Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Wedding photogs expensive? Have you seen other professions eroded by hacks?

Reply
Thread Tools

Wedding photogs expensive? Have you seen other professions eroded by hacks?

 
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-27-2012
There is a complaint in the trade's industry in Toronto that Third
Worlder's with no apparent training or skill are vastly underpricing
jobs, eroding wages in the industries (mostly contractors) and hurting
the industry's overall image by doing sub-par work.

I've been asked numerous times by people to shoot weddings or
portraits and I'll never do it. I'm not a pro photog and I can't ask
the prices they would so I won't degrade their profession's reputation
by doing a job I have no training or major experience doing. It's not
as dire a someone without a medical license practicing medicine, but
the results to the particular profession are just as bad, maybe
worse.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01...rices#comments

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Mike
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-27-2012
On 27/01/2012 2:15 PM, R. Mark Clayton wrote:
> Well if they didn't book to many jobs on the day, over-charge massively, boj
> the job and take the **** over copyright, then I might feel sorry for them.
>

Please explain that statement, as it makes no sense at all.


--
Mike
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-27-2012
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 20:56:33 +0100, Mxsmanic <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: RichA writes:
:
: > I've been asked numerous times by people to shoot weddings or
: > portraits and I'll never do it. I'm not a pro photog and I can't ask
: > the prices they would so I won't degrade their profession's reputation
: > by doing a job I have no training or major experience doing. It's not
: > as dire a someone without a medical license practicing medicine, but
: > the results to the particular profession are just as bad, maybe
: > worse.
:
: I've done two or three weddings after being pestered a great deal to do them,
: but I've never been happy with the results, and I daresay the people who
: wanted me to shoot the weddings weren't happy with the results, either.
:
: Sometimes people say "oh, I like the style of this photo, could you shoot my
: wedding the same way," but they don't actually mean that. If you really do
: shoot the wedding in that style (photojournalistic or whatever), they turn out
: disappointed, because they don't have all the standard photos that dedicated
: wedding photographers produce. They think they want to be different, but they
: don't. Sometimes it's hard to convince them that wedding photography is a very
: specialized type of photography, and it's not necessarily a good idea to
: experiment in other styles of shooting for an important once-in-a-lifetime
: event.
:
: I have signed over copyrights and negatives in cases where I've done weddings,
: as a consolation prize, but I still think they were disappointed. They got
: interesting photos, but not the ones that they truly, subconsciously wanted.

Quite right. To do weddings properly, you have to be good at both portrait and
event photography. They're different skills; and if you don't have both, you
have no business passing yourself off as a wedding photographer.

In the past five years I've shot two weddings as a friend or family member,
and I think my pictures turned out pretty well and were appreciated by the
participants. But in both cases there was a professional wedding photographer
on scene. I wouldn't have done it otherwise.

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mort
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-27-2012
Robert Coe wrote:
> In the past five years I've shot two weddings as a friend or family member,
> and I think my pictures turned out pretty well and were appreciated by the
> participants. But in both cases there was a professional wedding photographer
> on scene. I wouldn't have done it otherwise.
>


Exactly. When asked by friends or relatives to shoot a wedding, I tell
them to hire a professional wedding photographer with good credentials
and recommendations, to do the standard poses that people really do
want. I then volunteer as an additional hand, to take pictures that
might not be done otherwise: some human interest occurrences, close-ups
of the wedding cake and the invitations, some brief interpersonal
interactions, etc.. In that way, I have not really refused a dear friend
or loved one, and they get their pro pictures plus my additional human
interest shots.

Regards,

Mort Linder
 
Reply With Quote
 
MC
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-28-2012
RichA wrote:

> There is a complaint in the trade's industry in Toronto that Third
> Worlder's with no apparent training or skill are vastly underpricing
> jobs, eroding wages in the industries (mostly contractors) and hurting
> the industry's overall image by doing sub-par work.
>
> I've been asked numerous times by people to shoot weddings or
> portraits and I'll never do it. I'm not a pro photog and I can't ask
> the prices they would so I won't degrade their profession's reputation
> by doing a job I have no training or major experience doing. It's not
> as dire a someone without a medical license practicing medicine, but
> the results to the particular profession are just as bad, maybe
> worse.
>
>

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01...rices#comments

Because owning a camera, in one guise or another, has become as common
as owning a phone, other areas of photography are also affected. For
example, everybody is now a photo journalist.
I think it is a trend that will not reverse. Owning a top of the range
DSLR, it seems, makes you a pro photographer and friends and family are
hoodwinked into thinking this. I mean, if they own such a camera
surely they must be good, right?
Setting yourself up as a pro is also a lot cheaper than it was. For a
start you do not need a darkroom or access to one. As long as you can
use a computer you are away. Portable studio gear is also a lot
cheaper (or at least you can get hold of "starter" kits). People who
know nothing of photography are oblivious as to how much it all costs.
If it, and you, look the part you are half way there.

MC
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mr. Strat
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-28-2012
In article
<(E-Mail Removed)>,
RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> There is a complaint in the trade's industry in Toronto that Third
> Worlder's with no apparent training or skill are vastly underpricing
> jobs, eroding wages in the industries (mostly contractors) and hurting
> the industry's overall image by doing sub-par work.
>
> I've been asked numerous times by people to shoot weddings or
> portraits and I'll never do it. I'm not a pro photog and I can't ask
> the prices they would so I won't degrade their profession's reputation
> by doing a job I have no training or major experience doing. It's not
> as dire a someone without a medical license practicing medicine, but
> the results to the particular profession are just as bad, maybe
> worse.


I've been doing photography in various forms for over 45 years - 16+
operating my own portrait studio. I estimate that I've photographed
600-700 weddings which isn't much compared to some in the biz. But it's
still a lot.

What passes these days for professional photography is mostly crap. I
hate the crooked horizons and washed out trendy junk. Nobody learns
about light and shadow, musculature, posing, etc.

And with digital, the craftsmanship is gone. Today, all you have to do
is press a button, and you'll probably get something well-exposed and
in focus. You don't have to spend time in a darkroom sloshing around
chemicals...using the right combination of film, paper, and chemistry.

I'm glad I got out of it when I did.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-28-2012
"Mr. Strat" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>In article
><(E-Mail Removed)>,
>RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> There is a complaint in the trade's industry in Toronto that Third
>> Worlder's with no apparent training or skill are vastly underpricing
>> jobs, eroding wages in the industries (mostly contractors) and hurting
>> the industry's overall image by doing sub-par work.
>>
>> I've been asked numerous times by people to shoot weddings or
>> portraits and I'll never do it. I'm not a pro photog and I can't ask
>> the prices they would so I won't degrade their profession's reputation
>> by doing a job I have no training or major experience doing. It's not
>> as dire a someone without a medical license practicing medicine, but
>> the results to the particular profession are just as bad, maybe
>> worse.

>
>I've been doing photography in various forms for over 45 years - 16+
>operating my own portrait studio. I estimate that I've photographed
>600-700 weddings which isn't much compared to some in the biz. But it's
>still a lot.
>
>What passes these days for professional photography is mostly crap. I
>hate the crooked horizons and washed out trendy junk. Nobody learns
>about light and shadow, musculature, posing, etc.
>
>And with digital, the craftsmanship is gone. Today, all you have to do
>is press a button, and you'll probably get something well-exposed and
>in focus. You don't have to spend time in a darkroom sloshing around
>chemicals...using the right combination of film, paper, and chemistry.
>
>I'm glad I got out of it when I did.



My sentiments exactly. I think wedding photography is one of the most
stressful jobs I have ever done. I am *so* glad that I don't do it
anymore. It was good while it lasted, but even better when it
stopped.

I think the idea of buying 20 inexpensive digital cameras and giving
them to the wedding guests is a very good one. Whoever then has the
job of collating and editing the results into a coherent record of the
event will soon realise that wedding photography is rather more
difficult than it might first appear, especially when the formal shots
that people want (despite their prior protestations to the contrary)
do not appear among those taken.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-28-2012
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 12:55:04 -0800, "Mr. Strat" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
: I've been doing photography in various forms for over 45 years - 16+
: operating my own portrait studio. I estimate that I've photographed
: 600-700 weddings which isn't much compared to some in the biz. But it's
: still a lot.

Certainly.

: What passes these days for professional photography is mostly crap. I
: hate the crooked horizons and washed out trendy junk. Nobody learns
: about light and shadow, musculature, posing, etc.

I'm sure some do, but I suppose you're basically right.

: And with digital, the craftsmanship is gone. Today, all you have to do
: is press a button, and you'll probably get something well-exposed and
: in focus. You don't have to spend time in a darkroom sloshing around
: chemicals...using the right combination of film, paper, and chemistry.

But so what? Craftsmanship isn't what matters; results are. If some things
about modern photography are easier or quicker, what's wrong with that?
Doesn't it give you more time to spend on artistic judgement, rectification of
mistakes, exploitation of special effects, etc.? Or to take a different point
of view, to get more work done in a given time and be more price competitive?

: I'm glad I got out of it when I did.

If the shoe fits, wear it. But I'm probably as old as you are, and I'm glad to
be getting my toe in the water now. When photography was added to my duties at
work, I leapt at the opportunity; in the film era I might have ducked it. Time
will tell whether I made the right choice, but I'm happy with my decision so
far.

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
Robert Coe
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-28-2012
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 21:15:31 +0000, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: "Mr. Strat" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: >In article
: ><(E-Mail Removed)>,
: >RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: >> There is a complaint in the trade's industry in Toronto that Third
: >> Worlder's with no apparent training or skill are vastly underpricing
: >> jobs, eroding wages in the industries (mostly contractors) and hurting
: >> the industry's overall image by doing sub-par work.
: >>
: >> I've been asked numerous times by people to shoot weddings or
: >> portraits and I'll never do it. I'm not a pro photog and I can't ask
: >> the prices they would so I won't degrade their profession's reputation
: >> by doing a job I have no training or major experience doing. It's not
: >> as dire a someone without a medical license practicing medicine, but
: >> the results to the particular profession are just as bad, maybe
: >> worse.
: >
: >I've been doing photography in various forms for over 45 years - 16+
: >operating my own portrait studio. I estimate that I've photographed
: >600-700 weddings which isn't much compared to some in the biz. But it's
: >still a lot.
: >
: >What passes these days for professional photography is mostly crap. I
: >hate the crooked horizons and washed out trendy junk. Nobody learns
: >about light and shadow, musculature, posing, etc.
: >
: >And with digital, the craftsmanship is gone. Today, all you have to do
: >is press a button, and you'll probably get something well-exposed and
: >in focus. You don't have to spend time in a darkroom sloshing around
: >chemicals...using the right combination of film, paper, and chemistry.
: >
: >I'm glad I got out of it when I did.
:
:
: My sentiments exactly. I think wedding photography is one of the most
: stressful jobs I have ever done. I am *so* glad that I don't do it
: anymore. It was good while it lasted, but even better when it
: stopped.
:
: I think the idea of buying 20 inexpensive digital cameras and giving
: them to the wedding guests is a very good one. Whoever then has the
: job of collating and editing the results into a coherent record of the
: event will soon realise that wedding photography is rather more
: difficult than it might first appear, especially when the formal shots
: that people want (despite their prior protestations to the contrary)
: do not appear among those taken.

I've been to two or three weddings where they did that, but I believe there
was always a professional photographer there too.

Bob
 
Reply With Quote
 
MC
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-28-2012
Mr. Strat wrote:


> What passes these days for professional photography is mostly crap. I
> hate the crooked horizons and washed out trendy junk. Nobody learns
> about light and shadow, musculature, posing, etc.
>
> And with digital, the craftsmanship is gone. Today, all you have to do
> is press a button, and you'll probably get something well-exposed and
> in focus. You don't have to spend time in a darkroom sloshing around
> chemicals...using the right combination of film, paper, and chemistry.



Exactly. Many of those who own such cameras think that the camera
alone will make them a pro. It does take some learning, admittedly, to
use the depths of photoshop but for slight retouching only a miniscule
amount of skill and time is required.


> I'm glad I got out of it when I did.



....and about 5000 wannabes and thinkIcans took your place )

MC
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Starlight being eroded, say astronomers cyber science Python 0 08-18-2009 05:09 PM
Like all great travelers, I have seen more than I remember andremember more than I have seen. shenrilaa@gmail.com Java 0 03-06-2008 08:11 AM
Like all great travelers, I have seen more than I remember andremember more than I have seen. shenrilaa@gmail.com C++ 0 03-05-2008 08:41 AM
Like all great travelers, I have seen more than I remember andremember more than I have seen. shenrilaa@gmail.com C Programming 0 03-05-2008 03:26 AM
WEDDINGO ON LINE WEDDING MALL! ------Wedding dresses, bridesmaid dresses for your wedding day! weddingo Digital Photography 3 06-08-2007 12:11 AM



Advertisments