It seems as though there has been a spike recently with "photographers" offering to shoot weddings for free. I've seen a thread just today, right here at MM where the photograher is offering to shoot a wedding for free.
I do offer TF shoots to models on a selective basis, however, I see this as more of a trade between two professions and that hopefully both parties benefit.
I shoot weddings too and I'm finding it hard to understand why on earth whould a photographer offer this for free. Thoughts?
You cannot even pay me now to shoot weddings, after doing 200+ that was enough, i fail to understand how anyone is willing to shoot this style of torture for free, lack of experience at the pitfalls involved perhaps?
Seriously? I am brand new to photography but am very meticulous. I put a lot of time and detail into everything I do, and weddings are ridiculous.
I am shooting my sister-in-laws wedding because they are running close to budget and think my work is "good enough" (I'm not trying to fool myself here).
There are many photographers who are willing to shoot a wedding for free...
I can't speak for them, but I think the thought process is along the lines of: If I shoot this wedding, I get experience and images. Maybe even a few contacts. With those images, new knowledge, and potential new clients, I can start to build a wedding business.
I personally think someone should second shoot first, but that's a different story.
I can do it for a very best friend or family members. Cant do this to anyone else for free. Other then that, i rather shoot animals at zoo
Will King Photography wrote: It seems as though there has been a spike recently with "photographers" offering to shoot weddings for free. I've seen a thread just today, right here at MM where the photograher is offering to shoot a wedding for free.
I do offer TF shoots to models on a selective basis, however, I see this as more of a trade between two professions and that hopefully both parties benefit.
I shoot weddings too and I'm finding it hard to understand why on earth whould a photographer offer this for free. Thoughts?
The only reason why I shoot weddings is because they pay so well but I'm usually sore for at least 3 days afterwards. Lugging around strobes, light stands, 2 bodies, lenses, speedlites, and modifiers all at a very fast pace is grueling.
Laura Ann Photography wrote: There are many photographers who are willing to shoot a wedding for free...
I can't speak for them, but I think the thought process is along the lines of: If I shoot this wedding, I get experience and images. Maybe even a few contacts. With those images, new knowledge, and potential new clients, I can start to build a wedding business.
I personally think someone should second shoot first, but that's a different story.
That's probably true. I'm not sure if I would shoot an actual wedding to gain experience. Often times with weddings, there are no retakes.
Bang Truong wrote: I can do it for a very best friend or family members. Cant do this to anyone else for free. Other then that, i rather shoot animals at zoo
I don't shoot weddings. Period. I refuse to deal with bridezilla and her wicked witch mother. But then I don't shoot porn either. lol.
I especially would never shoot a wedding for a friend or family. Think about the relationship being damaged or destroyed if one little thing goes wrong!
I can see how an inexperienced wedding photographer could see shooting a wedding or two pro bono as beneficial to build a portfolio. But there are other much easier ways to get the images you need to market yourself in that area.
Will King Photography wrote: I shoot weddings too and I'm finding it hard to understand why on earth whould a photographer offer this for free. Thoughts?
It seems like an easy way to get experience and exposure, especially when they don't think their work is good enough to charge for yet.
Unfortunately, if they don't think it's good enough to pay money for, odds are it's downright unacceptable for recording what could be the most important day in someone's life.
Add in the legal ramifications of all the things that could go wrong, as well as the post-wedding drama that can occur...
As long as there are naïve people out there who think they're snagging a deal, these potential disasters will keep happening.
Will King Photography wrote: The only reason why I shoot weddings is because they pay so well but I'm usually sore for at least 3 days afterwards. Lugging around strobes, light stands, 2 bodies, lenses, speedlites, and modifiers all at a very fast pace is grueling.
Kelli Kickham wrote: Seriously? I am brand new to photography but am very meticulous. I put a lot of time and detail into everything I do, and weddings are ridiculous.
I am shooting my sister-in-laws wedding because they are running close to budget and think my work is "good enough" (I'm not trying to fool myself here).
And I certainly am not doing it for free.
It's just not sensible.
I shot my first (and only) wedding about 5 months after I picked up my camera.
It was for a friend, and I accepted because it was either going to be me or nothing. I charged him a low fee and made sure he was fully aware of my ability and experience.
It actually turned out very well and everyone involved was more than happy with the arrangement.
Ron Casas Photography wrote: My first two weddings were TF**, one for an aunt, the other for close friends...
Any one that does TF** weddings more than a couple of times just does not have a good business plan...
Ron
Why do you call it TF*? I don't see this as a trade. TF between model and photographer is a collaboration of talent (well not always "talent). The relationship between bride and photographer is a customer/service relationship.
I'm disappointed at how digital has cheapened how easy it is to call oneself a "photographer!" I noticed a posting on Craigslist that was by some guy who said he would shoot weddings for free. So I called him up and chatted nicely with him. Found out that he is employed in an industry not related to photography, and that he bought a nice SLR digital camera. He does not have any intention of being a professional that charges, nor does he even keep any of the images for his own portfolio. He does this because "he can" and he enjoys it. That's all I needed to know.
I have friends who are professional photographers in the San Jose area whose business at their portrait/wedding studio has declined so much since the on set of inexpensive digital cameras that these professionals may go out of business. They have invested in the digital technology themselves and have impressive work. However with people like the guy I called available, those couples who ordinarily would have considered hiring a wedding photographer back in the days when not so many were available ... are now easily able to get cheap or even free photography.
Will King Photography wrote: It seems as though there has been a spike recently with "photographers" offering to shoot weddings for free. I've seen a thread just today, right here at MM where the photograher is offering to shoot a wedding for free.
I do offer TF shoots to models on a selective basis, however, I see this as more of a trade between two professions and that hopefully both parties benefit.
I shoot weddings too and I'm finding it hard to understand why on earth whould a photographer offer this for free. Thoughts?
Maybe photographer in question who's shooting it for free is looking to gain experience.
Will King Photography wrote: It seems as though there has been a spike recently with "photographers" offering to shoot weddings for free. I've seen a thread just today, right here at MM where the photograher is offering to shoot a wedding for free.
I do offer TF shoots to models on a selective basis, however, I see this as more of a trade between two professions and that hopefully both parties benefit.
I shoot weddings too and I'm finding it hard to understand why on earth whould a photographer offer this for free. Thoughts?
I doubt they'll make that offer more than once ....
Patrick Walberg wrote: However with people like the guy I called available, those couples who ordinarily would have considered hiring a wedding photographer back in the days when not so many were available ... are now easily able to get cheap or even free photography.
I see this a lot. I wonder, though- are the freebie guys really taking that much business away from serious photographers? I'm talking about professionals who charge a few thousand to shoot a wedding and have portfolios, websites, packages, and contracts. It seems to me that a couple who has budgeted $2,000-$5,000 for a photographer isn't going to be swayed by some joe blow with no experience and no idea what he's doing just because he's offering to do it for free.
Patrick Walberg wrote: I'm disappointed at how digital has cheapened how easy it is to call oneself a "photographer!" I noticed a posting on Craigslist that was by some guy who said he would shoot weddings for free. So I called him up and chatted nicely with him. Found out that he is employed in an industry not related to photography, and that he bought a nice SLR digital camera. He does not have any intention of being a professional that charges, nor does he even keep any of the images for his own portfolio. He does this because "he can" and he enjoys it. That's all I needed to know.
I have friends who are professional photographers in the San Jose area whose business at their portrait/wedding studio has declined so much since the on set of inexpensive digital cameras that these professionals may go out of business. They have invested in the digital technology themselves and have impressive work. However with people like the guy I called available, those couples who ordinarily would have considered hiring a wedding photographer back in the days when not so many were available ... are now easily able to get cheap or even free photography.
So you do not consider yourself part of the problem by not charging for your own services as a photographer? All those girls in bikinis and lingerie could have paid a pro photographer for images when you just did TFP.
The guys who are losing buisness due to the advent of digital cameras are too lazy to create a better product then can be offered by a guy who uses P deserve to lose buisness.
If the pond gets bigger & you refuse to grow you will get eaten.
So you do not consider yourself part of the problem by not charging for your own services as a photographer? All those girls in bikinis and lingerie could have paid a pro photographer for images when you just did TFP.
The guys who are losing buisness due to the advent of digital cameras are too lazy to create a better product then can be offered by a guy who uses P deserve to lose buisness.
If the pond gets bigger & you refuse to grow you will get eaten.
Speaking just for myself here, but I'm just a hobbyist model and as such, I do not really have the money to be paying photographers for images. If it weren't for TF, I wouldn't be a model in the first place. So what I'm trying to say is, photographers doing model photography TF is completely different (most of the time) than a photographer doing a wedding for free.
But, concerning the OP, the advice given to my husband if he wanted to get into photography was to be an assistant for someone established in the business to get the experience, rather than just offer to do free/cheap wedding shoots. If CL people get you down, just keep in mind that they might just be looking for experience. They probably figure that's the best way to get it. So instead of flagging their post or getting angry with them, you could perhaps send them a message suggesting that they do what was suggested for my husband.
Why do you call it TF*? I don't see this as a trade. TF between model and photographer is a collaboration of talent (well not always "talent). The relationship between bride and photographer is a customer/service relationship.
The trade is work to be added to my port, to that point I had not shot any weddings to call it my work so I needed some images for my port.
It is kind of hard to book wedding gigs if you have no photographs to show the perspective clients...
So you do not consider yourself part of the problem by not charging for your own services as a photographer? All those girls in bikinis and lingerie could have paid a pro photographer for images when you just did TFP.
The guys who are losing buisness due to the advent of digital cameras are too lazy to create a better product then can be offered by a guy who uses P deserve to lose buisness.
If the pond gets bigger & you refuse to grow you will get eaten.
There's a difference. Modeling and photography are professions....in most cases. Models and photographers both have skills (hopefully) that they bring to the table. Being a bride is not a profession and there is no skill required therefore the term TF should not apply. It's not a trade. It's a free service.
There's a difference. Modeling and photography are professions....in most cases. Models and photographers both have skills (hopefully) that they bring to the table. Being a bride is not a profession and there is no skill required therefore the term TF should not apply. It's not a trade. It's a free service.
See, but not everyone views it that way.
Lets say there's a family that will not be hiring a photographer unless their friend, Joe the amateur photographer, shoots the wedding for them and hands them a disc of the pictures.
This couple, who otherwise would have had no shots of the wedding, or would have only had shots the guests took with the P&Ss now has a CD of potentially better photos. Joe the amateur now also have genuine wedding shots...hopefully good ones.
Joe has prints to start a portfolio, and the couple has some hopefully decent shots.
Capitol-Imaging-Group wrote: You cannot even pay me now to shoot weddings, after doing 200+ that was enough, i fail to understand how anyone is willing to shoot this style of torture for free, lack of experience at the pitfalls involved perhaps?
After seeing your gallery here I'm dying to see one of your bridal shoots!
If I found a bride and groom that where very photogenic at an amazing location I would consider it to bump up my portfolio. The problem with people looking for free wedding photographers is the space they are getting married. The local K of C hall with a drop ceiling and plastic plants makes a horrible back drop. I have shot 2 wedding for close friends and gave them the photos as my wedding gift. Lucky for me they where both at parks on beautiful days so I walked away with usable shots from inexpensive weddings.
Jim White Photography wrote: After seeing your gallery here I'm dying to see one of your bridal shoots!
I don''t shoot nor post wedding work any longer, why would i as i stopped shooting it in 2006, chances of seeing my wedding work nil, but thanx for the interest !!
Laura Ann Photography wrote: There are many photographers who are willing to shoot a wedding for free...
I can't speak for them, but I think the thought process is along the lines of: If I shoot this wedding, I get experience and images. Maybe even a few contacts. With those images, new knowledge, and potential new clients, I can start to build a wedding business.
I personally think someone should second shoot first, but that's a different story.
I would say that 90% of the time this is the reason. That said, this is why this idea will not lead to success:
1.) Most of the B&G's that would go for this are either Bridezillas or worse, cheap B&G's with weddings at a picnic area at a public park. The contacts you get from this will either want free to cheap coverage.
2.) Photographer then decides, "Hey, $250 is more than free. So I will shoot it". While it is true that $250.00 is more than free, I causes them to continue building a portfolio of cheap picnic table weddings.
3.) Photographer then starts going after higher paying clients and they start asking to see their albums. Well, with $250 wedding, the most they will be able to afford is a Blurb.com album. Same client meets with someone who shows them a Graffi album and we can guess on which one they book.
4.) Years later, the photographer has finally broken into the $1000.00 wedding bracket.
Will King Photography wrote: I shoot weddings too and I'm finding it hard to understand why on earth whould a photographer offer this for free. Thoughts?
I did my first 2 weddings for free. At the time, I wanted to try a wedding and couldn't possibly get hired by an experienced pro. So, craigslist ad with explicit warning about my inexperience, and a nice, poor local couple WHO WOULD NOT OTHERWISE HAVE A PHOTOGRAPHER let me give it a try. I brought a friend with camera as backup and absolutely loved it.
Do I worry about those CL guys now...no...because I'm after the couples with a bigger budget.
Will King Photography wrote: It seems as though there has been a spike recently with "photographers" offering to shoot weddings for free. I've seen a thread just today, right here at MM where the photograher is offering to shoot a wedding for free.
I do offer TF shoots to models on a selective basis, however, I see this as more of a trade between two professions and that hopefully both parties benefit.
I shoot weddings too and I'm finding it hard to understand why on earth whould a photographer offer this for free. Thoughts?
I thought of doing it to get samples to show...yes things are getting THAT tight finically for me. But as of yet it's just a thought..more like a bad dream. But since the last wedding I shot was for a friend (A GOOD friend) some 18 years ago, I'd say I need the practice before I could start charging again...and the current samples.
Patrick Walberg wrote: I'm disappointed at how digital has cheapened how easy it is to call oneself a "photographer!"
I have friends who are professional photographers in the San Jose area whose business at their portrait/wedding studio has declined so much since the on set of inexpensive digital cameras that these professionals may go out of business.
Technology does not always improve everyone's business that's for sure. Seems if you can afford a digital SLR you can call yourself a "professional." It doesn't bother me so much personally but I feel bad for many prospective brides who end up with crappy work.
For sure the biggest hits were taken by wedding and portrait photographers since that is what the buying public has had the most contact with. Now that I started shooting wedding once again, albiet part time, I had to rethink my entire business process.
No packages. No albums. No ordering prints. I negotiate each and every wedding and come to some kind of mutual price line. It seems to be working fairly well so in this respect some of those who have gone under may not have been able to adjust to a new digital world.
I can put my experience up against any of the local photographers in my area and never one problem. It's a tough world for wedding and portrait photographers but I suspect it's pretty much the same across the board.
I would say that 90% of the time this is the reason. That said, this is why this idea will not lead to success:
1.) Most of the B&G's that would go for this are either Bridezillas or worse, cheap B&G's with weddings at a picnic area at a public park. The contacts you get from this will either want free to cheap coverage.
2.) Photographer then decides, "Hey, $250 is more than free. So I will shoot it". While it is true that $250.00 is more than free, I causes them to continue building a portfolio of cheap picnic table weddings.
3.) Photographer then starts going after higher paying clients and they start asking to see their albums. Well, with $250 wedding, the most they will be able to afford is a Blurb.com album. Same client meets with someone who shows them a Graffi album and we can guess on which one they book.
4.) Years later, the photographer has finally broken into the $1000.00 wedding bracket.
I think you're absolutely correct.
I shot my first wedding for a friend. Small affair, no formals, just candids for the whole thing. The images weren't bad, but they certainly weren't going to get me in the 3,000-5,000 dollar wedding photography game. Then I started second shooting for a friend who was shooting the kind of weddings I wanted to shoot. I used those images to start building up my book...
Mind you, I have a way to go, but had I continued to go down the path I was on then I'm sure I would still be shooting those weddings.
Oh, and I'm saving up for my Graphi album, thank you very much!
