Two close friends are getting married in November. I'd be attending the wedding as a guest/"uncle bob" (dont want any bad blood between friends!). I'm just getting started in my own wedding photography business, and I offered to give them some insight about hiring a wedding photographer when the time came.
Well, they hired a photographer on their own. I know it's difficult, if not impossible, to make clients see the difference between "good" and "great" photography, but frankly I'm a little surprised with who they chose. The company's photos are fine, uninspired, look like they were taken in 1990, and they use a ton of outdated photoshop tricks--with poor execution to boot. Of course, I didn't say any of this to my friends, but I did ask what made them choose the photographer. This is what impressed them the most:
-they are a husband and wife team. Because there are two people, you will get twice as many photos
-they have lots and lots of equipment. They bring two pairs of cameras per person and have all kinds of lenses so we can take lots of cool photos: fisheye, camera-on-a-stick to get high above shots, telephoto, primes...
-you will be able to download all your photos for free from our website the day after your wedding, in addition to getting a DVD
-you get an album and an engagement session with the package
As you can see, not one of the points that sold my friends was picture quality! They interviewed 3 photographers, and this photographer basically sold them on things that are pretty standard among photographers here. This has really opened my eyes to the phrase you hear all the time about "successful photographers are great marketers, not necessarily great photographers".
Is this in line with anyone else? What sells your clients on you? Is it really about all the "specs" and very little focus on the images?