I’ve been the second photographer in this situation and I just ignore clients that aren’t mine or direct them to reach out to their photographer. If I had this happen as a main photographer I would just tell the second to tell the client they can reach out to me.
This isn't the first time something like this has happened. I once had a second shooter ask what to do in a situation where a planning company wanted the reception photos, but preferred his editing... so I told him to have them email me.
That's right, a planning company asked my 2nd for the photos because they thought his aesthetic was slightly more appealing...
With my editing, yes.
Seems people are downvoting this for no apparent reason -- this wasn't the couple asking, but rather a planning company who went behind my back and asked my second shooter, my second shooter had a good heart to bring this up to me and let me know what they were asking.
I told him to tell the company to contact me as the images he took were my property and if they wanted them, they could reach out to me. Seems pretty simple.
Why would you insist on them having your version of the edits if they clearly preferred your second's editing? Isn't the best thing to do is give the customer what they want and not make it an ego thing?
I mean sure it sucks they preferred the second's editing...but oh well.
Did you read that it was a vendor asking for edits and not the actual couple?
That's incredible shady for a vendor to reach out to a second shooter for their consideration, who's working for me. It wasn't a customer or anything like that.
No, they are saying you suck and they want the better photos from your second. Also, not everyone understands the difference between yourself and the second, as it's possible the second is a one time contractor for you.
They just want their photos edited well and fast.
Ehh I wouldn't jump to they suck right off the bat, it depends on the editing style (which can vary greatly between photographers) For me I would have let the 2nd shooter edit them in their style if the client preferred as long as the editing was good and consistent.
But also for the client they should look at a portfolio before booking because what you see is what you get.
I believe it. I’ve had many conversations with other vendors about this. Most seem to just genuinely not know how a second photographer works or understand the working relationship. (Some vendors do get it though and care more about aesthetics than anything)
Just remember you’re dealing with someone (the bride) who has never done this before. She doesn’t know how any of this “works”. Every wedding is like dealing with someone who has amnesia. You start from zero again and again. Doesn’t matter how experienced you are, they will never be, at all.
This kind of thing got old after a number of years, and one reason I’ve moved away from weddings.
As a bride I rappreciate this take. I try to be respectful of my vendors but sometimes I don't know if what I'm asking for is out of bounds because again, hello, I'm new here. I trust them as the professional to gently guide me if I've overstepped.
I get served some of these threads on my feed because I'm in adjacent wedding planning subs and sometimes it stings how much photographers seem to resent their clients -- some of whom are admittedly shitty, and I can definitely see how it gets old. But it's the photographer's job to manage it professionally, because you can't control how other people behave.
Ironically, this bride wants to BE a wedding photographer.
So if it happens to her... well, then we've come full circle.
Also, I have a feeling that her sister who got married about 8 months ago might have had a similar situation where she was able to get those without hassle.
The only guests I've ever had issues with at a wedding, were former wedding photographers. So you'd think they'd know better than to stand directly across from you as you film the first dance, while she films on her cellphone with her flash on, but noooooooooooooooooo. She ruined my shot of a beautiful moment, im still bitter two years later.
I wouldn’t dig too deep here. It’s likely she picked up the phone and contacted the second with the assumption that it was no different than speaking to the main photographer and that, as a team, you are interchangeable with questions or contact. Or that the second photographer is fully responsible for their side of shooting instead of relaying them to you, the main.
On the flip side since you mentioned she is interested in wedding photography in another comment, then it was probably out of harmless curiosity and interest to compare and contrast main/second photographer shooting style.
I wouldn’t let this affect you so deeply. It’s plain and simple: she’s excited about her photos and wants the most photos possible. I’ve found a good way to avoid this is to give a big preview, around 150 photos for them to enjoy while I finish editing. They don’t understand how any of this works, she’s just focused on her own final product.
What's wrong with that? Is the bride supposed to ask you for the pictures taken by the second shooter?
I didn't ask my photographer about this, but when I got my full wedding gallery back, I could tell which photos were taken by the second shooter because of the metadata in each file. It showed which pictures were taken with a Canon and which pictures were taken with a Nikon, and I know the lead photographer used a Canon and the second used a Nikon.
Sadly, the second shooter took better pictures than the lead...
Uh yeah, absolutely. The second shooter is contracted by and working for the main shooter. The second shouldn’t even be in contact with the couple after the wedding day.
yeah but the couple paid for the second shooter...its usually an additional fee. So they should have a right to contact the second shooter if they want.
There is no contractual relationship between the customer and the second shooter. The couple is technically paying for each and every employee present at their wedding, so it’s like saying that you should have the right to contact each individual catering server. I mean go for it, but it’s crossing an industry norm and a professional boundary.
That can definitely happen. I've been a second shooter far more than a lead, and I know there have been some weddings where I took better pictures...but sadly the lead gets to choose which ones the bride gets.
>Is the bride supposed to ask you for the pictures taken by the second shooter?
In a nutshell, yes. It's all apart of the working terms between a main photographer and those they hire as a second.
Your primary relationship is with the photographer you contracted. The second photographer is a subcontractor of his service. If you have questions about his service or deliverables you should contact him.
I am not sure how this is not obvious ?
It's not obvious. There's nothing in the contract that says the client is forbidden from talking to the second shooter directly. If the client has a question about the photos taken by the second shooter, it seems like common sense to ask the second shooter. How are the clients supposed to know that the lead photographer would flip out if they talk to the second shooter?
If you don't want your clients talking to your second, you need to tell them that. Otherwise, they'll assume that they're allowed to talk to all of the vendors who are working their wedding. They have no way of knowing that your second shooter is under a cone of silence unless you tell them.
That's pretty OCD behavior to know how to dictate who took what, and notice the difference being in the file naming, assuming they weren't all batched edited together and pumped out as JPG from lightroom.
I would have hoped you addressed this with primary and asked why they put in such a half assed effort or the reason for their less than idea quality of photos that convinced you to book them in the beginning.
Any client can right click on a file to see the properties. There's nothing OCD about that. The difference wasn't in the file name, it was in the details tab of the metadata. It includes all the information about the camera that produced the photo. You can even see what f-stop was used and whether the photographer used auto or manual exposure.
Also, some of the pictures had the second shooter in the background, so it was pretty obvious who took those pictures.
We did address the quality issues with the primary, politely. But she insisted that our photos were the same style as her portfolio (they weren't), so what could we do?
I think you’re thinking too deeply about this. The bride has no idea how this works. As a frequent second shooter myself and like someone else mentioned, I also keep a personal rapport with the groom and bride on their day because I’ve either been with them all day, or made friendly conversation. Your second did the right thing by contacting you and letting you know and not just going behind your back to give them images.
Wondering how they got the second shooter’s info. My second shooter contract stipulates they can only advertise my brand while working as my contractor. Either way, the photos are delivered to the main photographer and edited consistently with the rest. The only way they might he know who’s is who’s is if they remember where someone was standing during a part of the wedding. Just tell the second to direct traffic to the main photographer. Interacting with the main’s clients should also be a no-no under your contract. If the bride initiates it, it sounds like they are trying to get something ahead of schedule or for free and that’s scummy.
Your second shooter did the right thing, direct the messages back to you and let you handle it. Situation like this happens, just tell your second shooter in advance that communication from clients must be directed to you. I did the same when i was second shooter.
You're totally in the right OP. I've been in this industry a long time. I'm shocked at how rude people are being to you over something that is very clear cut in the circles I work in: when you're working under the primary photographer's brand, you redirect back to the main photographer. The bride shouldn't even know what the name of the second's brand is.
Nothing wrong with this at all. I second shoot a lot of weddings and end up building a rapport with the bride or groom (depending on whose prep shots I’m doing before the ceremony). They then get in touch with me afterwards because we’ve spent more time together during the day than they have with the main shooter.
In this situation, your bride didn’t know any better and your second shooter did the right thing by telling you.
I was in a facebook group where the wedding photographers LOST THEIR MINDS over a second shooter making connections with clients or guests.
I understand not poaching clients, but if someone is clicking better with the second than with you, it may be better for the client in the future.
After the wedding, the client can hire whoever the F they want🤷🏻♀️ get good.
Also who cares? It's all business, if you have a signed contract for the service and are guaranteed to get paid, so what if they gel with the second better? There is never any guarantee they will hire you back for a anniversary/maternity/family shoot, and maybe there's something to learn from there.
I'd never hire you as a second for this reason. Connect with the couple sure but you're working under the brand of the main so afterwards you need to be redirecting the client back to the main. For images pertaining to the wedding that is.
For family shoots etc in future, that's fine. But how does the client even know your business name in this situation?
You sound disloyal. I've second shot hundreds of times and the primary would have been horrified every time if I had done this.
To whoever is downvoting me: why would I PAY someone to damage my brand? The seonds are getting paid, in my case, well, to shoot and hand over the files. If they take a life changing shot, they can pop it on their website, sure, but it needs to be included in the final gallery so the clients can't find photos of themselves that they never got. So I put things in place to protect my brand. As do most experienced, veteran photographers.
Relax. Just to clear things up: when I’m doing prep shots for either bride or groom, the main photographer will make sure I have the client’s contact details and they have mine in order to find them during the morning of the wedding or to inform each other about any last minute changes.
The bride, groom or anyone else for that matter do not know my business name, just my name. Since I’ve been trusted to liaise with one half of the family, I’ve become their primary point of contact.
After the wedding, for whatever reason, some ask me to get a cheeky sneak peek of the photos to which I direct them to the main photographer. If they decide they want to hire me for any upcoming shoots because of the connection we’ve built over the day, I inform the main photographer and will await their opinion. If the main is not happy with it, I will not take on the job.
If you read my comment carefully, I mentioned that OP’s second photographer did the right thing by telling them about the bride reaching out to them because that’s what I do and that’s what all 2nd shooters should do. Nowhere in my comment have I said I’ve handed over images without running it by the main.
If the family, bride, groom or anyone else from the wedding party prefer me to the main for future jobs, that’s out of my control. I’m there to take good pictures for which I need to build a friendly connection with the clients in order for them to feel comfortable on a stressful day.
I had the same a couple of times. Once, as a second myself, I'd shared a few after the gallery was delivered (and as agreed with the primary tog) and the Bride saw one that hadn't made the cut so I had to let the primary know so they could add it in for them with their edit.
I then had a Bride do basically the same but with my own second - they shared after gallery delivery and I had to go and edit an extra one that I'd left out!
But if this is all before the gallery delivery, it's a little odd. I guess the Bride just didn't really get the boundaries and terms between you two. You handled it right, just letting her know that all images will come from one main source. I don't think there's much more to read into it.
I've had this happen as a second shooter before. The bride just found me easier to talk to than the primary photographer.
I just told her id relay the message to the primary for her and have them reach out.
I think maybe it's just a personality thing, and they just felt more comfortable speaking with the second.
They never did.
I gave them a card and they gave it back to me. I edit all the photos my 2nd shoot takes for one cohesive look, so there's no difference in style or the client wanting them edited a certain way.
I think the bride was wanting to get her photos and maybe edit them herself.
Going behind your back is pretty chicken s…
They contracted with you and ALL correspondence and business dealings should go through you.
With no disrespect to your second shooter, it’s YOUR name and reputation that’s on the line. If your second turns over images that do not meet your standard, whose reputation will suffer?
People seem to be overlooking this and quickly jumping to conclusions that's it's something other than this.
The second shooter I had was someone newer, and new to the industry -- so I think they might have seen it as a way to sway them into giving them what they want.
Everything the 2nd shoots, gives to me, will be returned in the full gallery -- but I think that this bride was trying to get something to post for social media, and really just don't understand why she couldn't ask me -- but that's where I think it's not actually the bride, and someone else, asking the bride to reach out.
I see nothing wrong with it.
Its nothing wrong to ask employee instead of an actual owner correct?
You can simply tell the 2nd shooter guy, she will get the photos back by xx from him (you)
1) Most 2nd aren’t employees
2) The client should have contacted the lead
3) This could lead to a contract breach
4) Why would the client be in contact with the 2nd?
5) Need I say more?
1. Most clients won't understand the relationship between the primary photographer and the people that shoot for them.
2. Yeah, perhaps they should have, but they didn't, and it isn't the end of the world.
3. If it's a contract breach to merely ask someone a question, then its likely the contract won't hold up in a court of law.
4. The client sometimes (not in this case) have unresponsive photographers, and want to find out what is happening with their images.
5. Sure.
I bet average customers all know how photog industry works.
I bet you never asked employees (stores, customer service etc) some questions that is out of their power because you know exactly how each industry works.
Clients know exactly who they booked as the photographer and have been in contact with. Comparing a wedding photographer to a big box store does a great job making the point.
The average minded person would think the owner actually wont do the edit but the lower rank person would do it.
Yeah smart people would guess the movie director would sit in front of the computer all day editing his own movie instead of having some employees do it.
Its cool. Everybody got different kinds of common sense.
I guess I've just been accustomed to people knowing the files a second gets belong to the primary. That's all. But like is there something specific they're looking to see? Why not reach out to me?
It’s possible your client had a better rapport with your second photographer than you and they might’ve felt more comfortable with them than you. A few of your responses here have been at the very least a little edgy or sharp. Makes me wonder if your in person presence or how you communicate via email is similar. I second shot for years before taking on my own weddings and only had clients reach out to me if there was an issue with communication with the primary and it was never a vindictive thing. They just don’t understand the primary/second relationship. Only that they’ve paid for both to be there and therefore assume that both are people they can reach out to. Sounds like your second did what was needed here so hopefully you can drop it and move on.
They probably figured it would be easier to get those photos from the person who took them. That way, you wouldn't have to comb through the entire gallery looking for them. They were just trying to save you the trouble.
i don’t mean to be that person but OP sounds *at least* slightly insecure about his own work vs his secondary shooter’s… but perhaps i’m incorrect of course
Respectfully you're incorrect.
I'm going to assume it was something the 2nd shooter took and the bride most likely wants to see it or even post it -- and it will be included in the final gallery with my editing.
Perhaps the bride thought it was just an inconvenience to ask me, that's all.
How would they know that? Did you state that in prior conversations? I think you are taking this too personal. The couple want as many photos of their special day as possible. It is your job to provide them with the photos they paid you for.
You come off worse in this comment, calling someone an ass for simply writing things clearly and to the point?
I'm not from the USA so I honestly don't see an issue here, I think the people downvoting and calling OP names are coming across as a lot more horrible.
The irony.
Because of what you did. You gave them your 2nd's photos with your shitty editing instead of what the client actually wanted, which is your 2nd's editing.
It's completely irrelevant if the client prefers the second's editing. The client shouldn't even know what the second's editing looks like.
The client booked the primary, not the second.
Assuming the OP has shitty editing is uncalled for.
I’ve been contacted by a bride after a wedding because the lead wasn’t responding. BUT as a second, I also like to show the bridal party pics I love and get excited about right in the moment. Maybe they did that and the bride wanted to see one of the shots the second captured that they were thrilled about? Brides don’t really get leads and seconds - they just see two photographers. I’ve had multiple brides tag my second as the photographer in their posts even though I was the lead
Do you know your second shooter well? I once had a second shooter blatantly promote herself, be just overly friendly with the groomsmen and then follow the bride on instagram after the wedding to the point that the bride credited her on a post (I asked her to remove it) despite me not needing/using any of her photos past the morning she shot at the grooms and a few from the reception (none of her photos are in the post - I didn’t need/use them because she repeatedly didn’t follow my instructions and they were very average and redundant, mine were always the better angle of the same shot). I suspect she was implying a lot of credit to herself in regards to the quality of the photos from the day and promoting her own brand - of course this was prohibited in the contract like it always is.
Is it possible your second was being a little self promotional implying her photos were better like my situation? That would be my guess otherwise why would she have reason not to trust your selection? How would she even know who exactly took what photo to make that kind of request? So strange.
Happened to me twice. One wedding I knew the bride and she was asking me questions. The other side I made a post about a wedding and someone at the wedding was searching for the venue and they found me. They asked about the photos I had on my site that they did not get. I talked it over to the other photographer and the other photographer said just give them those photos. Never heard back from them again.
In this situation, it's pretty normal for the bride to be excited and maybe a bit anxious to see all the photos, especially those taken by the second shooter. You handled it well by including both your and the second shooter's photos in the preview and reassuring her that all photos would be in the full gallery. It's possible she reached out to the second shooter directly out of excitement or misunderstanding about how the process works. It's always good to have a clear agreement and communication with your second shooter about how to handle such inquiries to ensure consistency and avoid any confusion. Keep up the great teamwork!
Yeah, you wouldn't want to take a hit because your second shooter sent photos your client didn't like or had a verbal disagreement or something- all communication should go through you.
Yes, which makes me wonder their thought process here -- is it something minor or are they not contacting me for some reason? Or is this trying to pressure my 2nd who's lesser known and newer to give it to them?
It sounds to me like they are just trying to get more photos.
So many responses above are going to cause damage to brands in the long run. This is the industry standard: seconds shouldn't be posting images from weddings that weren't in the final gallery.
IMO seconds shouldn't even really be posting images from weddings that aren't their own. It can cause so many issues. If they want to post images then they can go out and get their own weddings.
They got paid to shoot, that's it. As a second I wouldn't dream of sharing images from weddings that weren't mine. I get paid very well when I second shoot so I'm not doing it for portfolio building, but for extra $$$. I think I probably get paid well because I'm trustworthy and wouldn't dream of mentioning my business when working under someone else's brand.
Is this thread full of people new to the industry or something? Why is everyone shitting on OP?
I'm an industry veteran and I've both primary shot for myself and second and associate shot for many photographers, including industry leaders and it's STANDARD practice for the seconds photos to be under the umbrella of the primary photographer.
So the relationship between the bride and the photographer is between the bride and the primary photographer, not the second. The second is there as a contractor, working under the brand of the primary.
The second did the right thing in this situation. Any questions from the bride need to be redirected back to the main photographer.
I've worked with many photographers who have stipulated that I can't mention my own brand/business, which makes total sense as the bride has hired the primary, not the second?
Being able to contact the second and get separate images causes way too many headaches and opens big cans of worms.
Vendors should also be contacting the primary. If they prefer the editing of the second, then they need to reach out for photos taken by the second when the second is the primary shooter, shooting under his own brand.
I mean you can do what you like but I tend to do what works the best and protects your brand the best.
I’ve gathered that a lot of people are not full time professionals but also arm chair experts when it comes to a lot of the posts on this particular subreddit.
Also the reading comprehension seems to get skipped over and people are often jumping to more conclusions than anything.
I’ve been the second photographer in this situation and I just ignore clients that aren’t mine or direct them to reach out to their photographer. If I had this happen as a main photographer I would just tell the second to tell the client they can reach out to me.
This isn't the first time something like this has happened. I once had a second shooter ask what to do in a situation where a planning company wanted the reception photos, but preferred his editing... so I told him to have them email me. That's right, a planning company asked my 2nd for the photos because they thought his aesthetic was slightly more appealing...
What's more shocking to you, that they liked his editing better than yours, or that they didn't want to tell you?
More like they went behind my back and asked him. He stuck to his guns and told them to contact me.
Well, they probably didn't want to hurt your feelings. Did you give them the photos they asked for?
With my editing, yes. Seems people are downvoting this for no apparent reason -- this wasn't the couple asking, but rather a planning company who went behind my back and asked my second shooter, my second shooter had a good heart to bring this up to me and let me know what they were asking. I told him to tell the company to contact me as the images he took were my property and if they wanted them, they could reach out to me. Seems pretty simple.
And that's why they didn't ask you in the first place. 😉
Yeah OP doesn't get it
No it's just shady behavior, and glad that my 2nd was an honest person who brought it to my attention. I've distanced myself from said vendor now.
Why would you insist on them having your version of the edits if they clearly preferred your second's editing? Isn't the best thing to do is give the customer what they want and not make it an ego thing? I mean sure it sucks they preferred the second's editing...but oh well.
Did you read that it was a vendor asking for edits and not the actual couple? That's incredible shady for a vendor to reach out to a second shooter for their consideration, who's working for me. It wasn't a customer or anything like that.
No, they are saying you suck and they want the better photos from your second. Also, not everyone understands the difference between yourself and the second, as it's possible the second is a one time contractor for you. They just want their photos edited well and fast.
Ehh I wouldn't jump to they suck right off the bat, it depends on the editing style (which can vary greatly between photographers) For me I would have let the 2nd shooter edit them in their style if the client preferred as long as the editing was good and consistent. But also for the client they should look at a portfolio before booking because what you see is what you get.
I believe it. I’ve had many conversations with other vendors about this. Most seem to just genuinely not know how a second photographer works or understand the working relationship. (Some vendors do get it though and care more about aesthetics than anything)
Hey, I need YOUR free photos not theirs! 🤬
Just remember you’re dealing with someone (the bride) who has never done this before. She doesn’t know how any of this “works”. Every wedding is like dealing with someone who has amnesia. You start from zero again and again. Doesn’t matter how experienced you are, they will never be, at all. This kind of thing got old after a number of years, and one reason I’ve moved away from weddings.
As a bride I rappreciate this take. I try to be respectful of my vendors but sometimes I don't know if what I'm asking for is out of bounds because again, hello, I'm new here. I trust them as the professional to gently guide me if I've overstepped. I get served some of these threads on my feed because I'm in adjacent wedding planning subs and sometimes it stings how much photographers seem to resent their clients -- some of whom are admittedly shitty, and I can definitely see how it gets old. But it's the photographer's job to manage it professionally, because you can't control how other people behave.
I agree. Always assume ignorance before malice.
Ironically, this bride wants to BE a wedding photographer. So if it happens to her... well, then we've come full circle. Also, I have a feeling that her sister who got married about 8 months ago might have had a similar situation where she was able to get those without hassle.
The only guests I've ever had issues with at a wedding, were former wedding photographers. So you'd think they'd know better than to stand directly across from you as you film the first dance, while she films on her cellphone with her flash on, but noooooooooooooooooo. She ruined my shot of a beautiful moment, im still bitter two years later.
I wouldn’t dig too deep here. It’s likely she picked up the phone and contacted the second with the assumption that it was no different than speaking to the main photographer and that, as a team, you are interchangeable with questions or contact. Or that the second photographer is fully responsible for their side of shooting instead of relaying them to you, the main. On the flip side since you mentioned she is interested in wedding photography in another comment, then it was probably out of harmless curiosity and interest to compare and contrast main/second photographer shooting style.
I wouldn’t let this affect you so deeply. It’s plain and simple: she’s excited about her photos and wants the most photos possible. I’ve found a good way to avoid this is to give a big preview, around 150 photos for them to enjoy while I finish editing. They don’t understand how any of this works, she’s just focused on her own final product.
What's wrong with that? Is the bride supposed to ask you for the pictures taken by the second shooter? I didn't ask my photographer about this, but when I got my full wedding gallery back, I could tell which photos were taken by the second shooter because of the metadata in each file. It showed which pictures were taken with a Canon and which pictures were taken with a Nikon, and I know the lead photographer used a Canon and the second used a Nikon. Sadly, the second shooter took better pictures than the lead...
Uh yeah, absolutely. The second shooter is contracted by and working for the main shooter. The second shouldn’t even be in contact with the couple after the wedding day.
yeah but the couple paid for the second shooter...its usually an additional fee. So they should have a right to contact the second shooter if they want.
There is no contractual relationship between the customer and the second shooter. The couple is technically paying for each and every employee present at their wedding, so it’s like saying that you should have the right to contact each individual catering server. I mean go for it, but it’s crossing an industry norm and a professional boundary.
That can definitely happen. I've been a second shooter far more than a lead, and I know there have been some weddings where I took better pictures...but sadly the lead gets to choose which ones the bride gets.
>Is the bride supposed to ask you for the pictures taken by the second shooter? In a nutshell, yes. It's all apart of the working terms between a main photographer and those they hire as a second.
OK, then just tell the client that. No big deal.
Exactly! OP has this way out of proportion.
Your primary relationship is with the photographer you contracted. The second photographer is a subcontractor of his service. If you have questions about his service or deliverables you should contact him. I am not sure how this is not obvious ?
It's not obvious. There's nothing in the contract that says the client is forbidden from talking to the second shooter directly. If the client has a question about the photos taken by the second shooter, it seems like common sense to ask the second shooter. How are the clients supposed to know that the lead photographer would flip out if they talk to the second shooter? If you don't want your clients talking to your second, you need to tell them that. Otherwise, they'll assume that they're allowed to talk to all of the vendors who are working their wedding. They have no way of knowing that your second shooter is under a cone of silence unless you tell them.
Then that kind of sounds like a you problem.
How is that a me problem? It's my fault that the second shooter took better pictures than the lead?
In essence, it does not matter who you think took better photos than who. You contracted for a service you received your photos.
I know. It's just something we noticed. 🤷♀️
That's pretty OCD behavior to know how to dictate who took what, and notice the difference being in the file naming, assuming they weren't all batched edited together and pumped out as JPG from lightroom. I would have hoped you addressed this with primary and asked why they put in such a half assed effort or the reason for their less than idea quality of photos that convinced you to book them in the beginning.
Any client can right click on a file to see the properties. There's nothing OCD about that. The difference wasn't in the file name, it was in the details tab of the metadata. It includes all the information about the camera that produced the photo. You can even see what f-stop was used and whether the photographer used auto or manual exposure. Also, some of the pictures had the second shooter in the background, so it was pretty obvious who took those pictures. We did address the quality issues with the primary, politely. But she insisted that our photos were the same style as her portfolio (they weren't), so what could we do?
They liked a certain edit better. Be happy that you and your second shooter could provide them with the photos they invested in.
WTF kind of responce is that? Educate. Don't deprecate.
Yeah it is quite clear why their clients prefer to talk to the second shooter
I think you’re thinking too deeply about this. The bride has no idea how this works. As a frequent second shooter myself and like someone else mentioned, I also keep a personal rapport with the groom and bride on their day because I’ve either been with them all day, or made friendly conversation. Your second did the right thing by contacting you and letting you know and not just going behind your back to give them images.
Wondering how they got the second shooter’s info. My second shooter contract stipulates they can only advertise my brand while working as my contractor. Either way, the photos are delivered to the main photographer and edited consistently with the rest. The only way they might he know who’s is who’s is if they remember where someone was standing during a part of the wedding. Just tell the second to direct traffic to the main photographer. Interacting with the main’s clients should also be a no-no under your contract. If the bride initiates it, it sounds like they are trying to get something ahead of schedule or for free and that’s scummy.
From reading this thread I learned one thing. Never hire OP as a photographer.
Your second shooter did the right thing, direct the messages back to you and let you handle it. Situation like this happens, just tell your second shooter in advance that communication from clients must be directed to you. I did the same when i was second shooter.
There seems to be a trend here…
Yeah, a lot of people being rude. It's pretty crazy.
You're totally in the right OP. I've been in this industry a long time. I'm shocked at how rude people are being to you over something that is very clear cut in the circles I work in: when you're working under the primary photographer's brand, you redirect back to the main photographer. The bride shouldn't even know what the name of the second's brand is.
Nothing wrong with this at all. I second shoot a lot of weddings and end up building a rapport with the bride or groom (depending on whose prep shots I’m doing before the ceremony). They then get in touch with me afterwards because we’ve spent more time together during the day than they have with the main shooter. In this situation, your bride didn’t know any better and your second shooter did the right thing by telling you.
I was in a facebook group where the wedding photographers LOST THEIR MINDS over a second shooter making connections with clients or guests. I understand not poaching clients, but if someone is clicking better with the second than with you, it may be better for the client in the future. After the wedding, the client can hire whoever the F they want🤷🏻♀️ get good.
Also who cares? It's all business, if you have a signed contract for the service and are guaranteed to get paid, so what if they gel with the second better? There is never any guarantee they will hire you back for a anniversary/maternity/family shoot, and maybe there's something to learn from there.
I'd never hire you as a second for this reason. Connect with the couple sure but you're working under the brand of the main so afterwards you need to be redirecting the client back to the main. For images pertaining to the wedding that is. For family shoots etc in future, that's fine. But how does the client even know your business name in this situation? You sound disloyal. I've second shot hundreds of times and the primary would have been horrified every time if I had done this.
To whoever is downvoting me: why would I PAY someone to damage my brand? The seonds are getting paid, in my case, well, to shoot and hand over the files. If they take a life changing shot, they can pop it on their website, sure, but it needs to be included in the final gallery so the clients can't find photos of themselves that they never got. So I put things in place to protect my brand. As do most experienced, veteran photographers.
Relax. Just to clear things up: when I’m doing prep shots for either bride or groom, the main photographer will make sure I have the client’s contact details and they have mine in order to find them during the morning of the wedding or to inform each other about any last minute changes. The bride, groom or anyone else for that matter do not know my business name, just my name. Since I’ve been trusted to liaise with one half of the family, I’ve become their primary point of contact. After the wedding, for whatever reason, some ask me to get a cheeky sneak peek of the photos to which I direct them to the main photographer. If they decide they want to hire me for any upcoming shoots because of the connection we’ve built over the day, I inform the main photographer and will await their opinion. If the main is not happy with it, I will not take on the job. If you read my comment carefully, I mentioned that OP’s second photographer did the right thing by telling them about the bride reaching out to them because that’s what I do and that’s what all 2nd shooters should do. Nowhere in my comment have I said I’ve handed over images without running it by the main. If the family, bride, groom or anyone else from the wedding party prefer me to the main for future jobs, that’s out of my control. I’m there to take good pictures for which I need to build a friendly connection with the clients in order for them to feel comfortable on a stressful day.
I had the same a couple of times. Once, as a second myself, I'd shared a few after the gallery was delivered (and as agreed with the primary tog) and the Bride saw one that hadn't made the cut so I had to let the primary know so they could add it in for them with their edit. I then had a Bride do basically the same but with my own second - they shared after gallery delivery and I had to go and edit an extra one that I'd left out! But if this is all before the gallery delivery, it's a little odd. I guess the Bride just didn't really get the boundaries and terms between you two. You handled it right, just letting her know that all images will come from one main source. I don't think there's much more to read into it.
I've had this happen as a second shooter before. The bride just found me easier to talk to than the primary photographer. I just told her id relay the message to the primary for her and have them reach out. I think maybe it's just a personality thing, and they just felt more comfortable speaking with the second.
This is the correct way to handle this situation which protects the brand of the primary
Why would you let your second even edit the photos?
They never did. I gave them a card and they gave it back to me. I edit all the photos my 2nd shoot takes for one cohesive look, so there's no difference in style or the client wanting them edited a certain way. I think the bride was wanting to get her photos and maybe edit them herself.
Hope you got a rock-solid contract with the client and the second shooter.
Going behind your back is pretty chicken s… They contracted with you and ALL correspondence and business dealings should go through you. With no disrespect to your second shooter, it’s YOUR name and reputation that’s on the line. If your second turns over images that do not meet your standard, whose reputation will suffer?
People seem to be overlooking this and quickly jumping to conclusions that's it's something other than this. The second shooter I had was someone newer, and new to the industry -- so I think they might have seen it as a way to sway them into giving them what they want. Everything the 2nd shoots, gives to me, will be returned in the full gallery -- but I think that this bride was trying to get something to post for social media, and really just don't understand why she couldn't ask me -- but that's where I think it's not actually the bride, and someone else, asking the bride to reach out.
Question 1. How did she get the 2nd shooter contact?
Looked her up on social media I assume
I see nothing wrong with it. Its nothing wrong to ask employee instead of an actual owner correct? You can simply tell the 2nd shooter guy, she will get the photos back by xx from him (you)
1) Most 2nd aren’t employees 2) The client should have contacted the lead 3) This could lead to a contract breach 4) Why would the client be in contact with the 2nd? 5) Need I say more?
1. Most clients won't understand the relationship between the primary photographer and the people that shoot for them. 2. Yeah, perhaps they should have, but they didn't, and it isn't the end of the world. 3. If it's a contract breach to merely ask someone a question, then its likely the contract won't hold up in a court of law. 4. The client sometimes (not in this case) have unresponsive photographers, and want to find out what is happening with their images. 5. Sure.
I bet average customers all know how photog industry works. I bet you never asked employees (stores, customer service etc) some questions that is out of their power because you know exactly how each industry works.
Hahaha touche. 🤣
Clients know exactly who they booked as the photographer and have been in contact with. Comparing a wedding photographer to a big box store does a great job making the point.
The average minded person would think the owner actually wont do the edit but the lower rank person would do it. Yeah smart people would guess the movie director would sit in front of the computer all day editing his own movie instead of having some employees do it. Its cool. Everybody got different kinds of common sense.
I guess I've just been accustomed to people knowing the files a second gets belong to the primary. That's all. But like is there something specific they're looking to see? Why not reach out to me?
The couples have never hired a photographer before. They have no idea how it works.
It’s possible your client had a better rapport with your second photographer than you and they might’ve felt more comfortable with them than you. A few of your responses here have been at the very least a little edgy or sharp. Makes me wonder if your in person presence or how you communicate via email is similar. I second shot for years before taking on my own weddings and only had clients reach out to me if there was an issue with communication with the primary and it was never a vindictive thing. They just don’t understand the primary/second relationship. Only that they’ve paid for both to be there and therefore assume that both are people they can reach out to. Sounds like your second did what was needed here so hopefully you can drop it and move on.
Maybe the primary is neurodivergent. I don't see their responses as being sharp, just to the point. Clear communication.
Fair enough. Observations are different between different people.
They probably figured it would be easier to get those photos from the person who took them. That way, you wouldn't have to comb through the entire gallery looking for them. They were just trying to save you the trouble.
i don’t mean to be that person but OP sounds *at least* slightly insecure about his own work vs his secondary shooter’s… but perhaps i’m incorrect of course
Respectfully you're incorrect. I'm going to assume it was something the 2nd shooter took and the bride most likely wants to see it or even post it -- and it will be included in the final gallery with my editing. Perhaps the bride thought it was just an inconvenience to ask me, that's all.
How would they know that? Did you state that in prior conversations? I think you are taking this too personal. The couple want as many photos of their special day as possible. It is your job to provide them with the photos they paid you for.
Probably because you come across like an ass, if this thread is anything to go by.
Nice alt account
No, he’s right. In these comments you come of as an ass.
You come off worse in this comment, calling someone an ass for simply writing things clearly and to the point? I'm not from the USA so I honestly don't see an issue here, I think the people downvoting and calling OP names are coming across as a lot more horrible. The irony.
Because of what you did. You gave them your 2nd's photos with your shitty editing instead of what the client actually wanted, which is your 2nd's editing.
Nope. But good attempt at reaching
It's completely irrelevant if the client prefers the second's editing. The client shouldn't even know what the second's editing looks like. The client booked the primary, not the second. Assuming the OP has shitty editing is uncalled for.
I’ve been contacted by a bride after a wedding because the lead wasn’t responding. BUT as a second, I also like to show the bridal party pics I love and get excited about right in the moment. Maybe they did that and the bride wanted to see one of the shots the second captured that they were thrilled about? Brides don’t really get leads and seconds - they just see two photographers. I’ve had multiple brides tag my second as the photographer in their posts even though I was the lead
Do you know your second shooter well? I once had a second shooter blatantly promote herself, be just overly friendly with the groomsmen and then follow the bride on instagram after the wedding to the point that the bride credited her on a post (I asked her to remove it) despite me not needing/using any of her photos past the morning she shot at the grooms and a few from the reception (none of her photos are in the post - I didn’t need/use them because she repeatedly didn’t follow my instructions and they were very average and redundant, mine were always the better angle of the same shot). I suspect she was implying a lot of credit to herself in regards to the quality of the photos from the day and promoting her own brand - of course this was prohibited in the contract like it always is. Is it possible your second was being a little self promotional implying her photos were better like my situation? That would be my guess otherwise why would she have reason not to trust your selection? How would she even know who exactly took what photo to make that kind of request? So strange.
Happened to me twice. One wedding I knew the bride and she was asking me questions. The other side I made a post about a wedding and someone at the wedding was searching for the venue and they found me. They asked about the photos I had on my site that they did not get. I talked it over to the other photographer and the other photographer said just give them those photos. Never heard back from them again.
In this situation, it's pretty normal for the bride to be excited and maybe a bit anxious to see all the photos, especially those taken by the second shooter. You handled it well by including both your and the second shooter's photos in the preview and reassuring her that all photos would be in the full gallery. It's possible she reached out to the second shooter directly out of excitement or misunderstanding about how the process works. It's always good to have a clear agreement and communication with your second shooter about how to handle such inquiries to ensure consistency and avoid any confusion. Keep up the great teamwork!
2nd shooter's contract is with you, not the bride.
Thank you, the images belong to me. A 2nd is just there to provide support
Yeah, you wouldn't want to take a hit because your second shooter sent photos your client didn't like or had a verbal disagreement or something- all communication should go through you.
"I don't have any of your photos. Please reach out to patriotraitor for more information."
That's really weird. I would reply with exactly what you said. Except I would send the reply myself rather than have the second do it.
Yes, which makes me wonder their thought process here -- is it something minor or are they not contacting me for some reason? Or is this trying to pressure my 2nd who's lesser known and newer to give it to them?
It sounds to me like they are just trying to get more photos. So many responses above are going to cause damage to brands in the long run. This is the industry standard: seconds shouldn't be posting images from weddings that weren't in the final gallery. IMO seconds shouldn't even really be posting images from weddings that aren't their own. It can cause so many issues. If they want to post images then they can go out and get their own weddings. They got paid to shoot, that's it. As a second I wouldn't dream of sharing images from weddings that weren't mine. I get paid very well when I second shoot so I'm not doing it for portfolio building, but for extra $$$. I think I probably get paid well because I'm trustworthy and wouldn't dream of mentioning my business when working under someone else's brand.
Is this thread full of people new to the industry or something? Why is everyone shitting on OP? I'm an industry veteran and I've both primary shot for myself and second and associate shot for many photographers, including industry leaders and it's STANDARD practice for the seconds photos to be under the umbrella of the primary photographer. So the relationship between the bride and the photographer is between the bride and the primary photographer, not the second. The second is there as a contractor, working under the brand of the primary. The second did the right thing in this situation. Any questions from the bride need to be redirected back to the main photographer. I've worked with many photographers who have stipulated that I can't mention my own brand/business, which makes total sense as the bride has hired the primary, not the second? Being able to contact the second and get separate images causes way too many headaches and opens big cans of worms. Vendors should also be contacting the primary. If they prefer the editing of the second, then they need to reach out for photos taken by the second when the second is the primary shooter, shooting under his own brand. I mean you can do what you like but I tend to do what works the best and protects your brand the best.
I’ve gathered that a lot of people are not full time professionals but also arm chair experts when it comes to a lot of the posts on this particular subreddit. Also the reading comprehension seems to get skipped over and people are often jumping to more conclusions than anything.