Photos and Video

Question for pro photographers

Jen4948Jen4948 Houston
10000 Comments Sixth Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers
member
In my family there are a lot of, shall we say, "serious amateur" photographers who are really into photography as a hobby, and even a sports photographer who does it as a sideline for local sports events. Whenever our family members get together, there's a lot of family photo shoots.

I've heard it said, and seen posted here, that good pros can deal skillfully with these kinds of amateurs who might try to dominate posed photo groupings, but I'm wondering how you (pros) actually go about it? While I'm in no way opposed to such persons getting whatever shots they can outside of group sessions (and some are really great), how do you get such persons out of the way and prevent them from interfering with the group shots you're under contract to take or co-opting them by trying to take the same shots with their own equipment?

Re: Question for pro photographers

  • photokittyphotokitty where I want to be
    Moderator Knottie Warrior 5000 Comments 500 Love Its
    mod
    As you know, I don't do weddings, but do shoot other events with this issue. I say, up front, "I'm going to take my photos first, so everyone look at me. Then I'll let your family take photos." I them compose the shot, ensure I can see all heads and get my shots. Then I say - now look at your loved ones.

    Many wedding pros have it in their contract that others can't shoot during the posed formals. As for other stuff - candid stuff, the ceremony and key reception stuff- a trained photog can work around others. As a photojournalist and former newspaper photog, no guest is going to be As aggressive As another photog on assignment. And I'd have no problem politely telling a guest to move if I need to do so.
    :kiss: ~xoxo~ :kiss:

    Knottie1430775579
  • What @photokitty said.  It's in the contract for the formal portraits at least.  In some cases the photographer might have to intervene during the ceremony if it is being  in a location where someone else's flash could seriously interfere with the quality of the photos that the bride and groom have paid for.  When on assignment, I have had to ask family members to please go inside to enjoy the reception while I shoot the formal portraits. 
  • photokittyphotokitty where I want to be
    Moderator Knottie Warrior 5000 Comments 500 Love Its
    mod

    What @photokitty said.  It's in the contract for the formal portraits at least.  In some cases the photographer might have to intervene during the ceremony if it is being  in a location where someone else's flash could seriously interfere with the quality of the photos that the bride and groom have paid for.  When on assignment, I have had to ask family members to please go inside to enjoy the reception while I shoot the formal portraits. 

    No offense, BUT...As a pro I find the bolded statement to be complete BS. A pro knows how to deal with these situations. When shooting an event there are other photogs on assignment with real, high powered strobes - a wedding guest with an on board flash can't do much damage. This is myth perpetuated by that lame Corey Ann article to try and dictate what guests can and can't do at a wedding.
    :kiss: ~xoxo~ :kiss:

  • Jen4948Jen4948 Houston
    10000 Comments Sixth Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers
    member
    Thanks for answering. I actually have another question: While photographers all have their own customized contracts for shooting weddings, what's considered "standard," if such a thing exists, in terms of photos and rights provided in a contract?
  • Photographers must retain copyright of their images mainly because, in the era of the internet, it is common for the images to be stolen and claimed by other photographers (and other people as well). They can't expect the client to chase down any and all violators. 

    The old school rights when film was around and photographers made all their money on albums and prints was that they retained 100% of the rights. There was a legit reason for this as well, they were responsible for keeping the negatives safe and should be compensated for it.

    Digital has turned the world upside down. More photographers now charge for the time needed to create the images and less on the rights. Some still insist on purchasing everything from them. But more and more, will provide a "release" of rights in the contract to allow copies and prints to the client but retain the copyright for the above reasons.

    So when reading the contract, check the language of releasing rights. Or just ask the photographer, any good photographer should be upfront about their policy.
  • photokittyphotokitty where I want to be
    Moderator Knottie Warrior 5000 Comments 500 Love Its
    mod

    Photographers must retain copyright of their images mainly because, in the era of the internet, it is common for the images to be stolen and claimed by other photographers (and other people as well). They can't expect the client to chase down any and all violators. 


    The old school rights when film was around and photographers made all their money on albums and prints was that they retained 100% of the rights. There was a legit reason for this as well, they were responsible for keeping the negatives safe and should be compensated for it.

    Digital has turned the world upside down. More photographers now charge for the time needed to create the images and less on the rights. Some still insist on purchasing everything from them. But more and more, will provide a "release" of rights in the contract to allow copies and prints to the client but retain the copyright for the above reasons.

    So when reading the contract, check the language of releasing rights. Or just ask the photographer, any good photographer should be upfront about their policy.
    This isn't true, money talks and must retain is not always the case. You can pay to own full copy right. Most people don't want to pay what it costs to have the photog relinquish all rights. Celebrities do so they can sell the photos to Us Weekly and not have the photog use them in advertising. 

    To answer your question Jen, there is a standard template, hold harmless, etc - but most are customized. At the very least - delivery length, print rights or not, backup plan, liability for failure, length of time included, editing standards, etc - are customized. 
    :kiss: ~xoxo~ :kiss:

  • Jen4948Jen4948 Houston
    10000 Comments Sixth Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers
    member

    Photographers must retain copyright of their images mainly because, in the era of the internet, it is common for the images to be stolen and claimed by other photographers (and other people as well). They can't expect the client to chase down any and all violators. 


    The old school rights when film was around and photographers made all their money on albums and prints was that they retained 100% of the rights. There was a legit reason for this as well, they were responsible for keeping the negatives safe and should be compensated for it.

    Digital has turned the world upside down. More photographers now charge for the time needed to create the images and less on the rights. Some still insist on purchasing everything from them. But more and more, will provide a "release" of rights in the contract to allow copies and prints to the client but retain the copyright for the above reasons.

    So when reading the contract, check the language of releasing rights. Or just ask the photographer, any good photographer should be upfront about their policy.
    This isn't true, money talks and must retain is not always the case. You can pay to own full copy right. Most people don't want to pay what it costs to have the photog relinquish all rights. Celebrities do so they can sell the photos to Us Weekly and not have the photog use them in advertising. 

    To answer your question Jen, there is a standard template, hold harmless, etc - but most are customized. At the very least - delivery length, print rights or not, backup plan, liability for failure, length of time included, editing standards, etc - are customized. 
    Thanks.  What shots would you consider "standard" - the couple, the couple and parents, and the couple and wedding party?  Any others?
  • photokittyphotokitty where I want to be
    Moderator Knottie Warrior 5000 Comments 500 Love Its
    mod
    Jen4948 said:

    Photographers must retain copyright of their images mainly because, in the era of the internet, it is common for the images to be stolen and claimed by other photographers (and other people as well). They can't expect the client to chase down any and all violators. 


    The old school rights when film was around and photographers made all their money on albums and prints was that they retained 100% of the rights. There was a legit reason for this as well, they were responsible for keeping the negatives safe and should be compensated for it.

    Digital has turned the world upside down. More photographers now charge for the time needed to create the images and less on the rights. Some still insist on purchasing everything from them. But more and more, will provide a "release" of rights in the contract to allow copies and prints to the client but retain the copyright for the above reasons.

    So when reading the contract, check the language of releasing rights. Or just ask the photographer, any good photographer should be upfront about their policy.
    This isn't true, money talks and must retain is not always the case. You can pay to own full copy right. Most people don't want to pay what it costs to have the photog relinquish all rights. Celebrities do so they can sell the photos to Us Weekly and not have the photog use them in advertising. 

    To answer your question Jen, there is a standard template, hold harmless, etc - but most are customized. At the very least - delivery length, print rights or not, backup plan, liability for failure, length of time included, editing standards, etc - are customized. 
    Thanks.  What shots would you consider "standard" - the couple, the couple and parents, and the couple and wedding party?  Any others?
    If you ask for formal portraits I would consider those standard. I would go over it in advance. I wouldn't want to ask for the grandparents or a parent only to find out they were dead or estranged.

    To me (off the top of my head) the standard, understood, must get shots are:
    Walking in
    Establishing shot
    Vows
    First Kiss
    Announcing couple
    Enter reception
    Toasts
    First Dance
    F/D and M/S dance
    Cake cutting

    If these occur and there is no photo I would expect an explanation. 

    First kiss explanation is often you didn't kiss long enough - you can't just give a quick peck ;) Otherwise I would expect the explanation to be "I messed up, sorry"
    :kiss: ~xoxo~ :kiss:

  • Jen4948Jen4948 Houston
    10000 Comments Sixth Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers
    member

    Jen4948 said:

    Photographers must retain copyright of their images mainly because, in the era of the internet, it is common for the images to be stolen and claimed by other photographers (and other people as well). They can't expect the client to chase down any and all violators. 


    The old school rights when film was around and photographers made all their money on albums and prints was that they retained 100% of the rights. There was a legit reason for this as well, they were responsible for keeping the negatives safe and should be compensated for it.

    Digital has turned the world upside down. More photographers now charge for the time needed to create the images and less on the rights. Some still insist on purchasing everything from them. But more and more, will provide a "release" of rights in the contract to allow copies and prints to the client but retain the copyright for the above reasons.

    So when reading the contract, check the language of releasing rights. Or just ask the photographer, any good photographer should be upfront about their policy.
    This isn't true, money talks and must retain is not always the case. You can pay to own full copy right. Most people don't want to pay what it costs to have the photog relinquish all rights. Celebrities do so they can sell the photos to Us Weekly and not have the photog use them in advertising. 

    To answer your question Jen, there is a standard template, hold harmless, etc - but most are customized. At the very least - delivery length, print rights or not, backup plan, liability for failure, length of time included, editing standards, etc - are customized. 
    Thanks.  What shots would you consider "standard" - the couple, the couple and parents, and the couple and wedding party?  Any others?
    If you ask for formal portraits I would consider those standard. I would go over it in advance. I wouldn't want to ask for the grandparents or a parent only to find out they were dead or estranged.

    To me (off the top of my head) the standard, understood, must get shots are:
    Walking in
    Establishing shot
    Vows
    First Kiss
    Announcing couple
    Enter reception
    Toasts
    First Dance
    F/D and M/S dance
    Cake cutting

    If these occur and there is no photo I would expect an explanation. 

    First kiss explanation is often you didn't kiss long enough - you can't just give a quick peck ;) Otherwise I would expect the explanation to be "I messed up, sorry"



    For that first kiss, it sounds like the couple might have to stand together kissing for a while to get that photographed right!  :-)

    Thanks.

  • photokittyphotokitty where I want to be
    Moderator Knottie Warrior 5000 Comments 500 Love Its
    mod
    Jen4948 said:

    Jen4948 said:

    Photographers must retain copyright of their images mainly because, in the era of the internet, it is common for the images to be stolen and claimed by other photographers (and other people as well). They can't expect the client to chase down any and all violators. 


    The old school rights when film was around and photographers made all their money on albums and prints was that they retained 100% of the rights. There was a legit reason for this as well, they were responsible for keeping the negatives safe and should be compensated for it.

    Digital has turned the world upside down. More photographers now charge for the time needed to create the images and less on the rights. Some still insist on purchasing everything from them. But more and more, will provide a "release" of rights in the contract to allow copies and prints to the client but retain the copyright for the above reasons.

    So when reading the contract, check the language of releasing rights. Or just ask the photographer, any good photographer should be upfront about their policy.
    This isn't true, money talks and must retain is not always the case. You can pay to own full copy right. Most people don't want to pay what it costs to have the photog relinquish all rights. Celebrities do so they can sell the photos to Us Weekly and not have the photog use them in advertising. 

    To answer your question Jen, there is a standard template, hold harmless, etc - but most are customized. At the very least - delivery length, print rights or not, backup plan, liability for failure, length of time included, editing standards, etc - are customized. 
    Thanks.  What shots would you consider "standard" - the couple, the couple and parents, and the couple and wedding party?  Any others?
    If you ask for formal portraits I would consider those standard. I would go over it in advance. I wouldn't want to ask for the grandparents or a parent only to find out they were dead or estranged.

    To me (off the top of my head) the standard, understood, must get shots are:
    Walking in
    Establishing shot
    Vows
    First Kiss
    Announcing couple
    Enter reception
    Toasts
    First Dance
    F/D and M/S dance
    Cake cutting

    If these occur and there is no photo I would expect an explanation. 

    First kiss explanation is often you didn't kiss long enough - you can't just give a quick peck ;) Otherwise I would expect the explanation to be "I messed up, sorry"



    For that first kiss, it sounds like the couple might have to stand together kissing for a while to get that photographed right!  :-)

    Thanks.

    I recommend the 7 second rule and lots and lots of practice :blush:
    :kiss: ~xoxo~ :kiss:

    Jen4948
  • Photographers must retain copyright of their images mainly because, in the era of the internet, it is common for the images to be stolen and claimed by other photographers (and other people as well). They can't expect the client to chase down any and all violators. 


    The old school rights when film was around and photographers made all their money on albums and prints was that they retained 100% of the rights. There was a legit reason for this as well, they were responsible for keeping the negatives safe and should be compensated for it.

    Digital has turned the world upside down. More photographers now charge for the time needed to create the images and less on the rights. Some still insist on purchasing everything from them. But more and more, will provide a "release" of rights in the contract to allow copies and prints to the client but retain the copyright for the above reasons.

    So when reading the contract, check the language of releasing rights. Or just ask the photographer, any good photographer should be upfront about their policy.
    This isn't true, money talks and must retain is not always the case. You can pay to own full copy right. Most people don't want to pay what it costs to have the photog relinquish all rights. Celebrities do so they can sell the photos to Us Weekly and not have the photog use them in advertising. 

    To answer your question Jen, there is a standard template, hold harmless, etc - but most are customized. At the very least - delivery length, print rights or not, backup plan, liability for failure, length of time included, editing standards, etc - are customized. 
    Well, yeah. Money can make anything happen. But in 10 years, I've only had one client insist on terms like that. 99% of the terms are fairly standard. One example is a fairly new trend of people requesting unedited RAW images. When a price is negotiated for something like that, the request goes away pretty fast, sometimes they don't even know why they were asking - they were just told by someone on the web to ask for it.
  • Jen4948Jen4948 Houston
    10000 Comments Sixth Anniversary 500 Love Its 25 Answers
    member
    Thanks for answering all my questions!

    Just a couple more: How many shots per total package would be considered "standard," and how much do you charge, on average?
  • I will chime in on this. Our brides typically get around 60-100 images per hour. There are 2 photographers in our packages. The variance has to do with how much is going on at your wedding/reception. The average cost that brides book with us is around $3200.

    I will add that we typically do not have alot of issues with guests but where we have run into some problems is during the formals. Alot of the p&s cameras will put red focus lights on the subjects and there have been times that we have caught that on camera. So we are pretty adamant that the guests wait till we are done before jumping in to snap a pic. The biggest issue that doing this creates is the amount of time it adds on to the formal pictures. Most brides are to excited about spending extra time while uncle BOB gets his pictures of the same thing they are already getting.
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards