Wedding photographers websites....Why so bad.

[arith]

Most don't like getting scammed/deceived by posers. So what do we do.

Perhaps an example can help me clarify. Friends , Mr. A and Mr. B wants their respective cars repaired. So they go to an autorepair shop and are met by an oil-stained mechanic. As they explain their car-defects, they notice the mechanic is talking about contact-points, and other outdated car matters. Mr. A takes upon himself to taunt and educate the ignorant mechanic about modern day CDIgnition, fuel-injection, computerized suspension blabity-bla.

Mr. B. leaves, finds a competent mechanic, gets his car repaired and 3 hrs later passes by the 1st shop where Mr. A is still lecturing/showing off his superior car repair knowledge to the "duh" mechanic .



hmmmm......... So the landlord knows the guy is an idiot with a PnS. Yet he still employs the idiot and even entrusts the idiot to take pictures???

You should see his pics Victor; and he doesn't get paid, he is just on the board.

[anita]

hmmmm......... So the landlord knows the guy is an idiot with a PnS. Yet he still employs the idiot and even entrusts the idiot to take pictures???

how do u think he became a "landlord"? Throwing money here, there?

Guys, guys, beeing a photographer doesn't mean that you are a designer too. . To have a good site involves to know how to use computer, program(if it's the case) and have talent OR pay money to a pro to do it for you. Anyway it's about the photos that photograph do(does?!), not about where he lives.

About 1$ for every title "perfect exposure" , "learn to take photos like a pro", "tack sharp...improve your photographs" i agree. I often say that most of the books are written just to be written or Have only 1 or 2 intersting information in 500 pages(in any domain). I totally agree.


PS: I started photography because i wanted to make websites, and i needed to learn flash and dreamworks, but for that i needed to learn PS, but for that i needed to have pictures to work on, but for that i needed to take pictures => learn photography.

PS2: I hope the poor dog to live many years from now on . go go dogy!

[DGillespie13]

All the watches adjust to my date and time. That is cool. I can't call it a bad site, just not impressive. We come to expect high quality from a company like Rolex and when their website underwhelms it sticks with us. My answer to anyone asking if I will shoot their wedding is the same. "Sure, my photo business is really taking off, can I borrow $100,000 for some new gear? I will shoot the wedding for free". Crickets.....

[arith]

how do u think he became a "landlord"? Throwing money here, there?

Guys, guys, beeing a photographer doesn't mean that you are a designer too. . To have a good site involves to know how to use computer, program(if it's the case) and have talent OR pay money to a pro to do it for you. Anyway it's about the photos that photograph do(does?!), not about where he lives.

About 1$ for every title "perfect exposure" , "learn to take photos like a pro", "tack sharp...improve your photographs" i agree. I often say that most of the books are written just to be written or Have only 1 or 2 intersting information in 500 pages(in any domain). I totally agree.


PS: I started photography because i wanted to make websites, and i needed to learn flash and dreamworks, but for that i needed to learn PS, but for that i needed to have pictures to work on, but for that i needed to take pictures => learn photography.

PS2: I hope the poor dog to live many years from now on . go go dogy!

This is Staffordshire Ana; you get to be a social landlord because your posh and come from a builders background with council training, and Mrs Thatcher gives you 1.8 billion pounds.

Not because you have found a proof of the continuum hypothesis, or a cure for cancer, but because you know builders and have a few contacts.

For instance I want to buy 10,000 gas boilers, get the phone and I bet it isn't hard to find them with perks if I know the right people.

I can do the same sort of thing in my own sphere, networking in Russell Group University venues, every year I'm invited to the House of Lords, and I've had supervision offers for research from Oxford, all because of who I know and where I've been.

It is all about who you know, especially if you are CEO in a business.

[arith]

All the watches adjust to my date and time. That is cool. I can't call it a bad site, just not impressive. We come to expect high quality from a company like Rolex and when their website underwhelms it sticks with us. My answer to anyone asking if I will shoot their wedding is the same. "Sure, my photo business is really taking off, can I borrow $100,000 for some new gear? I will shoot the wedding for free". Crickets.....

What you need is a decent medium format camera so that you can talk to the couple while your doing the pics. You can get one for less than £20000 nowadays, then you need a second camera just in case, about £5000 and that should be enough.

[hoffstriker]

Since there is quite a bit of thinking there are no good professional wedding photogs, I'll post some examples of people I've worked with/learned from/or simply just admire: Mark Hawkins, David E Jackson (don't let the blog fool you he is also a wedding photog), 375 Photography, Cory Albrectson(a little more "hardcore"), Eric Uys, and Chasing Summer...

These are all great sites that show great photo's, but it takes a lot of time, money and effort to get there... None of these people woke up one day and said: "today I'm gonna make a great website and become an expert in photography". Yes, there are a ton of bad wedding photogs, but some of those that are bad today will become very good someday basically due to their learning and desire. Also, keep in mind that not every bride and groom have the kind of budget to allow for the top tier level of photographer and that is where the lesser talented/learned photogs can get their start.

If anyone wants to see better wedding photos, find someone that is just starting out and give them as much help as you can... It's a very steep and frustrating learning curve...

[hoffstriker]

PS2: I hope the poor dog to live many years from now on . go go dogy!

Thanks Ana!!!

[rpcrowe]

Here's another thought... I am a pretty decent photographer and, although I have not shot a wedding in years, I would expect that I could still do a creditable job.

However, I am not a website designer by any means. If I wanted to go the "el cheapo" route and do the website myself, it would probably not be all that great.

I would NOT do it myself but, in hiring a website designer' I would be in the same position as the clients hiring a wedding photographer. We hired a website designer for our original American Maltese Rescue website and the result was a calamity, None of my pictures of the rescue Maltese were any good on the website. We couldn't update the website and it pretty well was terrible.

We have since switched website persons and we are quite happy with our site.

If a wedding photographer has a good website, that doesn't necessarily mean he is a good photographer. Heck, the images posted on the website might not be his own. However, if a wedding photographer has a bad website; I would stay away from him (or her).

[Manfred M]

I kinda agree - the ironic part is though that most watch companies have exactly the same bad sites! Taken a look at www.rolex.com recently?

On the other hand, I would expect that Rolex does not generate a lot of their business, based on the first impressions people get from their website. When it comes to a wedding photograher, a poor website could be a fatal blow.

[Colin Southern]

Since there is quite a bit of thinking there are no good professional wedding photogs, I'll post some examples of people I've worked with/learned from/or simply just admire: Mark Hawkins, David E Jackson (don't let the blog fool you he is also a wedding photog), 375 Photography, Cory Albrectson(a little more "hardcore"), Eric Uys, and Chasing Summer...

These are all great sites that show great photo's, but it takes a lot of time, money and effort to get there... None of these people woke up one day and said: "today I'm gonna make a great website and become an expert in photography". Yes, there are a ton of bad wedding photogs, but some of those that are bad today will become very good someday basically due to their learning and desire. Also, keep in mind that not every bride and groom have the kind of budget to allow for the top tier level of photographer and that is where the lesser talented/learned photogs can get their start.

If anyone wants to see better wedding photos, find someone that is just starting out and give them as much help as you can... It's a very steep and frustrating learning curve...

I think there are many great wedding togs ... it's just that the other 98% of the "pretenders" often leave people with the opposite impression (and I'm serious about that).

Personally, I hope that the bad ones DO become good ones; unfortunately, only a few ever make it from the "bad pool", and a LOT of blood is left on the carpet from the slaughter of once-in-a-lifetime events.

As I mentioned above - if the tog and the B&G want to enter into any arrangement that's based on full disclosure and understanding then IMO that's great ... the problem is though (as I see it anyway), FAR too many are hanging our their shingle as professionals when in reality, their results are anything but. One "professional" I know wouldn't have a clue about guide numbers - contrast ratios - couldn't use a light meter if his life depended on it - doesn't use an assistant (so who's going to hold off-camera lighting?) - doesn't have HSS capable gear available off-camera (so all outside shots are shot at narrow aperture with resulting near infinite DoF) - and he considers himself one of the best (but the images don't back that up).

If someone wants help to improve then (a) only too happy to help them (and I/we do), but they (b) really need to get technically proficient in a wide-range of crappy-light shooting scenarios, and (c) invest in quite a lot of professional camera & lighting equipment, and (d) preferably serve an apprenticeship as a 2nd or 3rd shooter, and (e) have the personality and people skills to make it all work. IMO you can't "call yourself a professional" and then proceed to "learn the craft" and 'buy the gear" as you go; there are pre-requisites that need to be invested in first (and quite a few of them) that most of these turkeys just aren't understanding.

I'm one of the most technically competent photographers I know - I have a truckload of professional gear (both fixed and portable) - my own fully-equipped studio - I'm thoroughly familiar with using the equipment in all kinds of crappy light - I have assistants I use - I even provide technical advice & consultation to several wedding photographers ... and yet neither do I don't shoot weddings nor do I feel qualified to do so (although I feel I would probably do a much better job than many of the so-called professionals).

One needs to set the bar VERY high for this kind of photography (it's almost the pinnacle of photographic challenge IMO) - most set the bar far far far far too low.

[Colin Southern]

If a wedding photographer has a good website, that doesn't necessarily mean he is a good photographer. Heck, the images posted on the website might not be his own. However, if a wedding photographer has a bad website; I would stay away from him (or her).

I agree - if nothing else, it's probably an indication that they can't afford to engage a good designer -- and if they can't afford a good designer then they probably can't afford good equipment and/or aren't very successful.

[Colin Southern]

On the other hand, I would expect that Rolex does not generate a lot of their business, based on the first impressions people get from their website. When it comes to a wedding photograher, a poor website could be a fatal blow.

Dunno about the first - you're probably right. It's just something that I've noticed over the years with many leading brands. In reality, what I'm after is the ability to easily display phrotos and read information on selected models - in reality I usually end up just Googling the info.

In the 2nd case then yes - very likely to be fatal (assuming that these turkeys aren't getting a lot of referral business in the first place). Far to many "talk the talk" but without being able to "walk the walk". Then again, if they're bad photographers who are inept enough to have a cheap and/or bad site then it's probably a good thing from a "Darwin" perspective!

[ajohnw]

On the other hand, I would expect that Rolex does not generate a lot of their business, based on the first impressions people get from their website. When it comes to a wedding photograher, a poor website could be a fatal blow.

If only really good wedding photography was just a matter of being able and capable of using a camera and a load of software even extremely well. From Donald's comment early on I get the impression that he is the only one that realises that. or maybe he thinks it's too competitive. There is a lot more to a perfect wedding shoot than just taking photo's.

-

[Colin Southern]

Some of them even go on to set themselves up as pro wedding photographers and have the audacity to set up websites that illustrate how awful they are.

LOL - at least it's "honest advertising" for a change!

[wmoore]

Thanks to everyone for their comments on this topic. I think what gets me is that some people can go into business as a wedding photographer yet their photos look like snap shots that uncle harry could of taken with his DSLR. Being a wedding photographer is not just being a great photographer but being a people person as well. Making people feel relaxed etc and putting up with the mother of the bride. And because cameras/software is getting so good nearly anyone could shoot a wedding, add some soft blur/romantic filters in PP and the couple will love it because they know no better. Then on the other hand has the standard for what we want dropped. As a photographer I probably look at the photos in a different way compared to the 'hoi polloi' I guest at the end of the day as long as the wedding has been captured and the client is happy
then that is all that matters.

By the way here is some wedding photographers whose work I like.

Jerry Ghionis

Scott Jarvie

Roger clark

[hoffstriker]

Jerry Ghionis is awesome... He also has some really good training videos, but almost every venue he attends he is allowed to use flash at the service and nowadays that is a very rare occurrence (at least from my experience).

Also, 90% of his work is staged... That type of shooting is not for everyone...

[GrahamH]

$500 for a wedding.
$5000 for a wedding.

My expectations are different.
My minimum expectations are that the anyone who takes money as a professional photographer can produce pics better than average, but not necessarily vastly better than average.
At $500 for the wedding, that pays for the guys time and rent of equipment, and not a great deal of experience (as long as the minimum is met).
At $5000, I expect a damn sight more.
Everyone has to start somewhere and if they position themselves correctly, then you get what you pay for.
There are exceptions (almost always a higher price than ability), but in general ...


I've shot three weddings with NO assistance, no formal training, no apprenticeship - all for free (friends, who then donated several hundred for my efforts afterwards as they we so pleased - still cheaper than what a pro charges however).
I did a far better job than the pro at my last (so-called) wedding (as assessed by others who have seen and compared the pics).

Graham

[arith]

Jerry Ghionis is awesome... He also has some really good training videos, but almost every venue he attends he is allowed to use flash at the service and nowadays that is a very rare occurrence (at least from my experience).

Also, 90% of his work is staged... That type of shooting is not for everyone...

This Jerry Ghionis; way over the top for me, Some of the B+W stuff is alright though.

[hoffstriker]

This Jerry Ghionis; way over the top for me, Some of the B+W stuff is alright though.

But Steve, this is the epitome of what high-priced wedding photography is today for most people. They want to feel as though they are at an actual photo-shoot with 5 assistants running around changing lighting all day long.

You can't knock the fact that his shots are well posed and crafted. However, you need a certain type of bride and groom to pull this off along with the ability to shoot many of the shots prior to or after the wedding day actually occurs.

Here's a gallery of some shots I did for some friends. Only problem is, I was simply a guest. I was not the wedding photographer, so I hid in the very last pew (snuck up a couple of rows for a few of the shots, LOL) with my 70-200 and basically just snapped away with no worries for how the photos turned out.

[arith]

But Steve, this is the epitome of what high-priced wedding photography is today for most people. They want to feel as though they are at an actual photo-shoot with 5 assistants running around changing lighting all day long.

You can't knock the fact that his shots are well posed and crafted. However, you need a certain type of bride and groom to pull this off along with the ability to shoot many of the shots prior to or after the wedding day actually occurs.

Here's a gallery of some shots I did for some friends. Only problem is, I was simply a guest. I was not the wedding photographer, so I hid in the very last pew (snuck up a couple of rows for a few of the shots, LOL) with my 70-200 and basically just snapped away with no worries for how the photos turned out.

I prefer some of yours Chris; I would have thought a cardinal rule was, 'never ask a bride or groom to act'. Some of Jerry's photo's look like they was intended to be in a film like 'Dallas the movie'.