Are Digital Cameras Putting Wedding Photographers OUT ?

[adlerphotos]

OUT OF BUSNESS? The Wedding market is SOFT/NON Existent ? or is this my immagination? I would like to hear what other professionals have to say. thank You, Harold Adler http://www.pbase.com/adlerphotos What is The Problem?

[yippee2000]

I can't see why digicams in and of themselves would put traditional wedding photogs. out of business. It's my understanding that the quality of digicam images can be on par with manual cams. So perhaps it's that Digicam Wedding Photogs. are putting Manual Wedding Photogs. out of business, and not the digicams themselves. Naturally anyone using a digicam is going to charge less, because there are not film costs involved, and with the number of photoes normally taken at a wedding, this price difference could be substantial.

[oz]

Interesting topic. A lot of people think digicams will put pro's out of business yet, it is not the camera that makes a good photograph. If a person really wants good images they will hire a pro. Now along the same lines, can we say that the new technology is cutting into the business? Absolutely. Just one way is that people are using scanners to make duplicates of the pro's images and thus sales are lost, unless the pro has taken steps to make that difficult.

Now for another myth. Digital Photographer are not, or should not be cheaper than film Photographers. Now I must admit, when I switched from Film to Digital I thought this was true too. The greatest advantage here is for the amateurs who won't spend a bundle on film developing to learn their new cameras. I originally thought hey no more film developing cost, yep thats true, but on the other end there are the "digital" developing time that anyone in the business can tell you, is quite a bit. You have to resize, adjust, retouch the images to get the best quality. The images coming out of my camera are 2/3 ratio which equates to 8x12. How many people want 8x12's? I have to lop off 2 inches right off the bat and then if I resize that to 5x7 theres another 1/2 inches (appx) that has to be cut. Levels, brightness, contrast, etc all have to be tweaked too. I wish it was easier, but cheaper, labor wise it is not.

And thats Ozzie's two cents for today

[matiasasun]

Rally interesting topic. Just two or three comments:
1) Digital requieres new skills. In some ways it is a revolution in photography and all of us have to learn (profesional or not) the new features, new softwares, and printing techniques (at least). In my chilean experience the wedding photographers are really traditional and probably will stay out of a process that is making phography really massive. Chile has not developed a massive/popular market for digital photography; the average is a simple camera with good resolution, and the traditional stores -in Santiago, the capital- still remains absolutly focused in films. But soon it will be. And I´ll bet there will be problems with the cost of a professional photog. Add to that situation a new "young" guy/girl that wants to test his/her "new toy" (... don´t we all?).
2) At least in Chile the rate of marriages is decreasing. It is a really interesting process and the dimensions make me think the real business is located in the separation process (a proportion wich is heavily incresing year after year). The process of marriage itself is changing.
3) After all I don´t think Digital is going to exterminate wedding photog. And the reason is simply: PRO will never be beaten by Amateur when it comes to your wedding (those picture has to be perfect). There will be changes, some will survive and some will not.

(Sorry for bad english, as usual)

[gillettecraig]

No. It's making business tougher. The pro is going to have to deal with a lot tougher competition.

"Professional" as in essentially perfect results still come from really good equipment, but also the skill and ability to have the "right" equipment, the right processes, etc.

But really good equipment is not hard to come by, film or digital. And the amateur can in many ways come up with pretty good results. The pro is going to have a harder time explaining and selling the added value they bring to the table.

But that's not just the digital camera, there are cheap processing labs, cheap copies (even if a violation of copyright), etc.

[hugodrax]

What digital photography is doing is weeding out the weak players who are not really great photographers (which there are plenty) The great photographers have nothing to worry about since they have mastered the composition and the technical aspects and view things the way an artist would when composing an image and preparing the final product.

All those generic I will do your wedding cheap guys who shoot mediocre boring and typical shots will suffer as the industry weeds them out.

[hugodrax]

No. It's making business tougher. The pro is going to have to deal with a lot tougher competition.

.

Not the guys at the top of their game, they will have nothing to worry about since #1 they charge top dollar for top results and clients who appreciate top results will pay appropriately.

Its the bottomfeeders who will have the tough competition and will suffer.

But really good equipment is not hard to come by, film or digital. And the amateur can in many ways come up with pretty good results. The pro is going to have a harder time explaining and selling the added value they bring to the table.

That is the big misunderstanding that bottomfeeders/wellheeled amateurs with limited skills and big egos think. When you see a work of art by one of the top dogs in the industry there is no way you can compare them to what an inexperienced amateur does. Yes there are lots of bottomfeeder wedding photographers who take pictures that your amateur with some experience can meet but the guys with the pizzazz and skill will run circles around them. This is where the value is found.


Another note, I get asked by friends and family to take pictures at weddings as a favor, I turn them all down and tell them I want to enjoy the wedding as a guest not a volunteer photographer.

I always say, friends should not let friends become wedding photographers.

[gillettecraig]

Nobody seriously argues that under the conditions many venues present, professional caliber equipment (and experience and skill) can't make a difference. But the pros that don't recognize that there are a variety of changing dynamics in the market won't survive the paradigm changes.

It's not just the availability of better equipment (and it is better and it is cheaper and it does take less skill to get reasonable results). It's the fact that there are only a limited number of clients that are going to choose the really big bucks weddings. There are cultural dynamics in the way weddings are approached, fewer weddings, later in life, less extravagance, etc. And there are viable economic choices to make. Most people aren't bottom feeders and considering an economic competitor as a bottom feeder doesn't reduce the reality that they are in direct competition.

There is going to be a shakeout. When the choices presented are $50 "perfect" prints and $2 really, really good prints, or the choices between a $7500 wedding picture package and a fair start towards a downpayment on a home, or a $1000 package with a lot of digital data and few hard prints, or hit and miss with Uncle Harry, that's a tougher choice to make these days.

There will be enough people burned over poor results from rank amateurs that the professional ranks will regain some of the lost market, but they are going to have get lean and mean. Professionals will need to present a broader and more flexible array of product if they expect to compete. They may be able to survive the Uncle Harry's. But it's a lot less likely they will survive the Harry's and the good, budget competition.

[hugodrax]

The pay for the topdog photog weddings are not going away soon. People love to blow money on weddings and there are plenty of people with money to burn who want the best. That type of work will never decrease, look around you there is about 200+ million americans now with the high divorce rates (60-70 percent, meaning repeat customers) and 10-15 percent of the US population with money to burn you are good to go. bottom line the money is still flowing for high end weddingslike cheap wine, a nice goldmine of cash!

Trust me there are plenty of women spend 200-300 dollars to get a hair cut at the "so and so salon" and wear 400 dollars manolo's these women still lust for the top end superweddings photographed by s"so and so well known photog" so they can show the world.

So if you want to be a Wedding Photog, forget chasing for those 600 dollar Jim and Jane barbecue weddings in harlan county kentucky, what you need to do is be the best you can be in that industry and strive to be #1 all the time, make a name for yourself and keep only top end clients who can afford it (ie the manhattan yentas etc..) where you actually end up screening potential clients as the line up.

What fun is it working like a dog for pennies hoping cousin bob does not take away the last pennies of profit by scanning your shots, when you can work and get dined and wined by the top echelon of society.

Anyways the money is there you just need to make a name for yourself and be known.