Well as most of you know I am getting married next year. After going to the wedding show this past weekend I have found that there are a number of photography companys out there that offer a wide variety of services. Lets just say it all a bit overwhelming. I know that there are a number of you that do photography as a hobby and some that have bussiness. What should we be looking for in a photographer? Is there something we should pay close attension to when making this decission? Maybe someone here can give advise or even go as far as provide services for our very special day. One thing that is very important to us is price. We are trying to save as much as possible by doing a lot of the little things ourselves, eg. making our own invitations and center pieces.
So guys have at it. Give me pointers and tips to choosing a great photographer. We are also looking to get a videographer to capture our special day.
Thanks in advance for your help.
Kevin and Lindsey.
Doesn't Meford wife do that?
Talk to him...
focusonthis_88,Sep 12 2006, 08:54 PM Wrote:Doesn't Meford wife do that?
Talk to him...
[right][snapback]206774[/snapback][/right]
Well thats kind ofwhat I was getting at aswell as trying to get some pointers and tips.
Meford, what can you add to this?
Also a lot of the services that were being offered are in digital format and provide a CD with all the proofs without any logo's or PROOF across the print. I think this is a great idea so I would be able to e-mail photos to our familys in England and Iceland. Also alowing us to get prints at our leisure from whatever source we choose.
Go to the website, you will have a hard time beating our prices as my wife does it more for the love of photography and turns clients away constantly.
If you want to meet with her, I can make the arrangements. Ask AnthonyD (offline) and he can be candid about the work my wife does. He photographed their wedding in July.
As hip as digital might seem to you, I would suggest against it. In low light conditions, digital can be wonderful. But in the bright sun it can really wash pictures out.
Digital prints can be made, but wash out and eventually must be reprinted after approximately 7 years.
If you want to be able to digitally send pics after the wedding, i would suggest a mix of both film and digital, with the emphasis on the print.
You want your wedding memories to last forever, go film.
Don't have a photographer/studio that makes you take a package. That's BS and they are just upselling you in advance, before you see the final product. What if their work is garbage?
Don't pay too much. I've seen wedding photographers charge $7500 for pure crap that I could take on a drunken binge, and I am not a photographer.
Any other questions?
I retract all my comments as for this seems to be a touchy subject for some!!
I retract all my comments as for this seems to be a touchy subject for some!!
Thanks Meford, I never thought about the time digital photos last. That is a very good point. Does your wife take digital photos as well as film? I would hate to have to make new copies after say 10 years, well unless it doesn't work out then I would be ahead of the game. LOL only kidding, I only plan on getting married once.
Also with our wedding date a year away I am sure your wife isn't booked for 09/15/2007 yet. Maybe in the near future we should hook up and have a look at some of her work.
Thanks for the pointers and if anyone else has any pointers or past experiences please share them so we can have an informed oppinion.
Focus man, Focus.,Sep 13 2006, 07:05 AM Wrote:I only plan on getting married once.
[right][snapback]206829[/snapback][/right]
I think we all did, buddy. ;)
if you want a wacky touch, invest in a decent camera, find a willing family member that wants to assist (and who is fairly camera-proficient) and do them yourself.
The more my wife looks at our photos, the happier she is that we did it all ourselves. We also did our own videography, and considering we did it straight-up with a MiniDV cam on a tripod with no extras... it was phenomenal.
Of course, YMMV. This route is far from ideal for everyone. I had a brother-in-law to be and his partner that were happy to work the digicams and video camera for us all weekend. We captured the girls running around shopping prior to the big day, their adventure at the hair salon and everything up to the end of the reception. By "captured" I mean 2 hours of video prior to the wedding ceremony of shopping, our rehersal at the church the night prior, etc.
Of course, we got snaps and footage of the honeymoon, but that's not coming out to the public eye anytime soon :D ;)
NOS2Go4Me,Sep 13 2006, 11:45 AM Wrote:if you want a wacky touch, invest in a decent camera, find a willing family member that wants to assist (and who is fairly camera-proficient) and do them yourself.
The more my wife looks at our photos, the happier she is that we did it all ourselves. We also did our own videography, and considering we did it straight-up with a MiniDV cam on a tripod with no extras... it was phenomenal.
Of course, YMMV. This route is far from ideal for everyone. I had a brother-in-law to be and his partner that were happy to work the digicams and video camera for us all weekend. We captured the girls running around shopping prior to the big day, their adventure at the hair salon and everything up to the end of the reception. By "captured" I mean 2 hours of video prior to the wedding ceremony of shopping, our rehersal at the church the night prior, etc.
Of course, we got snaps and footage of the honeymoon, but that's not coming out to the public eye anytime soon :D ;)
[right][snapback]206871[/snapback][/right]
I retract all my comments as for this seems to be a touchy subject for some!!
I have no comment here for the two...................above that think they can shoot a professional wedding.
When the time comes and you are under pressure to take the right pics, you better have experience and be good at your craft.
Or have a good divorce lawyer.
I think I'll start fixing computers on my own and calling myself an "IT" guy. Just for the sake of saving a few bucks for family members. See how silly you sound???
Maybe it wasn't clear... I wasn't attacking YOU. I wasn't attacking photographers. But let's be fair here - anyone can work a computer and anyone can work a camera. The results with each will vary widely for both amateur and professional in both fields.
Did we claim to be professionals? No! This was a conscious choice that my wife made in that she felt that the cost of professional photography being offered in the area didn't justify past results. We also wanted videography and I really don't see what's so bad about doing it yourself. CTV won't be knocking down our door with videographer job offers, but when you combine a decent quality camera with a decent tripod... it's hard to screw it up. Roll the tape, leave the camera alone and let the day unfold. I was more than pleased with the results.
You're more than welcome to learn all about computers in your spare time and when you're comfortable to start with the little things... jump right in! There aren't enough competent IT guys around, and the industry could stand some part-time relief.
No offense man, but you're viewing the potential shots and potential outcome in too narrow of a light. Not everyone wants the same shots or setups. :)
NOS2Go4Me,Sep 13 2006, 08:34 PM Wrote:Maybe it wasn't clear... I wasn't attacking YOU. I wasn't attacking photographers. But let's be fair here - anyone can work a computer and anyone can work a camera. The results with each will vary widely for both amateur and professional in both fields.
Did we claim to be professionals? No! This was a conscious choice that my wife made in that she felt that the cost of professional photography being offered in the area didn't justify past results. We also wanted videography and I really don't see what's so bad about doing it yourself. CTV won't be knocking down our door with videographer job offers, but when you combine a decent quality camera with a decent tripod... it's hard to screw it up. Roll the tape, leave the camera alone and let the day unfold. I was more than pleased with the results.
You're more than welcome to learn all about computers in your spare time and when you're comfortable to start with the little things... jump right in! There aren't enough competent IT guys around, and the industry could stand some part-time relief.
No offense man, but you're viewing the potential shots and potential outcome in too narrow of a light. Not everyone wants the same shots or setups. :)
[right][snapback]206978[/snapback][/right]
How could you ever justify this as a response. The fact is you cheaped out.
I don't claim to be a professional IT guy and you don't claim to be a professional photographer. Great.
But you lose the dimension of the arguement that you think you can do the same job with little to no cost that a professional can. No way.
First, where did that camera come from?
a $500 camera versus a $5000 camera are night and day. You will and do notice a difference in the quality of the picture.
Second, you still have to pay for developing. The average cost to us for developing a wedding is $250, and that is at pro rates. It would cost you nearly double that.
Third, your time. Wouldn't you rather have your guest enjoy themselves at your wedding instead of dealing with photography? And since they are not getting paid, there is no obligation on their part to be there to capture the important moments.
Say what you want, but you cheaped out.
Upon further discussion with Lindsey I think we are closer to a decision now than we were yesterday. For the videography portion of our wedding day we are going to take Nos's advice and buy a Mini DV camera and film it ourselves. After it is all said and done we will take the disc's to an editor and have music and graphics added. That way we end up with a camera and can capture "anything" (wink wink) we want.
As for the photography we will be hiring a photographer for a basic package. Photos of Lindsey and family before the ceremony. and formal photos after. Going further than that we will provide each table with a disposable camera for candid shots and have our own cameras and familys cameras for the fun stuff. We can't really justify the cost for the total package and as I said in an earlier post money is a major issue. So Meford we will need to chat with your wife about what she can offer us.
Thanks guys for all your input on this subject. Please feel free to continue your discussion on this topic. And NOS if you and your wife are happy with the results that is all that really matters right? We are doing a combination of everyones suggestions and I think we will be more than happy with the outcome.
Thanks again,
Kevin and Lindsey
Not surprisingly NOS and Meford have a different take on the subject -- but interestingly I think they both have a point, even if they are somewhat distracted at this point.
IMO no amount of amateur luck or expensive camera can replace the composition and lighting control that a good professional photographer will give you - especially with a once in a lifetime deal like a wedding - zero tolerance for error (or in my case thrice in a lifetime, but you get my meaning I'm sure)
Add in the specialized equipment and finishing that only a professional photographer can bring to the table -- and budget nothwithstanding, there is in my view a compelling argument to hire a professional photographer for a wedding. And call me old school but IMO the digital world has yet to equal what a good photographer can do with film.
On the other hand ... there are elements of a wedding that a professional photographer is unlikely to be in a position to capture -- those candid moments outside the posed photos --often many at the same time -- that really do add to the special and personal nature of a wedding.
Our solution was to have both ... we hired the best photographer we could afford and made sure the deal included a package he could make a few bucks on ... but it also included me owning the negs so I would have my own reprint options later.
We had a few relatives who are good with cameras and we bought the film/media for them and told them to go crazy -- and they did.
And finally we gave everyone else one of those crazy 24-shot disposable cameras and asked them to fill 'em up and turn them in at the end of the day ... and the result was 1,440 candid shots to choose from -- most were crap (but still fantastic in their own special way) but a handful were priceless and our memories of that day are really enhanced by having these pics to look at.
The end result is an awesome collection of pics that were affordable (and affordable to share with our guests) -- that included the best of what a pro wedding photographer knows is important, as well as all the candid shots that he (and my wife and I) were simply not in a position to capture.
My advice - do it all.
meford4u,Sep 13 2006, 06:03 PM Wrote:I have no comment here for the two...................above that think they can shoot a professional wedding.
When the time comes and you are under pressure to take the right pics, you better have experience and be good at your craft.
Or have a good divorce lawyer.
I think I'll start fixing computers on my own and calling myself an "IT" guy.ÃÂ Just for the sake of saving a few bucks for family members.ÃÂ See how silly you sound???
[right][snapback]206961[/snapback][/right]
I retract all my comments as for this seems to be a touchy subject for some!!
The only thing I can add to the discussion is this. Please, please inform your guests that they are free to shoot pictures, but if they are going to shoot pictures, do so after the professional has finished and set up the shot.
I'll give a couple of examples.
First, we had a know-it-all relative(I'll call her NOS ;) :lol: ) who thought their $500 camera made her a pro. She was intrusive in Pat's way all day. When the bride and groom came to pick up the pictures they were furious. She was in 45% of the shots Pat had taken after Pat tried to get her to move away.
Second, when a photographer sets up indoor shots with lighting, the lights are typically triggered by a peanut bulb that is set off by flash. We had a couple that gave out the 24 one time camera's to their guests. When many ot the pics came back the same as what Pat had taken, they wanted a refund because "we could have done the same job for half the cost". This is now known in our household as "The NOS theory" :lol:
I hope you see the humour in this Adam.
Pat has decided to leave the wedding photography business and just do the odd wedding for friends, family and those customers that are willing to work with her unique style.
I will talk to her about doing your wedding in '07.
meford4u,Sep 13 2006, 10:27 PM Wrote:The only thing I can add to the discussion is this. ...[right][snapback]207002[/snapback][/right]
Some good advice here ... what we did was send all guests (except the wedding party) off to the bar while we took pictures in the rose garden (Dr's House, Kleinberg - highly recommended) - and so the only camera at the posed sessions was in fact the photog's - zero interference will make the photo session go more quickly and with better results ... make sure you let those who are to be in the photos know where and when they are expected to be, well in advance -- don't try to organize it on the day.
My photog suggested we do the larger group shots first so we could gradually cut more and more people loose, until it was just the wife and me with the photog for the more intimate shots - seemed to work out really good and the rest of the guests were nice and relaxed by the time we made it back for the lunch.
Anyway ... sounds like you've got an excellent plan (it's all in the execution now) -- best of luck to ya.