duluthdesigned 11:06am, 15 June 2010
I don't think I would do that for that cheap, kinda ridiculous actually.
You get to use your own gear AND get paid after you do the work. Sounds sketchy.
K. Praslowicz 8 years ago
And you must hand over copyrights! Where do I sign up?

Wait. There are only two zeros in the price. Never mind.
JustinSinks 8 years ago
Doesn't sound like a total bum job. 400 for 4 hours of causual photos. If I were to contact them, I would share my work and tell them if they want me they will have to put 50% down now to hold the day. And also they can have permission to print photos all they want, but copyright remains with me. I don't see a reason not to unless:
a:it's a "special" wedding (think Wiccan or nude)
b: they are well know people that don't want the wedding getting out
c: they are crazies who plan on killing you in the woods
NorthernMinnesotaPhoto Posted 8 years ago. Edited by NorthernMinnesotaPhoto (member) 8 years ago
What kind of imbeciles do these people think "us" Northern Minnesota (the sticks) photographers are? We a did a wedding two years ago on a Private Island on Lake Vermillion, everything went wrong for the bride (the island lost power twice, the food was cold, the band couldn't play without power, most of her guests couldn't find the island) etc, etc. Two Days after the wedding she called all the vendors and threatened to sue them IF we didn't refund her money in FULL! We laughed then too!
That "4 hours" of work is more like 8 by the time you factor in getting your gear cleaned, batteries charged, car loaded, 160 miles of drive time on scenic 61, meals, etc... You have now made $50/hour, that is if you even get paid.
Oh, Let's not forget you are using/abusing/depreciating your own equipment. That potential $50/hour just became much, much less. You are probably now making $25/$30 per hour.

Since you handed over the images and released the copyright,
You can not use them for your portfolio, website, etc...

When I say "you" I am speaking in general and not to anyone in this thread.
edgeways 8 years ago
"The photographer will basically wander/mingle and take casual photos of those attending the wedding"

$400 will buy a heck of a lot of disposable camera to pass out to your guests to do exactly the same thing, and you don't have to worry about copyright, or, you know photographers who actually give a shit.
-Snapshot- Posted 8 years ago. Edited by -Snapshot- (member) 8 years ago
What is wrong with $400.00?, at my first job I made 50 cents an hour and that is after at my expense and time I took a bus from Woodland to Billings park to get their.

If you are an established and known photographer you would not take this job, but for some one starting out this might be an opportunity. Let them keep the raw originals, but perhaps you could show them some examples of what you could do if allowed to polish some up.

Oh and that 50% down mentioned above, that should be a must.
edgeways 8 years ago
yeah... what job was that and in what year?

Keep in mind they want a professional or "serious amateur", they want someone who has done it before and knows their chops not the neighborhood kid with a canon rebel and a plastic prime.

Shawn kind of breaks it down a bit there. Consider though, if you are in Duluth and you take the job. $400 - .39 a mile for gas and wear on car = $338.

2 hours driving each way because of construction and tourist traffic 4 extra hours to the total time. You have to work even before the work, to convince them you are the person for the job... You give up all rights to your images, all to wander around and take crowd shots and be bossed around by stressed out people.

I think you're right thought, this is for someone starting out. Which I think they don't want.

But, you know, I'm absolutely the wrong person to write about this, I really dislike wedding photography and will only do it for friends and gratis.
Jay's Photography PRO 8 years ago
imbeciles is a funny word. Dont forget northern wisconsin folk!!! :o)
fragile existence [deleted] 8 years ago
I may have been born at night, but it wasn't last night.

I suppose they are paying the caterer after all of the meals are consumed and complimented by their guests as well? :|

Sadly, the person who takes this job is the person who lowers the professional standard for people trying to actually make a living off of this. I don't know what I'm more disappointed in, really.
melodic birds [deleted] 8 years ago
*takes my rebel and $100 50mm 1.8 and goes home*
edgeways 8 years ago
no no no you should totally go to Tofte
fragile existence [deleted] 8 years ago
Omg shawn i am freaking dying.
The About and Blog post are the best!
JustinSinks 8 years ago
" You are probably now making $25/$30 per hour."
?? ONLY 25/30 dollars a hour?
I'm suprised how quickly this became a "photographer" snob-fest.
N. Lindstrom Photo 8 years ago
I'm glad he was brought up, this thread wreaks of UB!
manley.josh 8 years ago

Did i see you in a tux in one of Uncle Bob's photos?!?!

that is awesome.

PS...no way to that job!
I wouldn't do that job either. No way. The person wants examples of a photographer's work, which I think most of us (all of us?) would only show a potential client finished images. So, if this person were to hire me based on the images on my website, they are clearly going to be expecting that the images that I hand over are processed and represent my normal work. I imagine, given the wording of the ad, that they wouldn't take too kindly to be handed images that look nothing like what my website images look, and would probably decide to not bother paying me if I gave them unprocessed images.

A four hour wedding would result in at least 10 hours of processing for me. Plus, it would take me 2 hours each way to get to Tofte, so that would add another 4 hours to this job, making my total work for the job about 18 hours of work. It would cost me $35 in gas to get there and back, plus figure $10-$20 for food/drink for the day. That would make my actual profit to be about $350. For me personally that is so not worth it, especially when I'd be loosing out on the ability to use the images at all. That isn't to say that I'd sneeze at $350, because money is money, but weddings are damn hard work no matter how you slice it and it has to be worth it for me to loose a full day away from my family.

Although, I get the feeling that whoever posted that ad has no clue what it means to be a photographer and probably thinks that a photographer does nothing but point, shoot, and walla!, nice pictures! I don't think that the person understands that any decent photographer's website is going to comprised of pictures that took more than the push of a shutter button to create and that it's not as simple as just "handing over" the files.

Besides, I'm not willing to work for someone who thinks he/she can tell me how I need to run my business. I am more than willing to negotiate custom packages for clients and I'm pretty laid back as far as that goes, but that person comes across as being unbelievably disrespectful, which makes me think that he/she would likely cause me a lot of grief. Not worth it.
Shawn that uncle Bob post was perfect. I darn near peeed myself.
HBRstudios 8 years ago
So, just out of curiosity, how much would you be willing to do a wedding for under these circumstances:

1) All images burned to a DVD(s) (on site) and handed over the night of the wedding -- so no editing necessary.
2) No reproduction of any images (to protect the privacy of the couple.)
3) Dinner provided at the reception for you and your assistant.

(Yes, 50% down is a requirement.)

Me? I would do it for $800, given that I have no other jobs that day. just starting out, I would have done it for $350.
fragile existence [deleted] 8 years ago
Here's the thing. It doesn't come down to snobbery, it comes down to business, basically.

Costs to consider, which shana laid out, but also does NOT figure in the cost of equipment rental or maintenance, business insurance, or any income tax - they did say they wanted a professional, so that SHOULD be considered, for that matter. All of those significantly reduce your take home pay. It isn't as simple as a 25/30 an hour figure.

Another point to consider: do I want this couple giving word of mouth with UNEDITED files of mine? NO WAY. That leaves them free to do god knows what to them (hey... we've all seen the crazy overediting some of our friends do...) and tout them as our work. I don't know about you, but I don't want people hiring me because I shot a wedding as a one-time deal for 400.00 and handed over all the files and copyright. Damn. That is highway robbery. Seriously.

I will never, ever, ever hand over un-edited files to a client. Period.

Some people just don't get what professional photography entails, and this couple sounds like those people.
Brian, I'd do it for $800 if all of those terms were agreed to. I'd even edit the images for $800. If for some reason the client insisted on having the images handed to them the night of the wedding (which would require me to bring extra equipment to burn the images to DVD for them on-site), then I would need to be sure that the client truly understood that what they would be getting would not look like the images on my website. That would require me to write and have them sign a special contract amendment for them, as I would not want them to come back and try to sue me later because they didn't get the pretty, finished images that I advertise on my site.

I do agree with Sarah that I'd not want to sell unprocessed images, but at the same time when we give clients a disk of full resolution, processed images there is still nothing stopping them from re-editing them and posting them all over FB or what have you.

Would I have done the wedding for $350, just starting out (i.e last year)? Yes, most likely, IF the client would agree to compromise on their terms and agree to the terms that Brian listed. Plus, be willing to sign my contract and a contract amendment if they did not want the images processed. Much of what is in my wedding portfolio I did as a second shooter for free, so I am not opposed to working for little to nothing when starting out. As it is I'm still pretty cheap as far as wedding photography goes and like I said before, I do negotiate special packages for clients if they request something different.
HBRstudios Posted 8 years ago. Edited by HBRstudios (admin) 8 years ago
Yes, in my situation I am not as concerned about my image as a wedding photographer so, in this case, I am less concerned about handing over unedited images (ie, not my "best" or final work.) That is a great point to consider, for sure and I am glad you brought it up, Sarah. I have, in many circumstances in the past, said the very same thing, and even when giving clients negatives (yes, I am old,) I was always hoping they don't go to Wal-Mart to print them! But, on the flip side, not having to process those images saves a TON of time that can be used to do more paid work.
I also especially like the contract addendum idea of a "full disclosure," if you will. Not that they cannot still go out and bad mouth you, but having this in writing certainly reduces the chance they will.
peteSwede PRO 8 years ago
would read again. really though.

people are making great points here.

did the OP know the interested party or any follow up? i see they didn't post again.
This is good reading for anyone who wonders why custom photography is so expensive and for anyone trying to figure out their pricing.

timescapephoto 8 years ago
Shawns' post is an excellent read and very thorough.

I know many of the membership here do not do photography full time as their only/primary source of income ... so for those that can only see in numbers, try out the National Press Photographer Association's Cost of Doing Business Calculator.
Groups Beta