What would you charge for a wedding shoot?

My first, dirt cheap because I was clueless, gave her a CD of all the images that were in focus, bride wasn't really satisfied.

My 2nd, had learned everything not to do from the 1st, was paid 5x more for the package, bride loved the images & bought a ton of prints on top.

You can see my current rates on my website if you do a little digging. I still have a cheap package but it's mostly aimed at young couples just starting out & they don't get a whole lot with it. Not everyone is loaded or spoiled by the parents.

Be sure to get a contract no matter what.

Where I'm from, we don't have a lot of $100,000+ weddings. Everyone is looking for someone good but affordable. When my husband and I were planning our wedding, we couldn't afford what the "pros" around here were charging... on average about $3000. That included an album and maybe some 8x10s.... but it wasn't worth the money. I was working at a JC Penney studio, and asked one of the gals I worked with if she would come and just get some pictures... I paid her $50, and she used my camera.

So when I went pro and started doing weddings, I would pretty much just make a deal with people. I would ask them what the budget was like, how many guests they were expecting, and how many people besides them might purchase pictures. And I kinda based my pricing on that.

But I realized I couldn't just keep hounding people for info before I gave them a price. Since I didn't have prices on my site, I didn't get a lot of interest. So I decided to be reasonable. Photography is one of the most expensive aspects of a wedding. No one wants to begin their new life together in debt.... So, for wedding photography ONLY I charge roughly $250, plus an additional $50 retainer fee. They get $100 in prints for free, and I only charge about $7 for an 8x10. If they want engagement and bridal portraits, then we're talking $350-$450, but with a bigger discount on prints and lower print prices. I let them make payments over time, but the package must be paid in full 15 days before the event, or I don't come. I give them 60 days to place an order, and I require that they let me place cards on the reception tables so their guests can order pictures too. I still end up making between $1500 - $3000 per wedding in the end. I don't charge by the hour, or have a set amount of hours I'm there like some, and that's one thing that makes my brides very happy.

If you're just starting, I wouldn't be a stickler on other people taking snapshots of the posed pictures you do. If yours don't turn out, then maybe someone else's will, and the bride won't be super angry. But once you get the feel for things, then you need to be stern with people trying to snag a shot. That will hurt your sales in the end. If someone tries that at my weddings, I tell them nicely that the prints are for sale at a very reasonable price, and they are more than welcome to purchase some. If they won't stop, I tell the bride and groom (in front of the wannabe) that their discount is no longer valid. They know that might happen, I tell them that at the consultation. Normally I don't mean it, it's just to get them to tell the person to STOP! And if that doesn't work, I pack up my stuff and leave. I've done that before, and the bride apologized to me! I gave her every picture on a disc, and still made a few sales from some family members that couldn't make it or didn't have a decent camera with them. A lot of people see the photographer, and think that the couple paid thousands of dollars for the person to be there, so they think that if they take some pictures of the posed stuff over the photographer's shoulder, they can help the couple save some money in the long run. But when you write out your contract, make sure there's a part in there about other photographers...

A lot of people will tell you to figure out what your time is worth to you. I agree with that, but you also need to consider your location and the income level of the majority of the surrounding population. If you're going to just do weddings, then you don't have a lot of overhead if you own your equipment and don't have a studio you have to pay rent on. Consider all the things that go into the event, and base your price on that. There is nothing wrong with setting a price and then changing it later.

bildeb0rg wrote in post #5624690
Why is it that no matter what figure you pick out of the air, some people just don't even blink

Keep raising your prices until they start to blink! Then add $500 more.

I only do portraits, mostly for school and private sessions, but I have been getting few requests to do wedding, which I'd flat out rejected because they all have limited budget. Personally I refuse to take any wedding job for less than $2500, my starting package price is $3000, up to $5500 for the premium package. If they want my service, they better come up with the money to pay for it. The hassle, planning, and time involved just ain't worth it for anything less than $3000.....

I charged $2100 for my first one after 2 years of being a second shooter, i had a solid portfolio in place. My target market was never low to middle income clients.

I'm currently at $2500 for 4 hour coverage and up to $4500 for 10 hour. There's some packages inbetween, there is no way in the world I'd ever do a wedding in the $1000 range.

The best photographers don't make the most money, the best business people do.

bwolford wrote in post #5619100
But it's ok for us to do it for you?

I don't think that's what he meant. Some people here have a "ballpark" knowledge oh how much to charge for weddings simply because they have been in the business for so long.

The FAQ I wrote covers this.

sfaust wrote in post #5681611
Keep raising your prices until they start to blink! Then add $500 more.

I was "booked" for a wedding at the weekend, and asked for a quote by the brides mother.
I asked for a few details, venue, size, and the date, and the mum pointed to a six year old child and replied "dunno yet, she doesn't really like boys at the moment."

Here are a few things to consider...

There are limited commercial uses for most wedding photos, beyond the B&G and immediate family. So, there are few opportunities to grow revenue from wedding shoots vertically, even if they B&G and all the necessary people sign model releases (which would be pretty difficult to get, due to the number of people involved). You honestly don't have much opportunity for any sort of stock sales or fine art sales, with most wedding shots. These are "multipliers" that can be used to leverage many other types of photography to produce additional income, with minimal additional work.

This is not to say that there aren't some commercially-oriented wedding shots being used, there are plenty in brides magazines and elsewhere. But I'd be willing to bet the majority of them are either speculative or assignment set ups done with hand-chosen models, a cast of support staff, and lots of upfront cost, rather than out takes from actual weddings.

Therefore, you basically have to make most of your profits on the shoot itself, plus any albums and reprints made after the fact.

Now, how many weddings can one person physically shoot in a year? Most are weekends only, and if you are lucky to schedule one for every single weekend of the year, about the best you can do is around 50. So, let's say you charge $2000 a pop and take in $100,000 gross revenue for the year. Sounds like a nice "six figure" number, but about 50-60%, perhaps even more, quickly evaporates into your cost of doing business, taxes and such.

So under these "ideal conditions" you are working a long day shooting every single weekend and a lot of days in between on post-production and fulfillment - essentially "full time" - for $40,000 to $50,000 a year, if you are very careful about expenses and don't have any major catastrophes.

Today that's not a lot of money really, and certainly not in the area where I live (SF Bay area, median income is about $75 - $80K). So, it's pretty obvious to me why the established wedding pros here start their packages at about $2500 for the most basic, and quickly go up in price from there. They really can't afford to shoot for much less than that.

Now, this is a very rough calculation, based upon some "ideal" conditions, but I hope you get the idea. You need to approach the business of wedding photography with a good business plan and pricing structure based upon your projected cost of doing business and the profits you hope to achieve. Fail to plan... Plan to fail.

Sure, there are plenty of wannabes/weekend shooters with a day job charging a lot less (look on Craigslist), but they won't be in the business very long unless they raise their rates substantially and get their act together. They won't have the money to replace their cameras when they wear out, or will find themselves wondering why their savings account is shrinking even though they're putting in all those extra days on weekends.

I know a few wedding photographers that shoot both Sat and Sun, and do about 70-80 weddings a year. They hire an assistant that works a few days a week assisting on the wedding, and helping with delivery, some basic post, etc. This allows the photographers to book both days on a weekend almost doubling their revenue, with only a small increment in their workload, and at about $25K per year for the assistant. That puts them into grossing a salary in the $80K and up range, even at the low end of their pricing structure. If they book more mid or high level weddings, that increases revenue as well and will put then into the 6 figures. It can be quite lucrative if you make your decisions based on sound business principles and models.

Alan brings up a very good point. At the low end $2,500 per wedding, booking at least 1 day a week for 50 weeks, $40-$50K is about what you can expect. I agree with that. If you only book 20 weekends, thats gong to be $20K-$30K.

So where does that put the new guy starting out who thins he will just undercut everyone and become the king of low budget value weddings. A good year would put him in the $20K range at $1,200 a wedding. By the time he is done paying off the business expenses, he may have enough to pay the mortgage payment and not much more. They become short timers, and eventually drop out and complain there is no money in shooting photography. Or, they get smart double their rates, get their skills up to snuff, and get serious about running a profitable business and charging what they need in order to make a decent living.

IMO, $2,500 is really about the bottom end one should be charging for a basic wedding, and still be able to market to new clients, have funds to grow the business, take home a decent salary, and still deliver quality products to their clients. The first few years will be very tight until the volume is up, but once there, I can see $100K in revenue bringing home $40-$50K in salary as Alan suggests.

I also think one has to ignore those budget guys shooting for less off craigs list, etc, and not try to play price wars. If one photographer drops his price to compete against the low budget guys, they will both be out of business in a year or so after struggling. Its best to spend that energy in finding new clients that aren't shopping on price, but are looking for excellent service and good images. Cater to them, let them spread your name by word of mouth, and they will bring more clients to you of the same caliber. If you go after those shopping on price, they will nickel and dime you to death, then spread the word to other clients of the same caliber. The last thing you want is all your clients trying to beat you down in price and squeeze every last ounce of value out of you.

I forgot to mention I also agree with AdrianeCale. You do have to keep in mind the market as well. If the mean income in a particular market is $20K per year, a $2,000 wedding is way out of line. Conversely, if the income level is $200K per year, a $5K wedding looks pretty affordable.

The good part is that the market will self equalize. If you can't charge $2,000 for a wedding because the income level in the area is very low, the cost of living in that area will also be low, and thus a photographer can draw less salary but be in the same financial situation. The reverse is also true. Market conditions are a big part of the equation and need to be factored in along with salary, growth funds, retirement, overhead, insurance, etc.