[shuttertalk]

There are a lot of misconceptions about what wedding photographers do - obviously a lot of people think they just spend a few hours taking photos, throwing them together in photoshop and then charging the client an arm and a leg.

Well one wedding photographer aims to dispel this myth by responding to a craigslist ad with the real breakdown of costs of being a wedding photographer. Quite sobering really...

I just want to state again, that being a photographer doesn’t mean that we wake up in the morning, photograph a wedding for 8 hours and then go home and our job is done. Those of us who are lucky enough to be able to support ourselves as full time photographers don’t just work as photographers. We are also small business owners, which also comes with the job of doing all of our own marketing, sales, accounting, scouting, art directing, managing our offices and studios, being our own webmasters, doing our own post production, designing, blogging, being students, being mentors, researching, etc…

http://www.petapixel.com/2012/01/26/why-...-are-wack/

Anyway, it's an interesting read.

[EnglishBob]

I know the last wedding I did was 7 hours onsite, and then over 26 hours processing, ordering prints etc... not to mention driving to the church twice, the reception etc. The mental anguish is not worth it LOL.

[Toad]

I am happy for photographers that can make a living like that, but I'm personally with EnglishBob on this one: too much trouble for the satisfaction IMO.

[matthew]

I thought that was a great response – though asking for an "exceptional, amazingly talented" photographer and not expecting an amazing and exceptional price isn't the way to look like a genius on the internet.

It looks like I may have some wedding photographs to take in the future… but fortunately it looks like a fairly informal event, and I won't be the only one with a camera. While there's no way I would leave my camera at home if I was just a guest, it's certainly not something I would want as a job, even if it did pay.

[shuttertalk]

I must say that $3000 is on the low side for weddings here in Melbourne... maybe that's why so many wedding photogs drive around in fancy cars around here...

[Wedding Shooter]

I spend around 25 hours on a wedding from replying to the first e-mail contact to pick-up of the finished album. My profit is around $2,000 to $2,500 per wedding after paying my staff and associated costs for the actual wedding. That has to cover gear, advertising, insurance, tax.

I work from home with an upstairs area dedicated to the business. I do very little advertising.

I probably end up earning around $60 net per hour based on 25 hours per wedding.

I have purchased about $100,000 worth of gear and own it all with no debt for the business.

I still like doing it - maybe in two years time I will think about giving it up.

[shuttertalk]

Thanks for the insight Chris... so would you say you do one wedding a week - which means you only work 25 hours a week? I imagine during the summer months it must be much busier, and then in winter the work drops off?

[peter]

You really get what you pay for though.. and sometimes not.. the only weddings I've done were for horrendously cheap or free.. but then I don't have to feel the feeling of responsibility, I'd rather make it a fun sorta thing, but hey I don't need to make an income from it.

That said, I've heard way too many horror stories lately about things gone wrong at weddings with the photographers.

The reason also why 3-5k photographers can justify themselves is by being 'safe'. There's too much riff raff diluting the market at lower prices but giving substandard services. I know quite a few who do a pretty good job for a bit over 1k though and they're doing well.

The problem is that in the old days i guess only the people dedicated to the industry could afford and justify the money to pay for film developing and the know how to make sure that they hit the shot every time.

People these days don't know what to look out for when hiring photographers and end up ultimately getting some person who has no idea... oh the horror.


Anyway.. that's my 5cents on the matter..

And HI EVERYONE! IM BACK!

[Toad]

Welcome back, Peter...

[Paul.R.Lindqvist]

I really admire wedding photographers, it's a hard job and far from everyone is cut out for it. Apart from having the knowledge, gear, and creative style you need to have social skills and you need to be able to think on your feet since often nothing goes according to plan.... and there really is no take two.

I'v shot a few weddings (around 12), and while my clients been very happy with my work, i really don't consider my self a wedding photographer. (these days i only shoot & formals on special request if i have the time)

Given the conditions wedding photographers have to work under it's quite obvious (well at least for us..lol) that it SHOULD cost quite a bit and it often does.

A bit OT:
A trend that may very well be associated with digital is that quantity often comes before quality this is evident in the wedding photography business as well. As a example Instead of maybe 5-10 really good shots we deliver 80-100. While the original 5-10 really good images still are there they are drowned by the rest of the OK images.

Im guilty of this as well.

I looked at my parents wedding (formals) and they have about 5, they are simply exceptional and timeless. I have yet to capture a Bride & Groom that will be as timeless and classic. (which is probably why it's a good thing i don't shoot weddings full time lol)

[Toad]

Paul: completely agree about the quantity vs quality conundrum. When I used to do weddings back in the stione age, I would offer a priced "wedding album" option which would include candid from the reception and also some outakes from the formal sessions. If the customer didn't want the album, they got a fixed set of proofs from which to order prints.

...but then, that was just my way of doing it, and I didn't really know anything about the business side.

[Zig]

Of the mere handful of weddings I've ever done(not even into double figures), by far the most successful was when using limited and finite film: fewer shots, more time crafting both the shot and processing. I appreciate the ease we have to rattle of 1000+ shots, but I wonder sometimes if better results(of wedding snappers I've seen) might have been secured by crafting a small number of shots rather than banging the whole lot through a Lightroom preset on the grounds that the snapper "is too busy and professional" to stray outside the 15 or so stock poses. Some great stuff out there, but also rafts of clinically-sharp, well-flashed poorly-composed nonsense. I've also known one or two photographers to become almost loftily impervious and selectively deaf merely by dint of them now being "professional", as if they've secured some elect and hermetically-sealed niche of brilliance.
Of course, this doesn't just include snappers: there are some excellent builders and plumbers about, for example: all are skilled in varied degrees, yet one can come across avaricious ones who do the stock job and overcharge, who generate professional mysticism to ennoble their ego and lord it over clients...as indeed fair-priced ones who exemplify skill and flair. Sadly too, there are numerous excellent workers out there in whatever field who are better than they think but who undercharge, I guess.

[Wedding Shooter]

Jules - I work as a Pastor 4 days a week plus half Sunday which pays very little. I have Mondays and Saturdays for Wedding work which pays well. So I have curtailed weddings to around 20 a year so that I have a life.

[Scottbad]

I spend around 25 hours on a wedding from replying to the first e-mail contact to pick-up of the finished album. My profit is around $2,000 to $2,500 per wedding after paying my staff and associated costs for the actual wedding. That has to cover gear, advertising, insurance, tax.

I work from home with an upstairs area dedicated to the business. I do very little advertising.

I probably end up earning around $60 net per hour based on 25 hours per wedding.

I have purchased about $100,000 worth of gear and own it all with no debt for the business.

I still like doing it - maybe in two years time I will think about giving it up.

Hello,

I don't know if you are hiring, however I would like to apply to be you.

Regards,

seriously though it sounds like you have done very well for yourself. Good on you.

[EnglishBob]

One of my friends from the PSA Council i am involved in does not advertise, limits himself to one wedding per month, charges a minimum of $5000 per wedding and an average of over $7000. He is booked almost solid for the next 18 months. I want to be him LOL. Not a bad income for a retired biology teacher!

But then, I still don't think I would do it, even with that income.

[shuttertalk]

Jules - I work as a Pastor 4 days a week plus half Sunday which pays very little. I have Mondays and Saturdays for Wedding work which pays well. So I have curtailed weddings to around 20 a year so that I have a life.

That's fantastic Chris... all props to you to be able to balance all that.

My weekends are always chockers with family and Church (I play guitar and lead worship twice a month) so I don't think I could ever become a wedding photographer...

[yashi]

Hey!!
I attended my friends wedding last month. It was arranged by a company in Australia. Everything was taken care of by them. The budget was't that expensive and the photography was done by them - only I mean everything was done by them (only that too at a cheap price). After that I didn't feel that wedding photographer prices are wack!!

[Barbara G.]

Hello Yashi,

It is nice to have you here in the forums! Have you been taking photos long?

[BrandyMaeD]

I haven't been brave enough to try a wedding yet. I've had several people ask me to do their wedding, but I've always given them info for a photographer friend who specilizes in weddings. I see too many crazy brides on TV sueing the photographer for one reason or another. Maybe one day, but I'm not ready yet. Bridezillas scare me.

[jinko]

I've done one wedding but since it was a family affair, it was pretty informal. Shooting weddings could be a quite nice business but a demanding one, I'm not sure if it's suitable for me. Besides technical ability it requires also good social skills.

[DebAnn]

I've done one wedding but since it was a family affair, it was pretty informal. Shooting weddings could be a quite nice business but a demanding one, I'm not sure if it's suitable for me. Besides technical ability it requires also good social skills.

I've got three under my belt now. They were family weddings - the next generation - but I still felt that expectations were as high as if the B&G had hired so-called professionals to do the shoots. The results were extremely gratifying. I designed photo books which turned out beautifully. Interestingly, people asked if I was a professional photographer. Frankly, I found that question difficult to answer. I wasn't being paid - the shoot and books were my wedding gifts to the couples - but since the results were professional, I feel justified in answering "yes" to the question.