always either registry office then pub or really eccentric.
I've done a few now (family & friends) and I'm gaining a reputation as a last port of call for desperate mothers alarmed that their children haven't booked a proper photographer. Maybe it's the crowd I hang around with, but no one I know has gone for the 'fairytale' wedding that costs over £15,000; they're always either registry office then pub or really eccentric. I like shooting the latter more. I don't get paid, but I do get to eat some nice food and meet interesting people.
I use two FM2 bodies, one with a 50, one with a 24. I use Fuji 400H and have a Vivitar 283 which I bounce off the registry office ceiling if I'm forced to shoot indoors. I send the films to a pro lab for 6x4 proofs and usually there's no reprint requests (the couple usually don't care about photos and the relatives are using a flat bed scanner). I hand print one or two nice photos myself. I normally shoot four rolls of film, so 144 photos.
people used to invite me to weddings when they realized how much a wedding photographer would cost them and as an afterthought asked me to shoot the event for free
Don't you feel that they are taking advantage of you
Yes, I suppose they are. But I do enjoy it and I find that the couples do reciprocate with kindness afterwards - I wouldn't do it for strangers, but for family and close friends mutual exploitation is what binds us! I'll scratch their back and further down the line when I need mine scratching...I've never approached photography as a money making exercise even though there are clearly many opportunities to make money if I was so inclined.
it's the acquaintances who once they know you have a skill who try to exploit it as of right who piss me off.
I did most of the shoot with digital gears. I had one film camera for few shots. I may get a flack for saying this on APUG, but be very careful about selection of your media... this is THE day for the couple, family, and all the guests. Not a day for our hobby.
Because film isn't as popular as it used to be it's suddenly not as good for weddings as it was twenty years ago?
My point was to think of the couple first - not the hobby. Being the first time wedding shooter that I was, the ability to view the result - to at least make sure half way decent image was recorded was high on my mind.
If you are only shooting weddings occasionally then this does give you a bit more peace of mind as you can check the images. But people used to do occasional weddings before digital.
I surprised they didn't ask you to do both Steve.I sometimes feel the same about parties I get invited to when I am asked to bring my guitar with me.
For the eccentric wedding I mentioned above, when asked, I told my friend that I had decided never to do wedding photography but in his case I would make an exception. The other one was someone at work who just wanted a few snaps of him and his wife after the service.
Neither of the weddings I have photographed could be described as 'normal' and in both cases I had the negatives processed and printed to 5x7 and gave them letters transferring copyright so they could get their own prints made if they wanted to.
I surprised they didn't ask you to do both Steve.
Steve.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?