cheap weddings lowering the value of photography

[CanonLaw]

I recently came across a thread on here about how the emergence of stock photos is cheapening photography. I also read that many professionals are upset that some newer photographers will do weddings or other events for a much lower price than a real pro would charge. The complaint is that when these amateurs charge way less, they are lowering the value of photography as a whole. Some pros said they are no longer able to charge what they used to because of this.

Here is my question then. I am trying to get into doing weddings. I have a full time job with weekends and evenings off. I don't want to become a full-time photographer because of the volatile nature of that work. However, I have summers off and I do want to do weddings for people then. I don't feel that I can charge $1000+ for a wedding. I don't feel that I am quite that good yet. I would maybe feel comfortable charging $500-$600. Now does that mean I am lowering the overall value of photography? Do I just wait and wait until I think I am good enough to charge real money for this (which would mean no practice, since I can't do it if I can't charge for it.) I feel if I did maybe four or five more, then I would be able to charge a bit more for them, but right now, I just don't think I can. Sorry for all this rambling. Hopefully this makes sense to someone out there!

[Shadowplay]

If you don't think you can charge $1000+ then you can't. Three options:

1.) Don't shoot weddings
2.) Shoot as an assisstant for another REAL photog
3.) Charge minimum 1k and deliver crap.

I think those are the only realistic three options (in order). Don't shoot $500 weddings!

[CanonLaw]

Originally Posted by Shadowplay

If you don't think you can charge $1000+ then you can't. Three options:

1.) Don't shoot weddings
2.) Shoot as an assisstant for another REAL photog
3.) Charge minimum 1k and deliver crap.

I think those are the only realistic three options (in order). Don't shoot $500 weddings!

So I really shouldn't do them for $500? To me that sounds high, but I guess it is not. Maybe I will just do them for family and friends for practice, or maybe work as an assistant for a local pro.

Thanks for the reply. Apparently it is pretty black and white.

[PhotoJourno]

Well, I am going to give it a shot.
I think your price has got to be something you can live with (Quality/Skill/Gear/Results vs Money).
After authoring a couple of threads myself here, and reading many more in the subject -added to my conversations with other photogs-, it seems that there are two divisions in the Wedding Photography world. The Budget Photographer, and the Pro photographer. With the latter, you know it will cost you two thou', but you would be likely to get proofs in a timely manner, extremely good quality photos from great equipment and years of experience,etc.
The budget photographer, would give you the cheaper option, from charging $500 for an album with 60 images and a DVD with all the digital photos. (Can you assume quality is bound to be less?.. By rule, a 20D with a 18-55 will not outperform a 5D with a 17-55, but then it depends on who is holding each camera).

So, my recap:
- Charge according to your skill level
- Be forthcoming on your experience and give references
- You might end up taking better photos than most out there, just be realistic.

Last but not least. Your thread seemed to have four or five great topics for discussion, into one single paragraph. I think the digitalized and internet-ized technologies are changing the world of photography. However, Stock photo companies are not to blame in this specific case.

Best of luck !...

[Curtis N]

First, a History lesson:
1900 - The first of the famous BROWNIE Cameras was introduced. It sold for $1 and used film that sold for 15 cents a roll. For the first time, the hobby of photography was within the financial reach of virtually everyone.

Two weeks later - Brownie owners began receiving prints in the mail.

One day later - Some professional photographers (the ones without any particular talent or skill) started whining about how the mass availability of cameras would "lower the value of photography".

The whining hasn't stopped since.

Now, as for your dilemma - Regardless of what you sell, no one is well-served by a newcomer who undercuts the market and offers an inferior product. Develop your skills in other arenas (events, reunions, anniversaries, etc.), work as an assistant to learn what wedding photography is really like. When you have the skills and confidence to offer a good product at a price that will make it truly worthwhile, then make that step. A wedding is a terrible place for on-the-job training.

Oh, and maybe read this thread.

[overclock]

If you're good enough to do weddings then you're good enough to charge for them. If you suck then you shouldn't even consider doing weddings.

Don't price yourself too low. If you become known as a budget photographer then the word will get around and potential customers will come to you wanting a price break only to find out that now you consider yourself much, much better than when their friend got married and now your prices are double what their friend said.

[sfaust]

If you're good enough to do weddings then you're good enough to charge for them. If you suck then you shouldn't even consider doing weddings.

This is sound advice. Practice in other venues to get your skills up before venturing off and trying weddings. If you botch a $200 or a $5,000 it could cost you thousands trying to fix your mistake. In other words, if don't feel you can honestly deliver usable images covering all aspects of the wedding to the bride/groom, then you aren't ready no matter what you decide to charge. Once you can consistently capture and deliver usable images, then you're ready, and your worth more than $500.

Just like a auto mechanic, dentist, insurance adjuster, or supermarket cashier, you just don't one day start doing the job until you can actually do it. You get training, practice, etc, until you are ready, then jump into the workplace and earn the same pay as everyone else.

If you get out there early on, even if you tell the clients you are just starting out, and you botch a wedding or two, you will have a very hard time overcoming that reputation in the future. Why risk that.

Two weeks later - Brownie owners began receiving prints in the mail.

One day later - Some professional photographers (the ones without any particular talent or skill) started whining about how the mass availability of cameras would "lower the value of photography".

The whining hasn't stopped since.

I agree. I don't think microstock and such is devaluing photography. The people buying microstock usually never considered rights managed stock anway. I think microstock does fill a need in the marketplace.

But what does devalue photography, is the proliferation of 'free' photography by good amateur photographers who do it for fun and are happy to just give it away. If you went to a wedding expo, and found 3 or 4 booths setup where photographers were charging $200 to cover their expenses, and were delivering results equal to $3,000 weddings, you can be sure everyone would have a very hard time selling their work. And that pretty much describes editorial magazine, sports, portraits, glamour, travel, nature, and retail photography. If weddings were so high pressure with a lot of risk, I think it would be much worse than it is today with $500 weddings and free images on CD.

[sapearl]

Well, as you've probably noticed this is a pretty hot topic with a lot of folks. I too have a regular full time and have been doing weddings and other social events part time now for 30+ years.

Other than assisting (good idea) or not doing it all (little experience) there is another option you may wish to consider. You could limit yourself to very small, limited service weddings to start. This will get you some experience, somewhat limit any possible danger your lack of experience may cause - no disrespect intended, just a fact of life - and allow you to charge a low but fair amount that's commensurate with your time and lack of experience. I would not recommend tackling full day, full service jobs though at this point.

For example, although I have a full day/service 8x10 album package that starts around $2K, I do offer a very abbreviated 3-hour proof package, single location, no frills arrangement for about $550.

This covers some formal groups, the ceremony and a small part of the reception (if at all). This has proven to be perfect for people on a tight budget who understand the importance of hiring a pro, and also those embarking on second marriages. This would allow you to get your feet wet and see just how involved you'd like to become.

Also as others have suggested, practice and hone your craft shooting other social events like anniversaries, birthday parties, corporate presentations, awards ceremonies, bar mitzvah, quinciniera's, etc. The more you shoot the more you polish your sense of timing and the better you'll become at interacting with your sujbjects. - Stu

[sfaust]

Thats a great idea Stu!

[cosworth]

I have shot weddings. I wouldn't put myself through it for $1000. I'd charge between $2000 and $3000 and do it right. Otherwise, I'd rather NOT shoot a wedding.

I would spend $500 of MY time just in prepartaions and communication pre-wedding. $500 of my time is post processing. $500 of my time would be printing and assembling an album. $500 in gear depreciation/acquisition. That leaves about $1000 for me to clean my suit, spend 15 hours walking around with drunk people, drive to 4 different places at least, get yelled at by the mother 46 times, haggle with dad over the deposit and payment date, shoo the videographer out of my shots 742 times.

I'm more inclined to go to the local racetrack and park my ass in turn 2 in a lawn chair and sell prints online and go home that night and watch the hockey game.

[sapearl]

Originally Posted by sfaust

Thats a great idea Stu!

Thank you Stephen - and I do want to emphasize that small package involves VERY minimal work on my part, and I only drive to one place. I only do about one of those a year, but find it's often a referral "hook" to sell my much more expensive packgages to those with larger budgets. Clients appreciate the consideration and talk it up to their friends.

[gateruner]

I agree with most on here. I have been second shooting at weddings to get the needed experience before my first solo in October. I wouldnt even consider it for $500.00. To much time and responsibility involved. Stu has a good thought and there isnt anything wrong with it. But he isnt giving away the farm for $500 bucks. The issue I would have is if someone wanted me to shoot a wedding and just turn over the disc. I wont EVER do that as that is my name they are running through the Walgreens 15 cent photo lab. But that is another subject to raise the ire of Photogs.

[convergent]

My experience is when you try to help someone out by doing something for free or budget prices, you end up getting burned almost every time (at least thats been my experience). When I've tried to do this (and not just with photography), these people are often the ones that complain the most about what you didn't do.

I agree with the others that you shouldn't do a budget job because your skills aren't there yet... but you should also be able to qualify what you are capable of and do that well. I don't do weddings and don't really want to. But I would feel comfortable doing some aspects of the job, and if I were to do it I'd be able to qualify what I'd do.

I think the best advice is to try to 2nd shoot with someone and get some experience and learn the "un-written" stuff... then go to charging.

[sapearl]

Originally Posted by gateruner

........ Stu has a good thought and there isnt anything wrong with it. But he isnt giving away the farm for $500 bucks. ............

Absolutely not - just maybe, if they spent $5k+ with me, I might consider providing some sort of disk with some of the images, but I'd have to think about that since I'd be kissing all my print sales goodbye.

If you want to read some REAL firestorms on "The $600 Disk Wedding," look through the wedding threads and you'll see a variety of opinions on that topic.

[CanonLaw]

Originally Posted by sapearl

Absolutely not - just maybe, if they spent $5k+ with me, I might consider providing some sort of disk with some of the images, but I'd have to think about that since I'd be kissing all my print sales goodbye.

If you want to read some REAL firestorms on "The $600 Disk Wedding," look through the wedding threads and you'll see a variety of opinions on that topic.

I agree with you on that. I did a wedding for a friend who couldn't afford anything, it was only my second time, BUT, I gave her a disc and she went to walgreens to print them and the stupid lab cut everyones heads off! I will not do that again.