How many Prints should I offer ?

I am not a professional photographer, but I did a wedding 2 weeks ago and the point of taking photographs of someone's wedding is to document the customer's special day not get shots to fill a wedding album. "Shooting all those pictures" (I took 2000+ shots in just under 8 hours)" gives you a thorough story to give back to the bride and groom and you owe your clients all the shots you can muster. And, if you are there anyway why not just keep shooting. The best shots are had when you least expect them. And if shooting 300 pictures in 4 hours sounds like a lot of work, maybe you should think again about wedding photography. Granted, I have only done one wedding and I am sure the first one is the most stressful of any but after about 4 hours I about had an anxiety attack. It is a lot of work but that's the least you can do for one of the most important days in the B/Gs' lives. My 2cents for whatever its worth.

Huh? Why let the size of a wedding album limit the number of pictures you take - or the number of pictures you offer your client? Of course, it depends on what you and the bride have contracted for, but you should be trying to capture every worthy moment in the celebration. And since you never know how many that is going to be..and you likely will take lots of throw-aways to get a few good ones...shoot away and sell all the good ones!

And decide on the album(s) AFTER she sees the proofs. It also sounds like you're thinking matted or slip-in albums... Consider magazine-style albums as an alternative. You have a lot of flexibility in number of images for a set number of pages.

80 to 100 high quality Finished 5x7 or 20 to 30 HQ Finished 10x8 plus (about) 40 5x7 is a ball park for the B&G wedding Album.

That is around the general output from the studio for which I work.

But, some businesses offer `1000 images on a CD`.

There are different businesses and there are different client`s requests and demands.

A client who is seeking out to buy a Wedding Album package, is a different customer to one who just wants the 1000 images on a CD. Also, not all customers necessarily want a Full Documentary style of coverage.

Typically, I would take about 400 digital images and around 60 x 645 film images (Formals).

From those, the client usually sees about 350 to 380 digital images and about 45 to 50 film images.

An average total of around 400 to 420 images for a full coverage, from me, start to finish.

That output and my quality, suits my clients. Frankly, to give them more images from which to choose is not what they are seeking (Client`s comments, not my guessometry).

It all depends what business one is in, what the product offer is. There is no `right` or `wrong` way of covering a Wedding, and it is limiting (and not wise business) to assume what the Client wants regarding the amount of prints in an album (and also in what general style they want too, IMO).

In that regard, it is sensible, IMO, when offering albums, to have a general print number, but flexible enough to easily accommodate a greater number, at little extra cost to the client.

But that is about Pricing and Client Value Add . . . and a different thread I think.

WW

Harry,

You have an excellent question. I shoot over 40 weddings a year and generally question whether or not I am giving enough or too many photos. I shoot around 600-800 photos for a 4- 6 hour period. I try to capture every detail of the wedding day. I do not use the shot-gun version of photography. I look at the situation and take the shot that I feel will help tell the story. I also know exactly what sells and what does not. I offer several packages and several different album choices. My photo count is in-line with my hours of coverage. If I shoot a 4-5 hour wedding, I offer 100 edited and printed photos. I can tell a story with 100 photos. If I shoot more then 5 hours, I offer 200 edited photos. Now, I retouch ever printed photo that goes into one of my albums. I do not offer unedited photos unless someone takes my budget package. Now, I have not sold that package in the past 2 years. Most couples want edited wedding photos that tell the story of their special day.

Now with all that said, it is all about economic. I do not agree with Amy. I will never give a couple 2000 images unless they pay for 2000 edited printed photos. Based on my current packages, 2000 edited photos will cost my couple an additional $6650.00. Like I said, it is all about economics.

My next point is quality. Unless you are one of the top photographers and you have an ideal situation, you will need to do some post processing of your photos. I could not even imagine processing 2000 photos.

Therefore, I only offer edited photos. I have the ability to capture every detail of the couple's wedding day and tell their story in less the 200 edited photos. I offer one style of traditional album that holds either 100 or 200 photos. I offer Flush Mounted and Magazine Style Coffee Table Books that can hold approximately 100 -200 photos. This is my comfort level and I am able to keep the cost down for my couple, tell their story, and produce a quality product.

Just remember, many guest have point and shoot cameras and they will offer the couple as many photos as they want. They will be unedited. They will be good enough. If you provide a few quality photos at a reasonable rate, the couple will feel they received a value. If you use the shot-gun effect to capture everything and anything and give the couple un-edited files, you will not separate yourself from the Uncle Bob's.

You should take a look at your bottom-line and determine how many quality photos you can provide your client and still make a profit. More is not always better. Just remember, once a photo leaves your studio, you can not control who sees it.

George

Great answers, I guess you have to be flexible. Cost wise and quality wise, I guess the less prints the more pictures and the more pictures, the less prints. I was thinking from a point of view of wedding albums not coverage. The wedding album's main purpose is for those must-haves and what you and the client agreed upon. The rest you can throw in as 4x6s ?

I was also taking into consideration "the nuisance factor". I mean how many pictures can you take at a wedding, before you start getting in the way of the wedding ? Combine that with how long are my batteries flash cards and flash head going to last and you are limited, unless you made arrangements to overcome those obstacles.

I originally started by offering 250 pictures for 4 hour coverage, then I stoppped by the local camera guy to take a look at some of his album covers and most could only handle about 150 pictures, so I revised my count, but as you guys recomend it's not all about album covers.

Some photographers offer 2 album covers one for the bride and groom and one for the parents. That would make it 3 album covers ! Now I see why some wedding photographers charge top-dollar for their services, it can get costly.

I'll have to check how many pictures I took during my last full-coverage wedding. I was working as a second photographer so I'll have to estimate how many pictures I actually missed. I think I took about 500 pictures, before my batteries sarted giving out and my flash cards became full. Out of those 500, only about 250 I would consider printable.

I now only do weddings on a limited basis. I don't even offer prints (I will print a couple enlargements however). I simply offer my Photoshop edited shots on DVD's in nice cases. I offer one DVD with downsized images for the web (and a musical slide show), and another DVD with full sized images suitable for printing. I charge enough to not worry about loss of reprint sales but provide a competitive price. It simplifies my work and the customer is happy. I had shot weddings for over 30 years so I understand what you are going through. I agree with other posters when they say shoot the event for best coverage, not worrying about how many shots will go in an album. At least today you are shooting digital versus medium format film when I started.

While I took 2000 images, I most certainly did not keep or offer all that I took. My point in replying was to say that Harry should not be looking at his job of documenting this wedding as a means of getting his album filled.

>That's like shooting a picture every minute for 4 hours and this is not counting the throw-aways. Is this possible ?

Umm...yes. I routinely shoot 3-20 frames per minute at a wedding. It's normal for me to walk away from a six hour wedding with 2000 to 2500 frames.

I edit those down to 300. The result is that the final 300 are really good. I tell people that the goal is to make your throwaways just as good as the keepers of other photographers.

> What would be the typical amount of prints.

I do 300 albums on a six hour wedding.

> what's the sense of shooting all those pictures?

To document the wedding. Dude, just forget albums. That's old school.

In my view, the job of the photographer today is not to produce a boring album from a list of photographs.

The job is to document the day and help the couple remember it for many, many years.

Only half of my couples care about albums. The other half want to have someone who can help them remember their wedding day.