So today I found myself thinking about the future of our business. With technology ever-improving, it's obvious that photographers need to stay on top of things to be successful. Also, I've really refined my post-processing in the past year to the point that a lot of it can be done very quickly. With that said, here's an idea I thought of. I'm not sure if the technology is quite there yet to make it worthwhile, but humor me...

On the wedding day, you take an assistant/partner, who has a laptop and whose only duty is to operate the laptop. As you shoot, the images are sent wirelessly to the laptop (which is possible now) and the assistant begins developing almost in real time. By the time you're done shooting, within and hour you can have the proofs done with a disc for the client. Keep a dye-sub printer nearby and you could even have a photo to put in a DVD case.

Certainly you'd have the opportunity to sell albums later, but couldn't this work for a simple shoot & burn wedding. Then all the people who think we get paid for 1 day's work would actually be right. Just a thought. Let me know what you think.

AS long as you have a very good assistant it sounds like a great plan! It would only be bad if they didn't do a good job. I have a hard time with putting important tasks, such as editing, in someone else's hands.

~Sarah

For the low end perhaps but the high end will not give out cd's
There is also less post work for that reason in that you only work on the images that go into the album.
As for being successful i'm not sure the shoot to burn market is one that will provide long term success. Certainly it would be counter productive to selling an album later.

Tony,

Maybe I don't have your skill level with a camera, but I find I spend at LEAST 3-5 days editing my photos post wedding. :-S

Chris

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that I want to try it. No way, not now!

I guess I'm just thinking that 5 or 10 years down the road, editing will be that much easier and faster. Camera technology will be that much better. The field will continue to evolve, so I guess I'm just thinking aloud as to where I think it might go.

Just think, 10 years ago, there was no Lightroom, no digital SLR, and many of the lenses I use weren't even in production. Where will we be in 10 more years??

I have found that by providing this "level" of service I have validated the perception that the products and process of producing professional results is not difficult or time consuming and therefore should not be so expensive. I have experienced clientelle that focus on this type of shoot/burn products are shopping price only and not interested in quality. Because of their motivation for negociating the lowest price, regardless of the quality, they insist that the price is too high and I have been trapped in a bidding war with clients who think I am charging too much. Besides the problem of loosing control of the print quality, the client never sees how much better their images could look when produced by knowledgable printers/service personnel.

I try to complete processing as quickly as possible but I have a real problem allowing someone else to process my images. I guess this is something that I will have to learn to overcome as my business evolves, but I "feel" each image in my imagination and retain such a personal feeling of pride and ownership that I want to make those adjustments to each image myself with the goal of extending the creative process that I started with the click of the shutter. If I failed to capture the image exactly as I attempted at the point of creation, I want to complete the creative process in post-processing myself.

Ultimately, what you have proposed is one way to operate your business and I am not saying it is right or wrong. It is just a different way. I AM saying it is not the right way for me.

I believe that I have been contracted to create a package of images for my client and the responibility to fulfill the terms of that contract through the completion of the act of creation weighs heavily on my mind and in my heart as an artist. I feel a sense of moral obligation. Finding someone I can trust for post-processing will be a really tough decision much like finding a second shooter to trust. It is my belief that both of these people will be entrusted with my reputation and the success and failure of the business that I have worked so hard to establish. I will not relinquish that trust easily.

I apologize for the rambling nature of this post but I have been wrestling with this issue for two years as I have struggled to start and build my business. It has been sweat, blood, and tears for both me and my wife. We have worked together to get to this point and my initial intention to produce a cd/dvd as part of a shoot/burn operation has come and gone as I have refined my business plan to produce images that stop my clients in their tracks and make them say: "Wow..." That, combined with customer service that creates an atmopshere of trust and faith that they can rely on me to get the job done. That's what drives me, those two things. I don't feel that surrending a disk after six to twelve hours of intense shooting that has been produced by someone else and I haven't even seen will work in the scope of my business plan.

There, that was a long-winded answer to your simple question. Excuse me if I have offended anyone. I apoligize, sincerely.

Bill, I agree with you completely. That's where I am now too.

I'm just saying for the future. Just think, printing will be better across the board, editing programs will be better, ect. I'm a control freak too, just wondering I guess...

Well said Bill.

Bill Zaspel wrote:
I have found that by providing this "level" of service I have validated the perception that the products and process of producing professional results is not difficult or time consuming and therefore should not be so expensive. I have experienced clientelle that focus on this type of shoot/burn products are shopping price only and not interested in quality. Because of their motivation for negociating the lowest price, regardless of the quality, they insist that the price is too high and I have been trapped in a bidding war with clients who think I am charging too much. Besides the problem of loosing control of the print quality, the client never sees how much better their images could look when produced by knowledgable printers/service personnel.

I try to complete processing as quickly as possible but I have a real problem allowing someone else to process my images. I guess this is something that I will have to learn to overcome as my business evolves, but I "feel" each image in my imagination and retain such a personal feeling of pride and ownership that I want to make those adjustments to each image myself with the goal of extending the creative process that I started with the click of the shutter. If I failed to capture the image exactly as I attempted at the point of creation, I want to complete the creative process in post-processing myself.

Ultimately, what you have proposed is one way to operate your business and I am not saying it is right or wrong. It is just a different way. I AM saying it is not the right way for me.

I believe that I have been contracted to create a package of images for my client and the responibility to fulfill the terms of that contract through the completion of the act of creation weighs heavily on my mind and in my heart as an artist. I feel a sense of moral obligation. Finding someone I can trust for post-processing will be a really tough decision much like finding a second shooter to trust. It is my belief that both of these people will be entrusted with my reputation and the success and failure of the business that I have worked so hard to establish. I will not relinquish that trust easily.

I apologize for the rambling nature of this post but I have been wrestling with this issue for two years as I have struggled to start and build my business. It has been sweat, blood, and tears for both me and my wife. We have worked together to get to this point and my initial intention to produce a cd/dvd as part of a shoot/burn operation has come and gone as I have refined my business plan to produce images that stop my clients in their tracks and make them say: "Wow..." That, combined with customer service that creates an atmopshere of trust and faith that they can rely on me to get the job done. That's what drives me, those two things. I don't feel that surrending a disk after six to twelve hours of intense shooting that has been produced by someone else and I haven't even seen will work in the scope of my business plan.

There, that was a long-winded answer to your simple question. Excuse me if I have offended anyone. I apoligize, sincerely.

Bill Zaspel wrote:
I have found that by providing this "level" of service I have validated the perception that the products and process of producing professional results is not difficult or time consuming and therefore should not be so expensive. I have experienced clientelle that focus on this type of shoot/burn products are shopping price only and not interested in quality. Because of their motivation for negociating the lowest price, regardless of the quality, they insist that the price is too high and I have been trapped in a bidding war with clients who think I am charging too much. Besides the problem of loosing control of the print quality, the client never sees how much better their images could look when produced by knowledgable printers/service personnel.


This WILL happen. Someone will make some kind of automated franchise software to quickly edit and burn in CDs, hand off to B&G and it will be called express photography by uncle bob where anyone can be a photographer with a 20 megapixel camera.

Yes, 5 years from now everyone will have cameras with over 20 megapixels and we will all have hard drives over 1 terabyte and over 8GB of ram.

And that's where art will differentiate from automated process, and more photographers who are second shooters will just grab their college roomate and have him process the photos quickly.

Italo we are kind of there now and anyone who says we should aim for higher standards is branded as narrow.
There will always be a demand for quality but we can help educate the general public to want that too. It will be other photographers who will benefit and therefor the industry as a whole.
I hope.

There will always be a demand for higher end service and products, no matter what industry it is in. The question is which market will we choose to service.

hassy501 wrote:
There will always be a demand for higher end service and products, no matter what industry it is in. The question is which market will we choose to service.


Hassy, 100% agreed. YOu just have to choose which market niche works for you, and which one are you most satisfied with. Personally, I prefer quality over quantity.

Either way is risky.

Quality = filter low-budget customers out and take less weddings a year at higher prices

Quantity = take middle-low budget customers but increase number of weddings a year. Sacrifice quality + life.

Whatever motivates your ego.

Italo Campilii wrote:
hassy501 wrote:
There will always be a demand for higher end service and products, no matter what industry it is in. The question is which market will we choose to service.


Hassy, 100% agreed. YOu just have to choose which market niche works for you, and which one are you most satisfied with. Personally, I prefer quality over quantity.

Either way is risky.

Quality = filter low-budget customers out and take less weddings a year at higher prices

Quantity = take middle-low budget customers but increase number of weddings a year. Sacrifice quality + life.

Whatever motivates your ego.

Italo:

While I agree with your position, I am not sure of your definitions. Others may enjoy working more and producing "acceptable" levels of products for the two segments of the market that you have defined. I am not sure that is a bad thing, for them. It's just not for me.

I couldn't imagine someone else editing my images. To me, that's a major part of the creative process. It takes me a couple of weeks to get them just right and do an album predesign.

I guess this kind of got off track...

I was trying to get a dialogue on what we see happening a few years in the future, as undoubtedly there will continue to be great advancements. Guess I didn't make that clear. Oh well.

Tony Hoffer wrote:
I guess this kind of got off track...

I was trying to get a dialogue on what we see happening a few years in the future, as undoubtedly there will continue to be great advancements. Guess I didn't make that clear. Oh well.

I believe the dialogue is on point. You can't separate the possibilities from who the client is (low/high end, quality/quantity/speed).

Either way, it's not something I would want to offer. I can't see doing it in the future either considering it's here today; just not refined yet. Once it is a common thing to do I mainly see this as lower tear.

Peace,
Cordell

Tony, I can totally see that happening down the road, although I don't necessarily think it'll be part of my strategy. I think it would be a low-end shoot-and-burn market strategy. It makes more sense from a sales standpoint to show the images after some time has passed.

I like the idea of a thread about where technology is going to take our business... but your first post made it seem you just wanted to talk about this one idea!

What things will help my business as technology advances? I think we'll see continued improvements in digital workflow as aperture and lightroom improve. Those programs are still very new and have lots of room to grow... A couple quick ideas off the top of my head:

* software that can determine which images don't meet a user-defined threshold of tolerance for focus and exposure. Throw all those images in a folder (like a "junk mail" filter for photos) that I can then quickly scan to see if it caught anything I'd like to keep. This will save me time in my first pass through my images.

* an improved array of filters and "actions" to give our images a certain "look", whether it's mimicking film or HDR, it will all done non-destructively and instantly.

* the simplification of post-processing - I think right now the software presents us with so many options for manipulating individual parameters of a photo (and this level of control is essential) that we can get bogged down with the limitless possibilities. I'd love to see the software evolve to be able to handle the basic post-processing almost on its own. So my "proofs" can look great, have that "pop", and a "look" that I define, but instead of me pouring over each image, or even stamping a formula on each image and then tweeking things as needed, the software can intuitively make all the adjustments regardless of exposure differences, white balance differences, etc... Then I can get all my proofs looking great in one quick step, inspiring the couple to spend more $$ and then spend extra time as needed on the special images the couple purchase for prints and albums.

Anyway, that's just a few quick thoughts.

I hear this general argument time and time again. How much should a photographer charge, don't undersell yourself or the industry, and low budgets are for losers.

I personally think that any photographer that charges more than 2K for a typical wedding is ripping off the client and a bit heartless, no matter how good their work is. Why would anyone want a wedding that puts them directly into the poorhouse as their first act together as a family, and what kind of person encourages that behavior.

I personally think that the bride and groom should be price shopping, we all do it as you'll notice in the buy/sell forums. Everyone wants quality, but everyone wants quality at the best price possible. What upsets me at times is reading about how many photogs out there are upset that they feel they're being lowballed and don't feel there's much room to negotiate on price. And I bet you that virtually all of us do.

I'm certain that many of you will rip on this. So I encourage you to come up with good reasons why your work is worth sending the typical young couple, that on average make $45K/ year combined, directly into debt at the very beginning of their life together.

Brian Rice wrote:
I hear this general argument time and time again. How much should a photographer charge, don't undersell yourself or the industry, and low budgets are for losers.

I personally think that any photographer that charges more than 2K for a typical wedding is ripping off the client and a bit heartless, no matter how good their work is. Why would anyone want a wedding that puts them directly into the poorhouse as their first act together as a family, and what kind of person encourages that behavior.

I personally think that the bride and groom should be price shopping, we all do it as you'll notice in the buy/sell forums. Everyone wants quality, but everyone wants quality at the best price possible. What upsets me at times is reading about how many photogs out there are upset that they feel they're being lowballed and don't feel there's much room to negotiate on price. And I bet you that virtually all of us do.

I'm certain that many of you will rip on this. So I encourage you to come up with good reasons why your work is worth sending the typical young couple, that on average make $45K/ year combined, directly into debt at the very beginning of their life together.

There is a price that some people want to pay. Sometimes, couples WANT to pay $10k for a photographer, it's a mental thing. Sometimes they like knowing they have more money to spend on other things, and only pay $500. Making a general statement that "anyone that charges more than $2k for wedding services is ripping people off" is just plain shortminded, silly and uneducated.

Why does Mercedes charge $70k for a car that gets you from point-A to point-B, just like a Honda Civic will? Why does Rolex even think about charging $5k for a watch? People that spend more than $500k on a home are obviously getting ripped off as well. How about the folks that pay more than $30 for a haircut? Or gasp, someone that buys a 5D over a 450D because simply they haven't thought about it yet that they are getting ripped off.

Different strokes for different folks. You insinuate that people that pay $10k for a wedding photographer are blind, stupid and clearly out of their mind to not notice the quality of a photographer that charges only $2k. It can't be that hard, right? Sometimes daddy has a spare $200k laying around and wants to do something nice for his daughter. Why would rich dad make poor daughter pay for everything?

Sorry, that comment was just downright silly. I'm sure others wont be as nice.

1. I think there already are photographers that give them the CD at the end of the day. I know there are photographers that give a slideshow of the wedding during the reception.

2. To do it the way you described, you'd have to have a computer that could continuously download wirelessly while you're editing rapidly. Like you said, I don't think we're there yet.

Sam, you're correct, and I won't be quite as nice, but I'll leave the meanness to others.

Brian,
Brian Rice wrote:
I personally think that any photographer that charges more than 2K for a typical wedding is ripping off the client and a bit heartless, no matter how good their work is.

I'm certain that many of you will rip on this. So I encourage you to come up with good reasons why your work is worth sending the typical young couple, that on average make $45K/ year combined, directly into debt at the very beginning of their life together.


I don't know if you're a full time photographer or not, but it seems a bit short-sighted of you to make the 2K comment. Let's take the 'art' completely out of it for a second and pretend all wedding photogs are the same quality.

Think about it this way... even if a photographer charged 2K and shot 30 weddings (more than almost all of us shoot in a year), that's 60K. However, when you subtract the cost for albums, gas and other expenses, not to mention upkeep and business expenses (well into the thousands per year for most people) and things like insurance and health care that most normal businesses provide, you're probably talking about 35-45K, before taxes.

In my area, most couples right out of college are making at least 60-80K combined. Most 30 year old couples are probably around 80-100K combined. Even if we charged just 2K for every wedding, that means that we're making the same or less money than the people we're working for. Don't you think that a great photographer has the right to earn the same as their clients? What about a photographer that serves high-end clients, who make a few hundred thousand? Don't they have a right to do the same if they're great?

Brian Rice wrote:
So I encourage you to come up with good reasons why your work is worth sending the typical young couple, that on average make $45K/ year combined, directly into debt at the very beginning of their life together.

Mate, it's their choice. The venue, food and often the flowers will be a bigger chunk of the budget, not to mention the engagement ring and dress. If they want to spend money they can spend it, if not they can get Uncle Bob to do it.

When this becomes the norm, I'm definitely quitting this business.

I'm interested in shooting and toning like an artist, not one of those club/nightlife/party shooter guys.

-m

Brian Rice wrote:
I hear this general argument time and time again. How much should a photographer charge, don't undersell yourself or the industry, and low budgets are for losers.

I personally think that any photographer that charges more than 2K for a typical wedding is ripping off the client and a bit heartless, no matter how good their work is. Why would anyone want a wedding that puts them directly into the poorhouse as their first act together as a family, and what kind of person encourages that behavior.

I personally think that the bride and groom should be price shopping, we all do it as you'll notice in the buy/sell forums. Everyone wants quality, but everyone wants quality at the best price possible. What upsets me at times is reading about how many photogs out there are upset that they feel they're being lowballed and don't feel there's much room to negotiate on price. And I bet you that virtually all of us do.

I'm certain that many of you will rip on this. So I encourage you to come up with good reasons why your work is worth sending the typical young couple, that on average make $45K/ year combined, directly into debt at the very beginning of their life together.

Nowhere did i read that low budget weddings were for losers. In any business , the customer is free to spend whatever they want. No one puts a gun to their head to spend more than what they can afford.

To label photographers who charge more than 2000.00 "heartless and cheats" is insulting.

No one has to justify anything. FREE WILL and FREEDOM of choice to purchase whatever they want to purchase is part of any economic society.

You make it seem as if WE are to blame for newlyweds getting into debt ? What about DJ's, Bakers, Florists, Caters, Dress Makers, Jewelers, they have NO blame in any of this either ?

NO ONE is to blame at all......blame is a non issue.

WE ALL purchase what we can afford according to our income and socio economic position in society.

To try to lay blame on a business for selling a product is ridiculous.