shape
carat
color
clarity

Pro pics: touched-up vs. untouched

sirbenson

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Messages
229
We are trying to decide between two main photographers right now. The main difference between them is the number of photos we'd get and how many of them are touched up.

Photographer A:
-We get a disk with ALL the pics he takes (minus the ones with closed eyes, stupid faces). Might be close to 800 pics.
-ALL the pics will be run though a colour corrector
-30 of the pics will be professionally touched up (i.e.effects like black/white, vintage, white washing, etc added; lighting perfected, etc.). These 30 can be used to blow up but if we wanted to blow up some of the non-30 we may have to get the photog (for a fee) to do some post processing on it.

Other: He's foremost a photojournalist and does weddings on the side for extra $.

Photographer B:
-We get a disk ONLY with the photos that are professionally touched up in post processing
-they guarantee 250 pics at a minimum but it usually higher (300-350)
-the 250+ are ALL professionally touched up (not by the photog that takes them but by their studio editor)
-their professional editing of these 250+ includes black/white, effects like vintage or white washing, post processing light effects, taking out things like garbage bins or parking signs that may not look good)

Other: They are a wedding studio. The photogs shoot and the editor does the post processing. We would have a say in how many pics were black/white, how many had effects added but the editor is the one who looks at all the photos taken and decides which ones have the potential for detailed processing.

I know that quality is more important that quantity. But something in the back of my mind is telling me that quantitiy is better value for our dollar because we get more pics. BUT this could mean getting 6 pics of the same pose.

So what do you think is better: 800 photos with 30 being professionally finished OR 300 pics that are all professionally finished??

Thanks!
 

4ever

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Dec 9, 2008
Messages
2,260
Although I like photojournalist style photography.....I'd probably go for option B.

I can't imagine trying to make up and album by sifting though a CD of 800 photos, many of which, like you said, will be very very similar. I also think with the second photographer having 250+ photos all profesionally edited rather than just 30 is much better value for money. Photo editing can take a REALLY long time and this insures every single photo you pick for your album or show to family and friends is edited to make the best of the image.
 

Rae~

Shiny_Rock
Joined
May 23, 2005
Messages
291
For myself, I would go with quality over quantity. I would rather have 300+ photos (which is still an awful lot of photos!!) that are ALL useable than 800 (yikes, that's a lot) of which a large proportion might need more work.
 

diamondseeker2006

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
58,342
For my daughter's wedding we had a similar choice. We went with the experienced wedding photographer who did higher quality work. So I would choose your second one.
 

slg47

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
9,667
I would also pick the 300 option, that is still a LOT of photos.
 

yssie

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
25,534
Definitely the third option.

I would also specify how much touching up you want done to the subjects, if they're people - obviously you want the garbage bins and exit signs removed, but what about that little wrinkle on your forehead, or the scar on your cheek the cat gave you the night before?

I wanted absolutely no enhancements to the subjects' faces other than colour correction - I didn't want them photoshopping out wrinkles and freckles and stray hairs, or whitening my teeth. My photog was surprised, and said it was an unusual request.
 

hawaiianorangetree

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
2,692
I think I would go with option B. You can still make a varied album with 300 photos.

My photographer who sounded very much like option A, did not edit many of my photos so I had lots of people milling in the background of scenery shots etc that would look a lot better if they weren't there, I was lucky as a friends husband offered to edit them out for me and he did a great job. I probably wouldn't have used a lot of those photos in their pre edited state.

800 photos is great, but not much use if they never make it off the disk due to lack of editing.
 

sirbenson

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Messages
229
Thanks for the advice.

I emailed photographer A last night to tell him my concerns about the untouched photos. He told me that about 90% of the photos on his website and that I saw in person were NOT retouched. They were colour corrected (which he does to ALL photos) but not professionally enhanced.

I'm not sure if I made it seem that with the first guy that the pics would be unuseable. They surely would be, but only 30 would have an artisitc flair to them.

Lemme post the link to the second photographer....the one that edits each and every photos you get on an individual basis. In your opinion, in the wedding galleries do they touch up photos TOO much? I like their modern vintage style as look as I can keep a good proportion of pics as just crisp clear pics with no vintage effects or other effects added:

http://www.renaissancestudios.ca/#home/

Whaddya think?
 

sillyberry

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Messages
1,792
I just looked through the teaser galleries on FB, and I think they do beautiful work! For my sensibilities, definitely not over-processed.
 

Clairitek

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 21, 2008
Messages
4,881
Sirbenson- I would probably choose whichever style I like the best, first and foremost. In regards to editing and touching up, I saw the raw pictures from my photographer (the rejects) on a disk and there was virtually no difference except for the ones that he turned into black and white (he did this for about half of our photos). Then again, he is a photojournalistic style photographer like your choice A so he wasn't likely to do a lot of editing and post-processing that alters the photo to be far from reality in the first place.

I just glanced through a few of choice B's website and they look like they do a pretty great job. Of course, on the website, you're seeing the best. But looking back on my own wedding photos I definitely have about 50 favorites that I share the most with people who ask to see them. I was given almost 400 proofs, if that gives you an idea of how many you really need in the end. I think you'd be fine with 250+ edited photos from choice B if you decided that they worked out for you better in the other details (cost, shooting time, etc). Do you know ahead of time which photographer from the group you would be getting from Renaissance and have you looked at their individual portfolio?

How do they compare in terms of shooting time and cost?

small threadjack:

diamondseeker2006|1295234401|2824683 said:
For my daughter's wedding we had a similar choice. We went with the experienced wedding photographer who did higher quality work. So I would choose your second one.

I just wanted to comment that just because a photographer is exclusively a wedding photographer it doesn't mean the work will be "higher quality." Sure there are metrics that could define a wedding photographer but I feel like quality overall is defined by personal preference. For example, I don't dig traditional wedding photographers, at all. Sure I might find a few photos that are pretty but in general they don't grab my attention. On the other hand, I have seen photos from photographers that do weddings on the side (like sirbenson's choice A) that I find to be gorgeous, different, and interesting. Works of art that I would happily live with on my walls forever and definitely not your run-of-the-mill wedding photography. Just my personal preference, you know? Some people love traditional photos and would probaly look at mine and think that they aren't very wedding-y at all and that I made a bad choice in a wedding photographer. Doesn't bother me if its not everyone's personal preference/idea of "quality."

/threadjack
 

sirbenson

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Messages
229
Thanks for the input.

The photographers compare pretty equally in terms of hours of shooting. They both give 8 hours of shooting and also include and engagement shoot. Both give a DVD with jpeg images for the engagement photos and the wedding photos. The "photojournalist" gives the images as-is and Renaissance gives just the edited ones. Renaissance also includes an online gallery that friends and family can visit and download our pics from. Renaissance sends out questionaires to help determine the site location for the shoot, what styles we'd like, what props (if any) to include. The will even go so far as to use Google maps to scout out photo locaitons close to our venue.

Hmmmm....we are really torn right now. I guess I have to decide if I'd rather have my wedding recorded/documented by the photojournalist as-is or if I'd rather have the photos turned into an artsy story by Renaissance.

I'm so tempted to post the photojournalist's website here to get some opinions on it but I've posted elsewhere about him and his administrator creeped my posts and told the photographer that I was concerned with not getting any retouched images. Hmm, maybe if I "hide" the website: a*v*e*p*h*o*t*o.c*a* (minus all the starts-haha!).
 

mrscushion

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
3,309
They have pretty different styles to me. Personally, I prefer Renaissance. Having also just gone through 2,000 digital photos to compose an album, I can tell you that pre-selection is a good thing!
 

sirbenson

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Messages
229
mscushion|1295299344|2825220 said:
They have pretty different styles to me. Personally, I prefer Renaissance. Having also just gone through 2,000 digital photos to compose an album, I can tell you that pre-selection is a good thing!

Thanks for your opinion! I know its up to us in the end but its good to get someone else's opinion since my fiance isn't as picky as me so would easily use eeny meeny miney to pick one. I don't think I need 2000 pics. That's a bit much for us and I don't think all those could really be unique and useable. But good point about having a good number to choose from.
 

mrscushion

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
3,309
sirbenson|1295301023|2825245 said:
mscushion|1295299344|2825220 said:
They have pretty different styles to me. Personally, I prefer Renaissance. Having also just gone through 2,000 digital photos to compose an album, I can tell you that pre-selection is a good thing!

Thanks for your opinion! I know its up to us in the end but its good to get someone else's opinion since my fiance isn't as picky as me so would easily use eeny meeny miney to pick one. I don't think I need 2000 pics. That's a bit much for us and I don't think all those could really be unique and useable. But good point about having a good number to choose from.
Hey sirbenson! I think I wasn't clear in my post. I actually meant that having the photographer choose a more limited number of pics for you (like Renaissance would do) is a good thing, because sorting through the whole download of all the photos was pretty overwhelming for me. So we agree ;))
 

sirbenson

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Messages
229
mscushion|1295305905|2825302 said:
sirbenson|1295301023|2825245 said:
mscushion|1295299344|2825220 said:
They have pretty different styles to me. Personally, I prefer Renaissance. Having also just gone through 2,000 digital photos to compose an album, I can tell you that pre-selection is a good thing!

Thanks for your opinion! I know its up to us in the end but its good to get someone else's opinion since my fiance isn't as picky as me so would easily use eeny meeny miney to pick one. I don't think I need 2000 pics. That's a bit much for us and I don't think all those could really be unique and useable. But good point about having a good number to choose from.
Hey sirbenson! I think I wasn't clear in my post. I actually meant that having the photographer choose a more limited number of pics for you (like Renaissance would do) is a good thing, because sorting through the whole download of all the photos was pretty overwhelming for me. So we agree ;))

Ahhhhh, ok. I did feel a bit overwhelmed thinking about sifting through 2000 pics! So I take it your photographer gave you ALLLLL the photos s/he took and left it to you to sift through? May I ask: of those, how many were unique and not duplicates that were maybe a milimieter different? Of the 2000, how many would you ballpark that were solid, useable, favourites? Thanks!
 

mrscushion

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
3,309
Hi again - hmmm, off the top of my head I would guess that half were unique pics. That's still a lot! The reason we have so many photos is that I had a destination wedding. The photographer flew in and brought her business partner (also a photographer) to make a mini-vacation out of it. So there were two of them, and they also shot a couple of hours on rehearsal day plus the whole wedding day.

Favorites... hmmm...all of them were really pretty good. The photo book I made for DH and I had about 250 pics in it, I think, and that's a pretty thick album. So I guess the 300 that Renaissance will provide you with would be a perfect number if almost all of them come out to your liking.

ETA: I don't actually know if the photos I got were ALL the photos they took. I assume so. I chose to sift through them myself because that saved us $$.
 

havernell

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
571
I guess I'm different in that I would prefer to have all 800 photos rather than just 250 that someone else selected for me. Our photographer gave us all 900+ photos from our wedding and, while it was a lot to sift through, I think that was half the fun! If our photographer had selected 250 from the bunch for us, I really shudder to think what she would have left out/which photos we would have never seen! I mean, there are some photos among our 900 that, from a photography standpoint, probably aren't the best photos, but they are fun photos of a dear friend of family member that we cherish because of the subject, not because of the photo's composition! I honestly don't recall how many photos our photographer re-touched, but I don't look at our photos going "oh, I wish she had edited that person out of the background" or anything- our photos are of the day as it unfolded, and that's fine with me.

Also, we didn't have that many duplicates- besides the photos with our families before the wedding, I don't think she shot double of anything (our photographer was also more "photojournalistic" I suppose, even thought I hesitate to use that word because I think it's been stretched to mean so many things now). If you are worried about this, ask the photojournalist photographer you are considering to see a full set of photos from a wedding s/he has shot and see for yourself how many duplicate photos there are among the 800.

So, I would personally go with the 800 photo option, but others have also made good arguments for the 250 photo option above. HOWEVER, have you asked Renaissance Studios if there is any way you could buy all of the photos from them on a disc for an additional fee? They could still do their retouching of the 250+ photos and give them to you as usual, but then for extra money perhaps they'd give you all of the other untouched photos on a disc. Can't hurt to ask because then you get the best of both worlds.
 

TooPatient

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
9,984
havernell|1295363899|2825725 said:
I guess I'm different in that I would prefer to have all 800 photos rather than just 250 that someone else selected for me. Our photographer gave us all 900+ photos from our wedding and, while it was a lot to sift through, I think that was half the fun! If our photographer had selected 250 from the bunch for us, I really shudder to think what she would have left out/which photos we would have never seen! I mean, there are some photos among our 900 that, from a photography standpoint, probably aren't the best photos, but they are fun photos of a dear friend of family member that we cherish because of the subject, not because of the photo's composition! I honestly don't recall how many photos our photographer re-touched, but I don't look at our photos going "oh, I wish she had edited that person out of the background" or anything- our photos are of the day as it unfolded, and that's fine with me.

Also, we didn't have that many duplicates- besides the photos with our families before the wedding, I don't think she shot double of anything (our photographer was also more "photojournalistic" I suppose, even thought I hesitate to use that word because I think it's been stretched to mean so many things now). If you are worried about this, ask the photojournalist photographer you are considering to see a full set of photos from a wedding s/he has shot and see for yourself how many duplicate photos there are among the 800.

So, I would personally go with the 800 photo option, but others have also made good arguments for the 250 photo option above. HOWEVER, have you asked Renaissance Studios if there is any way you could buy all of the photos from them on a disc for an additional fee? They could still do their retouching of the 250+ photos and give them to you as usual, but then for extra money perhaps they'd give you all of the other untouched photos on a disc. Can't hurt to ask because then you get the best of both worlds.

This is what I was thinking.

The photographer doesn't know your guests so they don't know who is just a date for the evening and who is a relative flown in specially for your big day. Behaviors, faces, looks are unique things that may mean something to you (old joke from when you were young or something) but just look like half-closed eyes that need fixed/deleted to the photographer.


I REALLY like Havernell's idea to ask if you can purchase all of them (untouched or just color-corrected) for an additional fee.
 

mrscushion

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
3,309
havernell|1295363899|2825725 said:
HOWEVER, have you asked Renaissance Studios if there is any way you could buy all of the photos from them on a disc for an additional fee?
Great idea!
 

sirbenson

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Messages
229
I talked to Renaissance today and here's what they said:

-I asked about the number of pics and she said that 250 is a low count minimum. How many final pics we get really depends on how long the wedding is and how many different things there are to photograph. Also depends on how much time we give the photographer to shoot us. She said we could even get up to 450 if there are enough different things to take pics of. The only reason we woould ever get as low as 250 pics is if the photographer doesn't have a lot to take pics of or if we don't reserve time for pics to be taken.

-I asked how they pick which photos we get. I told her I was concerned that maybe photos of people I ddin't care about would make the cut while photos of more important people would not make the cut. She said that they only cut out the bad pics i.e. stupid faces, closed eyes. They give us ALL the pics that were taken of guests because they don't know who is who so we get everything. If they take 4 of the same person and they are all the same they might not necessarily give us all 4 but just the best.

-I asked about the proportion of photos that would be of us vs of other things (details like shoes, venue, centerpieces, other guests). She said its not a concrete proportion of pics that are just of the bride and groom. It all depends on the number of pics taken. I was more concerned about this with the limit of 250 pics but since she told me that we'd VERY likely get more, I guess I'm not so worried. She also said that number of pics of bride and groom and bridal party will depend on how long you give the photographer to shoot just us.

-I asked about reverting photos back to their original form if we don't like the effects. Bascially before they adjust the photos we can make specific requests ie. I don't want ANY black/whites, I want only 15% vintage look (just examples). And if there are a few photos that they put effects on and then I don't like it, they can change them back (not for all, just a few). For example, if there is a nice pic of my grandmother but they make it black and white and my grandmother would prefer to have it in colour, they will do that for us.

-I mentioned that the particular photographer I was assigned didn't have very many albums vs some of the other photographers. Basically the two owners are the main photographers and used to shoot everything until they hired on more people in 2010. So some of the other photogs don't have too many pics with this studio yet. But more of our own photographer's stuff will be available for viewing in the spring after he shoots more weddings.

-I asked if I could see a full wedding album from one of our assigned photographer's weddings so that I could see the full range of pics that we'd get instead of just seeing a few pics in the teaser galleries. She said she would have to ask a few brides/grooms for their permission bc tehcnically the pics are theirs. Fair enough. So I'll wait and see what happens.


I think everything sounds pretty good. I'm still impressed by the OTHER photographer (the photojournalist) too. I creeped some of his flikr stuff recently and I really LOVE what he does as a photojournalist. I just think I'm hung up on the fact that he doesn't have much of a wedding portfolio so most of his work is non-wedding stuff. And I'm not sure how well his photojournalistic approach would work for a wedding. So far, the photographer is proving to be the hardest decision!
 

hoofbeats95

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
1,442
We also had a hard time choosing a photographer.

Choice one was cheaper and we got ALL photos on disc.

Choice two was a lot more expensive and we had to pay to get like 50 images on disc.

The choice one photographer was very brisk with us at our meeting. We arrived early, but by the time of our true appt time there was a couple there for their engagement photo session and he brushed us off. Not quite sure what would have happened if we had arrived on time.

Choice two took a lot of time with us, was friendly and in general I liked her photos better.

We went with choice two. When we had our engagement session we had a BLAST and we got amazing photos. We knew we chose the right photographer. :) Follow your instinct.
 

sirbenson

Shiny_Rock
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Messages
229
^Problem is....my instinct is sitting on the fence on this one. I wish I had a "gut" feeling but I'm evenly divided ether way. And I thought picking a venue was hard!
 
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top