Is the second shooter worth the extra $$? (aka 1 versus 2 photographer wedding packages)

Tags

, , , , , , ,

As a busy wedding photography studio, we received many inquiries per week, with brides typically asking a range of questions from ‘is my date available?’, to photographic style,  to questions about our packages and promotions.  But this particular inquiry made me pause for a moment

Hi there, I am wondering if you are available September 7 2013 to shoot a wedding? Do you typically use two photographers to shoot a wedding? Thanks very much

I was struck by the fact  that the only info the bride required from me was 1) is the date available, and 2) if there would be 2 photographers.

This second photographer trend has really only been around these last 5 years or so.  Which makes me wonder, why has the second shooter scenario recently become such a priority to brides?

Our pov on all things wedding is that the bride is always right.  Her day, her way.  Period.

But the second shooter debate is one area I wonder about.  Why has this 2 photographer phenomenon suddenly become  industry standard?

Now I understand the benefit of 2 angles captured.  Of peace of mind that 2 cameras are recording the event.  Even 2 different point of views, and  2 shooting styles.    Extra hands to hold & carry.

But what about the expense of 2 talented pro photographers?  Because if you think of it – if one fabulous, talented photographer that is worthy to record your wedding day costs on average $2000-$4000, then logically, 2 such worthy photogs working together, should run in the 4-8 k region.  Right?

So then how are some photographers able to offer 2 photographer –  packages  for $2500, $1500, and sometimes even less?  What is being diluted in the rest of the photo package to squeeze 2 ‘pro’ photogs a living?  Well talent for sure.  Equipment definitely.  Experience – absolutely.  Really –  if you thought these ‘pro’ photogs could earn $2000 per wedding each on their own, don’t you think they would do it, rather than splitting the profit with another photographer?

So what is better – 2 $1000 (x 2 =$2000) photogs, or one $2000 pro photographer?

At the end of the day, your wedding photos will only be as good as your photographer’s ability.  Having more photographers won’t make the images any better, tho it probably guarantees more of them.  What matters most to you?  Thousands of mediocre images, or hundreds of amazing ones?

I am pretty sure you see where I am going with this… so if you want a recommendation from a photographer who has seen it all, here it is.   Dedicate your photo budget towards getting the biggest, most fantastic  talent.  One super awesome photographer beats 2 mediocre ones.  Hands down.  Every time.

Here at Anne Edgar Photography – I am proud of the affordable & talented expertise we bring to our clients.  My staff & I are more than capable of single handedly capturing the largest high end events, in a manner that surpasses our clients high expectations.  And we can prove it in the dozens of sample wedding albums photographed in just that manner.   But in the interests of supplying clients with the wedding experience they are demanding, and because the client is always right, we also offer 2, 3, and 4 photographer options.  Our emphasis is always on ensuring that the primary photographer is of the upmost ability.  Second shooters are simplicity  the icing on the cake.  Visit our website for more information any time.  Happy wedding planning!

 

Anne Edgar Photography is a renown wedding and event photography specialist, located in Cambridge, Ontario, servicing Kitchener, Waterloo, Stratford, Listowel, Guelph, Brantford, Hamilton Toronto and beyond.

2011 was a great, busy year of photography…

So our 2011 wedding collection contains exactly 49,618 images.  Wow!  Those are all the images that we considered worthy of sharing with our beautiful brides and grooms.  The actual number of photos taken last season actually figures closer to 53,000, and man is that is a lot of clicks!  Not to mention the number of hours spent in front of the computer, editing said 49,618 images…

SO what do we do with all these photos, now that the brides have all their albums?  Well we make an album of our own, of course, and call it ‘the best of 2011’.   You can find it here on our website under the portfolios tab.  The goal was to come up with a ‘top 100’ gallery of  photos.  That is a lot of photos for the casual viewer to sit thru, but hey – we are choosing from nearly 50 000 worthy photos, so 100 seemed like a good target goal.

So ok, we truly tried.  We cut photos, then cut again.  I think we went thru the list at least 15 times.  I knew we were in trouble when we had it down to the top 500, with only beloved photos left.

So the bad news is that we never made it to 100.  But the good news is that we had sooo many worthy photos.  Two hundred & ninety-nine to be exact, with hundreds more that could have easily made the grade.  Look at them all or look at a few.  Share with us what you think.

Thank you to every bride who trusted us to capture their wedding day.  Thank you to every bride for having such beautiful weddings!

And thanks to my assistant Jenelle, for sitting thru hours and hours of image selecting & editing to build this monster gallery.

here are a few favourites to get you started…beautiful wedding photography in Kitchener, Waterloo, and Cambridge, and all over South Western Ontario, courtesy of Anne Edgar Photography.  Beautiful brides courtesy of themselves.

a cute article I found along the way…The Secret Life of Wedding Photographers

Tags

from http://www.ispwp.com/the-secret-life-of-wedding-photographers.html

What do Wedding Photographers Really Do?

It comes up a lot. Usually when I’m standing in the buffet line for dinner, or when there’s a slow time during the day when I’m not taking pictures.

“So you’re the photographer?”

“Yessir, I am, and I absolutely love it.”

“Well I don’t doubt it. You’re doing a great job out there. It must be great to work only one day a week!”

I hear similar stories from other wedding photographers. There seems to be a lot of misconceptions regarding what wedding photographers actually do all week. It’s perfectly understandable, after all, the only time most people see us working is at the wedding. So I thought it would be interesting to survey wedding photographers and discover what they really do besides take pictures every weekend. Hopefully it will help clear up some misconceptions and give some insight into what goes on behind the scenes after we leave the reception.

About 50 wedding photographers responded so it’s a fairly good sample size, and I’d be surprised if a larger response would yield a much different result.

The Perception

How some people think wedding photographers spend their time (and how some photographers WISHED they could spend their time):

 

The Reality

How wedding photographers REALLY spend their time:

We clearly spend more time in front of our computers than behind our cameras, which is a sign of these digital times.

Photographers, does that sound about right? If you think we’re way off or if we missed anything, let us know…

* a note from Anne – this is bang on… come on people – people did you really think we only work on Saturday?  Saturday is the easy day:)  It is the rest of the week that is killer…  SO now I better get back to it…7:10pm on a Wednesday, nearly time to call it a day.  See you in the morning!

 

 

 

preserving your photos BEFORE they become prints!

Tags

, , , , ,

Ok, so you are married, the honeymoon is behind you, gifts are opened, and now you find yourself up to your newly married smile in photos.  Or more accurately, digital images, stored on a dvd, a flash drive, a memory card, etc.  From your professional photographer, from your bridesmaids, from your dad, your Aunt Betty, cousin Tony…  Potentially thousands of images.  And you stop to think – “huh, I am not a photographer, what am I supposed to do with these things?”

Well a little bit of information at the beginning can save you some heartbreak down the road.  Most of the time, (like nearly ALWAYS!) these photos – that you cherish – are saved as a specific file type, one you may be familiar with – called a jpg.  That’s a good thing… it is convenient, familiar, easy to share and easy to use.  But did you know that there is also a dark side to jpgs, with  the potential for you to be damaging these images, just by saving your photos again as a jpg?  Huh!

Jpg (if you really want to know) stands for the Joint Photographic Experts Group.  Blah blah blah.  But what you may want to think on for a moment – is the fact that when you save your photo as a jpg – you are compressing the information in your image.  Why?  To make those files smaller, easier to use, & easier to store.

Now compression alone is not the issue.  But jpgs use a type of compression called ‘lossy’ compression. Lossy compression reduces a file by permanently eliminating certain information.  When the file is uncompressed (aka opened), only a part of the original information is still there.

SO what does this mean to you?  Well lets imagine this…

  • you get amazing photos on a dvd  from your professional photographer
  • you copy them all to your hard drive, and get to work – getting creative with them, by cropping some, playing with black & whites etc.  Any images you made changes to you save, naturally.

Problem # 1 – when you make changes to a jpg and save it, you are throwing out some of the detail of the image.  How much?  Well remember that slider where you choose a bigger / higher quality jpg vs a smaller lower quality jpg?  Well you are choosing how much info you are chucking.  But whether you choose big or small, you are without a doubt tossing away some amount of image detail.

  • next you email that cropped B&W photo to your mom, who opens it, changes something, renames it & saves it again.

Problem #2-  Mom has now re-compressed an already compressed file, so that now the image is significantly degraded from that amazing photo you first saw form your professional photographer.

  • your mom emails that same photo to your aunt… and so on…

You know where I am going with this!

So are jpgs evil?

No way.  They are fantastic when you know how they work, and how to avoid their pitfalls.

Then what to do?

Think about your intended use for the image.  Is it simply to use on face book?  Fine detail is not a crucial  issue.  Making a large wall print at your local lab?  Work from your original image file (meaning go back to your dvd), and consider saving it as another lossless file type, like a tiff.    Or change nothing and continue on, tossing image detail with careless abandon.  But do it with knowledge and a happy heart.

Now off you go, order prints & albums with your newly married smile, and look back on your detail filled wedding photos often!

Anne ❤

FYI…  from http://graphicssoft.about.com/od/formatsjpeg/a/jpegmythsfacts.htm

A quality setting of 100 does not degrade an image at all.

False. Saving an image to JPEG format, always introduces some loss in quality, though the loss at a quality setting of 100 is barely detectable by the average naked eye. In addition, using a quality setting of 100 compared to a quality setting of 90-95 or so will result in a considerably higher file size relative to the degree of image loss. If your software doesn’t provide a JPEG preview, try saving several copies of an image at 90, 95, and 100 quality and compare file size with image quality. Chances are, there will be no distinguishable difference between the 90 and 100 image, but the difference in size could be significant. Keep in mind, though, that subtle color shifting is one effect of JPEG compression–even at high quality settings–so JPEG should be avoided in situations where precise color matching is important.

If I compress a JPEG at 70%, then later reopen it and compress it at 90%, the final image will be restored to a quality setting of 90%.

False. The initial save at 70% introduces a permanent loss in quality that can’t be restored. Saving again at 90% quality only introduces additional degradation to an image that has already had considerable loss in quality. If you must decompress and recompress a JPEG image, using the exact same quality setting each time seems to introduce little or no degradation to the unedited areas of the image.

JPEGs lose quality every time they are opened, edited and saved.

True. If a JPEG image is opened, edited, and saved again it results in additional image degradation. It is very important to minimize the number of editing sessions between the initial and final version of a JPEG image. If you must perform editing functions in several sessions or in several different programs, you should use an image format that is not lossy (TIFF, BMP, PNG) for the intermediate editing sessions before saving the final version. Repeated saving within the same editing session won’t introduce additional damage. It is only when the image is closed, re-opened, edited and saved again.

JPEGs lose quality every time they are opened and/or saved.

False. Simply opening or displaying a JPEG image does not harm the image in any way. Saving a JPEG repeatedly during the same editing session (without ever closing the image) will not accumulate a loss in quality. Copying and renaming a JPEG will not introduce any loss, but some image editors do recompress JPEGs when the Save As command is used. To avoid more loss you should duplicate and rename JPEGs in a file manager rather than using “Save As JPEG” in an editing program.

published… Wedding Dreams magazine 2 page fashion feature!

An early fall fashion shoot in an exclusive location – (and by exclusive I mean TOP SECRET, cannot tell, James Bond could not break into this place) – for THE new magazine was tones of fun.  From the incredible tent venue (thanks to Julia Weddings) to the beautiful model – Ruth (from Gemini Models) to hair (Evolution Concepts) and make up (Erika Snyder), it was an all around dream team.  Can’t wait to do it again!