Low Budget Wedding... gesh~

man, i knew wedding photog is a tough business to be in. but man.. it just feel like as more and more DSLR are becoming more affordable, likewise more and more want to do wedding photog business.

the hardest part for me was setting my pricing, since many on here ask about what price should i set for this package etc.. and many will reply check with you local competition. well.. i did.. and found it very discouraging. 6hrs of full coverage with 500+ photos with print release for $600 ~ $750. Some willing to travel within 50mile radius for free?

Dang... in California gas is really high already.. and I just wonder.. how come those ppl are nearly doing it for free.

This is crazy.. i just needed to vent~

They probably have full time jobs too. I came from event photography to try to do more weddings and sometimes event photography was really tough. Keep plugging away and put forward this is your full time and the quality end also.

"Sell the sizzle, not the steak." -- Lloyd

I had the same issue when I started. I just stood my ground and charged more. I haven't had any problem with bookings, I've had people change their date, venue, pretty much anything to get me. And that's in my first year. I'm not saying I'm amazing, but I must be better than the 'competition'.

As long as you believe in yourself you can charge whatever you feel you need to.

Your photgraphic technique will set the price. Yes, the DLSR market has allowed alot of people to own 'pro' equipment. The difference should be how that equipment is put to use. If you're starting out, suck it up and build a portfolio and, more importantly, your artistic style and PP knowledge. That's where the edge is. Being able to pose a shot that's 'outside the box' and then complimenting it with some stylish PP. For this, people will pay $4K and up.

I am not a wedding pro, never shot one. I am gonna be a 2nd this weekend, so now you know my abilites.
When it comes to YOUR price charge YOUR price. Quality costs, if you needed heart surgery would you go with the guy that is cheaper? or would you go with the best, and deal with the price later? Do good work, charge good money, you'll be fine.

I never asked how much to shot our wedding, i saw the past pictures and we knew they were the ones to take the pictures. I about passed out when i got the price, but i didn't really care. I wanted quality pictures, if i want cheap i'll give Gramma a Kodak.

Im just getting into wedding photography (done 1, got 2nd booked), so I will be a bit cheaper than someone who has been doing it for a while.
The one thing that always jumps to mind for me is there are probably a fair few people who just cant afford to pay what most consider a good rate, does that mean they shouldnt have a photographer, seems a little harsh. I think they realise that they arent going to get the quality that the best have to offer but it will be better than nothing.
I'm saying that with the intention of uping my prices as soon as I have built up a portfolio so I do want people to pay what a photographer is worth but someone will always offer low prices becuase there will be people out there who dont have the money.

The situations when i think its mad is when someone is spending thousands on the day, expensive dress, location, cake etc and the opt for a cheap photographer, the photos are going to be the one thing that will truly remind them of the day so they should want them to be the best that they can afford.

jsut my 2 pence.

sblais wrote in post #4102484
"Sell the sizzle, not the steak." -- Lloyd

Live by it

EOS mE wrote in post #4102406
many will reply check with you local competition.

Check both price & quality .. if these guys in your neighbourhood are delivering 500 files for $600 you can bet the quality is dreck terrible.

So look at your local shooters prices & product. You'd be surprised how may couples are just looking for higher quality wedding photos and don't mind paying top dollar for it.

So $650 for 500 crap pics or $3,500 for quality wedding photos, many will pick the latter.
Mike

sblais wrote in post #4102484
"Sell the sizzle, not the steak." -- Lloyd

i like that quote.. especially now that i'm hungry!

spphoto wrote in post #4104530
I had the same issue when I started. I just stood my ground and charged more. I haven't had any problem with bookings, I've had people change their date, venue, pretty much anything to get me. And that's in my first year. I'm not saying I'm amazing, but I must be better than the 'competition'.

As long as you believe in yourself you can charge whatever you feel you need to.

Thanks Steph for the encouragement.

mmahoney wrote in post #4107721
Check both price & quality .. if these guys in your neighbourhood are delivering 500 files for $600 you can bet the quality is dreck terrible.

So look at your local shooters prices & product. You'd be surprised how may couples are just looking for higher quality wedding photos and don't mind paying top dollar for it.

So $650 for 500 crap pics or $3,500 for quality wedding photos, many will pick the latter.
Mike

Thanks Mike. I've seen the quality and some of which I wonder why they charge so cheap, because some are pretty good.

Yea, I need to make some sample albums and such to show my clients. that's what i'm missing now. I had some couples ask to see some albums and I couldn't show them

EOS mE wrote in post #4102406
Dang... in California gas is really high already..

On a totally different but serious topic - out of real curiosity, what price are you guys paying?

TJ

mmahoney wrote in post #4107721
Check both price & quality .. if these guys in your neighbourhood are delivering 500 files for $600 you can bet the quality is dreck terrible.

...

So $650 for 500 crap pics or $3,500 for quality wedding photos, many will pick the latter.
Mike

Mike,

"dreck terrible"? "500 crap pics" ?

Isn't this is pretty presumptuous on your behalf? How do you know this?

-- Perhaps some are trying to break into Wedding photography and are willing to set prices low in order to build a portfolio and a referral base?

-- Perhaps some are pursuing their love for photography and are only seeking to meet expenses?

-- Perhaps some are trying to supplement their daytime job with additional income and have discovered that they can readily find gigs by offering a sweet deal?

While I agree that there are folks out there claiming to be wedding photographers who lack the basic skills...that is a buyer's issue. The PRO's portfolio should sell the service. If a B&G sees a portfolio and decides to go for "quantity" over "quality" then that is a decision they will have to live with.

However IMHO not everyone who charges bargin rates is "dreck terrible."

My 2 cents worth.

I believe your main question was why do those photographers charge so little. In my opinion maybe they too are in the startup phase of their business, maybe they also have to price according to some of their competition, and maybe they too need to help build their portfolio. What a fairly easy way of building your portfolio by offering your clients a lot for a little bit of money. It is kinda too bad that this seems to be the going rate in many places, but I agree with just raise your rates as needed. If you've built a good word of mouth or have nice photos to back it up then people will pay for your services over those of your lower rate competition. I would just remember that everyone has to start somewhere.

I shot my first wedding for $200, because it was my first, and I was shooting for my coach, who couldn't afford any more anyways. My second booking is for $800, and now that I've gotten some more experience in doing portraits, I'm not booking another one for less than a grand on the cheap end. You may want to try ramping your prices up this way, but once you get to a point, make sure you refuse to slide back; you need to find out how much people are willing to pay for your work. After all, how many weddings can you do? One a week? If you can find one booking per week, then, who are willing to pay what you think it's worth, does it matter how many cheaper customers go to the cheap guys? Set your prices where you need them to be to make it worth it for you, and let the business come to you. Better to lose customers for being too expensive, after all, than too cheap.

JimAskew wrote in post #4116641
Mike,

"dreck terrible"? "500 crap pics" ?

Isn't this is pretty presumptuous on your behalf? How do you know this?

-- Perhaps some are trying to break into Wedding photography and are willing to set prices low in order to build a portfolio and a referral base?

-- Perhaps some are pursuing their love for photography and are only seeking to meet expenses?

-- Perhaps some are trying to supplement their daytime job with additional income and have discovered that they can readily find gigs by offering a sweet deal?

While I agree that there are folks out there claiming to be wedding photographers who lack the basic skills...that is a buyer's issue. The PRO's portfolio should sell the service. If a B&G sees a portfolio and decides to go for "quantity" over "quality" then that is a decision they will have to live with.

However IMHO not everyone who charges bargin rates is "dreck terrible."

My 2 cents worth.

Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps .. why not add perhaps they are closely related to Santa and are giving away work in a big red bag?

500 photos for $600 is more likely to be crap than any of the "perhaps" you offered.

Re-read the original question .. he surveyed the competition so this is not some isolated dilettante with a day job or some pro-bono bozo with a hard-on for bridesmaids charging the $600 .. it's the wedding shooters in his area.