Agreed!

Santo

I think a better analogy would be wine and cheese - some brides have wine in a box and velveeta budget and mentality (not that there's anything wrong with that!), others appreciate a fine vintage wine and some delicately aged brie... point being it takes all kinds, learn to find the market/brides that fit what you're trying to do.

Knowing your market is a critical factor, as if your market won't support the high end, you either need to travel/market to a different area and be able to deliver, or work within the local market parameters.

From experience in another completely different business, I will say that when you bring quality into a market, and charge accordingly, the rest of the market will typically be drawn up both in price and quality, which is good for everyone. The "sell cheap" mindset won't last, as to do so you'd better have another income stream, or be ready to find another biz in relatively short order. You can't "make it up on quantity" as there are only so many hours you can work, and only so many weddings one can shoot in a given year... props to guys like Don who do A LOT of weddings in a season!

Economically speaking, you ultimately have to provide a service at a price the market will bear, at or above a quality level the market expects, or you'll be pursuing other ways to eat... Going "cheap" to get a demo reel is one thing, but getting prices up to a "living income" has to happen farily quickly. The market will either support it or it won't.

On the other side of things, the sooner more brides realize that the multi-media approach to documenting their day is superior to a single media in the long run, the more demand there will be for quality videography.

That is just what I had to do this year. I offer a $500 package now, but I still make the same per hour as I did on a $1200 package. I really think there is a place for different price ranges and quality in wedding video. I bet a lot of people would be seriously ticked if you went to buy a car and the ONLY options were mercedes and lexus. and on top of that the dealer gave you attitude and told you if you really valued transportation then you would fork over the 60K+ and like it!

I am a kia dealer by neccessity.

Perfect example Ethan - obviously there's tremendous value in both products and each have their strengths and weaknesses.
The passive (for lack of a better term) viewer experience that great photography can offer can't be underestimated.

I completely understand your frustration with the lack of perceived value with our craft when compared to photography. A little OT but I had a couple xxl a booking late in 08 because the chair cover people had decided to raise their prices by 10%. I was left scratching my head at the couples priorities - not to mention the front of the chair hire company.

As mentioned earlier in another poster, my thoughts would be that a steady, gradual increasing of your prices is most likely the best solution. The work I've seen of yours certainly justifies it.

Love this quote...

Ethan:

If you are producing videos showing people in ANY obviously drunk or compromised manner, you are doing a huge dis-service to the client. I think anyone would agree that type of activity should be 100% edited out (except in 4X4 mudbog stlye weddings).

Having been an adult when attending weddings 30 years ago, I can also assure you, you will not remember ANY details, much less the event, and would actually appreciate seeing and hearing long passed friends and family in video. Your scenario is totally incorrect IMO. Im guessing you are just a little younger than me, no offense, and don't have the middle age perspective and life experience yet.

With that said, I do agree that photos rank above video, but for a different reason. Photos are a more tangible property in that anyone can possess, store and view them quickly at any time, in any way they want, without any equipment or effort. Remember pulling out the old 8mm projector for a family evening of home movies? Video just requires an additional level of effort to use that changes their percieved value in both costs and intrinsic worth. Photos are more shared with everyone, and video is more shared with family and close friends. Summary: Photos=lots of use/big viewing audience - Video=limited viewing audience.

Another aspect of video vs. photos is quality and content.

A favorite photo you really love is 80% content and 20% quality/production.

A favorite video you really love is more 50% content and 50% quality/production. I believe it's more difficult to make a good video than a good photo. You can throw out photos you don't like and keep the very best ones. You don't have that opportunity with video except during the editing, and the client never has that opportunity.

Edit for Don: I can still remember my wedding, and I have a video! I can't remember any aspect of my sisters wedding or if I even went (Im sure I did) and that was only 27 years ago. Kinda scary.

I had a bride who I was shooting in about two weeks call and cancel. The wedding is still on, they are just canceling video. They booked our cheapest package ($1295). No recap, no highlights, just the ceremony and reception. They are getting married at a very nice church and the reception is at a mansion on St. Charles street (fancy street in New Orleans). One of my best friends is the photographer and he starts at $3,000.
The mother asked me what we could do about the deposit and I kindly told her that it was non-refundable, especially with the wedding being less than a month away. Now, will she bad mouth me to other mothers/brides and cost me business? Should I have just given her the $400 deposit back and sucked it up. I was torn between both.
BTW....Ethan, I referred a bride to you yesterday. Peace.

Jeff,
I agree wwith you. Hell I can't even remember my own wedding but then that was 40 years ago-you know back in the stone age ;-)

We've all had times during the reception that while getting some dance footage the drunk uncle gets into the veiwfinder, so when editing you cut him out while he's making an a** of himself BUT keeping in mind that MAYBE he's always like that. (I would hope not). Anyway, using common sense when doing the edit and keeping the best footage is a starting point but you also keep in mind that some of the older folks (and I fall into that catagory) might not be around in a few years and the couple would probably want to see them and maybe even hear them having fun at their wedding, so while I agree that photo does have a higher priority than video (in most cases) a well crafted video, solid stabile footage with excellant audio will live on for the ages and while most couples may not watch it as often as they look at the photos it is to me as important and not just because I do it. I wish I had more video of my mother at my kids weddings, my grandkids love to watch and hear their great grandmother whenever they can.

Chad, IF your service agreement reads non refundable then that's what it is-I had one recently that cancelled and according to my agreement I refunded 1/2 of the retainer-she called and bit**ed about it but when I told her to re-read the agreement that SHE signed she let it go. IF she bad mouths me, while I wouldn't like it, that's business and I am running a business not a charity. BTW, she cancelled because she ran out of money-not because she isn't getting married.
Just my opinion-stick to your agreement. Like my lawyer says, 'if it ain't in writing, it ain't'.

I completely agree with Don. If your contract states the deposit is non-refundable (which it should), then do NOT refund it. Be confident and stand by your contract. This is another one of those areas where I think our professionalism sometimes suffers. I know too many 'video guys' that just do whatever the B&G want even if it breaches the contract ... and I know some that don't even have a contract.

I know you're concerned about the MoB bad-mouthing you, but had you given them a refund then you're hurting yourself by setting a precedent there as well; better to set the precedent that your contract is the real deal.

You guys crack me up sometimes, I was using that as an extreme example to buttress my argument that the individual viewer assigns their own meaning to the photos and that the beauty of photos for purposes of memories is that they can be taken out of context.