Mudshark Loc: Illinois

I am proud to say I have built a long standing reputation for photographic excellence. I've done this by doing the very best I could on every job. It makes no difference if an old friend stops by the studio and wants a mug shot for his license or a client wants an ad shot for a national magazine. I give each one my best. I don't have a PR firm. Word of mouth is all I've ever used. I have a steady stream of work. Doing sloppy stuff and counting on a PR flack to create your reputation may work for you...but I'll stick with doing my best. I also have made an effort to make a few large clients happy ALL the time...sorry Abe.

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Mudshark:I think what were saying about PR Firm is really word of mouth and our reputation, the few that I do are usually done that way, the best PR firm is a FIRM adherence to excellence and giving a bit more than contracted for.

Mudshark Loc: Illinois

Extremely well put Sir!!!

Mudshark Loc: Illinois

I'd also add...sometimes when old friends need a little photo work and insist on paying me...I tell them about the Meat For Photography program...translated...that means next time your coming this way (especially after you've butchered one of your Angus beefs) Just leave me a steak or two from the freezer. Some of that "payment" can't be bought at the store and it makes for most excellent PR and BBQ..........

johnnyg67 Loc: Northwest Georgia

That's the ticket!
:thumbup:

Sunrisepano Loc: West Sub of Chicago

I actually started comparing still photographers to videographers years ago. I saw the reorders falling to virtually zip. Pre-digital, the photographer low-balled the price of wedding coverage knowing that he/she would make it up in orders on the back end. The videographer would rarely get more than one or two videotapes ordered by parents or grandparents and the ones I knew sold the additional tapes for $50 or $75 each. The videographer made his money upfront; and that is what I saw the the still photographers had to do. However, there was a great demand for the high quality images on a DVD by the bridal couple and photographers all over caved in to the demand. In the film days, most photographers kept their negatives or, if they did sell them, it was at a living wage profit.

It is still possible to make a living at photography, but, you must stop caving in to the demands of the client, stand your ground, and start making a living.

A photographer I know would receive a request for artwork. He would get a price from a retoucher and mark it up SUBSTANTIALLY. I asked him if he couldn't give his clients a better price and his response was "I have the image they want. Where else can they go?"

As the photographers, we own the images, we own the rights, copyrights. Sell at a price that will make you a living wage.

Wheezie

probably a great indicator of a potential wedding client is: the first thing that comes out of their mouths is "what do your charge"? as opposed to " Is XYZ date still available"?
everyone wants to negotiate your price, I am wondering if florist, limo services, & DJ's have seen a drop also. I have done a few weddings where couples actually had their ipod hooked up to the function facility speakers so they didn't have to hire a DJ. Of course there was no master of ceremony to run things either which seemed to cause a little stress. no introduction, no announcements regarding the toasts, parent dances cutting the cake etc. A bit bizarre!
The profession of photography has certainly changed! towards the end of my shooting wedding days, there were guests with real nice cameras ei. canon 40D, however they had no flash and a generic lens. so at least I still looked better with a quantum flash, big lens and a bracket.. but still it's a little unsettling.

everyone who works a regular job at 36-40 hours a week wants to get paid for it right? they want that paycheck at the end of the week. because we are self-employed we don't deserve to get paid for our work? most everyone out there thinks we work only the 8 hours or so that they "see" us at the wedding. so you're getting $1995.00 for 8 hours of work! that's $250. an hour. outrageous to pay that much!!! BUT do they have a clue on how many other hours you work post production on their job?

Mudshark Loc: Illinois

A very wise and wealthy CPA and business man once told me (I was discussing what to charge for my work...) "one should always charge more than the client wants to pay and less than you want to make." It's a simple thought but powerful and at times very useful....

gsugal Loc: Rhode Island

After some serious thoughts about the DJ's behavior as well as some very interesting ideas from members up here I've decided that all new weddings booked for 2012 will include in the contract the following:
Very strong language relating to the B&G having another professional or sem-professional photographer taking photos.
Guests and friends, are welcome to take photos.
I WILL not allow the DJ or his assistant to photograph any of the ceremony,formals or when I take the bride and groom off for their formals. The DJ will not be allowed to take nor upload any photos of guests at the reception or posed candids -table shots with the bride and groom w/guests. That is my job. In the event the DJ is contracted to bring in big screens say for exambple to show a dvd of the bride and groom growing up that would be fine .. However, it would be considered a breach of contract if the DJ takes any photos of the ceremonky or reception and uploads them to the screens.
Any photos I do take I reserve the right to upload to FACEBOOK. ALL the photos uploaded to FB will have my "watermark" and a link from FB to my website -where guests may order most any photo in any size.
As I stated earlier I don't beleive the DJ was out to get us --nor am I worried about competition. We shoot with two Canon's 1DS Mark III's and two Canon 5D MARK II..so that was never the issue. I just found that the "cute" little redhead (DJ's )assistant from the get -go was always in my way..and my artistic abilities distracted (not because she was cute) but because she simply got in the way.. In half the reception candids she's in the shot. I WILL never walk out of a wedding but will discuss it with the DJ if this situation should arise. If the DJ persists then of course I will talk with the groom and let them know that the DJ is creating a huge creative problem and his photos will suffer due to the interference . .. but still will never walk. BTW we are always paid in full 30 days prior .. don't ever have it any other way. All businesses have their unique problems .. weddings are no different ..it's how you deal with it .. GS

MatthewUHS Loc: Bristol, PA

I find that when you shoot a wedding there is always an amateur in the way, they always want a good shot too. Your job, as a paid professional is to deal with it and take YOUR best shot. The DJ was using the redhead's shots as part of HIS presentation as a multi-media artist, I feel this was brilliant use of the technology available to him. Not sure of the reason you feel compelled to add language to your contract.
Use of your skillset and creativity to get your best shot(s) for the couple is all you should be concerned with. Given that you were prepaid ... do your job and cut the drama.

IMHO

les_stockton Loc: Eastern Oklahoma

I guess it wouldn't matter to me as long as it doesn't cut into the money I get, or cut me off from future sales.
In the future, knowing there might be a similar situation, I might talk with the deejay ahead of time and urge that person to be careful not to get into my shots because these are shots that the couple paid for, and it's not like they can be taken again later.
The deejay's shots are for a different purpose and are considerably less formal. They should understand this. And if they don't, then I'd have to wonder why they're not marketing themselves as wedding photographers rather than deejays.