Hi all - not understanding these prices here so if someone can clarify that would be great.
My fiancé and I are getting quoted between $8500 and $11,000 dollars to have both a photographer and videographer. Without the videographer, it’s roughly $5-$6K. Do they charge this much just because it’s a wedding? I’ve been hearing that most of the time is taken up by editing the photos? I mean why the F are you editing photos? I hired you to take RAW photos god damn it.
Anyway is this right?
If you just want someone to take photos and hand them over to you, find someone on airtasker. You can then spend the next 5 years editing them to look good.
It's expensive, but you're basically hiring two people to do a week's work worth. If you want less, find someone who offers less.
You are overestimating what the average lazy wedding photographer is doing.
give all guests cheap digital cameras, collect at the end, process yourself and print at big w - done!
Hi OP since you know about RAW I guess you are in photography as well, running this as a business is different from a hobby. There is a profit to be made in a business and running as business there will be running cost to cover wages and etc.
I know for sure if you pay peanuts you will get monkeys but you will also get monkeys if you pay top dollars so make sure you go through their portfolios. You want someone who is well presented and confident. He needs to have at least two main cameras and a backup. This is bare minimum gear. You will know why if you are a wedding photographer.
You don't want a clown who stand in your face or block everyone's view when you are exchanging vows or doing big moves distracting the attendees and etc. You want a ninja photographer who knows stealth and moves swiftly. It's not just about photography skills anymore, you want someone with the assistant who can blend in while recording your only day as a single and then married. If your venue lighting is poor forget about good results, all the actions and low light is challenging even with the sensor sensitivity bumped to the max.
Anyway, who's married here and how many times you looked at the photos and videos taken on your wedding day?
It depends on the duration too, we just booked a photographer/videographer for 6 hours for $3K.
I hired you to take RAW photos god damn it.
Hobbyist photographer here - while the price is definitely on the upper end, editing takes a long time. I don't know if you realise that RAW photos straight out of the camera usually look pretty garbage.
Thats not true at all.
For example, the RAW's from my wedding look amazing, thats what you get with a good photographer, a great camera and the correct lens.
Anyone who can't see a good photo due to it lacking some contrast/color etc needs to get their eyes checked.
Curious, what do you think a RAW photo is?
I don't think he realise RAW files are literally 1's and 0's lol…
I paid $5000 for both in 2013, so I dont know what your complaining about.
As a former wedding photographer, it's expensive running a wedding photography business and the days you can work a year are limited by demand. You're not just paying for photos, that cost has to cover income, insurances, gear wear and tear. You also get to charge for your skill in being able to take high quality photos. Wedding photographers take photos in RAW format, these images are not jpegs they're raw sensor data readout that needs to be edited somewhat to be viewable and printable raw sensor data does not look great out of camera, it's designed to get the most out of the file in editing.
You want unedited photos, get old mate off Facebook that charges $500.
Not sure I understand this, does a gardener charge more because he might not find enough clients to fill every day? Thats dependant on the person running the business?
Wedding photographers take photos in RAW format, these images are not jpegs they're raw sensor data readout that needs to be edited somewhat to be viewable and printable raw sensor data does not look great out of camera, it's designed to get the most out of the file in editing.
The Raw's from my wedding look amazing and only require some small tweaks of a slider bar to bring the colors/contrast into acceptable levels and become better photos then most. RAW processing can even be done automatically if you didn't need the best results.
Yes proper RAW configuration requires more time but then most photographers are either doing it in bulk or sending it overseas.
The Raw's from my wedding look amazing and only require some small tweaks of a slider bar to bring the colors/contrast into acceptable levels and become better photos then most. RAW processing can even be done automatically if you didn't need the best results.
Many photographers will have a design style they try keep, as that's how they'll keep wining business - giving the client a go at their own manipulation goes against that philosophy. Additionally, who wants to risk their reputation by allowing a client to trash their work by applying terrible colour editing & filters onto the RAW images and showing to their friends on social media?
Thats the great thing, you go with a real photographer instead of a fake wedding photographer and it won't have watermarks.
Without watermarks there is no issue.
There's also nothing wrong with supplying RAW's as well as providing edited photos with the style of the photographer, which is what I did.
Thats the great thing, you go with a real photographer instead of a fake wedding photographer and it won't have watermarks.
Yes because people never ask who took the photos without watermarks.
@Randolph Duke: Nobody is saying "I hate your photos, I would love to get his phone number for his wedding!"
And obviously if they say they like the photos.. literally everyone is going to mention were responsible for all the color/contrast/etc/etc/etc
I have no idea why you are making up situations which don't happen. It happens because of money, the end.
Nobody is saying "I hate your photos, I would love to get his phone number for his wedding!"
Couldn’t possibly be the inverse right?
“Who did your photos?” Mental note: don’t hire them because I’d didn’t like them
It happens because of money, the end.
It happens because you’re purchasing a finished product, not half the work so you do your own edits or AI processing over them.
Edit: from an earlier commment
Anyone who can't see a good photo due to it lacking some contrast/color etc needs to get their eyes checked
That stuff is not easy to get right to create a cohesive collection with no editing experience.
It's called running a profitable business. If you can't fill every day and can charge more to make a profit thst suits what you need, then you would be a poor businessperson not to. Good photographers can charge more and work less, you also get to stipulate what you deliver, like any other business. If a potential client isn't happy with what's offered, like any other business you can choose to go elsewhere.
Not sure I understand this, does a gardener charge more because he might not find enough clients to fill every day?
Yes
Well no.. they don't. What a silly thing to suggest.
@samfisher5986: Of course they do. That's how all employment works.
I'm sure your hourly rate accounts for the fact you won't work 24h a day. My daily rate accounts for the fact I can't work every day of the year. And a gardener's rate accounts for how much work they get.
Or are you one of those people who think electricians make $600k a year because they charge you $300 for a callout?
@Alice McGregor: No but you are being silly.
It costs say $80 for a mow in your house from most lawn mower people.
If one guy only works once a week or is having trouble getting customers, he's not going to charge $300 to mow your house because he's not working on other days.
Its such a ridiculous concept.
@samfisher5986: It only takes 20min to mow a lawn. Do you think the gardener is making $80 X 3x 8h = $1900 a day?
Obviously not. The gardener charges $80 because they can't get enough work to fill every hour of the day. Every job charges enough to cover the time they can't work.
Lol 'I hired you to take RAW photos' mate. You'd hate the RAW photos if they just gave it to you like that then demand a refund.
Your options are expensive but not outrageous. We paid just shy of 4k for photos only but it was only a 4hour block, 1 guy not a full company or anything. He also used an analogue in there a few times too.
I, personally, think Videographers aren't required.. It makes everyone feel like they're just constantly being recorded (they are) and feels less natural. Live in the moment, enjoy the memories. Absolutely get a photographer, video eh, very subjective but I feel not necessary. And try to get one that does less 'posed' shots, and more candid photos. Get your handful of mantelpiece photos with all the friends, family, etc, but otherwise just let them do their thing and get candid shots. They're much better/more fun!
My fiancé and I are getting quoted between $8500 and $11,000 dollars to have both a photographer and videographer.
Yes, that's the price for a decent photographer and videographer combo, especially somewhere like Sydney or Melbourne.
Without the videographer, it’s roughly $5-$6K. Do they charge this much just because it’s a wedding?
Yes, they charge this much because it's a wedding. A wedding typically has much more planning than your average corporate event, where the photographer is generally given a time to show up and leave, and a few sentences about planning.
With a wedding, there is about a week's worth of labour involved, including meeting the couple and/or planner before the wedding (usually at least twice, often more) the very long day of the wedding, the day or so of processing after the wedding, then a meeting with the couple to present the photos.
I’ve been hearing that most of the time is taken up by editing the photos? I mean why the F are you editing photos? I hired you to take RAW photos god damn it.
Photos need to be processed. Professionals will take photos in RAW because that's gives you the best quality photos, but I don't know of any professional that hands over RAW files.
Photographers know that a wedding may be the most memorable day of your life, so they will spend much more time and effort ensuring your photos are processed perfectly, a level of effort they won't invest into a corporate event, for example.
It's several hours work to process these photos properly, and doing it well requires quite a lot of experience. Processing specific photos is also only part of the process. A photographer will take a lot of photos on a given wedding shoot to ensure they're getting that perfect shot, and it will take them a long time just to cull through and find the best photos.
When you see a photographer's portfolio, you're seeing their processed photos, and you're hiring them based on that end product. It's a part of what you're paying for.
You wouldn't go to a restaurant, order a medium-rare steak and ask for a discount.
Anyway is this right?
Yes, that is right. You can get more affordable photographers, but you generally get what you pay for in this area.
Don't forget about the following facts:
- Weddings may be seasonal depending where you are, so a Wedding Photographer may need to make their annual salary in just a few months.
- You're paying for multiple people in your case, and in most cases a good photographer will at least have an assistant, if not a second shooter and an assistant.
- Professional photography equipment is extremely expensive - a wedding photographer may bring tens of thousands of dollars with them in lighting, camera bodies, lenses, filters, reflectors, batteries, memory cards, laptop, etc.
- Insurances cost thousands of dollars to cover not just that equipment, but also the worker's comp. insurance, public liability insurance, etc.
- It's still a business so they will still lose ~1/3rd of that money to taxes, they need to pay their own Super, they need to advertising and run websites, social media, etc.
Being a photographer often doesn't pay well, even if it looks like it does when you think they're getting paid "$10k in one" day (they're not). There's a saying amongst photographers:
"The only way to become a millionaire as a photographer is to start as a billionaire."
This is a typical shady photographers response.
With a wedding, there is about a week's worth of labour involved, including meeting the couple and/or planner before the wedding (usually at least twice, often more) the very long day of the wedding, the day or so of processing after the wedding, then a meeting with the couple to present the photos.
Is this for the Queen? Or someone doing a 100k+ wedding? A weeks worth of labour is a joke.
Weddings are not that complicated, photographers don't need much more then a run sheet and a brief chat over the phone/video call to discuss needs.
Sure you can do more, but it either means you are an inexperienced photographer or you are trying to justify exorbitant prices with filler.
Photos need to be processed. Professionals will take photos in RAW because that's gives you the best quality photos
And many wedding photographers are just bulk processing the RAW's or sending them overseas for someone else to do it.
, but I don't know of any professional that hands over RAW files.
Most photographers will do it, the shady wedding industry is where this changes but thankfully, its generally the bad wedding photographers who are not offering the RAW's, particularly so they can hide their bad photos, but also because they hold your photos hostage.
This guy just volunteered to do it for $5 !! He knows everything, fly him in !!!
With your stipulations, you’d be making less than minimum wage for a high stress job. It’s your view and of course, you are entitled to it. However, it is an utterly ridiculous take.
If you are not a people's person, a wedding photographer is not the job for you.
Yes, bare minimum you should see the place, meet with the groom and bride, understand their expectations and ideas.
It is not a fast food job. It is somebody's special day.
Far out, I am not even a wedding photographer and I know this.
being an in house photographer and videographer - the edit is probably 70-80% of the work if you are going for high production values.
yes it is a bit of a rip off but there is a lot of work post the wedding in preparing those images, also be aware though that unless through prior agreement you will almost certainly not get the Raw images and even if you did the RAW images for someone that isn't familiar with processing photos though will appear pretty bad, people look at their phone cameras and think "wow that is great" without realising it is actually not the RAW image, it is heavily processed.
We got a deal because we asked the photographer not to process more than 24 photos. They took loads, but we planned out 20 main ones which go in the album and get shared. Something like 1ea us getting ready, 8 from ceremony, 2 group shots, 4 bridal party and 10 from reception + misc.
Try to keep it tight, you don't want looking back on the album (average of once every 10 yrs) to be a slog. It's the Big Day leading up to and definitely on the day, but after that it stops feeling quite so important.
That all seems kind of negative but sincerely, congratulations.
Having to pay for the counselling session after being abused by bridzillas?
To cut down the cost of ours I only hired the photographer for the first hour at the wedding reception. I asked for photos of all the people of on the table, we pretended to cut the cake and a couple of other photos. Someone gave us disposable cameras for all the tables. We got some great shots from those. I also only opted for the photos to be put onto a CD and we only got 10 high gloss photos printed by the photographer. It reduced the price a lot.
The majority of wedding photographers are very shady in my opinion, here are their tactics:
Initial high pressure tactics to get the biggest package (which is generally not necessary)
Charging high prices because they have to "edit" the photos when they are instead doing a bulk Lightroom/Photoshop action.
Not providing the RAW photos - This is done for two reasons 1. So they can hold your photos hostage and charge exorbitant prices for future requests. 2. So you can't see that they actually didn't edit the RAW's manually, just a bulk action in most cases.
They will give you all sorts of excuses about why they can't provide the RAW's. I even had one wedding photographer tell me that she hired another photographer for her wedding and didn't ask for the RAW's because its unnecessary.
You absolutely need the RAW's unless you are extremely confident in your photographers post processing style.
Not providing the real full resolution and instead cropping to 12MP or similar. This is extreemly common with photographers that also sell prints. You can't get a good large print with 12MP so you are forced to go back to them.
Many of them are amateurs pretending to be professionals. Don't trust their portfolio unless it is extensive.
Many have fake reviews, pay close attention to who reviewed it and what they wrote.
My advice is to find a good photographer who also does weddings, rather then exclusively as this lowers your chance of being taken for a ride. Even then the industry is full of amateurs who don't understand photography and are closer to someone taking their instagram skills on their iPhone and buying a $2000 camera.
I found a great photographer for my wedding and he provided me the RAW's because he is a professional photographer rather then an amateur trying to scam people.
The guys I know in this field all send their photos to India for 90% of the edits/cropping/colour correction. The main photographer will probably edit the best 10%.
Even I do for my video work (not event video btw). I can pay a fixed price and get a crazy fast turn around. I'll fine tune my side.
Once you have a relationship with them, and they know what you are going for, they are consistent.
Thats actually a great point, I completely forgot about that aspect.
Not providing the real full resolution and instead cropping to 12MP or similar
That's not what cropping means.
Your price doesn't sound too high from what I've seen/heard.
Speaking to photographers here in Australia, they are quite protective of the RAW files, the analogy they used "you wouldn't ask a chef in a restaurant for the recipe?".
For all my events I’ve asked for the RAW photos, JPEGs and any stylistic edits. For videos I’ve ask for all the original footage, as well as the finals.
For the videos, things may not make the final cut. Having the original footage allows me to do a new edit a decade down the line, or relive a missed moment, a laugh or something like that.
For the photos, IMO there is a bit too much reliance on presets, filters, and over-top-editing, and these may be custom, something the photographer has developed over their career as that is ‘their look’. Horses for courses really, but I’d rather the subjects speak for themselves then wow viewer with all the tricks LR can do. At least with the RAW’s I have options at a later stage.
Anyway, if RAW’s are important to you find one who will comply, just make sure they have solid equipment and lots of experience, making themselves invisible, being a ninja. It’s a hard job, always reading the surroundings, thinking what’s next, where to be next, will I get in the way or the videographer, the guests, etc. Its mentally and physically exhausting.
IMO, I think you will struggle to find someone that will be economical, provide RAW’s and be pretty experienced at these types of events. You might have a to compromise a bit.
It is what it is tbh…everything with a wedding tag on it = $$$
10k is very standard for both
I got a friend who is a videographer, and I was shocked to hear a standard day rate for filming and editing is over 4K.
He told me this financial year to date he has grossed over 130k in income. And expense wise, well he hardly has any other than your insurance and tools (camera, lights MacBook), it’s nearly all labour really.
I’m in the wrong job.
He also says he doesn’t do weddings, it’s too emotional and crap. Doing corporate work is so much easier and pays the same or better.
1)Public liability insurance 10M
2)Tog equipment insurance
Photography is a lot easier than videography.
Id say the vast majority of cost is for the videographer.
Why?
Videography requires more equipment, lighting, sound, multiple camera angles, storage (TB's and TB's for 4k), how many SDXC cards do they need?
Grading video takes longer (a video is 25-50 frames per second) vs a single photo.
Cleaning up the sound sources, so things come out crystal clear
Sifting through 10hours of 4K footage from 3-4 cameras. so that's what 40 hours of footage?
Sync multiple videos with multiple sound sources , microphones, cameras, wireless lapels if used
Time taken to get you ur ur 1-2 minute TV spot (sifting through again that 40hours of footage to find the best snippets) , then give you the full ceremony /service + reception.
ask them to break down, whats the photo cost vs the video package, it might surprise you.
its completely stressful (and heavy) packing up video gear, vs photo gear
You are talking about the maximum costs for a videographer, not typical.
A videographer can do two camera angles, skip all the lighting, lapel microphone for the bride/groom. Storage is insanely cheap.
You don't grade photo per frame… where on earth did you read that?
Sifting through footage - A highly skilled videographer won't record footage they don't need.
But I agree overall, editing video is a huge pain compared to bulk processing RAW's or sending them overseas. Then again I bet many videographers are sending their videos overseas at this point, or they will start.
My overall point is cost is very depandant on the outcome. Its common in the wedding industry to charge top dollar for a basic result.
It's like buying any product, you might not be able to see the R&D, training, manufacturing costs, insurance, etc etc etc behind a product or service. But it's there and has to be factored in.
Posts like these are the reason I'd never quit my day job to become a full time photographer lol…
When I first started photography I used to think too "wow wedding photographers make so much money seems so easy" then I actually photographed a few myself.
Also it's not like there aren't cheaper photographers/videographers out there to choose from, but (most of the time) you get what you paid for.
Thank you for all your feedback.
What I've been reading
These days, I've been hearing that software and AI now essentially does everything from you if you know how to use the software. Anyway, thank you for all your help and feedback.
"I've been hearing that software and AI now essentially does everything from you" - yep, that's why there is no one working in post-production anymore because computers just … go!
This is clearly an over exaggeration of the reality of these tools and essentially untrue, especially if you're trying to create something that evokes a real emotion.
TBH, if I was the photographer/videographer and heard a client talking like this - I'd probably pass or charge more because the job sounds like it's gonna be a PITA.
TBH, if I was the photographer/videographer and heard a client talking like this - I'd probably pass or charge more because the job sounds like it's gonna be a PITA.
Agreed, talk about dismissing years of experience and knowledge.
"There is no cost to software, the hardware is a one time fee that you can avoid renewing for at least 10 years."
there is no cost to software or using AI photo tools, or cloud storage for offsite backups?
tell me your secrets on how these are zero or only purchasing hardware every 10 years.
LOL.
At this point I think he's just trolling, or met this one singular unicorn photographer that doesn't know their worth and undercharged (or someone that's like me doing it on the side and don't charge as much as they should) and thinks every other photographer in the world are scam artists.
What I meant was, there is no predetermined software cost. Its up to the photographer and even getting the most expensive adobe plan you really couldn't be passing on anymore then $5 onto the customer.
You don't need to buy cloud storage or offsite backups, you provide the photos to your client, tell them they have x months to download it and then you are done.
Also the only places that hold your photos for 10 years are holding the RAW's so they can upcharge you every time you want something, that isn't a cost, thats profit.
First of all, let's work out the hours thing.
No (good) wedding photographer shows up on the day of and goes for it. They scout where the event will be. They figure out the best locations and how to work with the light levels available to them to get the best results. When you have a wedding, a reception, a dinner, afterparty. etc. Many of these are in multiple different locations. This can be a good 8 hours of work.
So, day-of. This can be a good 6-12h depending on what's planned. They don't get a rest. Barely a break. And most hire help, usually at least one person, so double that.
Already we're into 20 hours of work, and we haven't even looked at the photos yet.
Honestly, when you've been shooting photos pretty much non-stop for 12 hours, you have thousands of photos to go through.
40-60 hours to go through them all honestly isn't an exaggeration. Ignoring the time it will take to sort through thousands of photos to pick the best, 90% of photos will need straightening. 90% of photos will need exposure correction (usually photogs shoot underexposed so they don't overblow the highlights). 90% of photos will need WB and colour correction. Automated tools are good, but a lot of this is just simply grunt work the photographer will need to do by hand.
Add on time for all the stuff the bride, groom, family and other guests want edited.
So, let's look on the higher end. 80 hours of work for a simple wedding.
Let's work out the money thing.
At $5K, assuming the photographer doesn't have help, they're pulling in $62.50 pre-tax.
$62.50/hour still sounds like a lot, sure. Almost triple minimum wage.
But then you need to factor in software costs, travel costs, hardware costs, insurance, hired help, etc.
A videographer is honestly even more work.
$5K for a wedding photographer seems like a lot. But it's downright reasonable.
Don't forget, that you're also relying on them to capture a once-in-a-lifetime event without any hiccups or issues, and that alone is worth the cost.
Simple - supply and demand. Photographers and videographers charge what they can because people are willing to pay for it (otherwise they'd just go out of business), especially those that are established/well known in the industry.
You get what you pay for. If you want high quality, then be prepared to fork out the money. If you could care less, then find someone who does it for cheap. Just don't have a whinge when the production quality is nowhere near 5-10x what you'd pay otherwise. You might be able to scout around and find someone up-and-coming (very common in the industry where someone who used to work for an established studio breaks away and starts their own gig) who might be willing to charge less to build their portfolio, but again DYOR.
Yep. I often advise people to look at the photographer's portfolio before looking at their price, since what's "good" to someone can be very subjective. You never know if you'll find someone that you like AND is cheaper than what some other photographers offer.
To some degree its supply and demand, but most of it is the predatory nature of the wedding industry hoping to upcharge you on everything possible and hope you don't notice because its a wedding, or because the parents put forward 50k etc.
If you want high quality, then be prepared to fork out the money.
This is terrible logic for the wedding industry. Its a predatory industry where everyone is trying to fleece you. If you want high quality you have to put the work in to get that quality. Throwing money around in the interest of quality has never really worked. Its the equivalent of buying a $500 Monster branded HDMI cable and saying it has to be better then the $20 HDMI cable because you paid $500 for it.
If you look closely at the wedding industry and the services that are provided the value provided is insanely low. They are working on 200-500% markups compared to getting it from non wedding industry services or just buying the whole thing yourself and still paying less then renting it.
I 100% agree - but to me (when it comes to economics and human behaviour) it's no different to hyper inflated flower/restaurant prices on Valentine's Day, or diamond rings. Prices are stupid and yet people still pay them, and that's just what the markets are. As long as people pay, businesses are more than happy to reap in profits and keep the wheels turning.
"This is terrible logic for the wedding industry. Its a predatory industry where everyone is trying to fleece you. If you want high quality you have to put the work in to get that quality. Throwing money around in the interest of quality has never really worked. Its the equivalent of buying a $500 Monster branded HDMI cable and saying it has to be better then the $20 HDMI cable because you paid $500 for it."
terrible logic, meet terrible metaphor.
terrible logic, meet terrible metaphor
And it was love at first sight, and they decided to get married and have some photos taken to memorialize their special day…
@Crow K: … but his buddy did it for $50 and the single slot SD card in the camera got corrupted, so ended up with nothing …
It's pricey - seems like the price goes up whenever a wedding's involved or any emotional event for that matter.
Each photographer/videographer has their own style - you'll pay more for fancier/well known ones as they'll trade off their existing portfolio to justify their price. Or you could go for a lesser known one and/or one that's trying to start up their own business and play the risk.
We had our wedding back in 2017 and hired a photographer from Malaysia - 12 hours (we had our tea ceremony on the same day), all included RAW files, few hundred processed ones and a second and third photographer along with them for the day, including travel - cost us about $3500. They wanted to be charged in RM however, during that time the RM/AUD dropped so we scored a great deal. Videographer, we risked it on a smaller business - a guy that wanted to branch off from a bigger business and he charged $2500 for 12 hours of footage, included same day edits, blu ray copies of all the important stuff and an SSD full of their raw files/processed ones.
Naturally, we made sure they were fed during the day and during the wedding.
On another note, treat your wedding as a business purchase eg negotiate better prices, play each business against another ..etc. eg we held our wedding on a Sunday and scored discounts off that, wife also negotiated a cheaper price per head after she name dropped a competitor (pph went from $165 to $120 for 150 guests, because they usually don't have bookings for Sunday nights) and guaranteed minimum guest numbers. A wedding's an emotional event, but don't let that drain your wallet.
Aside from what has already been pointed out:
This is usually a team of 1-2 photographers who have to be as on point as possible to capture the right shot which involves a lot of running around. They may take a thousand shots but only a small handful become art, art that you will use and can frame for the rest of your life. Your friends spamming photos on their phone may capture some cool bts shots but none of them will be frame worthy.
Are they going to add to the experience of you getting married? These are wedding day experts that will draw your attention to things or timings you wouldn't have though of. Find a photographer you vibe with and at the end of the day you'll probably feel like you didn't pay them enough.
This, vibe check very important!
Our guy almost disappeared into the crowd, super friendly and generally nice guy. it made the who experience great.
I'll take less shots with a better vibe over a fully documented wedding that impacted negatively on people's experience during the event.
Photography is like website building in the 90s: if the person paying doesn't know the difference between what is good and what is average, then people get away with charging whatever.
OP go digging for a young up and comer where you like their style. They'll likely do the job for a few grand
I paid $8k~ for 2 photographers and 2 videographers.
If you consider majority are contracted, studio takes a cut, each member in the team takes a cut… and they literally all spent the whole day with us, price was super reasonable.
If you don't want to pay that much, go to Airtasker, find somebody who will do the work for $1000, no editing, and give you the raw files. I'm sure that you can find somebody for the price that you want.
If you want a professional, with experience, proper gear, proper skills and the ability to produce photographs that you know you will be happy with, go with the professional.
Realistically, a business owner needs to charge a minimum of $50-60 per hour just for their time. Especially on the weekend, otherwise they would just get a casual retail job where their wage and super is paid for them.
Now add on all their other expenses (vehicle, camera, marketing, accountant, insurance, all the other things people have mentioned) and you'll find that professional services cost a lot more than you think.
To be honest, as you're already jaded about the price, I doubt you'll be happy with the end results as you will think it's "not worth the cost".
Yeah kind of a gamble to go lower. Can't redo the wedding. Some people just starting out (not that it's bad) may be cheaper. Friend who is a pro used to do $4k wedding packages as a discounted rate. This was back in 2010 though. Cameras spiked in prices since then. He talked about using $2k lenses and needing a second camera person or two for video. In a good day of studio photography, he would sell $4k-$5k+ worth of photos and prints back then (good salesperson). If someone bought his best package, it's $7-10k. So he could get a similar or more pay off with much less work.
That's a good thing to keep in mind - you can't redo the wedding!
I was talking to a wedding photographer many years ago who spent about 120 hours editing after each wedding. Would create incredible photo albums books to remember the day. There's a lot more time that goes into post-production than people realise.
Also, beautifully crafted wedding films are an amazing memory, too. Especially ones that integrate snippets of special audio from the day, rather than a generic music soundtrack over footage.
$5k or so for a professional photographer for the day is about right… depending on their 'name' it may be more or less.
People think the job is just snap a few photos and send a perfect album to the couple a week later.
Think about it - it's several hours/a whole day of work, with expensive equipment (and usually multiple cameras, lenses etc for capturing all types of shots AND having a backup), insurance for all the gear and any other things that might happen on the day (personal injury etc), then the post processing… which can be several hours a day for many days (sometimes weeks)… often there is an assistant/2nd photographer as well just to make things easier and not miss anything on the day.
Similar for videographers… the amount of work on the day is huge, but even more is done AFTER the event that a lot of people don't know about/assume is just magic.
Definitely shop around though and have a look at their portfolio. Just because someone is expensive/popular doesn't mean their style matches yours.
No, I am not a wedding photographer or videographer. I am very glad I had a professional photographer for my wedding… I have been to weddings where they just get a family member or friend that has a SLR camera and thinks they can do the job…. spoiler alert - they can't. It's a totally different ballgame comparing photography as a hobby vs professional job…
EDIT: just reading the comment about RAW photos and the previous comment/analogy about a chef giving up a recipe… that is actually quite accurate. If they give up the RAW files it is still their time/effort that took those photos and their 'IP' in terms of composition, planning etc.
and do you really want to trawl through several thousand images to filter out and edit them ?
Take a adobe photoshop course for $50
put an ad out say your only willing to pay 1000-2000 you will get people willing to do it for that
It seemed so much simpler back in the day when the photographer handed over the 35mm film.
No hours of post processing and the photos looked just fine to me.
It seemed so much simpler back in the day when the photographer handed over the 35mm film.
And yet often they didn't. Sometimes you could pay extra to get them, sometimes you got them for free, other times you didn't get them at all. There was still "post-processing", it just looked a bit different from today's.
When I got married, I got my work colleague to do the photography, he did it part time. I looked at the other work he had done and was amazing, very professional.
My photos were okay, just the subject(s) in the photo were not as attractive. :) With the photos, he gave me the edited pictures only at first, he did not want to give me raw pictures at first because it said it made him feel naked. He did in the end give me the unedited photos after hassling him, of those it was only a few I liked that he did not already edit and give me. He had an assistant with him, with the reflector thingy. He only did the wedding ceremony and a photoshoot after. How many times have we looked at the photos since then, never.
Went through this process recently and had few friends that have burned a lot of money on a studio that was crap. Anyone with a camera can call themselves a wedding photographer and charge an arm and leg then deliver you crap photos.
Sounds like you’re getting sucked around. We paid $800. Probably could go as high as $1,000 now. $8,500 is taking a load.
You ready to be blown away by tabletop math? I used to be a professional photographer (I'm not talking IT turned photographer, I'm talking actual industry, campaign photography). I have friends who've worked in the top wedding studios so I also understand what expenses might be related.
Expenses
Gear upkeep and maintenance $10k a year
Insurance $5k a year
2nd photographer per shoot, $60p/h for 5 hours = $300 per shoot. 38 weeks (i.e. 80% booking rate) = $11,520 p/a
Videographer, $80p/h for 10 hours (5 hours shoot, 5 hours edit) = $30,400 p/a
Electricity usage = Factoring in 100% home usage, $1,500 p/a
Internet usage (considering increased upload speed plans) = $90p/m = $1080 p/a
Fuel (considering base to venue, client meetings, location scouting) = $150 p/w = $7,800
Prints (albums + photobook) = $500 wholesale, 150 weddings a year = $75,000
Editing (3rd party retoucher), $1 per photo. 300 photos = $300. 150 weddings x $300 = $45,000
Software subscriptions = $1500 p/a (Capture One, Photoshop, 365, cloud storage etc)
Booking assistant/admin = $85,000 p/a (incl tax+super)
Rationale
- Editing costs are very trivial and when you are booked out, i.e. no time to waste, you outsource it.
- Printing deals are struck with Chinese suppliers, they give you very good rates.
- Fuel, internet, electricity etc, trivial costs.
- Didn't factor in office because you don't need it and frankly, it's not necessary unless you market a brand. Let's put aside $250,000 p/a for a warehouse space in Glebe, Sydney, for it anyway along with furniture.
- 2nd photographer and videographers are severely underpaid and pay doesn't scale well with the economy. It's been like that for over 20 years. I'm already being very liberal with pricing.
- Gear is most likely buying a new lens if one breaks. Frequency is not often. Gear will need regular maintenance. We assume one lens purchase a year and one camera purchase every 2 years, 2 memory card purchases a year, 2 hard drive purchases a year.
- Operating at 80% booking rate means you don't always get a filled weekend, or dead days throughout the year.
Income
4 weddings a weekend (1 morning, 1 evening)
$8k per event = $32k a week. 48 weeks = $1,536,000 p/a.
Operating at 80% booking rate = $1,228,800 p/a
Time
Gear repair = during downtime/weekdays
Gear purchase = during weekdays
Editing time = during weekday, you don't do anything. You focus on client meetings and negotiations.
Shooting time = during weekends
Client meetings = during weekdays
Client negotiations = during weekdays
Marketing (very trivial if you get booked via word of mouth)
Total at 80% booking rate, GST not included (i.e. added on top of $8,000 quote so forget about it)
$1,228,800 (income) - $523,800 expenses = ~$700,000 profit p/a
or: $4,600 profit from the $8,000 quote.
Hourly breakdown compared to a FTE = ~$380p/h.
For context, you hire a freelance photographer for any other job and (while it'll vary), the average will be $100 p/h. You can go upwards of $200p/h but even then, at nearly $400p/h, you know you are paying whatever the wedding photographer feels comfortable. To put into perspective, a single freelance photographer would have a liberal leaning daily rate estimate of ~$1500 tops without expenses considered.
And here's the catch. Most wedding photographers you see don't have actual creative style. Those that 'do' don't hold a candle to the true creative arts scene.
Wedding photographers can hate on me all they want, they know they are milking the public. Sure there may be expenses I might've left out, but understand that expenses are very, VERY miniscule in the grand scheme of things.
4 weddings a weekend for 40 weeks of the year, not saying its impossible but most wedding businesses I knew would be lucky to book 30 per year. Anybody doing a Sunday morning wedding is obviously doing it on the cheap and unlikely to be spending top $ on a photographer.
But I agree its quite the rip off at those prices.
To the OP if there is a full time 2 year photoimaging TAFE course in your area try and make contact with the coordinator and ask if there are any students they could recommend. I ran one of these programs for many years and there were always a few stand out students shooting work well above the average photographer in that area.
For context most of my career was as a photographer, commercial, fashion, media, advertising, magazine with very occasional weddings for friends and we were charging $1k per day back in the 90s but had big gear investments of full studios, Hasselblads, large format cameras, darkrooms etc.
17 years ago we eloped near Halls gap a private ceremony, some photos, 5 star accomodation for a couple nights I'd have to check but i think it was about $3000. How often do you plan to look at the wedding photos? A friend of mine got half dozen random guests to take photos you will be surprised at how many completely natural, funny and memorable photos there will be.
You get what you pay for.
I remember some person on this website arguing that getting married did not require a new diamond ring and that a second-hand diamond ring of low quality of a few hundred dollars would suffice. Most people here agreed. I end my argument.
Fly someone from overseas in, costs $1500-2000 for ticket, accommodation, travel and meals. They charge about another $1000-2000. You will save heaps, plus they will make spectacular album for you with a lot of editing. That's what I would do.
Bringing in a professional photographer from Indonesia would be legit cheaper.
Spent $6,800 in 2022 for a team of 5, 2 x photographers and 2x cinematographers. Extra person was an assistant. The owner and lead photographer was one of the photographers. We had them for 11 hours, and were supplied with over 1000 edited photos, 1.5 hour video, 5 min highlights video, queensberry wedding album, and prewedding shoot. I chose a certain style of photography that suited my tastes. Understand the pricing was a discount considering it was during Covid.
We were very happy with their advice, direction and results.
Your wedding day is one of the most emotional milestones of your life. Best you spend what you think is appropriate so all is captured and never forgotten.
Speak to a quality photographer and they will clarify the questions you have.
and after looking at '1000 edited photos, 1.5 hour video, 5 min highlights video, queensberry wedding album, and prewedding shoot' once, I'll guess you put them somewhere and will not look at them again for donkeys - certainly your friends and family won't, unless you invite them over and bore them again by pulling them out
But hey - we spend money we don't have, to buy stuff we don't need, to impress people we don't like - so way to go there !
A handful of the photos are on canvases in our house and maybe 500 are in rotation on digital photo frames.
It makes us happy, makes my wife happy, just like all the other costs involved in a wedding and a lead up to a wedding.
Look I get it. Not everyone is into spending on weddings. But that isn’t what the OP is asking for. How about you assist with the OP’s request?
Nice try though. Hahahahah
If you are in Sydney, dm me. I have a friend that does this cheaper
hire a few guys from airtasker to take photos, have them dressed in suits, collect all photos, deal with it later and have someone else from upwork go through all the photos and improve them for you so you can make a printable book at harvey norman print online
you need one guy specifically to tell you both how to pose and where to go, this is important, this can be a photographer, or someone dedicated to this specific task
get a friend with DSLR and get them biggest SD card you can find, and let them run around like wild rabbit
quantity over quality sometimes
you will need to sift through thousands of photos later on .. but you might even enjoy that who knows !
damn bro you are getting shafted 11k lol one of the many reasons im against marriage, girls just want the fairy tale wedding and they dont care how much they spent to live a childhood dream
You're not paying for a monkey and a camera (if you are then please don't). You're paying for years (maybe decades) of skill and expertise. Same analogy with tradie who comes out for a 10 minute job and charges you $600. They're fast because they know what they're doing and they can charge for it.
That being said, I'm always iffy on videography for events. Like how often do you think you'll be watching that thing? Pictures, sure. But like when was the last time you watched your engagement video (if one was taken), or birthday video, etc. 10k for a video I might watch another 2-3 times in my life is a bit much for me.
Look I would save the money and spend it on something else, just let guests take photos and share them with you later.
I can count on one hand the number of times I have looked at my wedding photos. The other day a friend showed me the wedding video for a wedding where he was best man or something, sure cool, whatever, but how many time are the bride+groom going to watch that? Once? Twice? Whack it on Insta as a story? Another wedding I went to had a video playing at the reception, really cool wedding video, well done, I bet it was expensive. Anyway chatting to one of the guys in the bridal party and I commented that it was amazing that they edited that video so quickly… no no, it was all done during various filming sessions during the week, so all completely fake and staged.
I dunno, weddings are already so expensive but IMO that is $11k that could go to a great honeymoon, or maybe go towards a house or maybe just spent on the wedding if you choose.
I offer RAW images at double the price of JPG's… haven't had a single taker since I went digital in 2002 :P
The only time I've given up raw files, is when I was helping out a fellow pro photographer as a contractor, and he has his own style of editing, and my name is not on the photos..
I'm one of the more experienced wedding photographers in the country and I'd just like to say this entire thread has been very amusing over a coffee.
Carry on. cheers guys
Sitting on Ozbargain while the batch editing runs and the money rolls in.
But seriously, your photography looks nice. OP should just hire Gavin here and be done with it.
Thanks mate. I wish I could batch edit! I often sync the settings/adjustments in a series of photos (say, 4-12) but not hundreds (unfortunately!)
In the wedding industry its actually just taking advantage of people's emotions.