3 ms·

"I made a $1,000 (mostly to cover expenses) to shoot a friend’s wedding... but weddings are so much work that I’ve decided to avoid shooting them if I can help

by rhplus 15y ago

"I made a $1,000 (mostly to cover expenses) to shoot a friend’s wedding... but weddings are so much work that I’ve decided to avoid shooting them if I can help it." OK, I admit that I don't know the business, but isn't the "so much work" part of wedding photography kind of the bread-and-butter for a lot of photographers? I'm guessing that the market rate for that wedding would have been closer to $3,000, which after a day or two of ground work and a couple of days of editing, really isn't to be sniffed at. Am I missing something? I'm not being snarky, I'm just wondering why photographers would pass up what seems to be relatively easy money.

leak 15y ago
He's probably talking about the other headaches that come along with any business, not so much the actual service.
tensafefrogs 15y ago
I believe the point is that wedding photography is really hard work compared to taking casual photos (or a more part time photo-journalist style). It sounds like the author already has a career doing something else, so perhaps even at $3k a pop, weddings are too much work to be very enjoyable. I've also shot a friend's wedding (partially as a favor, partially just to see what it was like) and I can safely say I don't ever want to give up software development for wedding photography.
lusr 15y ago
I believe there is a fair bit of stress photographing a wedding (it's a once-off event that if you screw up you stand a chance of losing future business), made worse because unlike many other shoots, the photographer doesn't have as much control over the proceedings (although the last wedding I was at seemed more like a photo shoot than a wedding in some ways, with the proceedings waiting for the photographers!).
jon2512chua 15y ago
I would say that there are 2 kinds of "work" involved in wedding photography: 1. The physical stuff like scouting out the locations way before the day of the actual wedding, attending wedding rehearsals to understand how the actual ceremony would go like on the day itself, the actual shooting for the wedding ceremony as well as the reception, and the days after spent sorting through the shots and editing them. This is definitely a lot more physically taxing compared what a recreational photographer (which I'm assuming the author is) is normally used to. I still remember how my legs just gave up after I came home from spending the whole day running around trying to get all the shots while lugging around a couple of kgs of gears. 2. The mental stuff like how stressful it is to know that you only have one chance to get things right on your client's special day, and if let's say you screw up the bride-walking-down-the-aisle shot, you can't just get the couple to rewind the whole ceremony just so you can get the shot right. On top of that, sometimes if you're unlucky enough you may even face lawsuits from dissatisfied couple asking for a refund AND for you to compensate for their wedding costs and pay for a new ceremony so that they can have those "memories" be immortalised in photos. Don't forget that like in all creative professions, you have to deal with clients who insist that you charge too much cause their 16 year old nephew with a DSLR can do the job for free. So yeah, wedding photography may be for some people but personally I wouldn't want to make a living out of it, probably because I don't think it suits my more laid back personality.
danso 15y ago
Yes...you're exactly right. $3,000 to $5,000 sounds about reasonable for me, since I live in NYC and have a higher cost of living. However, my pro colleagues in northern California charged that much for weddings, so I imagine I would not be able to charge that high. As another commenter noted, it's not about the amount of work, but just the type of work. The cat herding ("OK, find all the grandparents. Now let's do a shot with just the uncles and nephews. Now let's do their med school class with her mom, etc. etc.") is pretty tiring. I also really don't feel confident enough with lighting systems to consistently get the "money" shots (i.e. the kiss at the altar in a darkly lit church).

by rhplus 15y ago

leak 15y ago

He's probably talking about the other headaches that come along with any business, not so much the actual service.

tensafefrogs 15y ago

I believe the point is that wedding photography is really hard work compared to taking casual photos (or a more part time photo-journalist style). It sounds like the author already has a career doing something else, so perhaps even at $3k a pop, weddings are too much work to be very enjoyable. I've also shot a friend's wedding (partially as a favor, partially just to see what it was like) and I can safely say I don't ever want to give up software development for wedding photography.

lusr 15y ago

I believe there is a fair bit of stress photographing a wedding (it's a once-off event that if you screw up you stand a chance of losing future business), made worse because unlike many other shoots, the photographer doesn't have as much control over the proceedings (although the last wedding I was at seemed more like a photo shoot than a wedding in some ways, with the proceedings waiting for the photographers!).

jon2512chua 15y ago

I would say that there are 2 kinds of "work" involved in wedding photography: 1. The physical stuff like scouting out the locations way before the day of the actual wedding, attending wedding rehearsals to understand how the actual ceremony would go like on the day itself, the actual shooting for the wedding ceremony as well as the reception, and the days after spent sorting through the shots and editing them. This is definitely a lot more physically taxing compared what a recreational photographer (which I'm assuming the author is) is normally used to. I still remember how my legs just gave up after I came home from spending the whole day running around trying to get all the shots while lugging around a couple of kgs of gears. 2. The mental stuff like how stressful it is to know that you only have one chance to get things right on your client's special day, and if let's say you screw up the bride-walking-down-the-aisle shot, you can't just get the couple to rewind the whole ceremony just so you can get the shot right. On top of that, sometimes if you're unlucky enough you may even face lawsuits from dissatisfied couple asking for a refund AND for you to compensate for their wedding costs and pay for a new ceremony so that they can have those "memories" be immortalised in photos. Don't forget that like in all creative professions, you have to deal with clients who insist that you charge too much cause their 16 year old nephew with a DSLR can do the job for free. So yeah, wedding photography may be for some people but personally I wouldn't want to make a living out of it, probably because I don't think it suits my more laid back personality.

danso 15y ago

Yes...you're exactly right. $3,000 to $5,000 sounds about reasonable for me, since I live in NYC and have a higher cost of living. However, my pro colleagues in northern California charged that much for weddings, so I imagine I would not be able to charge that high. As another commenter noted, it's not about the amount of work, but just the type of work. The cat herding ("OK, find all the grandparents. Now let's do a shot with just the uncles and nephews. Now let's do their med school class with her mom, etc. etc.") is pretty tiring. I also really don't feel confident enough with lighting systems to consistently get the "money" shots (i.e. the kiss at the altar in a darkly lit church).