Pet Peeves?

I thought it might be interesting to hear everyone's pet peeves they run across when shooting a wedding. One of mine is when the Minister has the no flash rule during the ceremony so while the professional photographer is abiding by the rule, the pews are full of family and guest shooting away with their point and shoots and flashes going off every where .

The videographer stealing the bride and groom away when they are busy with the photographer....only happened once but he had 1/2 hr to have them after me but he chose to STEAL them....lol

My biggest peeve - at least lately - is when a beginning photographer decides that there's money to be made shooting weddings, and that they will make it. They've bought something like a Digital Rebel, need to rationalize that purchase to their wife, and therefore decide to go into the wedding photography business. Then he writes in to this site and asks beginning photographer type questions. Which kit lens should I get? Do I need to use flash? How do you pose people? And they expect us to help them.

Now I don't particularly care about any particular wedding that I might lose to this (generic) guy as there are plenty of weddings around. It's about all the crap that I take from the bride's sister/aunt/bridesmaid who had one of these morons shoot their wedding the year before and needs to vent, and vent big!

Just this year I heard about a women photographer who charged the B&G about 30% more than I do (and it was the photographer's first wedding!) and now FOUR MONTHS LATER they still don't have their proofs. This kind of garbage gets out there and make competent wedding photographer's lives a lot more difficult.

In my mind these "new" photographers are arrogant, incompetent, hide their experience, charge a lot of money, provide utter crap to their clients, and all because have little or no photography experience. Since wedding photography is a cash cow, they feel entitled to feed on that cow's tit simply because they WANT to. Well I've got a knife and I want to do some brains surgery. So what's the problem?

So my standard answer from now on is this; If you don't have five years of photography experience, or have gone to a photography school; have assisted on a half dozen weddings with a real pro; have shot at least three or four friends and family weddings, then: DON'T SHOOT WEDDINGS FOR MONEY.

Further, if you don't have two DSLR camera bodies; two lenses of wedding photography focal lengths; two flashes; a tripod; twice the CF card capacity that you think that you'll need; and 500 hours of Photoshop experience; then DON'T SHOOT WEDDINGS FOR MONEY.

And if you don't understand WHY I'm suggesting all of that, well then: DON'T SHOOT WEDDINGS FOR MONEY.

DaveG wrote in post #2309605
My biggest peeve - at least lately - is when a beginning photographer decides that there's money to be made shooting weddings, and that they will make it. They've bought something like a Digital Rebel, need to rationalize that purchase to their wife, and therefore decide to go into the wedding photography business. Then he writes in to this site and asks beginning photographer type questions. Which kit lens should I get? Do I need to use flash? How do you pose people? And they expect us to help them.

Now I don't particularly care about any particular wedding that I might lose to this (generic) guy as there are plenty of weddings around. It's about all the crap that I take from the bride's sister/aunt/bridesmaid who had one of these morons shoot their wedding the year before and needs to vent, and vent big!

Just this year I heard about a women photographer who charged the B&G about 30% more than I do (and it was the photographer's first wedding!) and now FOUR MONTHS LATER they still don't have their proofs. This kind of garbage gets out there and make competent wedding photographer's lives a lot more difficult.

In my mind these "new" photographers are arrogant, incompetent, hide their experience, charge a lot of money, provide utter crap to their clients, and all because have little or no photography experience. Since wedding photography is a cash cow, they feel entitled to feed on that cow's tit simply because they WANT to. Well I've got a knife and I want to do some brains surgery. So what's the problem?

So my standard answer from now on is this; If you don't have five years of photography experience, or have gone to a photography school; have assisted on a half dozen weddings with a real pro; have shot at least three or four friends and family weddings, then: DON'T SHOOT WEDDINGS FOR MONEY.

Further, if you don't have two DSLR camera bodies; two lenses of wedding photography focal lengths; two flashes; a tripod; twice the CF card capacity that you think that you'll need; and 500 hours of Photoshop experience; then DON'T SHOOT WEDDINGS FOR MONEY.

And if you don't understand WHY I'm suggesting all of that, well then: DON'T SHOOT WEDDINGS FOR MONEY.

BEAUTIFUL!!!!

PIXI_666 wrote in post #2307015
The videographer stealing the bride and groom away when they are busy with the photographer....only happened once but he had 1/2 hr to have them after me but he chose to STEAL them....lol

AC... I'm suprised you let him get away with that. That soes suck though. Hope everything turned out alright.

DaveG wrote in post #2309605
My biggest peeve - at least lately - is when a beginning photographer decides that there's money to be made shooting weddings, and that they will make it. They've bought something like a Digital Rebel, need to rationalize that purchase to their wife, and therefore decide to go into the wedding photography business. Then he writes in to this site and asks beginning photographer type questions. Which kit lens should I get? Do I need to use flash? How do you pose people? And they expect us to help them.

Now I don't particularly care about any particular wedding that I might lose to this (generic) guy as there are plenty of weddings around. It's about all the crap that I take from the bride's sister/aunt/bridesmaid who had one of these morons shoot their wedding the year before and needs to vent, and vent big!

Just this year I heard about a women photographer who charged the B&G about 30% more than I do (and it was the photographer's first wedding!) and now FOUR MONTHS LATER they still don't have their proofs. This kind of garbage gets out there and make competent wedding photographer's lives a lot more difficult.

In my mind these "new" photographers are arrogant, incompetent, hide their experience, charge a lot of money, provide utter crap to their clients, and all because have little or no photography experience. Since wedding photography is a cash cow, they feel entitled to feed on that cow's tit simply because they WANT to. Well I've got a knife and I want to do some brains surgery. So what's the problem?

So my standard answer from now on is this; If you don't have five years of photography experience, or have gone to a photography school; have assisted on a half dozen weddings with a real pro; have shot at least three or four friends and family weddings, then: DON'T SHOOT WEDDINGS FOR MONEY.

Further, if you don't have two DSLR camera bodies; two lenses of wedding photography focal lengths; two flashes; a tripod; twice the CF card capacity that you think that you'll need; and 500 hours of Photoshop experience; then DON'T SHOOT WEDDINGS FOR MONEY.

And if you don't understand WHY I'm suggesting all of that, well then: DON'T SHOOT WEDDINGS FOR MONEY.

Gee, how do you really feel.

I'm one of the beginners but I'm trying to do it the right way. Just family stuff to start out with that wouldn't have a photographer anyways as I learn. Reading, studying, practicing, two bodies, flash, etc, etc. Even though I'm a beginner myself I honestly do feel your pain. I wouldn't even post on these type of forums until I felt I knew enough to ask a decent question. Some of the questions that come up really make me groan. Just don't get too jaded to help some of us that are really serious about this.

woffles wrote in post #2309745
Gee, how do you really feel.

I'm one of the beginners but I'm trying to do it the right way. Just family stuff to start out with that wouldn't have a photographer anyways as I learn. Reading, studying, practicing, two bodies, flash, etc, etc. Even though I'm a beginner myself I honestly do feel your pain. I wouldn't even post on these type of forums until I felt I knew enough to ask a decent question. Some of the questions that come up really make me groan. Just don't get too jaded to help some of us that are really serious about this.

You may be the exception as well. It sounds like you may have some back-up equipment as well which is a huge step in front of some of the newbies. I think what he was talking about is people who get a digital camera and say, "I can do this" without ever even taking the time to even work with a local pro first to learn the ropes. There's another (actually several) other post floating around about the "importance" of the couples wedding and how a lot of paeople don't take that in to regard and are just trying to make a quick buck. It's sad sometimes and some of us on here will sound like a stuck record when it comes to trying to explain everything. It's asked A LOT on here....

DaveG wrote in post #2309605
My biggest peeve - at least lately - is when a beginning photographer decides that there's money to be made shooting weddings, and that they will make it. They've bought something like a Digital Rebel, need to rationalize that purchase to their wife, and therefore decide to go into the wedding photography business. Then he writes in to this site and asks beginning photographer type questions. Which kit lens should I get? Do I need to use flash? How do you pose people? And they expect us to help them.

More blame should be put on the wedding couple that goes with someone with no experience/portfolio and/or tries to save money. Most people like to save money, but a once in a lifetime (hopefully ) event is not the place. Business is business, some people charge a lot and given low quality work in any market.

And I thought the "no flash" policy for ceremonies was to have personal camera flashes not interfere with the photographer's flash.

My pet peeve are budget brides who assume that since I don't have a great deal of experience with weddings that I'll shoot it for next to nothing. They don't take into account that I'm a portrait, sports, and newspaper photographer with more than 20 years of experience. When I tell them what I'd charge, which is in line with the industry standard, they get a little huffy. Sorry, girls, but I don't work cheap!

Biggest pet peeve is when someone other than the b&g or their relatives or the planner does something that changes the timeline. I don't like surprises.

My pet peeve is arrogant photographers scared of competition from talented, but inexperienced photographers trying to get a foothold in an already flooded market!

So dave, why don't you tell us how you really feel?
My pet peeve it the guy/girl at events who sees a camera and does everything in their power to get into every shot. It's not bad when it's a chick and she looks good.

Dave are you saying I should, or shouldn't go with the kit lens?

LOL!

tony fanning wrote in post #2314446
My pet peeve is arrogant photographers scared of competition from talented, but inexperienced photographers trying to get a foothold in an already flooded market!

I agree with most of what Dave said, but that's pretty funny right there!

Anyway, videographers in general irritate me. There are a few around this area that I like working with, but most of them are very intrussive. And I think the product is lame. Really love the heart shaped transition some of them use!

Anybody had brides that wear uncomfortable shoes and spends the entire day complaining that her feet hurt?