Which photographer should we choose…?
Two photographers who do we choose?
ONE: I spent hours looking over his work, talking and bargaining. I really like what he does, it is subtle and whimsical and he is interested in trying different artistic shots for the wedding, suggested locations for good shots that will emphasise the colour theme. He is easy going and makes me smile real smiles (rather than fake polite smiles). Has no contract and I will have to ask to have one written up with all details from our bargaining.
$1700 (US$1100) for 7 hours coverage, bride getting ready, groom getting ready, photo shoot a 3 locations, ceremony, family photos, another photo shoot, 2 hours of reception with studio for couples photos then trash the dress session after wedding.
Includes 1000+ high res digital negatives all colour corrected with the best touched up (ie special effects, vignetting, black and white, sepia etc) and DVD put to music.
TWO: Fiancees ex-photography teacher, looked at his work and it is nice, but could not show me one whole wedding and isn’t as nice as other photographers, seems more point and shoot with some effects. Loves to talk and is pretty easy going, but to me it was a little strained (he talked fishing). Cheaper than the other photographer. My fiance want to go with him because he knows him and he has shot many of his friends/school mates weddings. Has a contract written up all we do is sign.
$1500 (US$975) for coverage of bride getting ready, location shot, ceremony, family photos, location shot, reception till bridal waltz.
Includes 400 high res digital negatives with the best touched up (ie special effects, vignetting, black and white, sepia etc
Which one would you choose and why?
Obviously I would get photographer 1 to write up a contract with all the details before giving him any money.
Image taken on by .
Mail this post
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
13 comments
Forlorn Hope-only 5 suspensions on March 10, 2010 at 3:06 pm
do with the professional.. then if things go wrong, you can sue…
Jordan D on March 10, 2010 at 3:27 pm
I’d go with #1. He’s only $200 more expensive and you seem to be getting a lot more for your money. He’ll cover more of your wedding (2 hours reception vs just through first dance), and you like his style better. Don’t skimp on photography; in 20 years you may not remember what you had for dinner, the flowers you carried, or who designed your dress, but you’ll still have the pictures.
chinarican522 on March 10, 2010 at 4:16 pm
I would def choose A. It seems like your are getting more out of the first photographer. It also depends on who you are more comfortable with and that also seems to be A. Congrats on your wedding and good luck finding a photographer
Blunt on March 10, 2010 at 4:25 pm
Neither.
The photographer #1 doesn’t even have a contract. What if he doesn’t show up? What if you pay a deposit and then dissapears? What would happen if he never gives you your pictures?? You would have no legal ground then. This person sounds amateaur and not seriuous and simply trying to get your bussiness by all means possible. Hunger and phptography are two things that are suspictious.
#2 sounds like a sensible options since yoru HTB knows him, but you do not like him.
YOu really have to love the phptographer that you chose, otherwise you will have regrets.
If I was you, I would find a reputable, serious photographer from a studio that has contracts, bussiness cards and a studio. Portafolio and REFERENCES are a must.
Good luck
Sublimity on March 10, 2010 at 4:46 pm
One.
The thought of poorly done wedding photos scares me. It will scare you too.
Its worth the cost.
www.LensPainter.com on March 10, 2010 at 5:00 pm
I would suggest going with Photographer A because you like his style better and he puts you at ease. Be careful since he does not have a contract though, that is a sure sign of an amateur. (By amateur, I mean someone who does not earn their living with photography, not necessarily a beginner).
Good luck!
Steph on March 10, 2010 at 5:52 pm
I’d go with the professional because he’s had a lot more experience with weddings and it’s your big day, your going to want to know the pictures are fabulous! Talk it over with your fiance and hopefully you’ll come to a conclusion together, so that your both satisfied. The professional photographer may be more expensive, but his package sounds more extensive.
♥ on March 10, 2010 at 6:23 pm
I would choose number one. It sounds like a great deal and you seem comfortable with him.
ncbaby03 on March 10, 2010 at 6:33 pm
I would definitely go with number one. It’s only 200 dollars extra and you get 600+ extra pictures, and more photography time. Your fiance probably feels like he “owes” the guy something. Since he is a friend. However, photos are the only thing your really left with after your wedding is over. Congrats and good luck!
Nate's mom on March 10, 2010 at 7:01 pm
Go with the professional. You seem to be more comfortable with what he has to offer and you know he’s willing to negotiate. Yes, it’s a little bit more expensive. But it’s not ridiculously more and you’re getting more for your money by going with the professional.
Mrs Noel ♥6/19/2010♥ on March 10, 2010 at 7:12 pm
I’d go with #1. There’s not THAT much of a price difference, after all. Besides, for another $200 you get over twice the proofs?? Not a tough call for me….
The only thing that would lean me towards #2 is the fact that he goes till the end of the reception. I’d talk to #1 and see if there’s some way you can get more reception time. 2 hours is not alot of time to get the intro, dinner, cake cutting, dances, garter/bouquet toss, toasts, etc. done. It it were me personally, I’d see about having the photo shoot at 2 locations instead of 3 and adding an extra hour of reception coverage.
*ADD* The bridal waltz is at the end of the night right?? That’s not just the first dance…?? If it’s the first dance, then I say definitely go w/ #1. (ALthough I’d still try to squeeze another hour out of him for the reception….)
junkman on March 10, 2010 at 8:09 pm
OK, one thing I noticed, there are NO photographs or albums mentioned. This can cost a considerable amount. The # of “images” does not really need to sway you. Why ? I can give you 300 carefully posed & taken, special effects, etc. or 1500 images of everything from shoes, forks, boxes, feet, glasses, to grandmother’s teeth, photoshop’ed to death. Look at their work, not seeing a whole wedding is fine. Too much effects are not a good thing, 20 years from now, you want to remember what your grandparents looked like, not some wierd colored special effect shot of your fingernails.
No contract ? what if he is sick, or feels “bad”, got to take dog to vet, or “accidentially” booked 2 weddings on the same day ? your contract may not be worth anything,
mrrmaid on March 10, 2010 at 8:56 pm
TWO sounds like a bad scene. There are not that many wedding photographers who are really talented, which leaves a lot of others who can sort of get the job done, but not well. Two sounds like he may be in that category.
ONE is iffy however because of a lack of professionalism so far on the business front. Maybe he’s just really easy going. But before you entrust your day to him be sure to get references. Also, see if he works with any major wedding planners in the area. The big ones won’t put up with flaky vendors.