Wedding photos

[bob100]

But it sucks that brides & grooms are even investing a single dollar into a photographer that won't be able to meet their needs or even produce good imagery. My beef is seeing all the people out there who spent money that they worked hard to earn on something that shouldn't even be out there in the first place. You feel bad for people who were taken advantage of in that way.

OK, you feel sorry for the people that hire cheapo/(bad) photographers, that's fine. I've actually met some of these people that do weekend weddings and they seem competent (to my amateur eye!). Like many other jobs, the economic "barriers to entry" have been lowered in the digital age and the better photographers can adjust to that. I suppose if there were lots of complaints to the BBB about bad photographers or people demanding that photographers be licensed like general contractors there would be some action taken but I don't think that's whats happening.

 

[Chikabowa]

OK, you feel sorry for the people that hire cheapo/(bad) photographers, that's fine. I've actually met some of these people that do weekend weddings and they seem competent (to my amateur eye!). Like many other jobs, the economic "barriers to entry" have been lowered in the digital age and the better photographers can adjust to that.

With anything in life, there are exceptions to anything. Of course there are some weekend warriors who are competent and good. But most of them have taken the time to set up legitimate business structures in order to protect themselves and their clients. But the MAJORITY that I've seen (and working closely in the industry it's something I look at every single day), do not take the time to get insurance or a business license, do not pay state and federal taxes as a small business, and do not take the time, energy and money to grow as both an artist and a business person.

(I should add something.... even if they are a weekend warrior... if they are actually GOOD photographers, they usually end up charging more. Why? Because they can - their skill, networking and business practice is getting them business. Why work for $1000 when you could be making a $5000 for the same work/product/time? And then you ask yourself if you are making $5K/weekend... why are you spending any time working a full time job on top of it?)

As for your second comment - the better photographer HAVE adjusted to it. No question or complaint about it. It's why I'm able to have a staff of four people, charge what I charge, and still make a profit and survive in an economic downturn. But it creates long-lasting ripples inside the industry.

I suppose if there were lots of complaints to the BBB about bad photographers or people demanding that photographers be licensed like general contractors there would be some action taken but I don't think that's whats happening.

There would be complaints...
However these people don't even have a business license or any type of business structure. How do you complain to the BBB about that?

Trust me... I hear the story every day... The #1 comment I get from bridesmaids/friends of the bride who are already married is "I wish I had spent more on my photographer. My pictures were nothing like <insert friends name here>."

 

[wenrob]

Susan, I don't disagree with you. I was just pointing out that if people don't have or won't spend the cash for a Pro that's not necessarily taking food off the Pro's table. That Pro is still going to get the client that wants that level of expertise.

Seventeen years ago, my entire wedding cost $2,000. The chapel, dresses, tuxes, pics, tips, everything. (my Dad is a chef so the reception was his gift, MIL was a florist, flowers were her gift) There were several reasons for this, we were young and broke and I didn't want a huge wedding. I'm a picture freak, I would have loved nothing more then to have the whole ceremony captured by a pro. Back then that Pro was half of what I was paying for the entire wedding. I had two choices: Wait another year or two to save up the cash (and no doubt it would have only cost more by then) or compromise and depend on family and friends to capture the ceremony while getting the formal portraits done by the chapel photographer. I didn't want to wait to get married and while I sure would have liked pics without bad light, people's heads chopped off and more pics of the ring bearer and flower girl then I'll ever need I'm still comfortable with my decision. Marrying the man I loved was the ultimate goal, photos if I got them were a bonus. I'm sure there are more then a few brides who feel the same way. In my first post and this one I'm not talking fly by night photographer's who charge people without knowing what they're doing, I'm talking people who are hobbyists and asked to do it as a favor. Is it the right choice? Maybe not but it may the one a bride has made peace with and is okay about. Of course I'd like nicer photos from my wedding. I'd like nicer portraits of my kids too but what can you do? On the flip side I think it's only right for the hobbyists to turn their friends down if they don't think they can do the job justice.

 

[Chikabowa]

Susan, I don't disagree with you. I was just pointing out that if people don't have or won't spend the cash for a Pro that's not necessarily taking food off the Pro's table. That Pro is still going to get the client that wants that level of expertise.
Seventeen years ago, my entire wedding cost $2,000. The chapel, dresses, tuxes, pics, tips, everything. (my Dad is a chef so the reception was his gift, MIL was a florist, flowers were her gift) There were several reasons for this, we were young and broke and I didn't want a huge wedding. I'm a picture freak, I would have loved nothing more then to have the whole ceremony captured by a pro. Back then that Pro was half of what I was paying for the entire wedding. I had two choices: Wait another year or two to save up the cash (and no doubt it would have only cost more by then) or compromise and depend on family and friends to capture the ceremony while getting the formal portraits done by the chapel photographer. I didn't want to wait to get married and while I sure would have liked pics without bad light, people's heads chopped off and more pics of the ring bearer and flower girl then I'll ever need I'm still comfortable with my decision. Marrying the man I loved was the ultimate goal, photos if I got them were a bonus. I'm sure there are more then a few brides who feel the same way. In my first post and this one I'm not talking fly by night photographer's who charge people without knowing what they're doing, I'm talking people who are hobbyists and asked to do it as a favor. Is it the right choice? Maybe not but it may the one a bride has made peace with and is okay about. Of course I'd like nicer photos from my wedding. I'd like nicer portraits of my kids too but what can you do? On the flip side I think it's only right for the hobbyists to turn their friends down if they don't think they can do the job justice.

Wen - you and I are more than in agreement!
Friends shooting friends for free.... I seriously have no beef with that. (And I too agree... if you are hobbyist and feel you can do it - go for it. But I still think that the photographer has an obligation to the friend to know what they are doing. After all... that is how hard feelings, resentment and end of relationships happen.)

But when you have strangers out there, charging money... well, that is what causes the problems.

 

[wenrob]

Wen - you and I are more than in agreement!
Friends shooting friends for free.... I seriously have no beef with that. (And I too agree... if you are hobbyist and feel you can do it - go for it. But I still think that the photographer has an obligation to the friend to know what they are doing. After all... that is how hard feelings, resentment and end of relationships happen.)

But when you have strangers out there, charging money... well, that is what causes the problems.

You are right we more then agree!

Absolutely to the bolded, which is why I'd never ever do it even for my closest friend, lol. A reception where I knew all the players as a gift, maybe. I lean more towards "lifestyle" and love a candid more then a formal portrait any day so that's something I'd be comfortable with as long as everyone was on the same page.

 

[Zoesmama03]

EEK I agreed to do my best friend's sister's wedding in March. When asked how much I'd charge I said nothing. I would like to try to do a 2nd shooting even before then but I'm new to this and haven't networked so I don't really have anybody I could work with. How do you go about finding a change to do 2nd shooting for free I would think would be easier. Oh and not to mention the friends live in another state(across country but planning to "probably" move back soon) but if I don't move back before March they are helping me fly out.

I dont know if they were planning to pay someone but if so I know it would be a "bargain" photographer anyway as they do not have money. So this is mainly why I have agreed to do it. Its also a 3rd wedding for the woman and not that big a wedding.

I want to thank the poster that shared the links.

 

[Chikabowa]

How do you go about finding a change to do 2nd shooting for free I would think would be easier.

You start by putting yourself and your work out there for others to view and critique. You participate in photography forums (more than just the Disney ones... the ones where real wedding professionals hang out) and becoming an active member. Most photographers I know are on the internet/connected 98% of the time and are very active in those forums.

You also need to take the criticism that other photographers give you and work to hone your skill better. You'll find that once you start honestly giving and receiving within the community, that most other photographers are willing and welcoming in inviting new comers to the profession. You'll be amazed at the amount of support you'll get within these communities - especially if you go in with an open heart and an open mind; wanting to hear what others think you can improve upon and then actively working to make those changes. Everyone, when first starting out, thinks their work is so awesome... it takes some very hard knocks and some consistent study and practice to overcome your own ego and start working on things that need to be worked upon.

From there, you then start networking in your area and getting to know the professionals that live around you. I highly advise you to not just send a list of questions to people or ask them to tell you all they know. We are all busy people and most of us have spent a good majority of time figuring things out ourselves, putting together business structures and networks, and doing years of leg work to get where we are. No one appreciates a random e-mail asking a photographer to hand over all that information for free right off the bat (I field at least 2-3 of these requests a week and I can say they are annoying at best. I'm always kind to the individual and give them some links and suggestions of where to start, but it sucks up my time replying to these and 99% of the time, the person never even bothers to write a simple "Thank You" in return to the information I share with them. A lot of photographers I know simply ignore the e-mails.).

But starting out as an assistant is the first place to start. My current assistant is AMAZING... she will end up as my competition someday, and I'm fine with that, but she works hard, for next to nothing, only for the experience and the knowledge. In return, I show her, teach her and give her all I can. At my wedding last night, she got all of 30 frames shot off because she was so busy with me... but the majority of her job is keeping me organized and hauling my equipment around. It's a total grunt job.

Once your photography skill level is to an acceptable level in terms of a quality product the main photographer can use, you will then be given more responsibility as a second shooter and be allowed to shoot more and have the opportunity to take on more responsibility with that photographer. Eventually, that photographer, when you get to a point where you skill is sellable, will start referring smaller jobs to you to do solo. From there, you'll be able to branch off and hone your skills and your process that much further.

All in all... expect to spend 1-3 years (depending on your skill level going into the process) working for another photographer. You will be paid pennies and never given credit for your work - but the experience you will gain is invaluable.

Running a successful photography business is less about skill or style and more about business sense. Obviously you have to know what you are doing in order to gain clients, but the biggest thing I do on a day to day basis isn't shooting... it's managing my clients. Having the personality to interact with them is a necessity... work just doesn't fall into your lap, you have to massage every single client and build a relationship with them that is long-lasting.

 

[GrillMouster]

Susan (Chikabowa) has pretty much phrased my point of view perfectly. Wenrob, as for your point that the chepo novice photographers aren't really causing experienced pro photographers to lose money is wrong. As Susan pointed out, there are pro photographers who provide quality work at affordable prices. Sometimes that means getting fewer hours of coverage, or no album, but it still means professional quality images and someone who's insured, etc.. However, when a bride gets scammed by a cheapo novice who isn't completely honest about his/her experience or skill, and offers full day coverage, etc., the bride often chooses the latter, because she doesn't know any better. Often she's left with sub-par images. So, to say that it's not affecting pros is naive. I see it happen all the time. You'd be surprised how many people who could easily afford a pro photographer go the Craigslist route. These photographers have also altered how the industry operates. They started offering "shoot and burn", with all images on the disc, simply because they sucked at post-production, couldn't design good albums, or were lazy. Now virtually every bride at all price ranges expect this. Heck, now they're asking for RAW files, when they don't even know what a RAW file is or what to do with them. I'm not saying that this is all bad, good photographers have adapted, and many now charge up front for their time, rather than trying to make their profit from prints. That's just the evolution of the industry, and I think it was inevitable now that nearly all media is transmitted and consumed digitally. I'm also not saying that the practice should be illegal or regulated. I'm a champion of the free market. I'm just saying that it sucks, and that the consumers often suffer for it.

Zoesmama03, the influx or new photographer has caused a lot of working pros to become wary of taking in new people under their wing. They see it as training their future competition. But you'll also find lots of photographers who see sharing their knowledge as a good thing. Your best bet, though, is to find a photographer in another town, not your own, to assist. Since you don't live in the town where they make most of their business, you can often convince them that you're not a direct threat. Plus, the fact that you're willling to travel to work with them shows your dedication. One of the worst things you can do, however, is to go in expecting to second shoot right away. Start off looking just to assist. That means carrying bags, setting up lights, gathering people, etc. I think you learn a lot more by assisting than by second shooting, because the assistant is always by the photographer's side and can observe his/her practices, how he/she deals with people, etc. After you've proven yourself as an assistant, then maybe the photographer can ask you to second shoot. Also, don't expect the photographer to teach you the basics of photography. They're working professionals and don't always have the time to do that. You should already know or be learning that stuff yourself. Professional people photography is only partly about technical skill. The rest involves learning how to deal with people, see creativity, operate a business, etc.. Also, don't expect to get paid. Most pros already get the most important shots of the day themselves; they don't really need a second shooter. So, what you're getting from the photographer is more valuable than what he/she is getting from you. Heck, some pros charge for the education they provide.

 

[DisneySuiteFreak]

My DH and I own a Commercial Recording Studio. We are part of a dying breed. This entire thread is reminding me so much about what has happened to the entire entertainment industry in a nutshell. When you have karaoke queens that have day jobs and work for the glory of being onstage as a weekend warrior, venues cut back what they are willing to pay for entertainment because why pay working professionals when there are people out there who are 'decent' i.e. slightly less than horrendous, and willing to do it for free? (And actually 90% of the people walking around in the real world are tone deaf or partially tone deaf so the paper pushers making these decisions wouldn't know the difference if it hit them in the face!) Like my grandad used to say, why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free? The digital age has done so much good, but it also has introduced a lot of riff raff. When Venues cut back, quality of entertainment goes down. Turn on the radio sometimes. It's junk. Venies don't pay, people are burning music for "free" (to them, not the artist!) There's the whole issue of burning and copyrights. In turn, the real working pros out there can't afford to record a quality product anymore. I could go on and on...It's all the same.
It's fine to be a hobbyist, but I totally agree with what Chikabowa is saying and many of the others here. How can a legitimate, tax paying business compete with people who are giving it away for free? You can't. In the digital age, we can take someone who can't sing a lick in tune and make her sound like shes an incredible vocalist. Most of the shows you see people performing on TV and in showrooms are lip synced. We were in Vegas and went to several different shows including Celine Dion. (My DH knows her sound guy.) Guess what? Their running ProTools with a vocal track the entire show with her singing over it. This is Celine! It was the same in all the other shows we went to.
I'd rather quit my industry than work for free. IMO, it's the equivalent of prostituting yourself when you are working for nothing. I mean if one is working for love and doing promotions for PR it's one thing, but when you're unqualified and giving it up for free just because you can, or because you want the glory, then that's something else entirely. I believe in the free market system, but this kind of thing is out of control, and I do believe that the ones getting ripped off in the end are the consumers who may not know the difference up front, but as Chikabowa said, they see it in her photos when they're in someone else's wedding. We have so many clients that record their CD at their friends "Recording Studio" which is really a computer running Garage Band in a bedroom with a vocal booth made out of a closet. They come to us to fix their recordings to get it suitable for airplay in our local market. It's pathetic. And a lot of these so called "recording studios" are charging just slightly less than what we charge. They probably are doing it under the table, so no taxes, no liability insurance, no unemployment insurance, no health insurance, no additional rent or cost to upkeep all the equipment, they're probably operating illegally in a residential area not zoned for commercial business. It's disgusting.
And Grillmouster is right. Some of these people can more than afford to pay for qualified pros they are just too tight to do it. We have a client who is a multi-millionaire who recently asked me to shoot his band's photos. I said no. I'm not qualified. I'm still learning. My son's band, I'll shoot for love because that's my kid and I can always re-shoot it if the first shoot doesn't have any keepers in it and he'll just have to suck it up because it's free. But in no way shape or form am I qualified to do a professional shoot. I think a wedding is a pretty big deal to most brides and grooms, so it should be professionally done. If they absolutely can't afford it then maybe someone helping out a relative is ok. It's not great. I mean that for both parties involved. As a friend/relative, I wouldn't want the pressure of having to produce something I am incapable of providing because I don't have the skill set yet. That's a lot of pressure and a lot of potential heartache for all involved, not to mention broken relationships. It's so much less potential heartache to just say, "I love you enough to say no and you need to get yourself a working professional who knows what they're doing."
There is a distinction that some people can't seem to make in their heads: Are you a qualified professional or are you just a hobbyist Karaoke Queen wannabe?
I hope I haven't offended any of you with my words but as you can see this is something I feel very passionately about. There is a huge distinction between a working professional and someone who is a total newbie. I've watched this thread for the last several days and I just couldn't hold it in any longer... I hope none of you take it personally; it wasn't directed at any one of you in particular, just sharing my feelings on the issues...

 

[DisneySuiteFreak]

Oh yeah, on the issue of unpaid assistants...We get calls all the time from kids who need to intern to earn extra credits to get their degree in audio engineering. We never take them on, because as GrillMouster said, it's like teaching your competition. In this ever shrinking market, why would we want to do that?

 

[bob100]

I wasn't going to get back on this thread but ... I can't help myself.

Real Estate appraisers complain untrained people are trying to do real estate valuations using the internet. Accountants complain software like QuickBooks allows ordinary people to do bookkeeping. Untrained people are now doing their own taxes using a free tax program and depriving the poor H&R Block office. Journalists complain about "bloggers" who think writing about the news is real journalism. Booksellers are going out big time because people like to order online. (wait til they find out about Kindle!) In the New York Times today porn producers claim the internet is destroying their business because too many people are giving it away for free!
I could go on but I won't.

 

[Chikabowa]

I wasn't going to get back on this thread but ... I can't help myself.

Real Estate appraisers complain untrained people are trying to do real estate valuations using the internet. Accountants complain software like QuickBooks allows ordinary people to do bookkeeping. Untrained people are now doing their own taxes using a free tax program and depriving the poor H&R Block office. Journalists complain about "bloggers" who think writing about the news is real journalism. Booksellers are going out big time because people like to order online. (wait til they find out about Kindle!) In the New York Times today porn producers claim the internet is destroying their business because too many people are giving it away for free!
I could go on but I won't.

Your point? Maybe I'm dense because I'm not exactly sure what type of point you are trying to make.

Everyone talking in this thread has conceded that this happens in all digitized industries - and even offered up examples of personal experience. However, this is a photography board. Where we talk about photography. Not the effects of the digital age on tax preparation or online book sales.

Therefore our discussion is relevant to the industry. And this is a hotly debated topic among a lot of boards and I see valid arguments in the discussion. Questions were raised to those working in the industry. Points explained and advice given. Isn't that the point of a discussion? Doesn't mean you have to agree with either side.

I'm just not sure what you are trying to prove with your statement here?

 

[bob100]

Your point? Maybe I'm dense because I'm not exactly sure what type of point you are trying to make.

Everyone talking in this thread has conceded that this happens in all digitized industries - and even offered up examples of personal experience. However, this is a photography board. Where we talk about photography. Not the effects of the digital age on tax preparation or online book sales.
Therefore our discussion is relevant to the industry. And this is a hotly debated topic among a lot of boards and I see valid arguments in the discussion. Questions were raised to those working in the industry. Points explained and advice given. Isn't that the point of a discussion? Doesn't mean you have to agree with either side.
I'm just not sure what you are trying to prove with your statement here?

In all the examples given it was the exact same "hotly debated topic" of lowered entry costs affecting the industry. Photograph is like any other business, if you can't adapt or change you go out of business. Complaining about people who charge less or don't deliver the service is not going to help you. Out of curiosity I did look at the Craigslist wedding services - yes, they are giving it away for practically nothing!
maybe I'll get into the $100 wedding business .... or maybe not

 

[DisneySuiteFreak]

I wasn't going to get back on this thread but ... I can't help myself.... Accountants complain software like QuickBooks allows ordinary people to do bookkeeping. Untrained people are now doing their own taxes using a free tax program and depriving the poor H&R Block office.

On the advice of our CPA, we use Quickbooks for our business. It makes it a lot easier for him to see our "books" which is now all virtual in the computer. However, we would never dream of doing our own taxes. We have a corporation that needs tax preperation as well as our personal taxes. We pay good money for our CPA every year because we want good representation if we ever have to go before the IRS for an audit. When we didn't use a CPA years ago we got audited. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. Since employing the use of our CPA, we haven't been audited in years. So I don't know what Accountant wouldn't want their customers to use QB because ours told us to get it and made me learn how to use it.

 

[bob100]

On the advice of our CPA, we use Quickbooks for our business. It makes it a lot easier for him to see our "books" which is now all virtual in the computer. However, we would never dream of doing our own taxes. We have a corporation that needs tax preperation as well as our personal taxes. We pay good money for our CPA every year because we want good representation if we ever have to go before the IRS for an audit. When we didn't use a CPA years ago we got audited. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy. Since employing the use of our CPA, we haven't been audited in years. So I don't know what Accountant wouldn't want their customers to use QB because ours told us to get it and made me learn how to use it.

the example was that when Quickbooks and similar programs were introduced accountants complained that ordinary people were using it to do bookkeeping and charging less than an experienced accountant. maybe like these people who get a DSLR and think they can do wedding photography!

 

[Zoesmama03]

Susan,
Thanks. I expected that it will take a year to fine tune the basics that I've been working on the past year and half(half time but ready to give it my all) for regular portrait photography and other than this wedding I wasn't planning to jump into it yet. Of course some experience in lighting will be good. I've been dabbling with a borrowed flash which I've been bouncing of ceiling. I have a couple forums other than this. I've been told I do have a photo journalistic feel to my photos which have been mostly of my daughter.

I took a look at your blog and I know Kristi too. I know her from a couple different forums actually. small world.

Thank you for your time to type that all out.

 

[WDWFigment]

This is the first time I've read a discussion like this, and I'm really glad I took the time. Very insightful, especially the posts by GrillMouster and Chikabowa.

Your points demonstrate the exact reason why I did not take up 'weekend' wedding photography this summer when I really could've used the money. Many friends and family members told me I had talent and could do a good job. Regardless of whether I have the talent, I knew I couldn't do it. I know nothing about the required poses (although this could fairly easily be learned...probably?). Additionally, and the big sticking point for me, is that I don't have the experience or skills working under pressure to nail every shot every time. Perhaps I have a conscience, but even charging $500, I could not offer my services. A wedding (hopefully) is a once in a lifetime experience, and is too important for someone else to be a 'learning experience' for me. I just knew I could not deliver a product on the level that I myself would expect. If I can't meet my own expectations (when putting myself in the shoes of the client) then I know the position is not for me. For me, that philosophy goes for everything I do in life.

People can say the free market will decide this, but with any free market, there are transaction costs that bar truly 'unconstrained' transactions. If the bride has no experience with photography, how can she truly make the decision as to whether she'll get scammed? Surely cost of the photographer alone isn't sufficient to make the decision. The information and time costs of the couple determining who might be a 'good' photographer is sometimes prohibitive.

Heck, now they're asking for RAW files, when they don't even know what a RAW file is or what to do with them. I'm not saying that this is all bad, good photographers have adapted, and many now charge up front for their time, rather than trying to make their profit from prints. That's just the evolution of the industry, and I think it was inevitable now that nearly all media is transmitted and consumed digitally. I'm also not saying that the practice should be illegal or regulated. I'm a champion of the free market. I'm just saying that it sucks, and that the consumers often suffer for it.

I will admit, I am one of these people (well, I do think I know how to use a RAW file, but you got me on the first point). Getting the RAW files was a deal-breaker for me. I actually 'walked away' from several otherwise good photographers because they simply wouldn't provide the RAW files.

To your 'evolution of the industry' remark: I was surprised at how many photographers don't provide electronic files at all. To me, that is just downright outmoded from a business perspective, is a disservice to customers, and is actually a legal liability for the photographer. Anyway, to make a long story short, we lucked out and I eventually found a photographer who had no issue providing the files.

Also of luck was that he is awesome. Very awesome. We paid more than we wanted, but I think it will be worth it. We met some people who I thought flat out stunk, and another requirement for me was that we had to have a photographer who is better at photography than me. Nothing would irritate me more to look through the pictures and think, "why didn't s/he do it this way?!" This guy is flat out awesome.

 

[MICKEY88]

1.People can say the free market will decide this, but with any free market, there are transaction costs that bar truly 'unconstrained' transactions. If the bride has no experience with photography, how can she truly make the decision as to whether she'll get scammed? Surely cost of the photographer alone isn't sufficient to make the decision. The information and time costs of the couple determining who might be a 'good' photographer is sometimes prohibitive.



2.To your 'evolution of the industry' remark: I was surprised at how many photographers don't provide electronic files at all. To me, that is just downright outmoded from a business perspective, is a disservice to customers, and is actually a legal liability for the photographer. Anyway, to make a long story short, we lucked out and I eventually found a photographer who had no issue providing the files.

.

1.although most photographers are shooting digital now, picking a photographer really shouldn't be any harder than it was 30 years ago,,, recomendation from friends and family, and asking to see examples of the work done in the past..

2. most pros don't give away digital files, for the same reason film photographers didn't provide negatives,, loss of revenue//

I'm not following your thought that it is a legal liability to not provide digital files..

 

[Chikabowa]

I will admit, I am one of these people (well, I do think I know how to use a RAW file, but you got me on the first point). Getting the RAW files was a deal-breaker for me. I actually 'walked away' from several otherwise good photographers because they simply wouldn't provide the RAW files.

A lot of professional photographers don't shoot raw. It's personal work flow preference when you get to that point in the industry. I only shoot raw because my graphic designer prefers the file type for the large album layouts that we do.

Additionally, what is the point of having the raw file anyway? So you can make edits to it? Most photographers who do provide digital files have very strict copyright infringements written inside of wedding contracts that the couples sign. Specifically stating that there is a print release given to the couple for reproduction of prints, but files may not be altered, changed, manipulated, submitted for competition or cropped in anyway. I also know quite a few photographers who have gone after couples who have violated these agreements and won.

I am certainly not naive enough to think that my digital files aren't manipulated upon release to the couple. I'm sure it happens although I haven't actually seen it personally. But again, that is why I charge what I charge... to make up for any lost revenue that I may not get in residual sales after the wedding. I've purposely structured my business in a way that fits with the digital revolution. Is it my preference? Absolutely not. I'm an album-production based studio, so I want people to walk away with these gorgeous albums that we do - not a bunch of digital files that end up sitting on discs in a closet long forgotten about after the wedding (Whoops... 7 years later that is exactly where my wedding pictures are. My husband and mother have never even seen our wedding pictures.).

Anyway... I leave you with one parting thought on the subject...
Each wedding that I do, I spend approximately 80-100 hours working for that particular client. I hope and believe that my couples hire me because they love my work and they love my style. If you hire a photographer based on those qualities, why would you want the raw files to edit later yourself?

 

[disneyboy2003]

I've really enjoyed reading this thread (is "enjoyed" the right word for this?), and I totally agree that if you can afford it, a professional photographer for your wedding is the way to go. I've seen so many examples of stunning wedding photography that go way beyond what any amateur or advanced amateur could do.

And what's even more amazing is that all those stunning images are taken during quick-moving, high-stress situations all throughout the wedding.

Perhaps part of the problem is that lay people see the final product as beautifully effortless. You flip through an album full of wonderful wedding pictures without realizing the dozens and dozens and dozens of hours required to produce those stunning images. Because of this, I think that photography is the least-understood of all the wedding services in terms of what goes on behind the scenes.

And because DSLRs are cheaper and cheaper, people with DSLRs believe that they, too, can produce stunning wedding images with a simple click of a button. (if only it were that simple)

I think that great artists make their craft appear deceptively simple. You don't realize how hard singing actually is until you try out for "American Idol". You don't realize how hard photography is until you get burned buying cheap wedding pictures.

One last thought. Is photography (and videography?) the only aspect of weddings where non-professionals dare try their hand at? For example, everyone knows how to bake a cake. Yet, no one offers to create the wedding cake. Who doesn't have flowers in their yard? Yet, no one offers to provide the flowers for the wedding. I think photography is very misunderstood.

Just my 2¢. Please don't flame me too hard.