Thoughts on Bringing on an Associate Photographer

I'm finding the business to be growing too quickly. I'm not yet ready to give up my "day job" and look to keep my wedding photography to about 15 gigs/year. Last year, I turned away about a dozen prospects because I was already booked and probably another dozen because I didn't want to take on more volume than was already scheduled.

As we enter the selling season, I'm once again finding myself a little overwhelmed by the volume of inquiries. I know the obvious solution is to up my price to tamp down the volume, but instead, I'm thinking of bringing on another photographer. The thought is that they would work as an independent contractor, shoot the day at a pretty nice wage, I'd earn a modest margin on their shoot, but it would still be me designing and selling the albums, etc. I've not yet sorted out whether I would want to do the PP or they.

The big issue for me is that I'm VERY protective of my brand (which I view as central to the business' current trajectory). So no matter how diligent I am about the hiring process, I can't help but be concerned about someone representing me while going out with less than the same commitment to quality, service, responsiveness, professionalism, etc. Or they somehow simply fail to produce or even show up.

What I don't want to do is replicate the very poor reputation of places like ThePros. I'm thinking of working with only one or two others who shoot in a style similar to my own, I expect to pay quite a bit more than those other outfits, and am looking for longer term relationships with a couple of what I assume are the many very talented and capable shooters who simply don't understand or want the hassle of the business side of things.

So has anyone done this and care to share your history of successes and problems? Thanks.

The highest charging wedding photog in my town... has just done this. His associates are better than he is. (he's good at what he does, but nothing special. Just happened to work his way into the "rich" side of town) Soon, those associates will be taking his business. Funny, because he mimicks everything we do and is always attempting to stay one step ahead of us (info coming from mutual friends) which he can because he's got loads of money himself. Too bad he's not paying attention to those that he's training.

I think you should just up your price. I wouldn't feel safe with someone else representing my business without me being there.

Spelling corrected as sctbiggs pointed out.

35mmNewbie wrote in post #11375311
I think you should just up your price. I would'nt feel safe with someone else representing my business without me being their.

or "there"

I would think that you'd want to work with a potential associate a couple of times before taking them on in such a role.
You never know how they are going to act and what they are going to produce until its too late otherwise.
i'd want them to shoot as a second for me at least once, then flip roles and shoot second for the associate on a whole wedding
and let them lead one while "observing".

i don't know, just my thought.. the timing probably isn't quite right for this though, aye?

I would never hire an associate. Considering my business has my name in it, I think I should be the one there. I would go the route of raising your prices and work less for more money.. I mean, how does that fail on any level? I always rather work less for more money.

I would definitely go with the price hike over an associate. Finding a photographer who is going to be equally invested in your brand will probably be really difficult.

Plus, if you are planning to still do all of the meetings/consultations​/selling it would leave a bad taste in my mouth (personally) if someone else showed up on my wedding day when I had been meeting with you all along. Unless your associate is going to be there for all of the meetings as well, which doesn't sound like is part of the plan. I try to meet with all of my clients three times before their wedding, the initial consultation, a few months later for an engagement session, and then about a month before the wedding to go over any last details, through this process we tend to develop a pretty close relationship...and I definitely think there is something to be said for that and you completely lose that when someone else shows up on the big day.

auroraskye wrote in post #11375467
I mean, how does that fail on any level?

You're right, it doesn't fail. BUT, there's some attraction to the concept of scalability. Almost like opening a second restaurant even though I can only physically be in one of them at a time.

helloagain36 wrote in post #11375597
Plus, if you are planning to still do all of the meetings/consultations​/selling it would leave a bad taste in my mouth (personally) if someone else showed up on my wedding day when I had been meeting with you all along.

I was thinking that the couple would know at the time of contract that someone else will shoot their actual day, I will have already shown them their work, and that indivdiual would have to join for my one-month-to-go meeting with the client to cover final logistics, family shoot lists, etc.

I guess it really just comes down to finding someone that you can really really trust and I would definitely shoot a handful of weddings with them first before letting them do it alone.

Raise your prices.

I actually work for a photographer who is doing just as you describe. There are 4 of us that work under her. We live in a high price beach town and everyone wants to get married there. She's able to double book days and send teams out to shoot. We are involved with all the meetings and engagments. She handles the business end, PP, and albums. So far it's working pretty well... we also all have our own business so if a date is booked we refer each other.

I am doing this with a few photographers myself. They are branching out, getting too busy, but love their clientele. IF they are booked, it goes something like this.

"Im actually booked for that day, but I can see if my other photographer is available. His name is blah blah blah. "

As I said, I work with several other photographer, and each one does things a bit differently. Some market me in particular, allowing me to show my work, both online and in an album, that the client can pick me directly. Then I am the one that meets with them, does the engagement session (plus editing) and then does the wedding. This one in particular actually lets me edit too, or not, whichever I choose. I get paid more for editing myself, and get a longer deadline to when I have to turn in the photos.
Another photographer I work with has a very distinct style. She assures her clients that I will be shooting, and she will edit in her style. This is seeming to work well.

There are plenty of ways to do this, and I say go for it. Each one of these photographers I have shot several weddings with, and they know me and trust me. Mitch has great advice, having them second shoot, then you second shoot. PM me if you have more particular questions about my situation.

From a business (dollars) standpoint, it would probably be an okay move. But I don't think it's a good idea. It's easy to see how much pride you take you work and I think that's reflected in your brand. Having an associate photographer would damage and diminish that.

Doug Gordon does this with his studio according to him. He's got a stable of photographers that he trains with his system (some would say cookie cutter system...) and eventually sends them out to do full weddings themselves. Because it's based around his system, the output is consistent and the clients are happy. He does around 1000 weddings a year this way, again, this is according to him. Not sure what happens when a photographer decides to quit does his/her own thing using Doug's system though...

Raise your prices, and take on an assistant to do post processing for you.

auroraskye wrote in post #11375467
I would never hire an associate. Considering my business has my name in it, I think I should be the one there. I would go the route of raising your prices and work less for more money.. I mean, how does that fail on any level? I always rather work less for more money.

This is one reason not to name your business with your own name. It makes it hard to grow or sell the business.