how long for pro photos?

We got told between 6-8 weeks. She has told us if it will take longer shell let us know

6 to 8 weeks wow, well before 2 weeks with me and quite a lot of photographers that I know.

Thats quite a jump 2 to 8 weeks!

We usually have a sneak peek post up within 2 days, the web resolution gallery within 7 (2 weeks at peak season) and the full resolution ones posted within 4 - 6 weeks.

Ah, yes well I've had a few sneak peeks so far which are both a curse and blessing since it only feed the need for more!

It depends on how experienced you are at editing and how many weddings you shot around the same time, I am quick at editing and know my way around photoshop so it never takes longer than 2 weeks to get a wedding finished but I know one photographer that will have a wedding edited and done in 2 days and done right as well and then there are those that will give you your photos the next day and haven't been edited but that's for another time.

There are some that give you a disk of images on the night.

I am roughly the same timescale as Bruce, although every tog is different. How long did they say it would take when you booked them?

Peter

I've completely forgotten ... and I feel too silly to ask. mainly because i personally find it claustrophobic when I'm chased on a project so i hate to chase other creatives!

I had a few the next day (we were flying to australia to see my dad and I wanted to take some for him to see. He's only started using email in the last month or so).

The rest were about 5 weeks I think.

2 weeks for my couples

Never longer than two weeks for me so that they are ready for when they are back from honeymoon. To be fair to others that take longer, because I am a full time professional I perhaps can get them done a little quicker than someone who has another job during the week, I also like to get on with the editing straight away as some colours/ shades do not photograph as how they look to the eye and doing it quicker while still fresh in my mind helps.I have always had a policy of not cramming as many weddings in as I can, this way I find I do not end up with a backlog that for me would take away the enjoyment of the editing stage.Believe it or not some photographers actually do not even bother editing them themselves and send them off to a 3rd party.

I forgot to mention that as well Bill so thanks for pointing it out, I know a lot of photographers that send the photos off to the far east to get them edited, yes sometimes they look nice but why?

I like to keep control of the images, also I know of two photographers that send the whole wedding off to a company who will then choose which images the photographer should give to the couple which I really think that is wrong, how do these companies know who was important at the wedding and should be left in it for the couple.

Wow!! crazy really. I know she edits her own, we spoke about photoshop and lightbox techniques when doing a walk through of the venue.

With the internet it has got too easy to be a wedding photographer, honestly with today's cameras and companies that will edit your photos then you don't need to know anything about wedding photography and what settings to use on the camera because if you mess up a photo they can edit it to an acceptable level that the client will love.

I know quite a few photographers that don't know much about photography and this is what they do, just send it off to a far east country who will pick the best photos and edit them for you for £0.20 each I think it was when I saw a photographer asking about this service on a facebook group.

This has actually turned into quite an interesting topic, from an artistic POV i can't see how you'd let someone else 'finish' your work. it would take away from too much of a personal touch and identity from the piece. the one thing i looked from in my TOG as composition, lighting and good angles. despite how good modern cameras are you cant fake the fundamentals of good art practises.

Yes you can, I have edited enough of other photographers photos to know any thing is possible and as I said with modern cameras if they mess up you can always go right in and crop it smaller to get a decent photo, been in this industry long enough to know what goes on and I can assure you anyone can be a photographer if they know where to go to get the images edited. Photoshop has made it possible for anyone to be a decent wedding photographer, you can correct anything even poor focus now.

Completely disagree and you are undervaluing the art that you perform. There are so many contradictions from TOGs on here. Warning brides one minute that the second shooter that has also been hired should be a pro TOG themselves but on the next thread, any images can be put right with the right editing software.

This is not the case. If an image is out of focus, it's out of focus. If the couple are not positioned correctly, PS cannot fix this.

Saying that you can correct an image by cropping because it was taken on a modern camera is only correct in some cases. Reminds me of the few people that have said "wow your images are amazing, you must have an amazing camera". ?

Yet another photography thread derailed. Sorry Elixia and you were absolutely right in saying "despite how good modern cameras are you cant fake the fundamentals of good art practices".

As DW said. No amount of processing can compensate for a good eye. A photographer needs to be able to 'see' the shot in order to capture it. Allot of people with expensive camera's are unable to do this.

This is the reason talent mostly trumps experience.

Getting back on subject to the Ops question. I spend roughly a week or so sorting and editing my images. At the beginning of the season I deliver the photo's with 1-2 weeks. At the busiest time I can shoot 3-4 weddings in a week which creates a backlog. Then it can take 6-8 weeks to deliver final images.

I could cut down the time I spend editing and deliver images sooner. However I wouldn't be prepared to sacrifice quality, and would rather charge more if I had to (and take more time) to be able to deliver a product I'm truly happy with.

Maybe its because i'm a total control freak, but i would never ever send my editing off to someone else!

I say to all my clients right at the beginning before they book that it takes up to 4 weeks for the images to be delivered, but most of the times they get delivered within 2-3 weeks and its a nice surprise. However, during peak season when I may shoot a few weddings a week, it can take the 4 weeks.

I think, so long as the photographer is upfront about the delivery time, there's never any disappointment. Whats worse is when the photographer says it'll be 4 weeks and takes 12 for example.

Same here. The lazy side of me would love to be able to outsource and put my feet up, but I could never bring myself to contemplate doing it.

To play devils advocate, pre digital, photographers used to shoot the images and take the film to the lab for processing. These days, in the mainly digital era, "labs" are still available as mentioned above, although most will attempt to process and tweak images themselves.

There are good togs, those designers that are good at photoshop, and some togs that can do both, although not all are anywhere near as good as some pro photoshop artists.

Sometimes, not all, some togs views on their photoshop ability and album design ability is blinkered.

Again depends on the Photoshop artist ive airbrushed some of my own photos, but the problem is always the source material. If its out of focus, overexposed, badly angled its just a fight against the tide. Thou, am looking forward to deigning my photobook. Im a control freak and like things just so

I never actually shot film, but you could argue the choice of film was like the photographers 'style' in terms of processing. Obviously the labs 'fixed' simple things like exposure etc, but it's mostly the film that has the character.

In the corporate market, there was great rivalry amongst photo labs as to who had the most artistic printer and how they interpreted each negative. The awards group would give the same negative to several competing companies to see what they produced and then awarded based on the outcome. Photoshop in many ways killed that off.

Around 2 weeks for me.

For those here who are berating the folk who send their images off for editing. You should know that the most successful wedding photographers in the world don't do their own editing :-) Lots outsource and lots others have employees do it for them

It's not being lazy, it's being busy. The theory being that as a photogrpher would you rather be spending a day editing or a day shooting more weddings?

If you get it right in camera then there isn't a lot of editing that needs doing and the best togs work that way. White balance and color correction are white balance and color correction - doesn't matter who is doing them.

I dont outsource my editing but I'm not precious and naive enough to think its somehow a bad thing.

For me it is never simply a question of white balance and tone correction, if it was I wouldn't bother doing it myself either.There are about 30 different stages to get from the one on the left to the one on the right, something that a 3rd party could not do as I explained earlier my final result is more about the feel of the image at the time it was taken and to put that back into an image canot be done with simple global adjustments from a 3rd party- yes I am precious about my work!!.

Bill if you dont think that someone else couldnt replicate exactly what you have done in that image then you need your eyes opening.

People think that their style of processing is unique to them but its really not.

Send that image to any retouching company and they would be able to exactly replicate what you have done - probably much quicker than you in fact. :-)

I think there are politer ways to disagree with someone tbh.

Regarding your point, no they couldn't. Bill obviously edits picture by picture with his own discretion as to how much sauce he uses. The only way 'they could' replicate what Bill would produce, is if Bill showed them the completed image and asked them to process it exactly like that. Obviously that would defeat the point.

As to your previous comments about some of the 'best' photographers outsourcing, well some do like Jasmine Star for example. However she happily admits she did it because she didn't know how to use photoshop to begin with. Now I believe she still outsources and applies final edits herself to her taste.

Most of the 'best' photographers process their own work and have their own style(s) they like.

How do you think that the guys I'm talking about do their outsourcing rhys?

They employ someone or outsource to somebody who learns their style by looking at what they have done. That's how it's done.

People think that their style is so unique to them but actually it really isn't - give your images to someone who specialises in retouching and processing and they will replicate it.

Its the same with album design - I know plenty of the busier photographers who outsource or employ someone to do this for them.

The skill is getting it right in camera - the composition, the moments, the technique - post processing is something that can be replicated.

Be as precious as you want about it, but thats the pure truth, we think we've found our unique recipe to process but it's so easily copied.

And just to add - One of the reasons I use queensberry for my wedding albums is they provide an album design service. They do a much better job of designing albums than I do and I'd rather spend that time photographing.

Of course I get final approval and can make adjustments. Just like I could if I outsourced my editing ?