Giving Away the Farm

If you don't like moaners, don't read today's post, because I am going to have a whinge!


Many wedding photographers provide their clients DVDs with the image files from their wedding day - many do not, and some will supply them for a fee.


Photographers who never offer files on a disk, or who charge for the files, tend to be highly respected professionals. Men and women with really impressive reputations, amazing talent and great skill. They know something that you may not have realised - they know that you do not really care much about their skill, talent or experience  - you just want some photos!  But still, their Names - and ultimately, your satisfaction - depends on you receiving photographs prepared, printed and presented with the individual care that their reputation is built on.


They also know that it doesn't matter how hard they worked for you or good their photography is,  the photos people see on Facebook or in a packet of prints that you hand around to your friends is their best advertisement.  They don't want  a stack of 20cent prints in a department store photo album to be the measure of their skill and efforts!


A photographer whose only commitment is to provide a set of files on a disk has a different mind set. How the pictures turn out is not their concern. It is your responsibility and and they don't much care where you get them done. They work cheap, and count on low price and ignorance to keep them in business.


Of course, they will do their best to ensure you have good pictures... the trouble is, good pictures are pictures taken with an understanding of how the photos will eventually be used. The file burnt to a disk may print well for a small book, but be useless as an enlargement - good for Internet viewing but poor in a flushmount album, acceptable in a digital album, but not work in a traditional album and so on. 


Specifying "high Resolution" files doesn't actually mean anything - or rather, it means different things to different people, and I'll talk about that a bit later.


When I know that I will be managing prints, albums and so on, I have a vested interest in ensuring that the files are not only of the highest quality, but that they are in an appropriate format for the various uses to which they are going to be put. 


What is more, knowing in advance how they will be used, I can photograph each wedding with those uses in mind; I need to be sure that,  in addition to the "standard" photos that make up most wedding collections,  there will be images in the portfolio that will be ideal for each planned use.


Why isn't it enough to just be sure that all the images are high resolution (HiRes)?  Can't HIRes files be enlarged for any anticipated use... unfortunately not:  HiRes is not a meaningful term. When you ask most  burn-and-shoot photographers what they mean by HiRes, they tend to talk about how many megapixels their camera captures- but the little toy cameras in cell phones have more megapixels than some professional SLR cameras. You would never think of them as HiRes! These photographers are mixing up pixel counts with resolution and digital capture with output. It is the output resolution that counts! Without going into technical detail, it is all about the final image, not the file it came from. 


Printing presses (used for digital photo books)  and inkjet printers used for most quality prints and albums, have different requirement, but basically you need a file that can provide 300 dots of ink(dpi) for every linear inch (25mm). of your print. If your photographer has supplied you with typical jpeg files direct from the camera to the disk, they will not manage this. If he shot in RAW, and then used default settings from most conversion software, it will still not be set up for enlargements  - but pictures up to A4 will be fine - usually - and other uses will be "good enough, but a long way short of what they should be. 

I was interested to read an ad from a "professional photographer" which offered hi-resolution files for purchased on disk: up to 250 files, edited and able to be printed as large as 5"x7". To me, that does not suggest a high resolution;  a 300 dpi file could be produced easily from a 2 megapixel camera; I suspect those files have been intentionally reduced to prevent enlarging, but they are still High Resolution.

The standard printer used for pro quality albums prints at 600 dpi. I work with a company that has a one-of-a-kind 3600 dpi printer; try uploading your typical shoot-and-burn files to that and then tell me about hi-res files.


You get what you pay for - so if you pay for a disk, that is what you get; the photos on it are often just an excuse to collect a fee for the disk. . So you say "I want hi-res images on a disk and the right to print them later"  and that's what you will get, too. But since you have taken on the responsibility of preparing the files for  printing you really have no comeback when the results are second class.


I'm sorry this has turned into such a diatribe, but I was just shown a set of files on a CD and asked if I could print an album from them. Of the 350 or so files, about 150 are suitable. Isn't 150 enough for an album? A small one, anyway?  Maybe, but all the "good" slides are from the garden part of the wedding ceremony, and most of these are so similar that you couldn't use more than half of them - 19 shots of the first kiss is all very well, but it doesn't tell very much of the story of the wedding day. Add 10 quite acceptable photos of the family groups, one of the bride walking up the aisle and that's about the sum of it. Very few of the indoor shots are any better than the guests took.  I could make some nice Canvas prints and some reasonable enlargements... and they will look good on Facebook, but for an album...


I will try to restore enough of the preparation  photos and the reception shots to make an album, but it won't be quick and it won't be easy. I can't help thinking that, if the photographer had known she was going to make the album, she would have made a very different set of pictures! 

Things Every Bride Should Know

There has been a discussion running on Linkedin over several months that I'd like to share, in outline at least. HR Manager Chastity asked the Wedding Industry Professionals group members to share the one piece of advice they give a bride that no one tells them about their wedding day. 


Some of the answers were trite, some were humorous (usually intentionally) and some answers were longer than I intend this whole blog to be. But there was a lot of common sense and even wisdom in the answers, which I have tried to distill into a list that you might find useful, especially if your own Planners, DJs, Celebrants, Caterers, Photographers and others don't offer you similar little gems.


If I haven't given anyone credit for a particular piece of advice, it is because it is mine; or it is my distillation of several contributions without quite being what any one person said....


I have to add, that if some of these thoughts seem a little eccentric or even foolish, remember where they come from: people who attend maybe 50 weddings every year, year after year. Great as your mum is at planning, as organised and assured as you are about the way things will be, and as experienced as your dad, fiance and matron of honour are, even their combined experience is unlikely to come close to what any one of these people see every day: they know what mistakes to avoid, where the pitfalls are and how to avoid them. So here goes (in no particular order):

• Take a few moments between the ceremony and reception for JUST YOU TWO. Perhaps get a few pics then, but be alone for 5-10 minutes as newlyweds! (Rev. Carleen Burns)
• Practice walking wearing your dress. I have seen many brides almost fall over when stepping onto their dress (Bernd Kestler)
• It won't be perfect, but the imperfections are what makes your wedding memorable (Stephanie Thompson)
• Take a pair of comfortable shoes to the reception! (Me)
• Don't go cheap, don't be last minute. Don't have huge expectations and you will have a great day. Remember it's going to go by pretty fast...enjoy it while it lasts (Jeff Donovan)
• After the wedding, couples have bills to pay, lives to lead, and often little expendable income for wedding pictures, so photos are really not something that can easily come "after" the wedding. Also, if you've cut corners on things like time, then you may not have professional photos of some key moments because you've sent your photographers home (Dana Gieringer)
• Prioritize what you really want out of the wedding- and that includes allocating your budget. I am often faced with brides who hired me to photograph their wedding, but then afterwards could not afford the album they really wanted - after spending an equal amount (if not more) on chair covers and napkins! (David Briggs)
• Plan the wedding for you and not for what everyone else thinks you should have! (Rob Stratford)
• If you go cheap, you'll probably get cheap, and maybe even cheated (Dana Gieringer)
• Stop and live the moment - many times we are all caught up in what is next or what else wiIl have to get done. Each time you find yourself in all caught up in a moment, take a deep breath and as you let out that air smile and enjoy the moment (liza atwood)
•  Decide what's most important to you and be realistic about what that is going to cost. And for goodness sake, get a contract that spells out what you get for your money (Dana Gieringer)
• Take 5 minutes to yourselves...even if it means locking yourselves away in a toilet between the day and the evening!  (Kirsty Chesterman)
• Be sure to hire a car that will fit you AND your dress and, if possible, practice getting in and out of the car with your wedding dress (or similar) on so that you can achieve it without an embarrassing moment! Hoops are worst and most likely to put you on display in a way you never intended (Simon Ross)
• Be yourself. Don't feel like a stranger at your own wedding (Lillian Lyon).

This isn't the sum of all wisdom, not even the sum of the ideas in the discussion; but every bit of advice in this blog is something I wish I had said to at least one bride this year - 
because I have seen the results of brides "going cheap" and being let down (or worse, stood up); 
brides and grooms who couldn't fit into their vintage sports hire-cars; 
people who didn't have a written agreement and needed one; young couples starting married life in debt to pay for wedding extravagances that they said afterwards didn't add anything to their day but cost; 
lots of falls and trips on the dress - brides and bridesmaids both. 


And most of all, couple's who put so much effort into making the day meet somebody's standard of "perfection" that they never got to savor and enjoy what should have been their day. 

Have a Happy New Year, a Happy Wedding Day and a wonderful marriage!

Trust and Wedding Photography

Generally, I won't accept more than one wedding contract on any weekend; this week I agreed to shoot one wedding on a Friday, and a second on the Sunday of the same weekend. Neither are high-end contracts, and it isn't about reputations - The parties are not celebrities or even well known; and it isn't a favour to a friend, either: they found me on the Internet.

So if it sn't for love, fame or fortune, why put yourself under this sort of pressure? My wife says the answer is simple: I must be mad! She is probably right.

What happened is this: on Tuesday I was shooting an event in Cabramatta when I got a call from a distraught lady... " I found you on the Internet: can you do my wedding in October?"

'October? That's pretty soon!'

"I know, but my wedding photographer has just cancelled ; he said he made a double booking and sent back the money."

So I checked my schedule, talked it over with my wife and called her back that evening to accept the job.

When a wedding photographer lets down their clients it isn't just bad for their reputation, it is bad for the reputation of every good photographer.

And it is wrong! OK, it is possible that unforeseen circumstances could arise - sickness or personal tragedy; an accident or a fire the destroys your cameras - maybe there is a reason you really cannot fulfil your obligation; but does that mean you can just cancel a contract?

Maybe (I want to say "no", but legally its depends on how the contract was worded) ... but does that make it all right to leave your clients in the lurch? Of course not!

You should never put the onus for finding a replacement on your clients! You should find an alternative professional. and if they charge more, YOU should pay the difference. That's ethical and reasonable: this character just said 'sorry' and sent back the money. Not good enough!

But I wouldn't be much better If I just complained about the other person's lack of ethics and did nothing practical: so I took the contract.

It isn't the first case like this I've come across recently, and they were all low-cost affairs: $400 to $600. That is too cheap to sustain a professional studio, it is the province of the week-end snapper and the part-timer earning a few dollars on the side.

Done properly, it costs more than this to provide a decent service. Break-even for a small operation without promotion costs and basic overheads is about $800, and I cant help being suspicious that the clients got dropped because the photographer found a more lucrative job. Even a couple of tickets to a big game might be enough of a temptation for a part time snapper to get out of the job that has no real profit margin in it.

That's the hidden danger in taking the cheapest price; not only are taking a big chance on quality, but you may find yourself hunting for a replacement photographer at the last minute, and having to pay whatever they ask; not that a reputable professional is going to take advantage of your situation, but with good photographers typically accepting booking 6 to 18 months out from the wedding, your choices may be quite limited.

There is a growing trend towards "Shoot-and-Burn" wedding photography. If that is your photographer's typical or preferred approach, then be careful. Shoot-and-Burn is about cheap, not about quality. It is not about service.

If the photographer never has to commit images to anything but a CD, the time savings are enormous. You can get away with never having to work on a single image after the shoot.

Few clients understand the technical qualities that determine how the images on their disk should reproduce, or what processing they require. By the time they actually get to see their photos it is too late. The photographer has accepted the fee, and has no further commitment or responsibility to the images or to the client. The client has a set of JPEG files; the RAW files from which they were produced are gone: actually most Shoot-and-Burners don't even bother to shoot RAW; the time and skill involved in converting these professional files into jpegs is just one more step to avoid, and one more "efficiency" they can apply.

A digital image straight from the camera is not ready to print. No professional truly proud of their work would ever allow these to be seen even as proofs until they had been colour corrected, sharpened and spotted at the very least. Only selected images ever make it through the editing process to the point of being presented to a client.

Every week I have someone tell me about how their 'cousin was so upset' by the quality of their wedding photos, and again and again, they were shoot-and-burn weddings. And every week I am asked to photograph a wedding and supply "just the CD". Will I do it? Sometimes: but only after I have spent enough time with the couple to ensure that they understand the options and choices they have. But not happily, and not often, and never for the kind of prices the typical shoot-and-burners offer.

At the budget end of the wedding market, photographers who care about their work and about their clients will always lose a few weddings to unsustainably cheap contracts, but not many; the quality and value offered by true pros more than offsets the higher prices they ask.

A realistic budget for an "economy" package is between $1000 and $3000; the high end of the market starts around $5000-$8000. Neither of these markets seems to have suffered much in the recession. The intermediate photo market ($3000-$6000) may have been effected more, with people looking very carefully at the value-for-money aspects of their packages, but it remains strong.

I am not sure, but I suspect the Shoot-and-Burn brigade are marketing to people who would not have considered hiring a photographer in the past; unfortunately, it may ruin their attitudes towards the legitimate professional for many years to come.