How cost effective is it having a second shooter?

Removed

If he or she is good......very IMHO. Two places at once, different style of photography, more media type relations with guests etc...

Removed

Its not a complicated algorithm, subtract the cost of a second shooter for the day, from the rate you would charge for expanded coverage. If the bump in your rate is more than your cost, then its a profit. Keep in mind you might also be training your future competition..

How much the second shooter gets paid is a big a factor. Some main shooters pay a nominal fee like $100 while others will pay over $500 to their second shooter. I have a $300 second shooting assignment coming up which is great. But I checked out her website and she's charging $400 to have me there, so it's not hurting her bottom line. Also, our contract states that if she's unable to shoot the wedding, I do it...for $400. A pretty shrewd business practice here.

gonzogolf wrote in post #12815285
Its not a complicated algorithm, subtract the cost of a second shooter for the day, from the rate you would charge for expanded coverage. If the bump in your rate is more than your cost, then its a profit. Keep in mind you might also be training your future competition..

Well said.

I second shoot often. I agree. It's simple. Whatever you charge your client for the second shooter to be there minus what you pay the second shooter.

I think the value of having a second shooter varies by person to person. Sounds like you've been able to cover weddings fine without them, so I am not sure what value a second shooter, even a good one will bring you.

I usually second shoot for the same guys. What I shoot depends on the day. Sometimes I am at the groom's house getting shots of the guys getting ready. Other times, I am at the bride's house getting secondary shots, detail shots, etc. At the ceremony, I usually stick around the back and sides to get the wedding party arriving, getting out of the car, waiting for the ceremony to begin, bride and father walking down the isle from behind, church detail shots, crowd reaction shots, etc, etc. At the reception, it's the same deal. I am there shooting details, entrance shots, crowd reaction, different angles, etc. I also shoot secondary video coverage as well.

As far as what type of value all that brings the main photographer, I am not sure, but I guess it brings some value, because he keeps on calling me for second shooting gigs when I am available, keeping me really busy.

As for training your competition, I suppose that's a good point. That's something you would have to weigh out.

I find an assistant far more useful than a second shooter. Their job is to help me make great images, rather than doing their own thing trying to get images. My assistant shoots as well though, for prep, ceremony, and parts of the reception, the rest of the time they do lighting, manage gear, etc.

gonzogolf wrote in post #12815285
Its not a complicated algorithm, subtract the cost of a second shooter for the day, from the rate you would charge for expanded coverage. If the bump in your rate is more than your cost, then its a profit. Keep in mind you might also be training your future competition..

I totally agree, but I also have to keep in mind that it's more time on the back end to process their photos in addition to mine.
Every wedding my wife shoots with me there are some photos that I see and just say "damn she proved her worth right there alone" haha
but having my significant other shooting with me has benifits other than the images too imho

but having a significant other 2nd shooter is def. different than a hired second

I have two second shooters- my fiance and his sister. I charge an extra $500+ for my packages that have a second shooter, I don't pay them at all. So the answer is, yes, it's worth it... for me anyway.

Of course, not everyone has the liberty of being the bread winner and have all their seconds *cough*mooching*couch* living with them. They are both extremely talented, in fact I sent them off on their own project today I trust them that much. So I don't feel I'm shorting my clients. Just them. Haha!

I only second for one person. She likes having second shooters for peace of mind. For her it's not a matter of being a profit center...she doesn't shoot without a second. It's built into her price and she doesn't let clients negotiate it out.

I don't believe this is something you can figure out on a balance sheet - if you're happy with what you deliver and don't feel you're losing work because you can't cover two places/angles at once, then there's no real point in considering it.

Others have covered the main advantages, and how to deal with costs, but there are a couple of things that haven't been mentioned...

1. Selling the idea of 2 shooters to a bride/groom is easy - because most people can easily see how being in two different places at once can make sense. And if your second (or equal-first) delivers a brilliant image that you could never have got, what value do you put on that for your balance sheet?

2. Looking at your gearlist you obviously see the value in having multiple camera bodies and lenses - but there's one thing that you've neglected to back up ...yourself!

We know quite a few people who would only ever consider shooting weddings as a team of 2 ...some of them are husband/wife, others are 2 equal-standing pros. One of our friends once tripped and badly twisted his ankle just as he walked into the old english pub where the groom and his men were having their pre-wedding celebration. Some of groomsmen were were medics, and they quickly sorted him out, but his mobility and ability was severely hampered for the rest of the day - fortunately his wife (who is also a fine photographer) took over the lead. What price do you put on that for the balance sheet?

So I think it's more a question of whether you see the need/advantage of a second ...if you don't, just carry on as you are.

Rob

Very good value IMHO...

I work as second shooter for this company who charges the client $1,000 extra for the extra coverage and groom's prep photos, and pay me $600 per wedding, I don't have to PP the photos, at the end of the day I give my card to the main photographer, and when he's done with it, gives me back my card with all my shots in it, and gives me a copy of the edited version too, everybody happy...

I also find an assistant to be more valuable than a second. I pay my assistant more than my second. To be honest, after a few months now, I may change things a bit. If my second wants to stay all day, they can. But I only really need them for the beginning and some parts of the ceremony. Bridals and reception, my assistant and I are more than enough.

Removed