Do you make a living as a wedding photographer?

"uw wayne" wrote in message
ups.com...
What a shame to have to move those images off the website. Your
work is about as obscene as the sculptures in Greece and Rome.
By the time the"arts police" get finished we will have every
sculpture or print look like a tour inside the Vatican...Photoshop a
fig leaf on everything. This certainly ain't the age of enlightenment.


FWIW, the Vatican's art collection is not censored in this way - it's a
wonderful museum, in fact.


Peter

Charles Self wrote:

Lessee, 25mm=1", give or take. 15mm x 10mm prints bring one question to
mind: why bother?

You could print them yourself at home...

I'll just get out my reducer...



--
http://www.petezilla.co.uk

I'm in rural Virginia. The only ones around here, other than doctors,
getting $120 an hour have "esquire" after their names.

I'm sure I've had a couple of letter addressed to myself with 'esquire' put
after my name. It is sometimes put as a courtesy (?) but means absolutely
nothing.

--
http://www.petezilla.co.uk

In article ,
DD wrote:

I think you are being ripped off with those prices. $175 for only ten
8x10 prints???

That's what prolab's charge for hand made prints.
--
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

www.gregblankphoto(dot)com

In article y7Blf.421$6N2.419@fed1read06,
"Skip M" wrote:

"DD" wrote in message
...

Do you remember Charo from these groups? She's doing it fulltime now -
had a look at her site www.charophoto.com. Basically it was looking at
her site that sparked me to ask all these questions about the biz


Ok, now I'm depressed. Just when I thought we were pretty good. Her stuff
is GREAT!

Yuk.
--
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

www.gregblankphoto(dot)com

In article ,
DD wrote:

In article y7Blf.421$6N2.419@fed1read06, says...
"DD" wrote in message
...

Do you remember Charo from these groups? She's doing it fulltime now -
had a look at her site www.charophoto.com. Basically it was looking at
her site that sparked me to ask all these questions about the biz


Ok, now I'm depressed. Just when I thought we were pretty good. Her stuff
is GREAT!

She is pretty good, eh? I haven't heard from her in ages - in fact since
she had her baby, but I pop in to her site from time-to-time. She's a
peach.

Double Yuk, imagery out of focus that should be, blown highlights etc.
the website is glitzy and that is about it.

I'll show you someone's work I like besides my own ;-)

http://www.bradleyimages.com/
--
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

www.gregblankphoto(dot)com

In article ,
"Bandicoot" wrote:


If you don't like them, who cares? because if you were getting married you
would simply employ a photographer whose style you did like.


Peter

& That's it folks- sales. Be a good sales man make lots of cash.
Learn to lie as it works for some quite well.
--
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

www.gregblankphoto(dot)com

I'm sure he'll be please to hear you say that.
You wouldn't be the first Photographer to look in shock at his pictures and
ask what he was on. Something you are overlooking is the "art" component of
those pictures. They are well accepted by his customers - I can attest to
that from the re-print rate. If you take away the notion of a photograph and
look at them as pieces of art, they take on a different look. When they are
printed on canvas, they cease to be regarded as photos and start to be
considered as what they are, works of art.

It's an odd thing that the canvas prints I make should use the course
texture of the weave in the canvas itself to add another element to the art.
This is not widely accepted by my customers. They mostly specify fine weave,
smooth surface, photo realistic canvas. So much for the $10k of chemical
development I shelled out just to get a printing canvas that no one had to
ask "is this on canvas". :-)

This is what I was talking about when I said there was a shift from
traditional photos to ones basically created in Photoshop in this industry.
Personally I prefer to work with natural elements and retain a neutral
contrast balance with detail in highlights and shadows, using lighting to
create any effects I might like. Pretty boring stuff alongside some of Ron's
work but if I were to do as he, I'd lose my professional customers in
droves. Besides, I'm doing nicely as it is, doing my thing.

Another important thing you are overlooking in your condemnation of his and
Charo's pictures is that they wouldn't be making them like that if they
couldn't sell them. Both are Professional Photographers, both support
themselves and both get plenty of money for what they do. Does that tell you
anything?

These sort of pictures are not my cup of tea, I'll grant you that but
despite this, I can appreciate the art for the art. If either of these
Photographers did not have a camera, I'm sure they'd still be producing
there art with pencils, chalk or paint. Some of the world's most valuable
paintings were produced by artists who were scorned during their lifetime
for the stuff they produced in the name of art. Only time and history will
tell if that is the case with these type of pictures but one thing is
certain above all else. We need these people and their ideas to stop the
industry becoming stale.

--
----m0o0m

wrote in message
oups.com...
So, burnt-out highlights (in both B&W and colour) off-colour, medded-up
focus is what Ron sells?

Pure crap....

In article ,
"BigPix" wrote:

We need these people and their ideas to stop the
industry becoming stale.

Your entitled to your opinion, I don't see their work as vastly creative
or particularly technically skilled.
--
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918

www.gregblankphoto(dot)com

Charles Self wrote:
"zeitgeist" wrote in message
...

I looked at a few US Wedding photographers sites and the average price
for a wedding seems to run at about $2,500 per date. Assuming the
photographer books a minimum of 4 shoots of this nature per month, that
rounds out at $10k gross. Take off about 25% for costs (being generous
here given the output that seems to be offered) the "average" wedding
photographer should be grossing in the region of $7,500 per month. Is
that not an above average income for working only a few days per month?


Bill 4 - 7 times costs. Include the cost of your own time at some given
rate.

I figure my time at $60/hour, but I'm just starting out, and that's what
the company I used to work for charged for my time when I was a computer
tech.

This is why engineers and other techs into photography tend to be more
successful than the average shooter, they are used to working for, and
charging for professional services at pro rates and continue that attitude
in their own business.

but most skilled labor like mechanics and plumbers charge $120 an hour
shop
rate.

this reply is echoed to the z-prophoto mailing list at yahoogroups.com



And you live where? I just paid $40 an hour for a mechanic's services on my
car, got an excellent job, and was a bit upset that the price had gone up.
The mechanic may get $18 of that in salary and benefits.

I'm in rural Virginia. The only ones around here, other than doctors,
getting $120 an hour have "esquire" after their names.



Try metro DC or any other large metropolitan area. A $120/hr shop rate
is pretty steep, but not unheard of. Lexus, BMW and the like will get
more than the Toyota dealer.

Average around here is $60 - $80 an hour.

If you're in business, you pay business costs & you better be charging
business rates ... or else you're not going to remain in business.