- 7 years ago
- Wedding: February 2009
The photos are one of the only things you have left after the wedding is over. Still, when I see the word “investment” on a web page, it makes me think that photographer is more expensive than I can (or want to) afford.
Maybe everytime I look at them my love for DH will grow…. that’s an potential increase in something valuable haha …..(god I hope I get mine this week lol)
No, that term is irritating.
I DO think photography is worth spending a disgusting boatload of money on. But it’s just splurging on something that’s emotionally important, not “investing”.
I laugh when I see that term on a photographer’s site. I don’t consider it an investment and I think the use of the term is annoying.
I don’t think “investment” is the proper term at all. And when I see it on photographer’s websites I just think they’re trying to justify their high prices!
I don’t mind when photographers use that term, as long as they are upfront about the starting price of their packages – aka, it doesn’t annoy me as long as it is accompanied by information. But honestly, I prefer “Packages start at… ” to investment. I don’t remember what my photographers used, but I don’t think they used investment.
Def of investment:
the action or process of investing money for profit or material result.
Unless you’re a kardashian or other celebrity your photos by definition are not an investment since no one is going to pay you more for them than you did.
The term really annoys me. Is any product or service I purchase an “investment” then? No.
Do the photos become more valuable (emotionally or financially) over time. Not really.
And the reason I say not really to the latter is the time you are most excited, when one cares MOST about the photos and goes through them over & over, is right after the wedding. In a year or so, the photo album is on the shelf rarely looked at.
It is not say it isn’t a valuable product and service, one that I care about. Of course I want nice photos. I also love photography as an art form. But I enjoy art as art, not as an investment.
My marriage is an investment in my future. I do not need a photographer to remember the day. I feel that when they use that term, it cheapens the experience.
And another reason: investment implies risk, speculation. If you buy into photography as investment, then some will be dissapointed in the result. The boards here are filled with trauma/drama over bad photos. Can less than stellar, or even “bad” photos ruin your wedding? It seems to be going in that direction. Photography should not trump experience (again, my opinion).
And honestly, the term is really used as a marketing tool but it has real consequences.
I should have warned that I’m a social psychologist that studies social influence and advertising. So please put my opinions in perspective. I like photographers, I enjoy their work. That word just annoys me for professional reasons.
I guess I don’t see how people thinking having the tab called “investment” is offenseive?
It’s no different than having “gallery” instead of “pictures” for where you view samples. Or “proofing” instead of “online ordering”. It just sounds better IMO. When I respond to client inquiries they get a PDF file with all my necessary info. I called it my “Wedding Guide” because that’s what it is….I think it sounds pretty crappy to say “Here’s my PDF packet of all my pricing and information”.
To the OP, I guess it depends on how people want to look at it. Beautiful images are very very important to me, I consider it an investment in memories. To some people, they’re just photos, and that’s okay.
I consider it an emotional investment, but I really don’t take offense if a photographer has an “investment” tab. There are so many other things on the internet to find offensive, maybe I’m just not that sensitive.
No, it’s ridiculous to me to refer to it that way. These would be the same photogs who want exclusive rights to the originals and don’t post prices, generally.
There’s a sucker born every minute and they’re ready for ’em, I guess. Not all photogs are like this, but there’s definitely a lot of sketchy ones.
An investment is putting money into an asset with the expectation of capital appreciation, dividends, and/or interest earnings. As my wedding photography will not be earning me any money it is not considered an investment in the true sense of the word. However our photography costs are 30% of our total wedding costs and we see the value in a highly skilled photographer. But when I see photography websites call their prices an investment (ours doesn’t and I’m glad) I think it’s just a stupid marketing tactic or that the photographer doesn’t understand the meaning of the word investment. It’s not just a fancier way of saying prices – it’s an entirely different word with a completely different meaning!
The topic ‘Do You Consider Wedding Photography an "Investment"?’ is closed to new replies.