HIB - Question...

Of course - It must be incredibly hard to decide how to present yourself to people in that way.In term of the shots of flowers and glasses I really meant when photographers include very few other types of photograph to demonstrate what they can do. A few mixed in there can be nice, if the majority of shots are any one type it doesn't give a great impression of their overall style - but when choosing a wedding photographer I would rather see shots of only the couples someone has photographed rather than only the inanimate objects.

I am all for getting across a slightly quirky style or something different, but I prefer to see evidence of a quirky, individual photographer in the photos they take, not the layout of the website as I desperately search for the button that turns off their background music or takes me back through the slideshow to the picture I really want to see again. ?

Having seen the awful poor photography results of my only two friends to get married in this country, I found finding a wedding photographer extremly fustrating.

Namely that googling around it seems that there is a huge number of people claiming to be professional photographers, but its very obvious that they are not.

Awful photos, none or few photos of weddings.

and those that do pass the inital website test, and I spoke to seemed to again be very amateur and unsure of themselves and unable to answer basic questions.

I'm totally drawn to the conclusion that there is simply a lot of people of there who claim to be photographers when they are not. Some openly admitted they had another job in the week and only shot weddings at weekends.

SoontobeSSmith,, alot of what you say, unfortunately is true. But because there has been such a flooding of the wedding photography industry in the past couple of years of people who either were keen on photography, went to a wedding took some snaps that the offical pro set up, got praise for their 'great shots', was in a wedding, knows someone who was in a wedding, sister of a bride, brother of a bride, who things it must be good fun, and easy money to put up a blog or website and instantly subsidize their income by offering to do weddings at prices that give the impression that wedding photography should be cheap, it's done alot of damage to the photography market. As a result alot of long term professionals have been known to have to take on additional jobs in order to survive. So while I know there are alot of weekend warrior types out there,, there will also be those who have been pushed out of making a living at this, some after doing it for decades, who have had to take on other jobs. So it's not all black and white out there. :/ I know many great photographers who have full time jobs doing something else, but they make the time for a photography busines on the side,, taking both very seriously. I realize that isn't always the case tho.

But it's become very easy to set up a business and fool people into thinking you are a professional. This has resulted in alot of bad wedding photography stories. It's definately the case of buyer beware.

Then why, if they are that professional do they not take on more photography work?
One of the things that made me book the photographer I have, is not only that he has plenty of stunning wedding photos and was able to show me lots of examples when we met, but also that during the week and out of the wedding season he shoots lots of other photography. He shoots for magazines, advertising, interiors.
He has shot loads of celebs.

This gives me lots of confidence in him, because he is shooting so regularly and shooting for such nice big people. Being published regularly and shooting all the celebs he does for magazines also helps my confidence, if he wasn't any good, he wouldn't be getting that work.

So if he can do it as a professional photographer, why can't others?

It also means his prices are suprisingly reasonable for the quality of his work, because he has plenty of other work coming in.

Your statements are confusing,, you do realise that taking on all those other types of photography work, IS taking on additional jobs? Many photographers I know are doing the same thing, some are doing whatever they have to, in order to get past the economic situation many are currently in. The higher end ones are doing workshops and seminars for those just entering the market, some are selling photographic software, all are considered additinal jobs. Even your photographer isn't making it as just a wedding photographer,, he's doing other things. Nothing wrong with that, which is my point to start with, lol. I have been very lucky to maintain my focus on weddings and portraits, my chosen field. I have done other types of photograhy in the past, when getting started and working out what I wanted to put my focus on. I know I am lucky to be busy. I am humbled and thankful for my supportive clientele. But it takes years to build up a good, strong business,, unfortunately what many who have been around for decades has discovered, is that it only takes one bad year to destroy one. I have alot of compassion for those professionals, and they deserve respect for setting the bar high for producing quality work. If they find other avenues to keep their business going until things are better, who are we to judge and say they are less than professional?

It's great that you have confidence in your photographer, that is important for him to be able to do a great job for you. Have a great wedding! I look forward to seeing the photos

Of course, but its all photography work, that means all throughout the week they are taking photos, which translates as more experience to deal with any situation, and I see all the different types such as fashion and interior photography as different skills that will be needed at a wedding.

What I was complaining was people who are car mechanics or sitting behind a desk during the week. They don't even pick up a camera. How does that give them experience? I most certainly don't want them to practisce at my wedding. Even selling photographic software means that you are not using a camera, and not taking pictures in real life.

If a photographer during the week is shooting photos of celebs and being published in magazines then he must be good in my opinion to be getting that work.

Interestingly though, the 5 "best wedding photographers" (according to a worldwide survey by the BBC) in the world all do sell software that they have developed for other photographers......

The Brit who was in that 5 makes quite a killing from the sales of his software "actions" for Photoshop......

Like I said, it's good that you like your photographer. That's very important Best of luck with the wedding!

Peter, that is true. It's a whole other side to the photography industry. In order to create that kind of software, they have to have an understanding of how photo manipulation and how to create great photos.

If people want full time photographers, then they also need to be be prepared to pay the right price for one... The weekend warrier has a low price, because he is just doing it for pin money - the other job is paying the bills> the full timer, is actually making a living form the weddings / photography they do

What the chap does through the rest of the week debate is interesting, but ultimately, a good full time wedding photographer spends time marketing, going accounts, meeting clients, editing images, making albums, designing albums blah blah blah... In other words, if they can pick up a camera 2-3 times again in the week they are lucky

Sorry, but I am not convienced by that, it seems like an excuse.

Both my parents and my fiances parents wedding photos are absolutely beautiful, they capture emotion as well as being sharp, clear and well lit.

And of course these were taken well before people started editing things in photoshop. If photographers could take photos such great photos 40 years ago without photoshop. Why do they need photoshop now to create the same images?

It really seems like an excuse.

At my fiances works, we have a man who is a welder, his welds are so nice that they don't need grinding down. But when we took on a couple of extra welders when we were very busy earlier in the year, all the new welders had to grind their welds down afterwards. It took longer and cost us more, and its simply because those guys were not as experienced as the regularly man we use.

Sorry, but I am very passionate about this subject. As I said before two of my friends their wedding photos are so bad they are unusable, and I just feel that there are so many photographers out there who are just not experienced / knowledged enough.

For what its worth I am paying my photographer £1000.00 to be there all day and recieve a very high quality handmade storybook album. (and the CD)
That I think is very reasonable, doubly so when you compare the quality.

I would agree with some of this comment. Photoshop should not be used to correct poorly shot images. They should be shot correctly to start with. That said, Photoshop is a great finishing tool, something that can polish the images.

40 years ago colour (believe it or not) was relatively new in this country for wedding photography. The film stock was rated at 100ISO and churches usually didn't allow photography as well as virtually all photographers going home before the couple sat down to eat....So no evening coverages. How things have changed........Coverages are totally different now.

Photoshop - is a digital way of doing the things that were done in the darkroom - and that process in the darkroom was slow, expensive and often very poorly executed

Yes we(I) also shoot film - and yes we sell hand finished prints - so we do know what we are talking about...

We can hanker after the past as much as we want...

20 30 40 years ago, the wedding photographer shot 36 / 12 shots, or 24 on 1 or 2 rolls of film, and shot 5-6 weddings a day, and nipped back to shoot one shot at the reception, on the end of a roll of 12

Nowadays, brides want 100's if not 1000's of images, and these need processing just like images were processed in the "gold old days" - they still need colour matching, they still need to be properly sharpened (depending on the output media) they still need airbrushing and retouching

Typically a pro lab in the past used to colour balance shots for the photogrpaher, and then hand finish negativs and prints - Nothing has changed, except nowadays, the photogrpaher is actually shooting more images, and doing what the labs did for them themselves. If todays professional wants to outsource, the Pro labs still offer this service

If we go way back, the photographer was developing and processingthe films/plates themselves, and techniques like re-touching, colouring, toning, cross processing, dodging, burning and masking were very common (exactly all the things we do with photoshop)

All that has happened is that we have ditched the darkroom, the darkness, the seeing things in negative, the mess, the chemicals, the smells with a nice crisp shiny monitor + photoshop.. what happens to "most" the images is pretty much very similar. If anything, the new clinical environment encourages higher quality work. An example of this is my working space - I no longer work in a cold dark, red lit darkroom, I have a perfectly lit, color balanced working environment (daylight lamps, specifically chosen painted neutral grey walls, colour calibrated screens, profiles that match my photolab etc. etc. I can work day or night, and see the colour correctly, knowing that the print will be "what I see", knowing that I am not influenced by the lighting in my environment etc. etc.. I expect most other pro's have similar setups

I cant agree with you more. There is no excuse for not learning the craft. In todays world, craftsman are not generally respected, or paid well. The general populus seems to respect and celebrate celebrity, people seem to listen to "buzz" more than substance. Quantity and product seems to matter more than quality. On the whole crafts and skills are being "dumbed down" to the lowest comon denominator. This is accross the board - Tailored suit, hand made dress, bespoke spectacles. hand made shoes - are all rarities, and mainly things of the past. Whats a real shame is that the artists that produce these sorts of things are sidelined because the lowest comon demoninator product is more profitable

Someone mentioned the "top 5 photographers" Undoubtedly they are decent photographers, but the thing that makes them stand out is thier ability to sell themselves and get people to "believe the hype"

Dont dispair - like your welder - there are a lot of skilled people about, they are just hard to find, and possibly a bit expensive, as the work they do invariably takes a bit longer and is to a higher standard

Not sure what it is you think you need convincing about,, lol. I am not saying this is a good thing, just trying to explain how it's all come to be. I think it's great that you have passion for this,, it's why I reply to you, because I also have passion as it's my field of expertise, and I have a working knowledge of the industry and art. I just want you to have the correct information. I get nothing from this except some sense that I am helping. Sorry your friends couldn't have gotten a better photographer, I get emails alot from people saying similar, and hoping I can do something to 'fix' the bad photos. It would have cost these people more for me to fix the bad work, than if they had splashed out for a better photographer from the start however. It's a poor state of affairs for photographers to rely on photoshop to fix bad photography when so much could be done to get a good capture if they knew what they were doing and didn't think that just having a big black camera set to the green box or 'p' was all they needed to have.

As technology advances, new needs are recognized all the time, and filled by clever people. In photography, it's other photographers who have a working understanding of what could help that profession, who design much of the tools we use. A good photographer has got to also be adept with this technology, including software to aid them in what they do. I'm referring to things that enhance images and gives them that 'film like' look that you can't get straight out of a camera. It's created shortcuts for bad photography, which I find a bit dismaying.

The professional flim labs that played a very important role 40 years ago, does not have the same role today. It's just not the same industry as it was 40 years ago. This is why quality varies from one photographer to another,, depending on their understanding of how to get the best out of a capture, or their access to someone to do it for them.

Many great photographers develop tools to help them with the process, to do this, they DO have to have a working understanding of photography. Many would never have considered offering their 'tips and tools' to the competition until the flood of the industry of cheap, inexpirenced photographers affected the industry so much. They saw it as an opportunity. It is just how it is. Many very clever photographers have cashed in on the needs of other photographers, and it's created a lot of photographer who can't make a living at any one type of photography and will try anything if they can get paid (I honestly don't buy into the ' jack of all trades' theory of photography, every type of photography requires a different skill set, to be truly a master at one type, you should focus on that) You must bare in mind, the software I speak of, is partly what helps create the 'good' images you like that you have seen around. Yes, you will see alot of bad work out there. But so long as people are content to pay a low sum for all day coverage, with an album, and disc of images, you will see more and more enter this field thinking it's a quick way to make cash, without caring about what they are producing, or have any understanding on how to produce better work.

oops, cross posted with Richard, lol.

Sorry, but again this doesn't seem right and once again when I was looking, it seemed the poorest photographers offered to supply me with the biggest number of images, some of them even 'guaranteeing' me a set and very large number of images, like 800.

The funny thing was for all these photographers offering hundreds of images, they had very little to show as exmples, which is odd when they take so many.

Once again I feel this is an excuse and / or marketing tool that poor photographers use to sell their photography.

and my friends whom I've mentioned that recieved very poor photographs, also got hundreds, but whats the point in hundreds of bad photos and hundreds of pointless photos? One friend got about 5 photos of the reception desk at the hotel, and 20 of the cake, all the same and all too dark to see it properly. It should also be noted that a news article earlier in the year about a photographer who was sued for delivering such bad photos, also delivered hundreds upon hundreds, most of which were just photos of nothing. I've seen some of them on the BBC website.

I have preordered a 40 page storybook album. I'm maybe going to have 100? photos in there, and personally I'd much rather have a much smaller number of high quality, beautiful photos, rather than stacks upon stacks of poor ones.

And finally if I do some maths. I've booked my photographer for 8 hours, which I think is quite a length of time. For him to take 'thousands' of photos lets say 2000. That would be over 4 photos taken every single minute, including through the dinner. And of what I don't know? Even if you had 200 guests, thats 10 photos of every single person.

If I get 200 beautiful photos of which I choose maybe a hundred, I will be very happy.

Well, if they are a great photographer, why would you not get a large number of photos all of equal quality? Anyone could provide 200 images of a certain standard, the odds are that out of 2000 images there surely would be 200 decent ones even with the most average skilled photographer. To know when to take a capture is a skill.

I had to pass on doing a friend's brothers wedding at the beginning of the year, he really couldn't afford us, but also I was hoping to be visiting family at that time. The person he got to shoot it, only provided 20 very poor images,, underexposed, poor compositions, not one of his side of the family, and just horrible flash technique. He left after the wedding breakfast and delivered the disc of images before the end of the evening. No processing on the images, just the straight out of the camera jpgs. All 20 of them. I wanted to cry when they showed them to me, I felt so bad. So trust me, this is only one of the dozens of horror stories I hear all the time.

TBH, you are being very narrow in what YOU are looking for. From a suppliers POV this is a dream - you would in our books be one of the easiest couples ever. However, your view doent repersent the wishes of very largest majoritory of our enquiries/weddings

Some brides do want details, and a large choice of images to choose from. A great example of this is that on a well known photography forum a bride was aguing black was blue wanting "ALL" the unprocessed and processed images from the wedding, including the DUFF ones, the blinks, and ones with tech issues - why - because in her mind, they were hers, and she wanted every last nuace recorded, no matter how poor the image was

As elluded to earlier in this thread, we as photographers have to decide how we place ourself in the market.. we have to offer "something" We are realists - a one size all approach doesnt work with everyone. On top of that, we need to react to our local market, and price point too.

Some things are not as they seem either. Many of the JFK wedding photo's (where a few examples were shown above) are very obviously posed and partly set up... not reportage at all. Some are toned and edited, some have been "pushed" and others developed to a style. Many of them have blown hilights, and no tonal range in the blacks. You are actually looking for a "style". The process your photographer uses to achieve that "style" will for certain include post processing

The only thing I am being narrow minded about is looking for great photography. This is going to be the one and only time I get married and I want lovely memories.
Its not like buying a coat that I can take back if I change my mind, or just shove to the back of the waredrobe, and buy another. The wedding is unrepeatable.

I went into looking for a photographer very carefully after my friends experiences, and found it a very fustrating business.
There will always be cowboys in every business, but it seems to me in wedding photography there is a very large percentage of cowboys.

And its as simple as that. Sorry if I am coming across as harsh.

I don't think Richard meant 'narrow minded', replace the word 'narrow' with 'specfic' and I think that's more what he meant. Also, I think he may have been directing that at the bride who posted the JFK photos.

I can't fault you for wanting to be sure of getting good photography. I think that is a good thing I share your frustration and trust me, all I can do is to be the best I can, and hope others can see the difference.

Nope... I meant "narrow" in terms of you have a vey definate specific list of things you want. This is good - it makes you very easy to deal with! ? You are not being harsh, you are demanding to get the job done properly, nothing at all wrong with that