Your feelings on FREE second shooters

[AndrewCCM]

Just wondering what your take is on solicitation of assistants and second shooters for free?

With the photography business getting more competitive and with the amount of people entering the business daily. I can understand the desire of people to apprentice and also can see the appeal of getting free second shooters to the established photogs.

However, is this good for the business in general? If a package is sold to a customer with 2 shooters, does that change your opinion? If it's sold as a single shooter but someone gives the opportunity to tag along, does that make your opinion different?

Just wondering about opinions on the subject.

[Michelle Allmon]

Well, I think it is great for the shooter and can be great for the primary. I don't think they should be "counted" into the package, unless it's someone you are really close to and have an understanding with. My friend Wendy and I each second-shot one wedding for the other, as an even swap.

[Daniel Bates]

I would say that there is some confusion between the terms "second shooter" and "assistant". A second shooter is a second photographer, with skills and equipment and creativity to match that of the primary photographer (or complement, as the case may be). An assistant is there for general help and education.

If I were a full-time wedding photographer, I would hire my second shooters - but it would not be a learning position. The learning position is the assistant position.

Just my thoughts...

--Daniel

[Michelle Allmon]

Oh, and also I think if someone is comfortable doing weddings but is having a hard time breaking into the high-end ones (like me) and needs expensive-looking portfolio it can be great and fair for both parties.

[dtscds]

From the second shooter's perspective:
My wife and I have 2nd shot (is that a proper phrase/description/title?) a couple of weddings. We look at it as if we are working for and with the principle photographer. I would hope he/she is counting on us getting usefull stuff. As such, I also hope they are charging for us to be there. I would hope that there is an expectation of quality work or why are we there?

The last wedding we helped with there was a feeling like, "We hired this guy to do our wedding, we don't know who you are or why you're here." Every time we asked them to do something they just stared at us before going on with whatever they were doing. So pretty early on we knew this was going to be bad--we got what we could without trying to use any of our own creativity. If they did something interesting we shot it, if not, why bother. We took lots of pictures of the cakes and little kids! (Ιn other words, the couple wasn't very interesting...)

If we know you are charging for one person, there is the undercurrent that you are the pro and we are tagging along, which may translate into how the seconds are treated. If you are charging for our time as well, there is the expectation/perception that we are professionals.

[Sbwood007]

Originally Posted by Michelle Allmon

Oh, and also I think if someone is comfortable doing weddings but is having a hard time breaking into the high-end ones (like me) and needs expensive-looking portfolio it can be great and fair for both parties.

Great point!

[Roy]

I have been told by some that it is looked on as an apprenticeship and if you don't have anything in the way of a portfolio, I suppose that is correct. However in almost every fields of work I can think of an apprentice is paid, not near what the professional earns but there is payment. I suppose it depends on the amount of experience you have. I think it's unfortunate but I know it's been said that if you want to be doing this on your own then this (free 2nd shooter) is the way you get educated for the job. If a person has no experience, I'm not so sure I'd want them shooting photos anyway. There are areas that they could help that don't involve shooting. I think a second shooter should have some photography skills and they don't have to be from shooting weddings in my un-humble opinion.

Just some of my thoughts on the second shooter thing.

[AndrewCCM]

Originally Posted by Michelle Allmon

Oh, and also I think if someone is comfortable doing weddings but is having a hard time breaking into the high-end ones (like me) and needs expensive-looking portfolio it can be great and fair for both parties.

I personally think you warrant being paid for your service regardless of higher end or not if you're an experienced photographer. If higher-end (and assuming experienced), you'd think they would respect the shooters time and have more profit margin to pay a second. At least I would think that of most.

(Disclaimer:) I am a regularly paid second shooter that shoots nearly every weekend of the year. I used to be primary, but after a few years, decided to spend the marketing, meeting, post processing, album design, etc...behind me to spend more time with family.

[Michelle Allmon]

I personally think you warrant being paid for your service regardless of higher end or not if you're an experienced photographer. If higher-end (and assuming experienced), you'd think they would respect the shooters time and have more profit margin to pay a second. At least I would think that of most.

Let's say the bride pays for two partners to shoot her wedding. It's a super fancy wedding. The partners shoot together all the time. You want in on that wedding, but they don't need you.

[AndrewCCM]

Originally Posted by Michelle Allmon

Let's say the bride pays for two partners to shoot her wedding. It's a super fancy wedding. The partners shoot together all the time. You want in on that wedding, but they don't need you.

Totally agree there. That is different. I'm mainly referring to the increasing number of posts regularly soliciting "SECOND" shooters for FREE. If you want in on a wedding for portfolio eye candy, sure...

I have helped out for free on numerous occasions.. reciprocated back to me or I was helping fill in for an emergency.

[dminton]

If you're working, you deserve to get paid. If someone is going to use your photos, and especially if they're gonna make money form them, you deserve to get paid. If you're vital to a shoot, you deserve to get paid.

I see this thrown around more and more. There is nothing wrong with someone asking "Hey, can I follow you around and see what you do and how you do it and maybe hope to learn something from you?" In fact, that's the best way to learn. But say you keep doing it? Say you ask to show up to observe again and you show your "mentor" your photos from before. They say "Wow you've improved so much!" and flatter you and they ask if you would show up again the next time and ask if they could use some of your images? BAMM! You just became a second shooter. It should be pay day. Regardless if you 're good or not, you shoud be paid. It should be up to your boss to determine your rate in this case, depending on how much more sale they may be getting because of your images etc etc. Anyway, my point is, that if you are working and producing images that will be sold and money made off of them, you should be getting paid. Especially if the person you are shooting on for is going to make more because of you. They can raise their rate because now they can say "We'll will have two photographers at your (insert job here)." Don't give yourself away for nothing, and don't let anyone walk all over and use you.

OK, NOW on to ASSISTANTS. I assist full-time in between freelancing for newspapers and doing a few other things. Assistants are NOT there for general help and education. That's what helpers are. "Hey I need a helper" means you need someone to move stuff or get coffee. Real assistants are professionals and know how to make stuff run right. They are there and know the equipment that a photographer uses and knows how to run it and trouble shoot it, and they have researched and have a feel for what the photographer they're assisting's style is and how to help them. When I assist say for a portrait shoot, it means, getting there early, and knowing what's going on, because my boss' job is going to be getting the subject to relax and talking with them and handling them. I'm the one that unloads the truck and sets up all the lights, cameras, computer, and everything else. Then during the shoot, I make sure everything is ok. Adjusting lights to the photographer's request, being a stand in model, holding color cards, moving things out of the way, doing hair, fixing clothes, running cards, gelling lights, and all that. At say, a soccer/football game, I do second shooter, AND assistant. I shoot what I'm told to, and then run cards and transmit images, get water, make sure my photographer has rain gear, tape, batteries, hold cameras, keep him abreast of the situation, point things out to him...there's a lot to it. Assistants are trust worthy, dependable, punctual, and above all reliable. Someone who can be given all the work, and be trusted to get it done. To assist a photographer. If you are doing ANY of the above things, you should also be getting paid. If you're going to seriously assist, come up with a day rate. If you work less than 4 hours, charge half rate. More than that, a full day.

Sorry if all of this is a rant, but, I feel pretty strongly about this. If anybody has questions about any of this, just send me a PM or email me. Thats the number one thing that people are afraid to do: ask if they don't know.

[AndrewCCM]

Well put David.

[kachina]

I've been following this interesting thread. I shot as a freebie second a couple of times and I am very grateful for the experience. It was a lot of work but mucho fun and I learned a bunch. However, this thread got the cogs turning on issues such as labor rights and copyright. I have two questions:

1. Does the primary actually own the copyright for the images the second shooter provides? Was a "fair" price paid for them? If the answer to the above is no, then does using a "free" second shooter add significant risk to the business equation? Would you be selling images that you do not own?

2. Are you paying minimum wage for the second shooter's services? How does this impact folks that are registered as sole proprietors? Do you still have to fill out an I-9 and/or one of the Ws for a second shooter. Do you have to send the second a 1099 or W-4 at the end of the year?

I am by no means an attorney or HR person. However, as someone who will probably be hiring second shooters and assistants in the future, I would like to know the answer to these questions for my own benefit. Thoughts?

[jeffkohn]

That is different. I'm mainly referring to the increasing number of posts regularly soliciting "SECOND" shooters for FREE

Yeah, and I have to wonder how many of those photogs who have no problem with getting free services from newbie second shooters also bemoan the lower prices in the market from newbies willing to sell service direct to customers for cheap....

[KdLaneJr]

First things first. My apologies if I've edited these quotes to the point of losing context.

Originally Posted by Roy

I have been told by some that it is looked on as an apprenticeship and if you don't have anything in the way of a portfolio, I suppose that is correct.

Originally Posted by AndrewCCM

I'm mainly referring to the increasing number of posts regularly soliciting "SECOND" shooters for FREE. If you want in on a wedding for portfolio eye candy, sure...

I have helped out for free on numerous occasions.. reciprocated back to me or I was helping fill in for an emergency.

Having shot film for over thirty years I had no qualms about shooting my first wedding. Nor my second. Both were shot for friends and neither was a first marriage.

For both shoots; All images and negatives were turned over as these were done as wedding presents. So..., no portfolio. Portfolios were not on my mind at all.

I've not responded to free second shooter requests because in my opinion, they are not free. They cost me.., both time and money. I have plenty of Time. I don't have plenty of money. (Not the way I'd like to anyway. )

Eventually I may decide that the money out of my pocket for gas and lodging is worth it as an investment in my portfolio. Yes, lodging. Most of these requests are from far enough away from me that I wouldn't remotely entertain driving there, covering the wedding and then driving back home on the same day.

As someone that does not have a digital portfolio of portraits or wedding images I'm sure I should be considering some of these "free" second shooter opportunities and I will probably do so at some point in the not so distant future.

Originally Posted by Roy

I think a second shooter should have some photography skills and they don't have to be from shooting weddings in my un-humble opinion.

Agreed.

Andrew, thanks for the OP.

David Minton, Well said!

Ken