Wedding photographers of /p/, how can you compete with these

File: 2.png (3MB, 1453x971px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1453x971px

'Photojournalistic wedding photographer'

What did he mean by this?

>>2974392
You ever just start saying anything that comes to mind when fleshing out a resume?

>>2974392

it involves hand grenades and nikon cameras.

>>2974386
Pay low prices, get shit photographs.

It's never been any different and has zero bearing on my £2k clients.

>>2974392
Means s/he doesn't follow the checklist, because s/he's an amateur. It's like shooting a funeral without getting a picture of everyone putting their flowers on the casket: not knowing the format is no excuse for offering services for pay, even if it's "photojournalistic".

The only formal thing where photojournalistic approaches are appropriate is one that ends in an outdoor booze-up, or was one to begin with. Anywhere else, there's certain pictures you gotta walk away with.

File: 1471896212122.jpg (19KB, 235x193px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 235x193px

>covering all of the England
Hahahaha, my sides.
Also, my sides whenever I see >wedding photography

Also, nice rates desu, Three hundred quid for 10 hours of work on location, 300 images edited (presumably at least another hour), 8x6 album, and 5 prints. Wew, and he's even willing to travel all over England.
So assuming the cost of materials is what, £75? Excluding gas, you got 11 hours of work time. Plus assuming this daft cunt lives in London, if he gets a job up in the borders then that's a solid 6 hours of travel. At the bare minimum, he's paying himself £13.20 before tax.
HAHAHAHA, Wedding photographers, always there for a good laff

>>2974392
>'Photojournalistic wedding photographer'

Just shows up and does whatever, probably drinks more than the guets. Uses a kit lens. Proceses with clarity slider on +50. Doesn't know what white balance is...ect

>>2974464
White balance manipulation affects the integrity of the photo because you decide how a photo should feel, you should let the camera designed by scientists to be objective decide.

Clarity just makes more details appear.

>>2974470
>Clarity just makes more details appear.

i know the compulsion to shitpost is strong, but please, stop trolling.

>>2974472
:(

>>2974386
>30 BongDollars per hour not counting in editing, travel, composing Albums and printing

JFC. I never used a camera for money and even I know that's fucking low.
How can he live like that?

>>2974475
By shooting 7 weddings a week, with one week off per month for editing? This goyim is obviously part time and has another job.

I dunno, it's really hard to break it down.
Assuming he works full time, He shoots 7 wedding a week, 21 weddings a month. with 7 days downtime for editing/printing/marketing etc That's £6300 per month. He's editing/printing three weddings a week on down time, let's say at 12 hours a pop because he's a trooper.
That brings his total amount of hours per wedding up to 14 excluding travelling. He's earning, assuming he travels to each wedding for 2.5 hours each way average for each wedding (since he covers all of England) He's now up to what 19 hours on average for every wedding. Excluding the cost of travelling, fuel, train tickets, he's now earning £15.70 an hour. Again before tax and before the cost of prints. Assuming the prints only cost £50, Albums/DVD are £25 per wedding and the average cost of travel is £25 per wedding (lel). Then he's now making £200 per wedding, split over 19 hours. Assuming he's written off those expenses and he's paying himself the rest, he's now earning £50.4k a year with no days off because he's dedicated.
When we deduct the tax due, yearly he has a maximum wage of £36,698. At what expense?

36,698/252 weddings, He's getting £145 per wedding.
Divide his hours spent working on the wedding/travelling and he's now paying himself under £7.66 per hour. Just £0.46 pence above the NMW for 0 days off a year.

I'm not a wedding photographer, because I have standards, but could someone chime in with the average cost of this package expense wise? It'd be nice to see.
It's clear to assume that S howard does this part time on his days off from his full time job, possibly using holiday days or flexi time etc to cover it. You could probably scrape by but christ, it doesn't even leave enough time to file your tax returns.

Though, if you take a look at his site, you'll not only see his disgustingly over PP-ed images, but that his standard wedding is around £700. So who knows, maybe he's just desperate for work and having a fire sale.
Gotta note that some of the portraits on his page are worse than I've seen on /p/ this year.

>>2974416
This.
As ever, you get what you pay for.

>>2974386
>Anyone over £500 is literally BTFO
Anyone charging that much and over is going for a completely different clientele than one that finds their wedding photog on a friend's FB wall.

As with all things, plebs gonna pleb because pleb.

Wedding photography horror/lulz stories?

>Be shootan friends wedding
>RB67, 5d and rabble
>95 degrees with 500% humidity outside
>68 degrees inside
>Shoot some stuff inside
>Notice gaggle of soccer moms following me with rabbles trying to take the same pictures for free that my friend paid me for
>Set my rabble outside
>Leave the 5d inside
>Hey anons! Let's go outside for pictures
>pick up my rabble and get some shots off
>soccer mom's cams instantly fog up from the humidity
>snap away while they are trying to clean their lenses that fog back up instantly because they can't into temperature differential
>go back inside once their cams adjust to the temperature
>pick up 5d, snap a bit
>their cams fog up again
>repeat for hours

Much lulz were had

>>2974529
Could be off season. Whoever heard of a November wedding? Dog's arse weather and all.

Do you think in order to be a good wedding photographer the photographer should have some relationship experience? Like how can some no-girlfriend-ever mid 20s year old guy convince older people they should hire him to capture photos a couple that's been together like 15+ years would want?

Am I just being stupid?

>>2974636

You need social skills to be a wedding photographer. Trust me.

Has anyone Googled the award the guy claims to have won? Personally I think he is scamming people and running away with deposits. His Facebook has enormous interest from stupid women marrying in their thirties.

>>2974443
Problem is, he will do it for a while and when he wakes up, there will be 10 more kids with cameras behind him willing to do the same.

File: 1480285405089.jpg (46KB, 596x628px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 596x628px

>>2974386
Then don't? He's competing in a market for budget weddings and there's plenty of reasons you shouldn't be working that market anyway. Build a decent portfolio and work in the market that is willing and wanting to pay more. Budget weddings are shit show and they tend to blow chunks to shoot.

>>2974392
you ignorats, photojournal is to take pictures to tell the story of how the wedding is ocurring, not only the formal pictures

>>2977868
You haven't been to many weddings, have you?
There are four things happening in this order:

- Ceremony, everyone is sitting in silence, maybe tearing up a bit
- Chow, starting to get drunk (if they haven't already) while music is on
- Ceremonially getting more drunk while dancing and music is still on
- Music fucked off, everyone is getting ass drunk while the newlyweds fuck off

It's not like in the movies where everything is nice with lovely single girls around. Mostly it is a pigfest where the bride and groom are fat, the brides friends are fat, the whole family is fat and the only single girls around are fat and get aggressively manhunting while drunk.
This is why you should do the pro-face and making your best to appear as part of the scenery. And especially the last part is why you charge the extra.
It is a soul crushing work but someone has to do it, and pays for the nice things like traveling or food on your table.

>>2974526
It's even less than that, since weddings are seasonal. 7 weddings a week during the busy season, sure. 7 weddings a week in December? Yeah right.

My friend's dad is a wedding photographer. He makes quite good money (even still offers to shoot on medium format film is asked) and get booked solid during the busy season. However during the slow season he needs to do business events/lame shit since some months only see him getting a handful of weddings (maybe 1/week). He shoots lots of business holiday parties and award ceremonies during the winter. Even with all that, he's told me 70% of his totally work happens during ~4-5 months out of the year.

This guy in the OP picture probabky isn't even paying off his overhead.

>>2974776
Sure, and GoPro will probably release an AutoWedding drone, and smartphones and normal cameras will continue to take better pictures handling the technicals on full auto without photographers knowing any details about what they do.

Making it possible for amateurs and autonomous vehicles to cover all the basics of some weddings and even a few things you can't currently do even with pretty good skills.

Shit is always annoying when you're in a business that isn't absolutely necessary, can't be kinda "forced" upon customers either, and where technology increasingly obsoletes part of your market (even if not necessarily your own skills - there will be more people competing with you, I guess).