Why Wedding Photographers’ Prices are “Wack”?
- Thread starter cayenne
- Start date
RobertP said:
I think that's mostly where I stand on this discussion. I'm no Professional Wedding Photographer. I'm the guy that friends want to ask to shoot their weddings (usually for free). While at my current skill level I would never dream of charging $3000 for a wedding, I think "free" for anyone not joined to me at the hip would be grossly underselling myself (and very presumptuous). Don't get me wrong, I have shot several of my friends weddings for "free" (and to gain experience), but in general, I've always felt that they got the better end of the deal.
I can see and agree with both sides. Customers want the best value. Photographers want fair compensation for their work... and for most, their work doesn't end after the dancing stops, the lights go out, and the decorations come down.
Lately, I've been declining to shoot as the sole or main photographer at friends' weddings. I don't want the pressure- I just want to enjoy the day like a regular guest. Of the probably 10 weddings I've shot, only one I can think of has ever paid me for it.
As a photographer who knows that some good photos are luck, but consistent good photos are skill, I tend to side with the photographer charging what they believe their skill is worth. If the customer doesn't believe you're worth your price tag, I'm sure there are plenty suckers like me (friends, relatives, etc) that will shoot for "experience." In some cases it's legit to complain about the prices photographers charge, but in most cases, it's best to just find someone that fits your price point for the quality you're willing to accept.
Upvote
0
Man, the US is insane for photography costs in general!
Here in Japan I'd be lucky to get over $500 worth of pay... and by that price there are photography business monopolies that do everything everywhere, most people aren't even aware of "freelance photographers", and these companies can be cheap for events. But most people don't understand what they're getting, the cheaper they go the less quality they get, naturally. The largest sum I know a photographer has charged and received for a major wedding was about $2000 and most think that's insane. So average starting prices of $2,750 over there in the US is wow.
I once was negotiating a shoot with a couple and they agreed to what I had to offer, they contacted me a while later and told me that they decided I was too expensive, so I said I could drop down to below $500, they said still that was too expensive, and that they found a "professional" who would shoot all day for far less, I couldn't believe them but they signed up with that guy before I could negotiate some more... a Pro is a PRO, and anyone with a good camera should be good at what they do. Portfolios??? No one seems to care, and I think I saw some of the photos from that couple's wedding and they didn't look good at all...
Though, most of the time a wedding just takes place in a chapel or small place, rarely does it become a large scale deal or be planned out in any unique/interesting way with themes and stuff, usually simple reception with simple photos
Here in Japan I'd be lucky to get over $500 worth of pay... and by that price there are photography business monopolies that do everything everywhere, most people aren't even aware of "freelance photographers", and these companies can be cheap for events. But most people don't understand what they're getting, the cheaper they go the less quality they get, naturally. The largest sum I know a photographer has charged and received for a major wedding was about $2000 and most think that's insane. So average starting prices of $2,750 over there in the US is wow.
I once was negotiating a shoot with a couple and they agreed to what I had to offer, they contacted me a while later and told me that they decided I was too expensive, so I said I could drop down to below $500, they said still that was too expensive, and that they found a "professional" who would shoot all day for far less, I couldn't believe them but they signed up with that guy before I could negotiate some more... a Pro is a PRO, and anyone with a good camera should be good at what they do. Portfolios??? No one seems to care, and I think I saw some of the photos from that couple's wedding and they didn't look good at all...
Though, most of the time a wedding just takes place in a chapel or small place, rarely does it become a large scale deal or be planned out in any unique/interesting way with themes and stuff, usually simple reception with simple photos
Upvote
0
I think anyone who has shot a wedding will agree it is more difficult than most people imagine. I shot free pictures at a wedding for a friend because they could never afford a pro. That experience humbled me. A good Professional wedding photographer has a wealth of knowledge and experience in the art or they would be out of business. It takes time and considerable effort to produce great wedding photography even if you have the equipment and know how to use it. My hat is tipped to those that have the art mastered.
Upvote
0
Not sure if I read the article correctly, but it seems she wrote that she pays taxes then lists all these business expenses coming out of her take home net pay. Really should be the other way around.
Upvote
0
Dear colleagues,
in original article I see many many conceptual mistakes. Let me explain:
1) Photographer expects to shoot 20 weddings a year and live from that income the whole year. This is conceptually wrong. Even if you shoot 4 weddings per month and remaining time use for retouching photos you will spend maximum 5 months for that work. To spend 7 remaining months for marketing is too much luxury.
2) Equipment (camera / lens/etc.) costs should be depreciated during their useful life. 2 cameras - during 4 years, lenses - maybe during 6-8 years. If you shoot 20 weddings per year, your equipment should even last longer. Of course, here we might have moral depreciation issue, however, many wedding photographers still using their Canon 5DMKII and do not see any problem in that area
3) House, electricity, insurance, car costs calculated for the whole year. Which is wrong. One of the main accounting rule is that you have to match income and costs for the same periods. Accordingly expenses, that are attributable to that 5 montsh would be significant smaller.
4) Also, she attributes the whole house rent expenses instead of attributing small portion (garage rent costs) to business expenses.
In summary, she needs to do other activities / work during remaining 7 months in order to have sustainable income for the living. Not long ago I saw very good workshop "How to become 10k wedding photographer". Lecturer was prominent photog who makes 10k per wedding and he showed rough calculations which very clearly indicated that he needs to do a lot of other activities (he is doing photog workshops and lessons) in order to keep earn sufficient income for his living. In summary, it is very hard to live from photography only. You caan be successful photographer if you have another profession and photography is your serious hobby. In case you earn something from photography everything counts to profit
In my case I would be very have if my income from photography matches my equipment costs
Also, I would like to respond to comment who says that you need 10,000 hours to become really a pro. In such case you have to spend almost 5 full years (working 8 h a day, 22 days a month) learning photography secrets. I disagree with this statements as:
a) If you are really interested it is very easy to get technical knowledge that relates to equipment, how it operates, what are main principles of photography. There are many on-line and other course which lets you understand these aspects. For me it took maximum few months (during my free time from my main work as BIG 4 Audit director). Of course, I can not compare myself to such experts as Neuro or few others, however, my current technical knowledge is fully sufficient for photography.
b) Composition, lightning, ability to see that light. In order to master these things you need practice and tutor. I saw many cases when people became prominent photographers (especially wedding pros) after 2-3 seasons (they also have other full time jobs).
c) Photoshop - in my opinion, if you are seriously interested in retouching 2-3 months are more that sufficent to master that skills to acceptable level (for wedding photographers).
USD 3,000 / per wedding price is too high. Clients are not interested in your experience, equipment, lighting equipment, insurance. They want to buy specific product - wedding photos. Nobody cares about your expenses. If someone is doing wedding photography during weekends, has a good equipment and required skills he / she is able to make wedding photos much cheaper.
Surapon, I was very surprised that your sister paid USD 11,000 for wedding (not including indirect photog costs) and had to wait for such a long time. It seems that person is not a professional as real professional demonstrates professionalism in all aspects (communication with client, timely delivery of high quality results, significatly assissting in preparation for weddig ceremony). In my opinion, your sister significantly overpaid for taht services.
in original article I see many many conceptual mistakes. Let me explain:
1) Photographer expects to shoot 20 weddings a year and live from that income the whole year. This is conceptually wrong. Even if you shoot 4 weddings per month and remaining time use for retouching photos you will spend maximum 5 months for that work. To spend 7 remaining months for marketing is too much luxury.
2) Equipment (camera / lens/etc.) costs should be depreciated during their useful life. 2 cameras - during 4 years, lenses - maybe during 6-8 years. If you shoot 20 weddings per year, your equipment should even last longer. Of course, here we might have moral depreciation issue, however, many wedding photographers still using their Canon 5DMKII and do not see any problem in that area
3) House, electricity, insurance, car costs calculated for the whole year. Which is wrong. One of the main accounting rule is that you have to match income and costs for the same periods. Accordingly expenses, that are attributable to that 5 montsh would be significant smaller.
4) Also, she attributes the whole house rent expenses instead of attributing small portion (garage rent costs) to business expenses.
In summary, she needs to do other activities / work during remaining 7 months in order to have sustainable income for the living. Not long ago I saw very good workshop "How to become 10k wedding photographer". Lecturer was prominent photog who makes 10k per wedding and he showed rough calculations which very clearly indicated that he needs to do a lot of other activities (he is doing photog workshops and lessons) in order to keep earn sufficient income for his living. In summary, it is very hard to live from photography only. You caan be successful photographer if you have another profession and photography is your serious hobby. In case you earn something from photography everything counts to profit
In my case I would be very have if my income from photography matches my equipment costs Also, I would like to respond to comment who says that you need 10,000 hours to become really a pro. In such case you have to spend almost 5 full years (working 8 h a day, 22 days a month) learning photography secrets. I disagree with this statements as:
a) If you are really interested it is very easy to get technical knowledge that relates to equipment, how it operates, what are main principles of photography. There are many on-line and other course which lets you understand these aspects. For me it took maximum few months (during my free time from my main work as BIG 4 Audit director). Of course, I can not compare myself to such experts as Neuro or few others, however, my current technical knowledge is fully sufficient for photography.
b) Composition, lightning, ability to see that light. In order to master these things you need practice and tutor. I saw many cases when people became prominent photographers (especially wedding pros) after 2-3 seasons (they also have other full time jobs).
c) Photoshop - in my opinion, if you are seriously interested in retouching 2-3 months are more that sufficent to master that skills to acceptable level (for wedding photographers).
USD 3,000 / per wedding price is too high. Clients are not interested in your experience, equipment, lighting equipment, insurance. They want to buy specific product - wedding photos. Nobody cares about your expenses. If someone is doing wedding photography during weekends, has a good equipment and required skills he / she is able to make wedding photos much cheaper.
Surapon, I was very surprised that your sister paid USD 11,000 for wedding (not including indirect photog costs) and had to wait for such a long time. It seems that person is not a professional as real professional demonstrates professionalism in all aspects (communication with client, timely delivery of high quality results, significatly assissting in preparation for weddig ceremony). In my opinion, your sister significantly overpaid for taht services.
Upvote
0
LewisShermer
point shoot hope
It's difficult to know what to charge or what you're worth for weddings if that's not your main source of income. I have a steady job where I run a photography studio and shoot mainly product for advertising in magazines, on the internet and billboards. after being asked to do a wedding for a friend as they couldn't afford a proper wedding photographer I kinda just fell into it. I do maybe 1 a month on average and I'm taking bookings now a year or 2 in advance based on my portfolio, I'm still only charging £400 (I've recently put my prices as £800 on my website but obviously that's up for negotiation with regards to who it is, how I know them and who has referred them). I don't advertise as I probably couldn't handle the workload if I were shooting more than 1 a month (not that I'm arrogant enough to think that people would use me if they didn't know me).
How would one go about assessing their own worth as a photographer?
How would one go about assessing their own worth as a photographer?
Upvote
0
I think that is relatively easy to estimate you worth as you are going to charge the market rates. In US that would be around USD 3,000. In Lithuania - EUR 1,000, in UK - ? If you are very prominent and known photographer you might charge USD 10,000 in US, EUR 3000 - in Lithuania. If you charge your price and have many orders, you increase your price until you have a number of orders that you can fulfill
Upvote
0
While the reply letter is probably personally satisfying, it is irrelevant. She is trying to equate cost with price. While they are related, they are not the same thing. Cost is the amount of money and and time it takes a vendor to create and deliver a product or service. Price is the amount of money a customer must spend to acquire that product or service. The only required relationship between those two is that over the long term course of business, prices must exceed cost if you want to stay in business.
But once that requirement is met, there is absolutely no obligation for price to be related to cost - i.e. just because it costs me $1.00 to build a widget, there is no obligation on my part to sell it for $1.10. If my widget is something that revolutionizes the planet and the lives of the people on it, and everyone on planet Earth wants one, I'd be insane not to sell it for $100 if that's what people are willing to pay.
Because at the point of sale, the only real attribute that matters is the perceived value the customer places in your product or service. When someone complains, "Why should I pay X when it only costs Y to build?", what they are really saying is, "I don't think that thing is worth X."
What the complaining bride is really saying is she just doesn't think wedding photography is worth $3,000. In the same way, if you went to a car dealership and complained about the price of the model you wanted to buy, you wouldn't get a lecture from the salesman about how much it cost to build the car, ship the car, insure the car while it's on the lot, cover his commission, etc. He's try to sell you on the "value" of the car - the smoothness and quietness of the ride, the collision safety, the reliability, maybe even the status associated with the driving that model.
At which point, one of two things will happen. If he sells you on those values and you have the money, you'll buy the car. But if he doesn't sell you on those values, you won't buy it, even if you have the money. Because you don't think those values are worth the price. At which point he'll steer you over the corner of the lot with the clown cars on it.
If a prospective customer balks or complains about your prices, you have one of three choices:
1) Successfully sell them on the value of your product
2) Lower your price to match their value expectations
3) Redirect them somewhere else where they can buy at a price that matches their value expectations
Having said all that, I have a sneaking suspicion that the bride wasn't really complaining about supposedly overpriced $3,000 wedding photographers. She claims she can find someone who will do the job for $400. Fine. Why then isn't she just shutting her trap and hiring the $400 photographer. The answer seems obvious. She's looked a the work of the $400 and $3000 photographers, respectively. She realizes by any measure of evaluation that the $3000 photographer is infinitely better and will deliver a vastly superior product. She WANTS the photos created by the $3000 photographer. The $400 photographer? Not so much. So what she's really pissed about is the fact that the guy whose work is clearly superior but costs a lot more won't lower his prices to meet those of the guy she knows whose photos are going to suck but is charging what she is willing to pay.
But once that requirement is met, there is absolutely no obligation for price to be related to cost - i.e. just because it costs me $1.00 to build a widget, there is no obligation on my part to sell it for $1.10. If my widget is something that revolutionizes the planet and the lives of the people on it, and everyone on planet Earth wants one, I'd be insane not to sell it for $100 if that's what people are willing to pay.
Because at the point of sale, the only real attribute that matters is the perceived value the customer places in your product or service. When someone complains, "Why should I pay X when it only costs Y to build?", what they are really saying is, "I don't think that thing is worth X."
What the complaining bride is really saying is she just doesn't think wedding photography is worth $3,000. In the same way, if you went to a car dealership and complained about the price of the model you wanted to buy, you wouldn't get a lecture from the salesman about how much it cost to build the car, ship the car, insure the car while it's on the lot, cover his commission, etc. He's try to sell you on the "value" of the car - the smoothness and quietness of the ride, the collision safety, the reliability, maybe even the status associated with the driving that model.
At which point, one of two things will happen. If he sells you on those values and you have the money, you'll buy the car. But if he doesn't sell you on those values, you won't buy it, even if you have the money. Because you don't think those values are worth the price. At which point he'll steer you over the corner of the lot with the clown cars on it.
If a prospective customer balks or complains about your prices, you have one of three choices:
1) Successfully sell them on the value of your product
2) Lower your price to match their value expectations
3) Redirect them somewhere else where they can buy at a price that matches their value expectations
Having said all that, I have a sneaking suspicion that the bride wasn't really complaining about supposedly overpriced $3,000 wedding photographers. She claims she can find someone who will do the job for $400. Fine. Why then isn't she just shutting her trap and hiring the $400 photographer. The answer seems obvious. She's looked a the work of the $400 and $3000 photographers, respectively. She realizes by any measure of evaluation that the $3000 photographer is infinitely better and will deliver a vastly superior product. She WANTS the photos created by the $3000 photographer. The $400 photographer? Not so much. So what she's really pissed about is the fact that the guy whose work is clearly superior but costs a lot more won't lower his prices to meet those of the guy she knows whose photos are going to suck but is charging what she is willing to pay.
Upvote
0
What you are paying for is pictures. You do not have the option to go back and take them over again. It is the ability to get it right the first time that rises the price above Bubba and his iPhone....
Upvote
0
I think at the core of the counter argument in that two-year old craigslist rant lies why few photographers make a decent living if they're trying to go full time. And why so many then do stuff that they probably never signed up for (I personally have no interests in shooting weddings).
What do I mean? It's really an economic argument. The photographer who responded to the cranky bride makes a classic mistake: argue with cost. The thing is, cost is completely irrelevant for the value you're selling. It's only relevant for your own book keeping and as a market entry barrier (or lack thereof really in photography).
Anyone, in any line of business who is calculating their prices as a function of their cost will not be doing well most likely. Not always a popular viewpoint where many folks still remember the good-old-cost-plus-markup.
I could go on and on about it and draw some parallels with the problems in my main line of work in the healthcare sector. But that usually gets me in trouble ;-)
Just some food for thought.
What do I mean? It's really an economic argument. The photographer who responded to the cranky bride makes a classic mistake: argue with cost. The thing is, cost is completely irrelevant for the value you're selling. It's only relevant for your own book keeping and as a market entry barrier (or lack thereof really in photography).
Anyone, in any line of business who is calculating their prices as a function of their cost will not be doing well most likely. Not always a popular viewpoint where many folks still remember the good-old-cost-plus-markup.
I could go on and on about it and draw some parallels with the problems in my main line of work in the healthcare sector. But that usually gets me in trouble ;-)
Just some food for thought.
Upvote
0
Efka76 said:
Not knowing a few key variables, but with a reasonable assumption and some easy math...
Lots of so-called "professionals" are near the $100.00/hr rate for their services. Some are considerably more.
So, $3,000.00 USD gets you 30 man-hours of time at the hypothetical $100.00/hr.
Seems to me, from the outside looking in, that it would be fairly easy to rack up 30 man-hours of time on a wedding job. Easier (faster) if you have paid assistants (8 hour day can equal 12-16 man-hours for 2 people, depending on the billing rate). Remember, you have to track and account for all time spent for that one job: Initial consultation, site preview, the event itself, proofs, more client conversations, delivery (those are just off the top of my head).
Depending on what you really want or need to make per hour, there is some latitude. It always comes down to some sort of hourly rate.
Then the other stuff like mileage and equipment depreciation, supplies and so forth comes out of that hypothetical hourly rate.
So, just from a business perspective, there is justification for the price. Value and selling those services to paying clients are completely separate entities.
I bet if the $500.00/event photographers figured out what they were making per hour after lugging several thousand dollars of equipment around, many would be very disappointed.
Upvote
0
BLFPhoto
Canon EOS user since '91...
I cannot speak for markets in other countries, as I don't shoot there and have not run a business there. But as for the US, it is apparent many of you really don't have much business background. You don't figure out how much you charge for weddings based on what you think of your product, or even what you think others are willing to pay. If you are actually in the business, whether part time or full time, you simply do the math to figure out how much it takes for you to do business, including what you expect to be personally compensated annually, and charge per number of weddings/portrait session/other shoot mix. When someone does the math, they'll quickly figure out that charging less than about $3k (Charleston, SC local market) average per wedding is a losing business proposition in the long run. And that's for a wedding without assistants or second photographers.
Only when you know that break even amount will you be able to answer the question of whether you can or should charge what your services should cost. Hopefully, the "worth" of your product in the marketplace meets or exceeds the amount you need to charge to be a sustainable business. If that answer is no, then you should not be in business. The correct answer is NOT to lower your rates to what you think you can get away with. If you've done the math, you'll know why and won't sabotage your dream without good reason and a solid plan to mitigate the shortfalls.
As a businessman and program manager in my regular job, I am very familiar with the actual costs of doing business. When I take that knowledge to my full-time photographer friends and look at what they are doing, I'm amazed they manage to stay in business. Many don't. They don't charge enough, and are always robbing peter to pay paul in their personal finances.
It's a worn out argument, but the trajectory of this thread demonstrates why so many photography businesses fail.
Only when you know that break even amount will you be able to answer the question of whether you can or should charge what your services should cost. Hopefully, the "worth" of your product in the marketplace meets or exceeds the amount you need to charge to be a sustainable business. If that answer is no, then you should not be in business. The correct answer is NOT to lower your rates to what you think you can get away with. If you've done the math, you'll know why and won't sabotage your dream without good reason and a solid plan to mitigate the shortfalls.
As a businessman and program manager in my regular job, I am very familiar with the actual costs of doing business. When I take that knowledge to my full-time photographer friends and look at what they are doing, I'm amazed they manage to stay in business. Many don't. They don't charge enough, and are always robbing peter to pay paul in their personal finances.
It's a worn out argument, but the trajectory of this thread demonstrates why so many photography businesses fail.
Upvote
0
The title should read "Why GOOD Wedding Photographers' Prices are Wack" I book about a dozen or so weddings a year and my portfolio is as good as anyone else's out there (been shooting for 40 years, so if I can't take a good wedding pict by now I'm never going to!). If a perspective client doesn't like my prices I encourage them to shop around, they usually come back after a week or two and book my services, if they don't then they can shoot their own wedding with an iPhone and hope that they get decent results! The market (for really good photos) drives the price. Like everything else, you get what you pay for.
Upvote
0
I see a number of good responses here and many mention thoughts that have crossed my mind over the years.
I am curious as to why so many people seem to feel qualified to decide what a person in ANY trade should earn.
I have been fortunate to make a full time income that is at the upper end for our industry. I avoid weddings like the plague specifically because the clientele are emotional, delusional (at times) and believe that I should earn 10% less than a gardener.
I choose clients who will not freak out by my pricing thus I do not do retail photography. Everyone has scissors yet few cut their own hair. Those that do, look the part and would never go to a professional.
The attraction for so many to do wedding photography is that it appears easy, fun and lucrative. Anyone who has shot one ( I shot many as a younger man) knows that it is demanding, time sensitive, and long with lots of off event work. Digital has made even the most casual snapper somewhat unimpressed with those who make a living doing it.
My nephew asked me the other day why anyone would pay me to take pictures and my answer was " I take pictures for people who will get fired if they don't show their boss a good photo". "If you knew you would lose your job for bad pictures would you hire someone who had always made your boss happy or would you use your phone?".
The DIY mentality rampant in the digital world means that if you do get hired, many clients believe that the fee should be roughly the amount to offset the inconvenience in your day.
I am curious as to why so many people seem to feel qualified to decide what a person in ANY trade should earn.
I have been fortunate to make a full time income that is at the upper end for our industry. I avoid weddings like the plague specifically because the clientele are emotional, delusional (at times) and believe that I should earn 10% less than a gardener.
I choose clients who will not freak out by my pricing thus I do not do retail photography. Everyone has scissors yet few cut their own hair. Those that do, look the part and would never go to a professional.
The attraction for so many to do wedding photography is that it appears easy, fun and lucrative. Anyone who has shot one ( I shot many as a younger man) knows that it is demanding, time sensitive, and long with lots of off event work. Digital has made even the most casual snapper somewhat unimpressed with those who make a living doing it.
My nephew asked me the other day why anyone would pay me to take pictures and my answer was " I take pictures for people who will get fired if they don't show their boss a good photo". "If you knew you would lose your job for bad pictures would you hire someone who had always made your boss happy or would you use your phone?".
The DIY mentality rampant in the digital world means that if you do get hired, many clients believe that the fee should be roughly the amount to offset the inconvenience in your day.
Upvote
0
first, I want to say that I am happy so many ppl replied to this topic. It gives balance to my idea of what I should charge. I am VERY new to selling wedding photography and all the ideas about what to charge clients helps me to delivery what should be a fair price at the sit down. I remember seeing the VERY article the OP used to spark this lil hootin'nanny. I actually wrote a similar post that had way less ranting to my photo bizs' FB page ( something inside told me not to post to my actual website such an article).
A lot goes into this art we all love so much... time, money, sweat and pain to name a few. Even though I agree with most of the opinions that disagree with the articles rantiness I disagree way more with the posters who think 3000 US is too much.
For my own wedding my wife and I had a chance to hire Ken Sklute of AZ ( the Canon explorer of light Ken Sklute) as he was going to be in town to do my wife's colleagues wedding. The price he gave us then was 3500 US. I learned that this was discounted from his usual fee because I think
1. He was going to be in NY anyway and
2. He knew how much of an avid Photography student I was, how I knew of him and how much I admired his body of work( I like to think this anyway, lol).
We had already budgeted to have him shoot our wedding when my wife all of a sudden wanted video as well as photos. The event company mention to her a studio that did both video and photos. She asked that we at least take a look and we did. they were charging the same for stills and 1000US for video. We went over to their studio and my Wife and I were BLOWN AWAY by the images they had on their website and hanging all over their walls. they seemed like a very capable and fun company to hire. Further thinking I should put the cork on my wallet at this point I asked this studio if they would just give me the Images so that I could create my own album and save some money. I asked for the RAW files, they said NO PROBLEM. after all was said and done we found out the hard way that they F@*king Sucked!!!!
first off the photog tells me the day of that he only shoots jpegs. Then I saw that they shot the most grainy high iso no WB photos I have seen in a long time! We were lucky to salvage two family group shots and 3 B&G pics to hang on the wall. they took 9 months to return video and that was decent to their credit.
Bottom line is that, who is anyone to say how much is TOO MUCH? If a persons work is worth it it's worth it. There are plenty of $500 wedding photographers out there. " Good luck with that" is what I say to potential clients who bring it up. for all of the time I spend making sure the job is top notch I have to charge accordingly.
This is something that sticks with me because my wife and I got had by a looser who probably used someone Else's images to display. So I will NEVER for the life of me give back bad work to a client, and that just costs what it costs.
A lot goes into this art we all love so much... time, money, sweat and pain to name a few. Even though I agree with most of the opinions that disagree with the articles rantiness I disagree way more with the posters who think 3000 US is too much.
For my own wedding my wife and I had a chance to hire Ken Sklute of AZ ( the Canon explorer of light Ken Sklute) as he was going to be in town to do my wife's colleagues wedding. The price he gave us then was 3500 US. I learned that this was discounted from his usual fee because I think
1. He was going to be in NY anyway and
2. He knew how much of an avid Photography student I was, how I knew of him and how much I admired his body of work( I like to think this anyway, lol).
We had already budgeted to have him shoot our wedding when my wife all of a sudden wanted video as well as photos. The event company mention to her a studio that did both video and photos. She asked that we at least take a look and we did. they were charging the same for stills and 1000US for video. We went over to their studio and my Wife and I were BLOWN AWAY by the images they had on their website and hanging all over their walls. they seemed like a very capable and fun company to hire. Further thinking I should put the cork on my wallet at this point I asked this studio if they would just give me the Images so that I could create my own album and save some money. I asked for the RAW files, they said NO PROBLEM. after all was said and done we found out the hard way that they F@*king Sucked!!!!
first off the photog tells me the day of that he only shoots jpegs. Then I saw that they shot the most grainy high iso no WB photos I have seen in a long time! We were lucky to salvage two family group shots and 3 B&G pics to hang on the wall. they took 9 months to return video and that was decent to their credit.
Bottom line is that, who is anyone to say how much is TOO MUCH? If a persons work is worth it it's worth it. There are plenty of $500 wedding photographers out there. " Good luck with that" is what I say to potential clients who bring it up. for all of the time I spend making sure the job is top notch I have to charge accordingly.
This is something that sticks with me because my wife and I got had by a looser who probably used someone Else's images to display. So I will NEVER for the life of me give back bad work to a client, and that just costs what it costs.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
