rcirr Loc: Gilbert, Arizona

Ok...my nephew is getting married and I am getting agravated by the "professional" photographer. I have read quite a few postings about wedding photographer contracts regarding "amature" photographers at the event. To be honest, I strongly disagree with a lot of attitude by the pro photographers toward "guest" shooters. It seems that some of these pros think their work should be the top priority of everyone at the wedding. One gentleman suggested that guests should keep their face out of a viewfinder and be a "guest". I'm not a big dancer. There are 3 things I like to do at weddings. I drink, I talk to family and friends and I take pictures. I have married off two of my 3 daughters and my brother in law's son also got married. At all 3 of their weddings (and about 5 friends weddings) I have taken anywhere from 900 to 1500 shots. I pick out 400 or 500 I like the best and do a slide show DVD with 3 sections (ceremony, cocktail hour and dinner). I usually give these to the couple at the next Christmas, birthday or some such event. The DVD's have been a big hit and I have had people asking me to do their wedding's as well.
Here's the problem....my second nephew is getting married. His photographer is charging him $4,500.00 for just taking the pictures and delivering them on CD. No prints, no album, no special effects. I mention this because I want to establish he is being reasonably compensated for his time. My nephew comes to my house to show me the contract. It has a "No Uncle Bob Photographer" clause stating he is to be the only one shooting the wedding. I found this amusing considering my name is Bob and I am the grooms uncle but is also made me angry. At all of the weddings I shot I never got in the pros way. In fact, I helped one getting the wedding party together (very big boys with large amounts of booze). Yet this man wanted to contractually prohibit me from taking pictures! Who's wedding was this? I am a reasonable man. I understand the photographer has responsiblities at the event...but it's about the couple AND their family. It's not about the photographer! My nephew asked me if I thought it would be a problem. He hadn't noticed the clause when he signed the contract and he did like this photographer's work. My problem is I don't want to have to hide from this guy. I think he'll notice my 14" off camera flash bracket. To be honest, knowing my nephew is paying this guy.....and he tries to tell me to stop taking pictures at my nephew's wedding.....I might suggest a new place for him to store his flash!
I told my nephew that if he didn't get the contract ammended, I would leave my camera home. Now the family is upset because they like the slide shows I do. But I'm not about to have to hide at my own family's event.
This is not the first time I have heard of photographers being a little demanding. I have no problem with a contract designed to ensure they have the ability to do the job. I just think these "exclusive shooting" clauses go to far. Yes, I understand that other people shooting create some challenges...but overcoming those challenges is part of being a professional, is it not?

Danilo Loc: Las Vegas

If you haven't spoken with the photographer, perhaps you should. Professionals in most fields prefer to be unencumbered in the performance of their job. You and he/she may see eye to eye and get along just fine.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Maybe the professional photographers attitude comes from the amount of times he has done all the hard work trying to organise to do his job in a professional manner and had Uncle Bob and cousin Marge photogs rearranging people, holding up proceedings by telling people to stay like that while Cindy gets her camera from the car, standing behind him taking his set ups, getting in front of him, disrupting proceedings and just bloody giggling and nattering away inanely while he is trying to concentrate on what is a very stressful job.
These professional photographers job IS up there as one of the most important things at the wedding. They have a job to do.
At these weddings where you have taken 900-1500 shots and handing out your DVDs and photos at birthdays and Christmases - you are taking money out of the professional photographers pocket. You are undermining what he does.

I suggest that you take up the offer of being the "professional photographer" at some of these weddings that they have asked you to do. That might give you a bit of perspective.

You asked "whose wedding is this?" I think that is a very good question. Because it's not Uncle Bobs wedding.
It is the nephews wedding and maybe he totally agrees with the clause because he wants it to be about them and not about you. But because "Uncle Bob" always takes pics at weddings and has been milking it for years, it might be too hard for nephew to say.

donrent Loc: Punta Gorda , Fl

I think that taking "profesionalism" too far... The main reason to hire a " photog" is for the "formal" shots that the average "Joe" cannot or know how to do...

Oh, btw, that $4500 fee for what he does sounds totally unreasonable to me..........

sarge69 Loc: Ft Myers, FL

I am no professional but at weddings and stuff, it is really tough to set up your camera and flashes for the ' best ' shot and then have 20 P&S camera flashes going off while you're trying to shoot a professional shot.

Sarge69
Let everyone know about the professionals wishes and leave your camera at home and enjoy the wedding. Tell the professional about the family wishes for a DVD of the day.

EstherP

When our son got married, there was a similar clause in the contract, with the stipulation that while the photographer was "setting up" anyone could take photos.
Now as Mom of the groom, I did not take any pictures in (or near) the church, but when we retired to a nearby park for outdoors pictures, first thing the photographer did, was inform everyone, in a very professional and kind way, what she had contracted for. So as she was setting her camera, lights, reflectors, assistant... people were grouping together and taking pictures - including me!
At a signal from the photographer, all cameras but hers and her assistants were put away, till halfway through the "official" part. She again gave a signal "go for it", then proceeded to re-arrange her gear, another signal and it was her show again.
It worked very well, guests were happy to be able to take their own photos, hired photographer happy that no-one interfered with her.
EstherP

sarge69 Loc: Ft Myers, FL

Now THAT sounds like a professional.

Sarge69 :thumbup: :thumbup:

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Reminds me of a poster I saw in a mechanics shop:

Labor rate, $50 per hour.
If you watch, $75 per hour.
If you help, $200 per hour.
THIS IS NOT A JOKE!!!

Short answer, if you hire a professional photographer, let him do the job he was hired to do! If you don't want a pro on the job, then hire 6 amatuers and see what you end up with.

Jusoljoe Loc: Texas

From the photographers viewpoint YOU are the reason for the clause in the contract. It is meant to be prohibitive. The wedding belongs to the Bride & Groom, it's their day and event. As a wedding photographer for many years I faced the same problems and had the contract clause, as well, perhaps worded a bit differently. Using multiple lights for many shots was a nightmare when "uncle Bob" kept setting them off with his flash. As someone else indicated, I was very willing to have others shoot when I was not actively working. You see, I was being paid by the couple to produce professional results, which was extremely difficult with such competition. Time is also a very important factor. Have you ever heard complaints both from guests and family that the photographs were taking too long, thereby holding up the reception, etc.?? I certainly have! Most often that was caused by "uncle Bobs" jumping up to "hold that pose" & "just one more shot"....flash, flash, flash. Also part of the price charged is for more than time...equipment depreciation, assistants pay, studio overhead, AND the posible lack of additional orders due to freebies from "uncle Bob". The photographer is in BUSINESS to make a living.
These are things you should consider, and speak with the Bride and the photographer to work out an agreeable situation. By the way, 900+ shots is way too intrusive!

Wahawk Loc: NE IA

TOTALLY agree!! $4500 and NO prints??? That is TOTALLY out of line!!

lightchime Loc: Somewhere Over The Rainbow

If one doesn't like the fee, you don't sign the contract. If you don't like the terms of the contract, you don't sign it. Once the contract is signed all guests are committed. It is an agreement between the wedding party and the photographer. "Uncle Bob" is a guest.

PTM Loc: Harrisburg, PA

My stepson was married earlier this month, and two (2 !!) professional photographers were hired: one for the wedding. and one for the reception.
I approached each one before they began shooting. and explained my purpose was to capture "snapshots" of the event.
I assured them I would not interfere with their work, and both were agreeable to this "solution."

When the noticed my equipment (Canon 5D mk II body. Canon 430EXII flash. Two lenses: Canon 50 mm f/1.8, Canon 85 mm f/1.8) they asked if I planned to sell my photos.

When I assured them I would not sell any photos, they were more than accomodating, even sharing "war stories" of previous weddings they shot.

My experience might not be typical, but an obvious conclusion
follows: ask permission, don't interfere, don't compete.

Wahawk Loc: NE IA

I have only had my camera out at a couple of weddings. The first was one where the bride wanted me to bring my camera and take shots other than the "official" ones from the pro. My only problem was that the "pro" kept wanting me to come closer and let him help me with the poses and shots. This was back in film days, and I was shooting Fuji 1600 film, using a Minolta with a 135mm lens. He was using a 6x4.5 and all the "pro" standard equipment. AFTER the couple had all the pics they wanted from him, and they showed them to me, I gave them a set of 4x6's as a gift, then they ordered some 16x20's from me. I had captured the angles and views that pleased them more than the 'pro'.
The 2nd I was just working a reception with a karaoke crew and was primarily interested in the singers, etc, but did get some candids that the couple enjoyed.
I will "NEVER" take wedding photos as the "official" photographer, and I will NOT use flash, but if I ever go to a wedding again, I will have my camera available for the candids that the pro never gets.

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

The Pro has no way of knowing how many "Uncle Bob" shooters will be at the wedding or what levels of skill they might have. A contract should be reviewed and, if necessary, terms negotiated before it is signed. If your nephew signed the contract without understanding the contents, shame on him. But you're out of luck if there is no retraction clause.

dasloaf

love the contract, have been to weddings where family and friends take charge and think they are doing the right thing for the bride and groom. I tried to go with the flow at one wedding and the maid of honor was the boss. bride and groom unhappy with results, maid of honor tired to blame me but her husband defended me and said his wife was Godzilla and ruined it. I would love a copy of the Uncle Bob contract. Sounds good to me!