Genuinely Surprised By This

[Benny Smyth]

For the last few months, I have been second shooting at some weddings with a view to launching my own photography business in the first or second quarter of next year. I've sat down and worked out my business plan and in the process, I've worked out that - on average - every DJ event that I am booked for comes to about 15 hours altogether (from the initial answering of the enquiry to the pack away of gear at the end of the night and everything in between). I decided that I would double that for photography work as, based on my little experience, 30 hours should be enough to cover the pre-wedding stuff, shooting all day and all the editing afterwards. Based on that logic, I saw fit to double my DJ fee - twice the work, twice the price, and all that.

After that, I decided to refer to Bridebook's annual survey to see what the average price of a Wedding Photographer was in the UK in 2018 - £1,264.00. This has genuinely surprised me, as I thought that it would be much higher than that! I wasn't expecting my starting out price to be at the low end of the market, but I certainly wasn't expecting it to be above average (albeit by £31.00).

I'm not going to lower what I'll be charging as I based it on a business plan and I feel that it correctly values me. I'm just genuinely surprised at the average price and I think it shows how many are making a 'business' decision and how many are making a 'who is charging what' decision. I always knew photography would be similar to the DJ world when it came to this stuff, but I am gobsmacked at (on average) how little photographers are charging.

[Imagine]

I am gobsmacked at (on average) how little photographers are charging.


Sadly, the world of the professional Togger is just as bad as ours as a DJ.
EVERYBODY is now a photographer....you go and buy a camera, point it and shoot....innit?

WE ALL KNOW that's not the case, the same as with DJs, and I think that somewhere along the line there needs to be some proper education of the public as to what things cost (I can't keep doing it on my own!).

I know several photographers round here who are getting close to the wall. They're full time and just can't make it pay anymore. It's a great shame because there's some exceptional talent amongst them. But whilst brides and grooms are seeing all day packages for as little as £500 (and even less)....you have to ask when it's all going to end.

Good luck with the photography though. It's something I've always fancied but never really had the time or opportunity to get into.

[Excalibur]

I had a little chat with Benny on the back of this ( but actually before I'd seen any figures ) and it turns out I wasn't surprised. Guessed the numbers to within a Gnat's whiskers. ( OK, 10%, but close enough for Jazz, eh) ?

Many trades are being squeezed, and I know one or two folk who are currently charging less than they once did for certain add ons than they did years ago, or they can't sell them at all. One of the pitfalls of modern technology is that it can make instant professionals of rank amateurs. Market is flooded, price plummets. :(

[DJ Jules]

I generally expect to see at least a couple of guests at every wedding who are now waving around at least a mid-level DSLR with a reasonable lens or two attached to it. I mean, even DJ's are at it!!
I'm even seeing a few DSLR's turning up at kids parties and school discos now. I did a double take last weekend when a parent turned up with a Sony A7III with a couple of £k of lens attached. Turns out one his friends gets a discount as he works for Sony!

Photographers these days have to have a damn good portfolio and, ideally, some kind of pedigree in photography (ex-press, etc) to be able to discern themselves from their competition.

Julian

[rth_discos]

Most photographers near me seem to go out around the £1,500 mark (these are good photographers at nice venues). Speaking to the photographer on Saturday, and there's a few going out for £4k a wedding!

However, a good friend of mine does £950 for a wedding - or £1200 if he brings a second shooter (his wife, who is also a pro photographer).

Doesn't seem much, but he does around 80 weddings a year. Add in some corporate work during the week, and you can do the maths.

He's nearly paid off his mortgage and regularly goes for lengthy holidays.

So it's not all bad...

[Benny Smyth]

If, as a professional photographer, you are competing with Uncle Brian with a DSLR (great or otherwise) then there are some grave issues in your business approach. Much in the same way that I'm not competing with DJ iPad.

75% of weddings last year (according to Bridebook) had a photographer present (up from 66% in 2017). Again, I'm surprised by those numbers but I'm willing to put a bet on which end of the market isn't having a photographer and if you're marketing yourself towards that 25%, then you deserve to miss out.

[Benny Smyth]

Most photographers near me seem to go out around the £1,500 mark.

Snap, which is probably a big contributing factor to my surprise at the average.

[Excalibur]

He's nearly paid off his mortgage and regularly goes for lengthy holidays.

So it's not all bad...

Indeed, but I think you'd agree that he's earning his money. Sounds to me like " Work hard, Play hard". :)

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

I generally expect to see at least a couple of guests at every wedding who are now waving around at least a mid-level DSLR with a reasonable lens or two attached to it. I mean, even DJ's are at it!!


Julian

:zip:

I actually take more £££s worth now out in gear for doing my little video montages than music gear :daft:

It's something I've kind of considered doing a sideways step with but I come from a band background and I just love performing. As much as I find photography / film making fun, I don't get the same buzz from playing music.

I did gain my PfCO for shooting with a drone earlier int he year, purely to cover my back from being grassed into the CAA for my DJ vids but when I realised how much energy and effort is going to go in to simply maintaining it - x amount of hours logged per month, a tonne of paper work and risk assessments, I'm looking into some other ways to exploit it as it's way too much effort just to catch 10-20 seconds of venue footage at the start of my DJ videos.

On a related note. I saw someone on one of the fb bride forums today asking for videographer recommendations because she'd just been cancelled on.

£750 she'd paid for 2 shooters from makeup to 3rd dance, drone, USB and a few other things!!! That's a stupid price before you even take into consideration that amount of hours spent editing.

[DJ Jules]

If, as a professional photographer, you are competing with Uncle Brian with a DSLR (great or otherwise) then there are some grave issues in your business approach. Much in the same way that I'm not competing with DJ iPad.

Agreed :) Certain demographics are being tempted to allow Uncle Brian to do the photos to save a few quid. Definitely not where you want to target your services though...

Julian

[Retrodisco]

Agreed :) Certain demographics are being tempted to allow Uncle Brian to do the photos to save a few quid. Definitely not where you want to target your services though...

Julian

It's the same people who have their mates cousin who does a bit of DJing on the side, ruin their wedding.

[Benny Smyth]

I did gain my PfCO for shooting with a drone earlier int he year, purely to cover my back from being grassed into the CAA for my DJ vids but when I realised how much energy and effort is going to go in to simply maintaining it - x amount of hours logged per month, a tonne of paper work and risk assessments, I'm looking into some other ways to exploit it as it's way too much effort just to catch 10-20 seconds of venue footage at the start of my DJ videos.

I have a theory - and it's backed up by a few videographer friends of mine - that based on the number of rules and regs being placed on drones (in Canada, you essentially have to have a pilots license to fly a drone!), I reckon that the Government is waiting for a drone to kill someone so they can outright ban them.


£750 she'd paid for 2 shooters from makeup to 3rd dance, drone, USB and a few other things!!!

According to Bridebook, the UK average cost of a Wedding Videographer? Less than a Photographer. That really did make my jaw hot the floor.


That's a stupid price before you even take into consideration that amount of hours spent editing.

Peter reckons that it's only a short job to edit video. :p

[Excalibur]

.

£750 she'd paid for 2 shooters from makeup to 3rd dance, drone, USB and a few other things!!! That's a stupid price before you even take into consideration that amount of hours spent editing.



Peter reckons that it's only a short job to edit video. :p

Peter also reckons that Brummies with big mouths would do well to remember that misquoting grumpy old mods can seriously damage your health. :Naughty:

[DazzyD]

Maybe, just maybe, the average price professional photographers charge has declined is due to increased competition? From, say, DJs? :zip:

I noticed the comment moaning about the availability of all day, all in packages. But, to be fair, that's not much different to a DJ adding on other services such as photography. Maybe I'm old school but I still believe in doing your thing and doing it well, not trying to be a jack of all trades. Also, I know technology is advanced but if I'm going to pay a DJ to also take the photos, wouldn't I be better off just hiring a PA and preloading a set? After all, the DJ wouldn't be spending too much time behind the decks as he'd be too busy out front searching for that extra special shot.

[Excalibur]

Maybe, just maybe, the average price professional photographers charge has declined is due to increased competition? From, say, DJs? :zip:

I noticed the comment moaning about the availability of all day, all in packages. But, to be fair, that's not much different to a DJ adding on other services such as photography. Maybe I'm old school but I still believe in doing your thing and doing it well, not trying to be a jack of all trades. Also, I know technology is advanced but if I'm going to pay a DJ to also take the photos, wouldn't I be better off just hiring a PA and preloading a set? After all, the DJ wouldn't be spending too much time behind the decks as he'd be too busy out front searching for that extra special shot.

You're not my long lost Brother are you? :agree: Wot he said.

[Benny Smyth]

Maybe, just maybe, the average price professional photographers charge has declined is due to increased competition? From, say, DJs? :zip:

I noticed the comment moaning about the availability of all day, all in packages. But, to be fair, that's not much different to a DJ adding on other services such as photography. Maybe I'm old school but I still believe in doing your thing and doing it well, not trying to be a jack of all trades. Also, I know technology is advanced but if I'm going to pay a DJ to also take the photos, wouldn't I be better off just hiring a PA and preloading a set? After all, the DJ wouldn't be spending too much time behind the decks as he'd be too busy out front searching for that extra special shot.

I don't know if that was aimed at my plans or a general comment, but to add a bit more detail to my plans, I will be running a Photography business and a DJ business - two separate entities meaning that I will be a DJ or a Photgrapher. Quite frankly, I don't feel I can give either my best if I offer both as a single service and the thought of waking up at 7am and then getting to bed at 3am...stuff that!

As for increase of competition, I'm not sure I buy that argument. I very much doubt any £4k+ 'togs are going to worry about me, the same that I'm not worried about those offering DJ + Dancefloor + Photobooth + Uplighting + Photography. As a DJ, I offer just a DJ service and none of the extras and I'm not worried about those who are offering them.

[Excalibur]

I will be running a Photography business and a DJ business - two separate entities meaning that I will be a DJ or a Photgrapher.
I'm sorry Benny, I've now got this vision of you as a Tog lining up the most magnificent shot of the day, when suddenly your inner DJ cottons on to the fact that the DJ has just followed Baby Shark with Cha Cha Slide, and you recoil in horror at his cheesiness/affrontery/incompetence/whatever! :Laugh:



Quite frankly, I don't feel I can give either my best if I offer both as a single service and the thought of waking up at 7am and then getting to bed at 3am...stuff that!


Re one job at a time, I agree wholeheartedly.

Re your time reservations, wuss! :ner:

[DeckstarDeluxe]

You have to consider that some togs spend tons of time doing editing and touch ups afterwards and heavily promote the album books. I know some others who's style is all relaxed and pretty much unedited pics.

On first glance I'd of thought comparing hours spent working on a wedding that a photographer would spend more than double the time a DJ would?

[Benny Smyth]

On first glance I'd of thought comparing hours spent working on a wedding that a photographer would spend more than double the time a DJ would?

That may turn out to be the case. I'm basing those hours on my (admittedly, limited) experience as a second shooter where I also edit my own photos. As I gain more experience, I may find that my average number of hours is off and will adjust accordingly but for a starting off point, I don't think that I am far off.

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

Maybe, just maybe, the average price professional photographers charge has declined is due to increased competition? From, say, DJs? :zip:

I noticed the comment moaning about the availability of all day, all in packages. But, to be fair, that's not much different to a DJ adding on other services such as photography. Maybe I'm old school but I still believe in doing your thing and doing it well, not trying to be a jack of all trades. Also, I know technology is advanced but if I'm going to pay a DJ to also take the photos, wouldn't I be better off just hiring a PA and preloading a set? After all, the DJ wouldn't be spending too much time behind the decks as he'd be too busy out front searching for that extra special shot.

I'm assuming that was aimed at me?

I think I do a pretty good job with my photos and video - there's a couple of hundred on my website if you're that interested, I'm certainly not just jumping about with my camera on manual and firing up rotten short clips on to YouTube.

On the flipside, if people are losing work (and they're not, I can't think of a single wedding I've ever done without a tog and the majority have a video tog too) based on guys like me doing half a dozen snaps and a 3 minute video of the evening dancing then they've more problems with their business than anything I've contributed to.

[Benny Smyth]

On the flipside, if people are losing work (and they're not, I can't think of a single wedding I've ever done without a tog and the majority have a video tog too) based on guys like me doing half a dozen snaps and a 3 minute video of the evening dancing then they've more problems with their business than anything I've contributed to.

This. All day long.

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

*without a tog that should read.

I know one guy that does all day DJ and actual sells it as a full tog add on too.

I've no idea how much he charges but the only folk he's 'stwaling' work from are the mob who get a nice camera and decide they'll be a wedding tog. He's certainly not competition for people who want a specific style or really arty type album of the day.

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

I have a theory - and it's backed up by a few videographer friends of mine - that based on the number of rules and regs being placed on drones (in Canada, you essentially have to have a pilots license to fly a drone!), I reckon that the Government is waiting for a drone to kill someone so they can outright ban them.


I would disagree with that, the rules and regs are reasonably minimal and straight forward. I'm all for registration too.

They are aircraft and share the same airspace as everything from a glider to a dreamliner. I sit on the periphery of Glasgow ATC zone, it's literally just round the corner, so if I'm flying irresponsibly here or there's a malfunction, I could potentially bring down an air craft.

At any other point, anywhere really, I could damage or harm people or property except for in remote areas. The CAA have to make assumptions based on worst case scenario otherwise they're culpable if said worst case scenario happens but, as long as you're not being a duck, they're pretty cool. In one of my recent videos I'm flying 50m from Prestwicks exclusion zone, toward it, at speed. Entering it is a jail able offence but I phoned ATC and they were like 'yeah no problem, just let us know if you have a fky away in our direction, enjoy your flight'

[DazzyD]

I don't know if that was aimed at my plans or a general comment, but to add a bit more detail to my plans, I will be running a Photography business and a DJ business - two separate entities meaning that I will be a DJ or a Photgrapher. Quite frankly, I don't feel I can give either my best if I offer both as a single service and the thought of waking up at 7am and then getting to bed at 3am...stuff that!

As for increase of competition, I'm not sure I buy that argument. I very much doubt any £4k+ 'togs are going to worry about me, the same that I'm not worried about those offering DJ + Dancefloor + Photobooth + Uplighting + Photography. As a DJ, I offer just a DJ service and none of the extras and I'm not worried about those who are offering them.


I'm assuming that was aimed at me?

I think I do a pretty good job with my photos and video - there's a couple of hundred on my website if you're that interested, I'm certainly not just jumping about with my camera on manual and firing up rotten short clips on to YouTube.

On the flipside, if people are losing work (and they're not, I can't think of a single wedding I've ever done without a tog and the majority have a video tog too) based on guys like me doing half a dozen snaps and a 3 minute video of the evening dancing then they've more problems with their business than anything I've contributed to.

By, there's some touchy people on here! :D

First up, my comments weren't aimed at anyone in particular. I'm merely playing devil's advocate whilst taking on board my own experiences and opinions of the topic in hand!

Secondly, Jim, you don't have to assume anything with me. I was asked to join the team here because of my honesty and upfrontedness. Basically, I can be pretty blunt and sometimes over-honest. I don't go in for snideness or underhand, veiled comments. So, if I was aiming any comments directly at you, I'd either reply to you directly or I would name you in my comments. You can be assured of that. That's the way I work and always have done. I do, however, sometimes descend in to sarcasm but that's just my sense of humour and it's never intended to offend anyone.

Right, before anyone else thinks I'm picking on them, I'll quantify my original comments. I'm old school. I think at the events we do (and that I used to do), there is room for different trades. All of those trades do what they do because they are (or should be) good at it. When one trade starts to move in to other trades, where does it all end? Do we have photographers cooking the buffet? Does the DJ make the wedding dress? Do the cleaners provide officiating duties? The times I hear of DJs complaining that a client has cancelled as the band have offered to include DJing as part of their service is just staggering. Yet we see DJs (talking generally again - not aimed at anyone in particular!) taking on the photographer's duties which, personally, I see as a little bit hypocritical. But that's just me. Like I said, I'm an old-school, union-activist type of guy!

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

Unless there's a slew of DJs down your way photographing during the day, as I said there's only 1 up here I knpw who does that, then it's a moot point.

A DJ taking shots / video in the evening isn't cutting a togs grass, a band with an iPhone on shuffle is cutting a DJs grass.

[DJ Jules]

Interesting take on pricing for photographers...

https://www.facebook.com/221859977894724/posts/2476082405805792/

Looks like you're too cheap again Benny :o

Julian

[Excalibur]

Looks like you're too cheap again Benny :o



Genuinely Surprised By This. :Laugh: Do you see what I did there? :D

[ppentertainments]

A DJ taking shots / video in the evening isn't cutting a togs grass, a band with an iPhone on shuffle is cutting a DJs grass.
Playing devils advocate here, I disagree, I think they are very similar. There are a lot of DJs out there who are very handy with a camera and I know a few togs who upsell evening photography who are now challenged by this. Different taking a few photos for facebook/marketing, I am talking about those taking 100+ a night.

Again, it is all about public perception - the average Joe public will think a band with an Iphone is 'the same' as a DJ, likewise a DJ with a good camera who knows how to use it is 'the same' as a Photographer.

The big argument here though is that DJs have a reputation of stepping on others toes and offering a multitude of services. How many DJs do you know make a successful living out of purely DJing ? I keep saying, DJs would be annoyed if a photographer bought a load of PA and lights and then offered a free/cheap DJ service as an add-on

[Excalibur]

Playing devils advocate here, I disagree, I think they are very similar. There are a lot of DJs out there who are very handy with a camera and I know a few togs who upsell evening photography who are now challenged by this. Different taking a few photos for facebook/marketing, I am talking about those taking 100+ a night.

Again, it is all about public perception - the average Joe public will think a band with an Iphone is 'the same' as a DJ, likewise a DJ with a good camera who knows how to use it is 'the same' as a Photographer.

The big argument here though is that DJs have a reputation of stepping on others toes and offering a multitude of services. How many DJs do you know make a successful living out of purely DJing ? I keep saying, DJs would be annoyed if a photographer bought a load of PA and lights and then offered a free/cheap DJ service as an add-on

And this month's prize* for the best, most reasoned and sensible post goes to this one. :agree:



* The prize? No idea yet. :confused:

[Benny Smyth]

...I am talking about those taking 100+ a night...

Show me a DJ who gives a client 100+ photos, and I will show you one of three things:

- A good DJ who takes 100+ crap photos
- A crap DJ who takes 100+ good photos
- A crap DJ who takes 100+ crap photos

I'm a very good DJ and I like to think that I am slightly above average when it comes to my Wedding Photography. I cannot deliver that level of quality for both services at the same time and I am yet to see any good DJ offer up that many photos of a quality that should worry a good photographer.

[ppentertainments]

Show me a DJ who gives a client 100+ photos, and I will show you one of three things:

- A good DJ who takes 100+ crap photos
- A crap DJ who takes 100+ good photos
- A crap DJ who takes 100+ crap photos

I'm a very good DJ and I like to think that I am slightly above average when it comes to my Wedding Photography. I cannot deliver that level of quality for both services at the same time and I am yet to see any good DJ offer up that many photos of a quality that should worry a good photographer.

I know quite a few good DJs who take 100+ good photos (give or take) a night, and they are growing in numbers

[Excalibur]

I'm a very good DJ and I like to think that I am slightly above average when it comes to my Wedding Photography. I cannot deliver that level of quality for both services at the same time and I am yet to see any good DJ offer up that many photos of a quality that should worry a good photographer.

Benny, I agree with you entirely, but:


I know quite a few good DJs who take 100+ good photos (give or take) a night, and they are growing in numbers

" Never mind the quality, feel the width ".

[DJ Jules]

I know quite a few good DJs who take 100+ good photos (give or take) a night, and they are growing in numbers

People have very different definitions of "good" :D I'm with Benny on this one (and the majority I've seen are in the third category).

I'm also not going to mention the guy on MDJN who posted 200+ iPhone gig photos every single week... But he would be a prime example.

Julian

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

This is the first I've ever heard of a tog being booked to stay on at the evening and I've yet to see many DJs up here, myself, my brother and the DJ I mentioned who does the day time togging too, put up even a handful of 'good' photos never mind over 100.

I had last week's bride ask me if I had more than the 7 or 8 shots that I'd captured and the truth was no - I dumped a few that had had captured 'dance face' and that was it.

There's only so many shots of people actually dancing as opposed to standing about posing as a group that you can take before they all end up looking the same.

Kind of like the ceremony I suppose, even at my own wedding there's only so many backshot photos of us looking at each other whilst the Humanist talked that I can be bothered looking at and I'd never really thought about it but getting to know some togs over the past while and asking why it's standard they only stay for the first few tunes that's their responses 1. I've been here all day, I want to go home, 2. Auntie Mabel dancing is the same as friend Jenny dancing is the same as the young team bouncing around, after an amount of them, the shots just become noise.

[DJ Jules]

This is the first I've ever heard of a tog being booked to stay on at the evening and I've yet to see many DJs up here, myself, my brother and the DJ I mentioned who does the day time togging too, put up even a handful of 'good' photos never mind over 100.

I think the point is that the most of the people posting 100+ photos, aren't photographers, never mind good photographers. Often they don't appear to be reviewing what they're posting before they post them (never mind applying any kind of post processing). A local guy just posted 228 photos of last Saturday's gig - about 20 of which weren't even in focus!!!

My take on this is that every photo I post that carries my watermark represents my business and can be shared without any context. Meaning that a single shot could be the sole item that someone uses to judge the quality of what I do. Because of that, I share few and far between and cull heavily from what I shoot before I even consider sharing anything.


Kind of like the ceremony I suppose, even at my own wedding there's only so many backshot photos of us looking at each other whilst the Humanist talked that I can be bothered looking at and I'd never really thought about it but getting to know some togs over the past while and asking why it's standard they only stay for the first few tunes that's their responses 1. I've been here all day, I want to go home, 2. Auntie Mabel dancing is the same as friend Jenny dancing is the same as the young team bouncing around, after an amount of them, the shots just become noise.

People also get fed up with having a camera shoved in their faces after a while! Chatting to a photographer a few weeks ago.... he mentioned that brides are currently expecting to get around 700 edited photos from a photographer for a typical all day package and some are now upping this and demanding 1000+.

Quantity over quality?!? :)

Julian

[Excalibur]

Quantity over quality?!? :)

Julian

Heaven forfend! :whistle: :D

[rth_discos]

getting to know some togs over the past while and asking why it's standard they only stay for the first few tunes that's their responses 1. I've been here all day, I want to go home, 2. Auntie Mabel dancing is the same as friend Jenny dancing is the same as the young team bouncing around, after an amount of them, the shots just become noise.

I understand why the majority of togs leave after the first dance, but for me, it feels like the story of the wedding is incomplete.

The evening entertainment makes up around 1/3rd of the day. The first 2/3rds are the more 'formal' aspect of the day. To finish the story with a few dancing pics after the first dance feels like the story is left a little short changed.

However, I don't blame the togs for this. The reality is that the majority of DJs are quite frankly awful, so there is nothing else to capture.

When I have certain pieces of interaction during the evening, it's a shame they are not captured. And most of all, I always feel it's a shame that the very last dance of the night isn't captured, because it's usually full of emotion.

The weddings where the tog has stayed to the end definitely feel like they capture the full wedding.

[Benny Smyth]

I understand why the majority of togs leave after the first dance, but for me, it feels like the story of the wedding is incomplete.

The evening entertainment makes up around 1/3rd of the day. The first 2/3rds are the more 'formal' aspect of the day. To finish the story with a few dancing pics after the first dance feels like the story is left a little short changed.

However, I don't blame the togs for this. The reality is that the majority of DJs are quite frankly awful, so there is nothing else to capture.

When I have certain pieces of interaction during the evening, it's a shame they are not captured. And most of all, I always feel it's a shame that the very last dance of the night isn't captured, because it's usually full of emotion.

The weddings where the tog has stayed to the end definitely feel like they capture the full wedding.

We're incredibly biased in this point of view. If you start looking at the point of view of what photos the client wants - especially when it comes to putting together their albums - any post first-dance dancing shots (generally) take up a fraction of the final cut. It took me a long time to accept this because I agree wholeheartedly with you, but look at your local venue's social media stuff. How many photos do you see of the party vs. a candle on a bloody table? That's what clients want. They may love the idea of having a shed load of photos of the evening but when it comes to it (for the most part), they are more interested in everything before the first dance. Same as when the clients love the idea of having a ceremony at midday and then partying hard until 4am - we know (for the most part) that we're not going that far.

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

If there was a market for togs to hang about you can bet they'd be exploiting it.

Guys like Benny and myself offer a happy medium where the evening is captured not just on 100 phones.

I've got my video work flow so slick now that I can have it edited, clipped, colour graded, a full watch for QC uploading and out the back with a bottle of wine in under 15 minutes. They look great, my clients love them and unlike most online mumbo jumbo, it really is a USP.

I actually quite like the fact there's so many DJs out there doing it badly. Just like the music, if the majority are 'ok' it makes it really easy to stand out.

[Marc J]

On the subject of evening entertainment and photographers, I saw this yesterday: -

Photographer Forced to Spend Hours Photoshopping Lines From Wedding Photos, Issues Warning That Lasers Can Ruin Sensors (https://fstoppers.com/social-media/photographer-forced-spend-hours-photoshopping-lines-wedding-photos-issues-425923)

Is that a real problem? Do any of you use lasers, or been asked about them by photographers?

The most interesting thing I gained from that link? I learned what "chimping" is :eek::D

[Benny Smyth]

Is that a real problem? Do any of you use lasers, or been asked about them by photographers?

I get asked about it all the time by 'togs. I don't have them 'cos they look crap and those that do use them (for the most part) use them incorrectly and have them pointing directly at the audience. The damage to cameras has happened a fair few times before, but this story really got some traction over the weekend.

[Imagine]

Is that a real problem? Do any of you use lasers, or been asked about them by photographers?

It is - I know of a photographer that's been affected in the past.

My solution is simple - I don't actually OWN any lasers (I don't like the effect personally and to get anything like some of those that used to flash across the top of BPM where out of my budget by several thousand pounds!)

When it comes to the actual FD photos....I used to boast that I could coordinate lighting colours etc. to match their theme for the first dance. Then I started asking the 'toggers what THEY preferred because let's face it....they're the ones that have to capture the moment. Whilst I sometimes still have pink/blue/gold/[insert bride's theme colour here], it's now predominantly WHITE, only changing to colour once the rest of the guests join them on the dance floor.

Now as for the haze/no-haze debate for the FD....that's one for another day ;)

[rth_discos]

Is that a real problem? Do any of you use lasers, or been asked about them by photographers?


I don't user lasers. The *right* effect from lasers costs too much, and requires haze/smoke - which I also don't have.

The main reason I don't use lasers is for the benefit of a photographer, but not for the reason in the link.

Lasers on a white dress look awful. And odd marks on their face - not quite the dream photo they were looking for!

[Excalibur]

Lasers on a white dress look awful. And odd marks on their face - not quite the dream photo they were looking for!

And now you have realised how to " persuade" recalcitrant photographers to toe the line. ;):) " Play the game, or the bride gets the laser treatment, both barrels". :Naughty:

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

It is - I know of a photographer that's been affected in the past.

My solution is simple - I don't actually OWN any lasers (I don't like the effect personally and to get anything like some of those that used to flash across the top of BPM where out of my budget by several thousand pounds!)

When it comes to the actual FD photos....I used to boast that I could coordinate lighting colours etc. to match their theme for the first dance. Then I started asking the 'toggers what THEY preferred because let's face it....they're the ones that have to capture the moment. Whilst I sometimes still have pink/blue/gold/[insert bride's theme colour here], it's now predominantly WHITE, only changing to colour once the rest of the guests join them on the dance floor.

Now as for the haze/no-haze debate for the FD....that's one for another day ;)

SNAP.

I will happily co-ordinate mood lights and programme them for throughout the night but first dance for several years has been white, I actually now tend to keep everything on my 1st dance scene for the first few scenes if people are dancing to help the tog out.

[DJ Jules]

I will happily co-ordinate mood lights and programme them for throughout the night but first dance for several years has been white, I actually now tend to keep everything on my 1st dance scene for the first few scenes if people are dancing to help the tog out.

A few weeks back I had three weddings in a row with different photographers. The first asked me to ditch the colour in the uplighters for the first dance to help him out, the other two told me they don't care (as long as I'm not using lasers). Personally, I prefer there to be a bit of colour in the room behind the B&G. While I get the whole colour cast thing, speedlites should be able to easily overpower that and it saves dull photos with the B&G floating in a dark (or white) room.

Mind, I was the first photographers best friend for the space of 30mins just because I said I *could* control the lighting - he said the majority of DJ's just tell them that they can't do it :zip:

Julian

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

A few weeks back I had three weddings in a row with different photographers. The first asked me to ditch the colour in the uplighters for the first dance to help him out, the other two told me they don't care (as long as I'm not using lasers). Personally, I prefer there to be a bit of colour in the room behind the B&G. While I get the whole colour cast thing, speedlites should be able to easily overpower that and it saves dull photos with the B&G floating in a dark (or white) room.

Mind, I was the first photographers best friend for the space of 30mins just because I said I *could* control the lighting - he said the majority of DJ's just tell them that they can't do it :zip:

Julian

Can't as I can't be arsed DMXing. Christ most lights these days must come with sone sort of remote.

[Excalibur]

SNAP.

I will happily co-ordinate mood lights and programme them for throughout the night but first dance for several years has been white, I actually now tend to keep everything on my 1st dance scene for the first few scenes if people are dancing to help the tog out.
Common sense, I'd have said. My first job is to set the lights for first dance, and leave them thus till it's over. One less thing to organise.



Mind, I was the first photographers best friend for the space of 30mins just because I said I *could* control the lighting - he said the majority of DJ's just tell them that they can't do it :zip:

Julian
:zip: is right! " The majority of DJs " seem to be a particularly unimpressive bunch. :sofa: The more I see/hear about on my travels, the more I think that there must be a lot of DJs putting out a service that's not at all customer focussed. :(


Can't as I can't be arsed DMXing. Christ most lights these days must come with some sort of remote.
Come on Jim, even I can push faders to make the lights change colour. :p:)

[Benny Smyth]

Bring out yer dead!

Slightly behind schedule, but I've now officially launched the Photography business with a brand new website (https://bennysmythphotography.co.uk/).

I popped a short video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yD5BIfGeNvg) on my Social Media pages and I'm working on the SEO for this site myself. I'm now at that point where I have to be patient (Google has only just acknowledged that the website exists) which is a bit frustrating as I am raring to go but, alas, this is just the beginnings of what will hopefully be exciting times.

[Marc J]

Slightly behind schedule, but I've now officially launched the Photography business with a brand new website (https://bennysmythphotography.co.uk/).

Nice site, Benny, but I've got to be honest it's very slow, especially first page view. For me it was more than 5 seconds of your "loading" coloured box animation. Despite disabling my browser cache I haven't got it to go quite that slow again, so maybe just a temporary glitch?

On your portfolio page, when clicking on a filtered set of photos, the next and previous still go through the whole unfiltered set of photos, which is unexpected and perhaps annoying for visitors. On the technical side, your "fancybox" selector should only be targeting the visible elements on the page, something like : -


<script>
$(function () {
$('[data-fancybox="gallery"]:visible').fancybox({
buttons: [
"close"
],
loop: true
});
});
</script>

[Benny Smyth]

Nice site, Benny, but I've got to be honest it's very slow, especially first page view. For me it was more than 5 seconds of your "loading" coloured box animation. Despite disabling my browser cache I haven't got it to go quite that slow again, so maybe just a temporary glitch?

On your portfolio page, when clicking on a filtered set of photos, the next and previous still go through the whole unfiltered set of photos, which is unexpected and perhaps annoying for visitors. On the technical side, your "fancybox" selector should only be targeting the visible elements on the page, something like : -

Thanks, Marc. I'll feed that back to my web guys.

[Nakatomi]

Great new site Benny. One question leapt out at me on hitting the bottom of a page.. do you get a discount for letting the web developer advertise on your site? ;)

[Benny Smyth]

do you get a discount for letting the web developer advertise on your site? ;)

About as much of a discount as you give your clients when you pop your branding on your DJ stand. :p :lol:

[Marc J]

do you get a discount for letting the web developer advertise on your site? ;)

I sometimes do this, sometimes not. It has never been raised with or by the client, though, and nobody has ever asked me to remove it or for a discount if it's there. For a lot of web design companies it's "the normal" and not open for discussion.

There are a variety of deciding factors... mainly if I'm personally happy with the site design at the time, or if I feel I've put a little more work into it than the quote allowed for...so not so much a discount as not charging them more for any little "extras".

Of course, there have been times when, after handing over a site to a client, they've absolutely trashed it with their "web design skills"... at that point I usually go in and remove the link to me :D;) :muppet:

[rth_discos]

I sometimes do this, sometimes not. It has never been raised with or by the client, though, and nobody has ever asked me to remove it or for a discount if it's there. For a lot of web design companies it's "the normal" and not open for discussion.

There are a variety of deciding factors... mainly if I'm personally happy with the site design at the time, or if I feel I've put a little more work into it than the quote allowed for...so not so much a discount as not charging them more for any little "extras".

As a designer myself, I do this too.

It has come in useful. Many years ago, there was one client where something had gone wrong somewhere - I can't remember the exact details, but they were unable to get in contact with the customer, so contacted me as the web developer through the link, and I was able to 1: divert their message to the client, and 2: fix the issue.

So it does have its benefits!