice, it is greatly appreciated.

Thanks

[smtp722]

Well, you can offer, but that doesn't mean that anyone will take you up on that. I get a lot of requests from people wanting to work for me. Most of them come in the form of a mass email that gets sent out to a bunch of photographers. Those go directly in the trash.

Others want to come in and assist me on a wedding or two. That ain't gonna happen either. The number one rule that I give assistants is "Don't f*** up my shoot." If I allow some untried photographer to shoot a wedding with me, I have no guarantee that they won't violate my cardinal rule. Training someone in the middle of a wedding is not an option either. Besides, what's in it for me? I let some unskilled, inexperienced photography mess up my wedding shoot and then leave? Oh yeah, sign me up.

Where I do work with new photographers is as interns. They work for a set period of time - usually ten weeks - at no charge. During that time, they learn how I work and gain ever-increasing responsibility. They can start with simple test shoots, then portrait shoots and eventually weddings. They learn the business and the technical. At the end of that, if I like them, I can bring them on as a paid assistant. If not, they'll have real world training the likes of which you can't pay for.

Few though are willing to make that commitment. Most just want to jump in, see what I do and bail. Sorry folks, that ain't the way it works.

John

John, i apologize if i came off wrong. i may have read your post all wrong as well. it just came off really cocky and slightly abrasive. maybe it's because i'm looking for a 2nd shooter position and when i read what you wrote, it just turned me off. i was trying to be very polite about it. I was in no way trying to pick or attack. That's not me but after reading what you posted, i was very curious to seeing what your work was like. Everyone's got different tastes, i should respect that, and i should've kept my opinions to myself. I was honestly trying to give some feedback. I thought your other pics were amazing. How come nobody focuses on that as well? Maybe if you step back a little and understand what i'm trying to say, you'll actually appreciate my comment. Either way, i apologize for talking out loud.

[razyl]

I was keeping away from this thread after getting slammed for some earlier ideas on second photographers being competition :confused: But after seeing the post re John's work I cant help but put up my own comments: anyone with their eyes open and an appreciation for photography would see that John's work is of VERY high quality, period. His images are what any photographer would aspire to take, and so far from "missing the wow factor" that it's laughable to suggest they are.

I'll add that I also see the negative comments that I got came primarily from people NOT currently working as wedding / professional photographers.... which would in many ways explain why they were so negative ;) It might be easy to take a few nice photos of your friends and think you'll make a great photographer, but capturing the kind of images that John shows consistently on his websites (wedding, landscape, and commercial work) takes an unbelievable amount of skill and art. Sit up and take notice.

The sooner you guys try to see how second photographer relationships work from an established business owners perspective the sooner you might approach established photographers with a better offer than "I'll shoot at your weddings for free....but I'll use the images for building my own portfolio". You need to offer something more, with better commitment, and less (or no) emphasis on building up a portfolio if you want to get taken seriously.

[notapro]

I was keeping away from this thread after getting slammed for some earlier ideas on second photographers being competition :confused: But after seeing the post re John's work I cant help but put up my own comments: anyone with their eyes open and an appreciation for photography would see that John's work is of VERY high quality, period. His images are what any photographer would aspire to take, and so far from "missing the wow factor" that it's laughable to suggest they are.

I'll add that I also see the negative comments that I got came primarily from people NOT currently working as wedding / professional photographers.... which would in many ways explain why they were so negative ;) It might be easy to take a few nice photos of your friends and think you'll make a great photographer, but capturing the kind of images that John shows consistently on his websites (wedding, landscape, and commercial work) takes an unbelievable amount of skill and art. Sit up and take notice.

The sooner you guys try to see how second photographer relationships work from an established business owners perspective the sooner you might approach established photographers with a better offer than "I'll shoot at your weddings for free....but I'll use the images for building my own portfolio". You need to offer something more, with better commitment, and less (or no) emphasis on building up a portfolio if you want to get taken seriously.

If you're referring to me, I don't think I ever suggested that that was the offer I would make to an established photographer, and I never took issue with your not allowing use of photos for a portfolio. It was the cut-throat attitude you seemed to have toward the second and competition in general.

If we were on the PR forum (and I do paid PR work) and somebody posted your first post, I would have had the same response. I'm not bitter because nobody will let me shoot with them. Maybe I have a fuzzy view of the world, but I believe there is room for companionship and mutually beneficial relationships amongst professionals sharing a market.

My quazi-apology earlier was intended as recognition that people have differing views and you needn't share mine (and I perhaps read too much into your comments). Unless I should assume that you are struggling greatly as a wedding photographer which would in many ways explain why you are so negative ;).

I've been following this thread because I appreciate different views on the role a 2nd shooter should play and how that experience should benefit both the established photographer and the novice. I appreciate your offering your thoughts on that.

[razyl]

No I'm not struggling....well only to finish processing photos and designing albums on time so my clients don't kill me :)

I guess I'm referring to anyone who thinks the offer of unpaid work is significantly valuable or attractive to an established photographer. Like John mentioned above, I get a number of emails (why do people never call?) to this effect and it surprises me people don't see it from "our" perspective and try to offer something that will actually appeal to an established business.

I do believe there should be companionship and mutually beneficial relationships in a second photographer relationship, and I'd like to think I have one with the people I use. I also think established photographers should be wary of those simply seeking to build up a portfolio, and therefore take the proper steps (eg legal / contracts) to ensure they are protected.

[notapro]

No I'm not struggling....well only to finish processing photos and designing albums on time so my clients don't kill me :)

I guess I'm referring to anyone who thinks the offer of unpaid work is significantly valuable or attractive to an established photographer. Like John mentioned above, I get a number of emails (why do people never call?) to this effect and it surprises me people don't see it from "our" perspective and try to offer something that will actually appeal to an established business.

I do believe there should be companionship and mutually beneficial relationships in a second photographer relationship, and I'd like to think I have one with the people I use. I also think established photographers should be wary of those simply seeking to build up a portfolio, and therefore take the proper steps (eg legal / contracts) to ensure they are protected.

Completely understand your wish to protect your images. I'd be interested to hear what would appeal more to you (or anyone else) as an established photographer than simply second shooting. Is assisting more appealing to you (i.e. carrying your stuff, fetching, fixing the bride's hair, etc.)? What else do you hire help for?

[John Mireles]

John, i apologize if i came off wrong. i may have read your post all wrong as well. Cool. Enough said, let's move on.

John

[razyl]

Completely understand your wish to protect your images. I'd be interested to hear what would appeal more to you (or anyone else) as an established photographer than simply second shooting. Is assisting more appealing to you (i.e. carrying your stuff, fetching, fixing the bride's hair, etc.)? What else do you hire help for?

I mainly hire a second shooter because clients ask for it as they (and I) know it gives a better coverage and range of shots. Getting a different angle at the ceremony, more candid shots as everyone mingles, or simply having someone else's perspective on a wedding is excellent.

I have no problem working with second shooters who run their own business (everyone needs to eat), but just not to use images from "my" weddings in their own business presentations.

[Philco]

Just fyi - John Mireles is one of the 'who's who' in the So. Cal. wedding photography market - so I would say this forum is fortunate to have some one of his caliber chiming in on this subject.

Speaking for myself, I've hired second shooters and I've been hired as a second shooter. My terms for second shooters are the same that I've worked under many times. Studio use of images is okay, web use is subject to my approval - only so that I don't post very similar images on my blog/webpage. I've been very fortunate in that the few people I've shot for were happy with the above arrangement and I have yet to see a need for me to alter it if I bring someone along.

Second shooting is almost as intense as being primary if the expectations are high, but the pay is low ($200-$300 per day) so the inspiration for a second shooter to do well has to come from the desire to improve their own portfolio, learn something new from the primary shooter, and ideally be asked to second shoot again in the future. I've shot for a friend of mine a number of times, and in a lot of ways I'd have been happy to work for nothing because the knowledge I received in return has changed the way I shoot and improved my approach in invaluable ways - on the other hand, many of my images have been chosen for his clients albums and my work is on his webpage, so it was a fair trade. He's not worried about me stealing his brides since he charges 3 to 6 times as much as I do, and let's face it, when I get to the point where I'm charging that much, I'll be hiring help the same way. There is an open acknowledgement that we are training our competition, but I see it as a fair trade. If someone can't produce good results, there's no reason to hire them as a second....as an assistant maybe, but that's a distinctly different job. If they do solid work, it should be no surprise that they want ot build their own business. Maybe I'm niave, but I still think there's enough pie to go around, if your work is solid. I've been trained by some of the very best and I am happy to return the favor as I grow (I'm not saying I'm there yet, so don't start flaming me right away).

Cheers,
Phil

[ofdphoto]

There is much more to creating a successful business than taking good photos. So my view of second shooting is as an ad-hoc apprenticeship ... all photographers can learn from each other about photography, so there should be enough mutual benefits for two photographers (who get on well) to shoot together one or more times without worrying too much about the dollars or legalities. The savviness of building a business is harder to teach and is unlikely to be learnt by a second shooter in the intensity of covering a wedding anyway.

I'd expect the second shooter to retain ownership of their images and be free to use them. I'd also expect the second shooter to resist screwing the main shooter, which is why I would only engage with a second (or main ;-)) whom I know well via other means ...

But for working with people I don't know, I can understand the legal stuff. So I probably won't do it.

[Alexajlex]

I'd also expect the second shooter to resist screwing the main shooter


I have to point out that sometimes it is the other way around.
The main is screwing the 2nd.
I have heard first hand stories from a friend of mine who got taken 3 times.
Anything from "the check is in the mail" to copying and formatting his card on the camera.

[zorz]

Let me try my question here...

I've looked but haven't found info on when the payment to a second is actually made. I am talking to one photog, he wants me to second-shoot but his contract (which covers the points discussed here such as insurance, copyright, etc.) states that the payment for my service will be made within 30 days after I deliver my images... As a photographer myself, I feel somewhat unusual being paid, say, a month after the wedding... If he gets paid by the client, in advance, for both photographers, why can't I get my portion at the same time?

Those who paid/ was paid for second-shooting - when was the payment made?

[amonline]

I pay the shooter when he hands me the files.

[John Mireles]

I think 30 days is way too long. The photographer has the payment for the client so waiting shouldn't be a matter of cash flow. The assistant or second shooter is usually the least paid person on the shoot so I like to see to it that they get paid quickly.

I have a bookkeeper pay all of my bills so I rarely cut checks on the spot. I let my crew know that we pay our bills every Thursday so they know when they can expect payment. Most of my second shooters are paid as employees so we take out taxes and all that which is one reason why I never pay on the spot.

I never pay in advance since I want to make sure that the second will show up. That's not to say that you can't negotiate an advance with the hiring photographer if you feel you need to.

John