Photographer Debate

[jet_kit]

Well done Gary,
As usual incisive and to the point.
I was a professional photographer (in as much as I derived my income from it) for 11 years, then decided to change my career to something that paid proper money.
I still consider myself a photographer, just no longer a professional.

[GeoffWessex]

Chris..... nicely worded post, but you say
"Much of the disappointment from under-performing photographers could have been avoided if the customer had carefully vetted the quality of the work provided"...... well..... exactly! And how does a young couple, looking for quality wedding shots, assess the quality of a photographer.... before the event? Surely it's got to be from recommendations or by trusting you'll find one from the ranks of a professional body..... like the SWPP.

I may really like the work of a photographer (whether amateur or pro) when it concerns any other form of photography - and when I can make a judgment from the evidence before me. But when I don't have that evidence, the job's important and I've got no other way of knowing, I would have to trust a professional body.... one whose members can be relied on to do the work well. The same applies if I need a new gas boiler, a carpet fitter, gardener, plumber or any other specialist. I require some evidence - backed up by a professional body I can turn to if things go wrong!

[ABERS]

Originally Posted by GeoffWessex

Chris..... nicely worded post, but you say
Surely it's got to be from recommendations or by trusting you'll find one from the ranks of a professional body..... like the SWPP.

Have you looked at the SWPP site? Pay your £90 and you can be listed as a Professional Wedding Photographer.

http://www.swpp.co.uk/

Nowhere can I find that you have to submit any work to be accepted. as a member.
"The membership is open to full-time professional, semi-professional and the serious enthusiast" it says in the blurb about who can join.

Reading the small print it would appear you will only be chucked out if you don't pay your annual dues!

[Cathus]

Geoff,

I echo what Abers says. There is no value in an organisation where the only criteria of acceptance is that you have paid the requisite fee, which I believe is how SWPP runs.

I would put the owness on finding out about a photographer's abilities on the customer. It can't be too diffuclt to ask to see previous work and if it is, find someone else, there are plenty out there.
I've done a few weddings and been asked to do a few more. The first thing I say is have you seen any of my work and what do you think. The feel I get is that people are more concerned with a cheap price rather than finding out what the quality of the work is like.

I joined the National Association of Photoshop Professionals, not because I wanted to tell people I was a member but because I wanted access to their video tutorial bank. If someone wanted quality Photoshop work they could have found me in the membership list and used me despite me knowing absolutely nothing about Photoshop.

Who has the say on what criteria someone must meet before they are allowed do do a wedding or any other kind of paid photography?

[GeoffWessex]

Yes, I mentioned earlier that I was a bit dubious about the SWPP - which didn't list at least one of two very good wedding photographers I know in Dorset, yet it listed somebody who does the occasional bit of product photography. So forget my mention of the SWPP!

If I were hiring a photographer for a wedding I'm sure that seeing a few samples of their work, or at least getting a recommendation from a satisfied customer would swing it for me rather than finding the name in a list. But when that can't be done, I'd go for membership of a professional body. The trouble was, when testing the theory I started from scratch (as a client might do) and used Google to look for some kind of trade body..... and the SWPP came up. Kind of shot my argument to pieces, really!

I tried again, though, and came up with a "UK Wedding Photographers" site..... and all its members seem to have quality websites - along with samples and testimonials. On the other hand, there don't seem to be many photographers registered. It does seem quite easy for photographers to submit their details, but without going through the whole registration process I can't tell if there's any scrutiny involved.... or whether there's some kind of quality standard required.

Maybe there really is a good professional body for wedding photographers in UK - maybe not.

As you say, some people just want to pay a photographer perhaps 100 quid (or less) for the day, and prints..... when a quality photographer could cost maybe 3000 or more.

[jet_kit]

Time was when membership of the Royal Photographic Society was your key to success, and fellowship of this august body opened the door to the big time because they only accepted members on sight of a comprehensive high-quality portfolio (I failed to impress in 1969 BTW).
Now you only have to pay an annual subscription to be a member.

[GeoffWessex]

True, but being a member of the RPS doesn't mean anything - never did. The RPS is not a professional body and the 'distinctions' of the RPS are Licentiateship, Associateship and Fellowship...... LRPS, ARPS and FRPS. Anybody advertising themselves simply as "Members" of the RPS are actually saying nothing - might as well say they are 'members' of Facebook...... although you can see how somebody with no knowledge of it - e.g. the 'punter' looking for a pro photographer - might be fooled.

LRPS proves competency in photography - but not much else. ARPS would be a better standard and something which professionals (if they so desire) would/should be able to achieve. FRPS is granted to people who really are top of the tree - or maybe contributed to developments in photography in general over time. None of the distinctions, though, are of any relevance when it comes to looking for a good photographer, whatever the genre.

[wave01]

heres my take I have taken pictures all my life and i understand what the OP is saying as i see in other forums the posts from people who want to take people weddings. there is nothing wrong in this, but its clear from the post that these people have no idea what it takes to actually do a wedding and here they want to go out and take the pictures of someones special day.
It does take a lot of skill to do a wedding as photography is part art, science and creativity. if you look at the horror stories in the earlier posts its clear that the person behind the camera has no idea how to compose or compensate for the light conditions, basic photography skills. I did a course in photography when i was young that taught me the some skills i was lucky to be go for for a professional and then he let me do second shooting, while all this was building up my own knowledge and experience. After all this he let me do my own wedding but I was ready i had done my apprenticeship.
If people want to do this kind of work then i would say they should look for a job as a second shooter and get some experience before going out on there own, they will get something out of it and the brides day wont be ruined.

[rkraw3]

Funny reading some of this debate,s topics or whatever, when one starts on about pro photography,one of the first thing that pops up is he cant be a pro he has a beginers camera lol ,Now wiith the digital age and everythng comes with built in camera, and adds saying get the latest and greatest and you will be a better photographer.. its not the tools as much as who is using them.. And this day and age anyone can have pro gear..then comes weddings , not all pro,s shoot weddings, What about the pro,s that put their lives at risk getting the latest pics and news from war torn country,s, or the paps that follow or stalk the stars , the wildlife and lanscape photographer,
So what makes a pro photographer, and how do you know ??

[wotcars]

My veiws on the difference between amature and professional.
professional some one who make a full time living out of it what ever it is (this doesn't make them good just that they can market their work) they do.
Amateur some one who does this who doesn't make a full time living or anymoney at all from it
As in all walks you have pros that well just shouldn't be in that profession. And then there's amateurs who produce work just as if not better as a.pro
I've done a couple of weddings for a few people I know as a favour ,but they know I'm not a pro and when they ask how much I charge I just tell them just a donation for my time and the prints albums etc are what ever they cost me. Luckily they've all been happy with my work and even been asked to do some other shots for them. They were the scariest thing I've ever had to do and wouldn't want to do it full time just so many things that could go so easliy wrong. I think the biggest problem for people looking for a wedding photographer is the cost IV seen every price from 500 pound just for the photographer and pics on a CD up to and beyond 5 k for the works. On average around 2 k which on top of proberly the most expensive day that person will ever have its a lot of money to fork out on.