Do I Stay Single or take on a Permanent Second?

I'm in business for just over a year, work the northern NJ market, and am priced pretty modestly at $1500 to shoot but usually do about another $1500 on "stuff". I have 15 weddings already booked for 2010. I wouldn't want less, but as this is a part time gig, probably couldn't handle doing more. And though I do some advertising, most of my cilents come to me through organic searches.

I work as a single shooter but always bring along an assistant. My assistants are either one of my 21 year old twin sons (for whom the business is named). They are NOT photographers. They help me carry the bags, guard and protect the gear, and their real contribution comes in helping to make off-camera flash quick and efficient. I pay them $100 for the day and they do an excellent job. Soon, though, they'll finish up school and will be moving on.

I do offer clients the option of bringing on a second photographer at an additional cost. Though I think that price to also be fairly modest, I have had zero takers.

As a solitary photographer, there are parts of the day that can be a struggle to capture like the groom before the ceremony as well as the bride arriving. I can't cover the groom's prep if they're not getting ready in the same location. I also need to think about replacing my sons.

So here's my issue/question. Do I discard the approach of offering my services as a single photographer knowing that I'll probably draw volume less easily, partner with a second photographer who will also periodically serve in that assistant role, and set my base shoot-only price $X higher? Or do I stay with a model that works pretty well and simply look to replace my sons with other assistants? Has anyone else made such a transition recently and how was the experience?

People are expensive, and don't forget if you hire someone that's not family you need to work out taxes, insurances (liability for them), holiday pay (in NZ you do anyway), etc. Unless you want that hassle just find a reliable 18 year old (relatively speaking) and keep doing what you're doing. To me second shooters only add a little value.

I get the guys getting ready if I can, sometimes they get ready a bit early for photos, or even kinda mock it. I don't like mocking anything though, except fools.

My fiancee usually assists/second shoots. When she can't or doesn't feel like doing it, I hire another person to second shoot the ceremony and then assist. She does the guys getting ready- with guys it only takes a few minutes for them to get their suits on and their cufflinks done up.

For second shooters, I pay around $25/hour for about 3 1/2 hours of work. There area actually a few of us photogs who will second for each for free if the need arises. In Tazzie at least, second shooters would be considered "casual" employees so you don't have to worry about superannuation or holiday pay, which is nice.

Your base model appears to be working well (being a part time job). Assistants should be easy to replace. Train them a little so that they know where to be, what to do in which situation etc.

If you find that the actual shooting and processing aspect of the job is adequate, there is no need for a second shooter unless your business model expands or requires it.

There are plenty of eager beavers (from Sydney) who'd give an arm and a leg to just be present so they can have experience within the wedding environment.

dche5390 wrote in post #9896007
There are plenty of eager beavers (from Sydney) who'd give an arm and a leg to just be present so they can have experience within the wedding environment.

True, but he's from New Jersey

Thanks, everyone; I think I will stay the course. And believe me, there are plenty of eager beavers in NJ, too.

Peacefield wrote in post #9892138
I'm in business for just over a year, work the northern NJ market, and am priced pretty modestly at $1500 to shoot but usually do about another $1500 on "stuff". I have 15 weddings already booked for 2010. I wouldn't want less, but as this is a part time gig, probably couldn't handle doing more. And though I do some advertising, most of my cilents come to me through organic searches.

I work as a single shooter but always bring along an assistant. My assistants are either one of my 21 year old twin sons (for whom the business is named). They are NOT photographers. They help me carry the bags, guard and protect the gear, and their real contribution comes in helping to make off-camera flash quick and efficient. I pay them $100 for the day and they do an excellent job. Soon, though, they'll finish up school and will be moving on.

I do offer clients the option of bringing on a second photographer at an additional cost. Though I think that price to also be fairly modest, I have had zero takers.

As a solitary photographer, there are parts of the day that can be a struggle to capture like the groom before the ceremony as well as the bride arriving. I can't cover the groom's prep if they're not getting ready in the same location. I also need to think about replacing my sons.

So here's my issue/question. Do I discard the approach of offering my services as a single photographer knowing that I'll probably draw volume less easily, partner with a second photographer who will also periodically serve in that assistant role, and set my base shoot-only price $X higher? Or do I stay with a model that works pretty well and simply look to replace my sons with other assistants? Has anyone else made such a transition recently and how was the experience?

Increase your price and add your second assistant. I'm sure you wouldn't want to change your game plan which is working for you right now. Why have the added pressure? Also consider earning a little less but having the assistant.

Many photogs can work alone, but since this is part time, don't change your game plan and work more worry-free.

ebann wrote in post #9898751
Many photogs can work alone, but since this is part time, don't change your game plan and work more worry-free.

agreed. unless I absolutely need to, I tend to work alone