What are your thoughts?

OhEddieOhEddie Mere MortalPosts: 337Registered Users Major grins
edited May 14, 2012 in Weddings
I found a website (not mine) and wondered if you experienced shooters could give an opinion.

Here is the "Investment"....

http://melindafaithphotography.zenfolio.com/wedding-investment-options

And here is the product....

http://melindafaithphotography.zenfolio.com/p21155275#h164e4854

Just curious.
Blessed are those who remain flexible, for they shall not get bent out of shape.

Comments

  • ricstewricstew Big grins Posts: 92Registered Users Big grins
    edited May 2, 2012
    I think that is seriously floral wallpaper :)
  • Quincy TQuincy T from ear to ear Posts: 1,090Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 2, 2012
    Extortion. I can't believe people pick up a camera and just start charging people because they press the shutter button. It irritates me to no end.
  • Moogle PepperMoogle Pepper Big picture in the sky Posts: 2,960Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 2, 2012
    So why exactly are you posting this? Is this in any relation to you or what you have experienced?

    Are there people like this out there that would quickly jump into this industry?
    yes. Are there people willing to go for this? Yes. Are there people who want images, but just can't afford it? Yes.

    My thoughts on this, is that as this industry is extremely competitive, care about your own work and pay heed to your own artistic vision.
    Food & Culture.
    www.tednghiem.com
  • mjoshi123mjoshi123 Major grins Posts: 216Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 2, 2012
    My thoughts on this, is that as this industry is extremely competitive, care about your own work and pay heed to your own artistic vision.

    My exact thought.
  • KinkajouKinkajou Major grins Posts: 1,241Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 2, 2012
    my thoughts on this, is that as this industry is extremely competitive, care about your own work and pay heed to your own artistic vision.

    +1
    Webpage - Blog

    Spread the love! Go comment on something!
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Wedding Photographer Posts: 3,394Super Moderators Major grins
    edited May 2, 2012
    My thoughts are, no offense, that it is not very polite to talk about people behind their back, for one.

    It is however still productive to talk about the industry situation in general, in which subject I will comment that every opportunity I get I encourage people to only ever hire a photographer that can show consistently, job after job after job, that they deliver stunning results. The industry is absolutely overflowing right now, at all skill levels. That is my only real nugget of advice though. Hire based on personal recommendation, and not "oh I have a friend who is a photographer", but "oh so-and-so photographed MY wedding, and I'm thrilled with the photos"...

    And so on and so forth.

    =Matt=
    My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug PortfolioMy Astro-Landscape Photo BlogModerator of the Dgrin Weddings Forum
  • OhEddieOhEddie Mere Mortal Posts: 337Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 2, 2012
    I did not have any intention of "talking behind someones back". I am sorry if that is what has been implied.

    I just wanted to give an example of what I have seen as the "dumbing down" of the art of photography in general. I am sure we have all seen it as "Photographers" post photos, of rather poor quality, on FB and Flickr and such, only to be told "great pictures" by a couple dozen people. And I am not talking about everyday folks that post pics of their kids & cats, but rather people that think of themselves "photographers". And please understand that I am not directing any criticism toward the photographers, but rather the public in general for not knowing a quality photo when they see one.

    It just frustrates me.
    Blessed are those who remain flexible, for they shall not get bent out of shape.
  • GlortGlort Major grins Posts: 1,015Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 4, 2012
    OhEddie wrote: »
    And please understand that I am not directing any criticism toward the photographers, but rather the public in general for not knowing a quality photo when they see one.

    I thing generally the Public don't know their ass from their elbow so photography is no different.

    I have seen lots of people talk about educating the public by telling them how much equipment costs and insurance and tax and materials and cost of shoe leather amongst and how much time they spend and..... who bloody cares?
    Someone tried that sales pitch on me and i'd definately be out the door.

    I think the notion of educating the public to what is a good pic and what isn't is also rather laughable. Lets face it, If a bride can go through the wedding arranging process and not be educated by the thousands of pics she sees in bridal books and even just advertising pieces,to me she is beyond practical help.

    The fact is, some people have their taste in their backsides and just don't appreciate quality in anything because they may not have been used to it.
    I'm not trying to defend bad photography at all, I'm just saying there will always be a market for it simply because some people will want something familiar to them in being like shots they would take themselves rather than pics they may consider too "artsy".

    You also have to Consider budget.
    When I started in wedding I put ad's in the local paper. Most of the weddings I got were REAL low budget. I shot more in backyards, sometimes with a tent, sometimes not, than anything else.
    Starting out my work was not much above good snapshots but my clients were always very happy and I had no trouble with getting referrals.

    It's all well and good to say quality costs and all the rest but to some people, sharp, bright, straight shots are good pics and regardless of how much they prefer something else, Photography WILL be something they can cut back on.

    I think it's also a bit Hypocritical for shooters to whinge about a lot of the low enders.
    There have been loads of people come onto this forum and say " I'm doing wedding for the first time what shots should I take or what should I do" and people rush to offer advise.
    Should we not be trying to deter these people that haven't had training by an established shooter or is it the right thing to give them a bit of confidence to stumble on and undoubtedly create what most shooters with experience would call a dogs breakfast?

    I have seen some local shooters that have gone on for years churning out the same horrid crap and never seeming to make improvement. Somehow, they still get loads of work. It always amazes me though when a shooter is producing work that is clearly lacking, how they can do it for years and not improve one bit. Surely they can't help but see much higher standards of work around?

    They fact they keep getting work is proof in itself of the market demand for what they do which many would consider highly sub standard.
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Wedding Photographer Posts: 3,394Super Moderators Major grins
    edited May 4, 2012
    Glort wrote: »
    ...I have seen lots of people talk about educating the public by telling them how much equipment costs and insurance and tax and materials and cost of shoe leather amongst and how much time they spend and..... who bloody cares?
    Someone tried that sales pitch on me and i'd definately be out the door...

    Bingo. Customers simply DO NOT CARE what it costs to run your business. They don't care at all whether you put your kids through college by taking pictures, or by swinging a hammer.

    They just want cheap photos. If they can get cheap photos from a hobbyist who does it in their spare time, then we can't compete with that. We just can't. Better customer service, insurance, etc? Maybe valuable to some, but not to the general consumer. They'd rather risk disaster and save a few thousand dollars.

    Throughout history, technology has done this to "equipment operation professionals" as I would call them. Since the industrial revolution, countless jobs, careers, even entire industries have vanished into thin air thanks to advances in technology. Who are we to stand in the way of a digital imaging revolution?

    There will always be a market for professional photography. Don't get me wrong! However make no mistake, the industry will change dramatically over the next few years / decades, in ways that we can't even fathom yet.

    A lowering of standards also plays into the picture, but not as much as you'd think. Those with lower standards are simply the new additions to the world of photography, those who wouldn't have been into photography at all, if it were not for digital to begin with. See what I mean? It's not that standards have been lowered by those who previously had high standards, it's just that newcomers are starting at zero.

    Either way, dramatic changes are occurring, and I'm interested to see where it all goes.

    =Matt=
    My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug PortfolioMy Astro-Landscape Photo BlogModerator of the Dgrin Weddings Forum
  • heatherfeatherheatherfeather Major grins Posts: 2,739Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 5, 2012
    ^That being said.... people are getting used to crappy photos, since all that most people use are their phone cameras as seen on facebook. So when they see a real photo by someone who shoots it intentionally, with real equipment, they are a bit amazed. I think technology isn't quite ready to steal the show... yet.
  • DemianDemian Major grins Posts: 211Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 5, 2012
    OhEddie wrote: »
    I did not have any intention of "talking behind someones back". I am sorry if that is what has been implied.

    I just wanted to give an example of what I have seen as the "dumbing down" of the art of photography in general. I am sure we have all seen it as "Photographers" post photos, of rather poor quality, on FB and Flickr and such, only to be told "great pictures" by a couple dozen people. And I am not talking about everyday folks that post pics of their kids & cats, but rather people that think of themselves "photographers". And please understand that I am not directing any criticism toward the photographers, but rather the public in general for not knowing a quality photo when they see one.

    It just frustrates me.

    This criticism
    Cries in all ages:
    New generations,
    No friends to art.
  • GlortGlort Major grins Posts: 1,015Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 7, 2012
    ^That being said.... people are getting used to crappy photos, since all that most people use are their phone cameras as seen on facebook. So when they see a real photo by someone who shoots it intentionally, with real equipment, they are a bit amazed. I think technology isn't quite ready to steal the show... yet.

    I am always going off at my kids for taking chit pics on their phones. There is always a ready to go camera sitting on my desk and they shoot event work for me so it's not like they can't use the things. Somehow while they would criticize a crap Event or wedding pic, taking garbage pics of other things seems to be OK.

    It's really just the standard they are used to seeing from other kids and people who think a Phone is a perfectly good substitute for a camera when used in poor lighting and other conditions which only show up their limitations.

    I have done events and heard people say that the pics they got on their phone weren't anywhere as good as what we took but for whatever excuse, they are " good enough".
    That's scary.

    The thing I hear all the time from wannabe shooters all the time is how great photo shop is at fixing pictures up. That mentality is rife even here with people declaring that every pic they shoot has to be edited before it is fit for the world to see it.
    So many having never shot film don't get that you shoot the pic right in the first place like one did before the digital age.

    I hear all the time of people taking weeks to edit a shoot and each image taking 10-30 min to edit and I wonder how the hell they have the patience.
    If I had to Photoshop every pic I took, I'd give up!

    The game will change. It will go more to pics people cant take themselves through access or equipment. A lot of traditional markets will shift and some new ones will open.
    Of course then there is the problem of the over saturation of the market with shooters.

    For the last few years this has been an important point in what I do. I have learned the difficulty of competing with every man and his dog, even if they are at different levels to what you are doing. I look for the Niches but they are getting fewer and other people are also looking to get into the less serviced markets.
    I have been lucky so far but that won't last forever.
  • SamSam San Jose CA Posts: 7,418Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 7, 2012
    Glort wrote: »

    The thing I hear all the time from wannabe shooters all the time is how great photo shop is at fixing pictures up. That mentality is rife even here with people declaring that every pic they shoot has to be edited before it is fit for the world to see it.
    So many having never shot film don't get that you shoot the pic right in the first place like one did before the digital age.

    I hear all the time of people taking weeks to edit a shoot and each image taking 10-30 min to edit and I wonder how the hell they have the patience.
    If I had to Photoshop every pic I took, I'd give up!

    For the last few years this has been an important point in what I do. I have learned the difficulty of competing with every man and his dog, even if they are at different levels to what you are doing. I look for the Niches but they are getting fewer and other people are also looking to get into the less serviced markets.
    I have been lucky so far but that won't last forever.

    Glort,

    I will disagree with you on Photoshop and editing. The question of is it better to shoot .jpg and get it right in camera or edit in PS after the fact is not a valid question.

    I know you deal with high volume event photography. For that type of photography shooting .jpg and doing the ABSOLUTE minimum in post is key to making a profit. Learning to get the best possible image straight out of camera is critical.

    However no matter how good you are shooting jpg the cameras and sensors have there limits. For example we can increase the dynamic range of an image beyond the sensors capability by opening the shadows in PS.

    I will wager you a case of that nasty food like substance Vegemite I can produce a better image shooting RAW and using PS than you can shooting .jpg and not using any post. It doesn't matter how much better you are.

    The key here is shooting RAW and capturing a great image in camera can with PS become a fantastic image. Shooting RAW and getting a crap image and using PS will only get you a processed crap image.

    Different workflows for different types of photography and clients.

    Sam
  • FoquesFoques He who caN Posts: 1,938Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 7, 2012
    I suppose i'm one of those people who is, actually, glad that this was posted..
    I needed a reassurance in my "skills"..
    Arseny - the too honest guy.
    My Site
    My Facebook
  • trooperstroopers Major grins Posts: 317Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 7, 2012
    Although I understand why some may feel "threatened", I think it's great for the industry (to some extent). Bring on the competition. I'll need to re-think my services, my equipment, marketing, etc. If I get priced out of the market/lose potential clients, that's my fault.
  • DreadnoteDreadnote Unwanted Customer Posts: 634Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 9, 2012
    Glort wrote: »
    The thing I hear all the time from wannabe shooters all the time is how great photo shop is at fixing pictures up. That mentality is rife even here with people declaring that every pic they shoot has to be edited before it is fit for the world to see it.
    So many having never shot film don't get that you shoot the pic right in the first place like one did before the digital age.

    I hear all the time of people taking weeks to edit a shoot and each image taking 10-30 min to edit and I wonder how the hell they have the patience.
    If I had to Photoshop every pic I took, I'd give up!

    No offense intended and I don't want to come across as flippant, but common "Photoshop" processes like dodging, burning, Gaussian blur, an so on and on and on... are in reality nothing more than carry over terms from the dark room. To suppose that Ansel Adams got it right in one click in the camera is a bit naive.
    Sports, Dance, Portraits, Events... www.jasonhowardking.com
  • GlortGlort Major grins Posts: 1,015Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 9, 2012
    Dreadnote wrote: »
    No offense intended and I don't want to come across as flippant, but common "Photoshop" processes like dodging, burning, Gaussian blur, an so on and on and on... are in reality nothing more than carry over terms from the dark room. To suppose that Ansel Adams got it right in one click in the camera is a bit naive.

    True.

    But I'll bet he didn't go correcting mistakes that should have been fixed before the shot was taken.

    Lots of Johhny come latelys do a lot more than a bit of dodging and burning. They basically re- create the shot. If I see another shot of a girl where she looks like she has a face like a wax dummy, I'll throw up.

    If a shot is not worthy of being shown without Photofiddling, then to me its a dud.
    Improvements are one thing, spending 30 min recreating it to something decent is something else.
  • JamesbjenkinsJamesbjenkins Live, shoot, post, repeat Posts: 435Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 9, 2012
    Honestly, I love seeing trash photos (and websites), bc all it does it increase the value of my products by comparison. I'm certainly not going to lose any clients to this or other similar photographers. People who would sign with these types of photographers also get their pictures taken at Walmart.
    Website: www.captured-photos.com
    Proofing: clients.captured-photos.com
    Facebook: Like Me || Twitter: Follow Me
    Gear: Lots of Nikon bodies & glass, an office full of tools and toys
  • rhommelrhommel Major grins Posts: 306Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 9, 2012
    it's obvious she's getting some contracts in, which means that some people like her work :)

    people buy no name brands all the time. granted that quality is way less, but people buying them know exactly what their getting. what's wrong with that?

    why do car manufacturers produce cheap-$hitty cars? well, because some people will still buy it for the price alone even if they know they won't last long.
  • insanefredinsanefred Disgruntled Photographer Posts: 628Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 10, 2012
    Bingo. Customers simply DO NOT CARE what it costs to run your business. They don't care at all whether you put your kids through college by taking pictures, or by swinging a hammer.

    They just want cheap photos. If they can get cheap photos from a hobbyist who does it in their spare time, then we can't compete with that. We just can't. Better customer service, insurance, etc? Maybe valuable to some, but not to the general consumer. They'd rather risk disaster and save a few thousand dollars.

    Throughout history, technology has done this to "equipment operation professionals" as I would call them. Since the industrial revolution, countless jobs, careers, even entire industries have vanished into thin air thanks to advances in technology. Who are we to stand in the way of a digital imaging revolution?

    There will always be a market for professional photography. Don't get me wrong! However make no mistake, the industry will change dramatically over the next few years / decades, in ways that we can't even fathom yet.

    A lowering of standards also plays into the picture, but not as much as you'd think. Those with lower standards are simply the new additions to the world of photography, those who wouldn't have been into photography at all, if it were not for digital to begin with. See what I mean? It's not that standards have been lowered by those who previously had high standards, it's just that newcomers are starting at zero.

    Either way, dramatic changes are occurring, and I'm interested to see where it all goes.

    =Matt=


    Hey, I resent that!
  • JamesbjenkinsJamesbjenkins Live, shoot, post, repeat Posts: 435Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 11, 2012
    insanefred wrote: »
    Hey, I resent that!

    Truth hurts, eh?

    The vast majority of the general public wants to know price first. There are about a dozen more important things to consider when selecting a photographer than price. Any client who skips to the bottom line isn't a client I'm interested in. Those types of people are always trying to work a deal or get stuff free, and they NEVER buy any add-ons.

    No thank you.

    My clients are much more concerned with VALUE than cost. They understand if you want premium quality, you have to pay premium price...
    Website: www.captured-photos.com
    Proofing: clients.captured-photos.com
    Facebook: Like Me || Twitter: Follow Me
    Gear: Lots of Nikon bodies & glass, an office full of tools and toys
  • insanefredinsanefred Disgruntled Photographer Posts: 628Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 11, 2012
    Truth hurts, eh?

    The vast majority of the general public wants to know price first. There are about a dozen more important things to consider when selecting a photographer than price. Any client who skips to the bottom line isn't a client I'm interested in. Those types of people are always trying to work a deal or get stuff free, and they NEVER buy any add-ons.

    No thank you.

    My clients are much more concerned with VALUE than cost. They understand if you want premium quality, you have to pay premium price...


    I meant in, that I consider myself as an hobbyist, but I only photograph weddings for clients that know my work and ask for me. As for price, if they try to low ball me without good reason, I can always say no and possibly refer them to someone else.
  • GlortGlort Major grins Posts: 1,015Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 14, 2012

    The vast majority of the general public wants to know price first. There are about a dozen more important things to consider when selecting a photographer than price. Any client who skips to the bottom line isn't a client I'm interested in. Those types of people are always trying to work a deal or get stuff free, and they NEVER buy any add-ons.

    Spot on!

    I try to get the price issue out of the way as soon as possible though. I ask what sort of budget the client has and being in the ball park, confirm we are on the same level and then go on to find out all the details of their wedding and basically sell them over the phone. At the end I tell them what their investment will be in their pics for me to give them what they are wanting and again confirm that's within their budget.

    I find that confirming you are within the clients budget put the focus back on the important stuff.
    Yes, they can afford me, that's that potential sticking point put aside, lets get on with the important stuff. If the client is not prepared to pay what I charge, I prefer to find that out in the first 5 min than jabber on trying to win a client that's never going to happen or waste time with them coming into the studio to waste more of my time still.

    Occasionally you get the hero groom come in that tries to low ball you and drop your price, hasn't worked on me for many years. Those ones without fail turn out to be the biggest pains in the but, the most demanding, take the most of your time and give you the lowest returns.

    I'm always amazed at how some people think that you are going to be desperate to get every job and will do whatever they dictate to get it. The fastest way to put them in their place and gain control over the situation is restate your price and if they want to negotiate, close your book and tell them your not the photographer for them and you can give them the name of a cheaper guy down the road who will better suit their main concern.
    I stand up, thank them for their time in coming to see me and wish them well for their day.

    If they stand up and go to leave you know they can't afford you and if they stay seated and ask something else, you know you have them. I really don't care which option they choose, both are good for me but if they stay, I'm in control from then on and they are unlikely to try and low ball me from there on in.
  • Dooginfif20Dooginfif20 Major grins Posts: 844Registered Users Major grins
    edited May 14, 2012
    I think your work should speak for itself. If someone searches the interweb looking for a photographer in the area and they look at your site and this other photographers page and doesnt choose you then oh well. I had a company out of Seattle contact me because their photographer that contracted to shoot a wedding in my area got sick. They said they would pay me $250 for 8 hours of coverage and I give all of the images on disk back to the company. The couple paid $500 total. My point is (I live in a military town as I am military as well) there a lot of people who dont really care about quality as much as they do about price. They may think "oh wow this guys works is awesome!" see the price and run to the posted photographer. I think this post is both good and bad. It proves to me that my work is better than some, yet not as good as most. It also seems a little low to post this and not inform the photographer about it. You can hide who you are on here and this photographer cant.
Sign In or Register to comment.