Wedding Photography Volume: Anyone notice a trend in wedding photography being volume as a selling tool? Although quality is still a big part of wedding photography (as it should be)...

skidooman Loc: Minnesota

Anyone notice a trend in wedding photography being volume as a selling tool? Although quality is still a big part of wedding photography (as it should be), volume seems to be at least an equal part of selling.

I just had a lengthy discussion/disagreement with some wedding photographers on another forum. The OP was new at it, and wanted to know how many images people are providing to the B&G. I was amazed at the numbers photogs were providing, ranging from 500 to 2000. Maybe I am old school, but to me anything more than a hundred or so in an album or 200 in a proof book should be enough to satisfy telling the story of the day. Maybe I'm wrong and I need to up my shutter count for the day.

People are telling me they shoot between 50 and 100 images an hour. I don't do anywhere near that many. How many images of the same thing do people need?

I'd be interested in both old school wedding photogs and the new up and comers in the business thoughts on image count.

Bill Houghton Loc: New York area

Yep. Seems there are quite a few using their cameras as machine guns. Perhaps there will be a few worth while shots in the lot. I wonder if they them in sport mode.

Beercat Loc: Central Coast of California

Bill Houghton wrote:

Yep. Seems there are quite a few using their cameras as machine guns. Perhaps there will be a few worth while shots in the lot. I wonder if they them in sport mode.

There are some down and dirty photographers who advertise 1500 - 2000 photos but for the most part they hand the SD card to the B&G before leaving the wedding, another words no PP.

I advertise 500 - 750 photos for a 10 hour day, that includes the pictures from my second shooter. I will go through and toss out the garbage, then crop and do basic enhancements. When you include PP it's amazing how your style of shooting changes. ;)

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

The photogs that taught me shot weddings with 12 shots, 6 holders of 4x5, I never used more than 3 rolls of 36, at least not that I can remember, but then I did a lot of low budget weddings, some still owe me the money.

skidooman Loc: Minnesota

bobmcculloch wrote:

The photogs that taught me shot weddings with 12 shots, 6 holders of 4x5, I never used more than 3 rolls of 36, at least not that I can remember, but then I did a lot of low budget weddings, some still owe me the money.

At most I used 5 rolls of 36.

Probably not planning on collecting from those past dues, are you?

Shellback Loc: North of Cheyenne Bottoms Wetlands - Kansas

The photographers I interviewed about 5 years ago for my nieces wedding (I opted out) told me they typically deliver 50-100 photos for every hour of coverage they provide. It may seem like a lot, but, as explained to me, we are preserving all those little details and the moments you missed while you were mingling... I didn't have to go through them for review and edit so they can shoot as many as they want...

skidooman Loc: Minnesota

Beercat wrote:

There are some down and dirty photographers who advertise 1500 - 2000 photos but for the most part they hand the SD card to the B&G before leaving the wedding, another words no PP.

I advertise 500 - 750 photos for a 10 hour day, that includes the pictures from my second shooter. I will go through and toss out the garbage, then crop and do basic enhancements. When you include PP it's amazing how your style of shooting changes. ;)

Yeah, PP does make it a game changer.

I just can't wrap my head around people shooting 50-100 images/hr, even at the reception. That's really wracking them out at almost 2 images a minute. Don't get me wrong here, I'm working my behind off taking photos of every centerpiece, decoration and hugs/kisses I can get. Maybe I'm slowing down in my old age.

skidooman Loc: Minnesota

Shellback wrote:

The photographers I interviewed about 5 years ago for my nieces wedding (I opted out) told me they typically deliver 50-100 photos for every hour of coverage they provide. It may seem like a lot, but, as explained to me, we are preserving all those little details and the moments you missed while you were mingling... I didn't have to go through them for review and edit so they can shoot as many as they want...

50-100 per hour seems to be the norm these days, at least according to the discussions I'm having. Seems like a lot to cull through and PP to me.

amehta Loc: Boston

skidooman wrote:

Anyone notice a trend in wedding photography being... (show quote)

I think we need to recognize that the use of the photos has also changed, and many images are simply included in an on-line album. Digital also allows the delivered photographs to document the event at a greater level of detail. I think there is a group of photographers and clients who want the greater detail, and another group who do not. Even for the "less detail" people, I think 50-100 images for the proof set is reasonable.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

I used a RB67 about a pack (5 rolls 220) I was not onto 'cheap weddings'.
Reception was shot with a 35mm but not the 'events' (cutting cake, first dance, garter and the like). That took care of what was left of my 5 rolls. 2 36 films, no more. Drunken folks and the like do not make for great pictures so most of the time the second roll was not finished.

I am glad I am out of this mess.

Beercat Loc: Central Coast of California

skidooman wrote:

Yeah, PP does make it a game changer.

I just can't wrap my head around people shooting 50-100 images/hr, even at the reception. That's really wracking them out at almost 2 images a minute. Don't get me wrong here, I'm working my behind off taking photos of every centerpiece, decoration and hugs/kisses I can get. Maybe I'm slowing down in my old age.

Keep in mind I said my photo count included my second shooter.

Realistically I shoot 400, my second 200. After tossing the garbage I end up with around 500 for PP.

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

As I often said, almost all (if not all) the weddings were shot informally, either because Aunt Bridgette couldn't afford a photographer, because Uncle George (the "official" photographer) got into the sauce before the ceremony, because my boss was too cheap to hire a professional or because I was the only one there with anything better than a 110 Instamatic. I usually shot 4-6 rolls of 36 and my wife shot 2-3 rolls of family at the reception/keg party/brawl. When we weren't too disgusted, we would have the film processed and the B&G (or Mama Bridezilla) got around 50-100 shots we weren't totally embarassed for having taken (and maybe 10-12 of her husband trying to put the make on the bridesmaids). If the whole thing was a total rout, we'd just hand the unprocessed rolls to a reasonably sober person and leave. Heaven only knows why we kept getting invited back (unless it was because my MIL was the family matriarch and had all the family assets in her name and a lawyer who kept one typist busy changing the will.

Bobbee

About 105-110 an hour. I immediately run through them a trash the trash. I then select the ones I like the best, edit these and put them in the online gallery for the B&G and guests to see. Then I edit the rest and deliver on DVD. I do take 'some' and do special edits on them. Mostly fun edits like frames and Mag covers. Cutsie stuff. Once in a while I screw up and need to correct things on important shots. Like my over firing flash(s) that put harsh shadows on the group shots right after the wedding. What a pain, but lesson learned. Yes there are multiple shots of the same pose. But you are supposed to do that. That look in the eye I like may not be what they want and a lot of time. PEOLE COLES THEIR EYES on 3. As in 'Ready, one, two, three' aaaggghhhh!!!!

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

skidooman wrote:

Anyone notice a trend in wedding photography being... (show quote)

Why would anyone want 2,000 pictures of their wedding? That sounds more like a movie. Maybe it's bragging rights so they can show off to other newly-weds. :D

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

Shooting with my 'Blads would be 4, Max 5 x 120 rolls or 1 x 220 plus 1 x 120. The shots were thought-out before pressing the shutter button. Changing to digital(Nikon) I still kept the maximum shots to about 75. I didn't, and the B&G didn't see the need for excessive numbers of shots.
I am also glad to be out of the Wedding Photography business now.