Photographer Ruined Wedding ..

[James Manford]

With this camera I thee behead: Couple Evette and Gary Crack sue photographer who they claim ruined their big day | Mail Online

Ouch'

[Robert Benda]

I suddenly feel a lot better about myself.

[Jeff Harper]

These were people who seemed to have a modest income, who hired a someone pretending to be a photographer for next to nothing, and got what they paid for, sadly. The location and setting were not nice, which made things worse. In my area people often hire photographers on craigslist. They do not interview the person they hire, and are often bitterly disappointed.

There is no way to protect people from themselves or from making poor choices.

[James Manford]

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

These were people who seemed to have a modest income, who hired a someone pretending to be a photographer for next to nothing, and got what they paid for, sadly. The location and setting were not nice, which made things worse. In my area people often hire photographers on craigslist. They do not interview the person they hire, and are often bitterly disappointed.

There is no way to protect people from themselves or from making poor choices.

Makes me angry when potential clients ring up and dispute your prices by saying 'oh but he's charging so and so ... why are your prices so high'

FOR REASONS LIKE THIS!

[Shaun Roemich]

I don't know... that yellow lens flare is very "now"

JJ ABrams would have added it in post though.

Wow...

And I rant about all the dSLR and MacBook kiddies trying to do live conference streaming...

[Jordan Brindle]

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

These were people who seemed to have a modest income, who hired a someone pretending to be a photographer for next to nothing, and got what they paid for, sadly. The location and setting were not nice, which made things worse. In my area people often hire photographers on craigslist. They do not interview the person they hire, and are often bitterly disappointed.

There is no way to protect people from themselves or from making poor choices.

Exactly this. The 'photographer' probably isn't even a professional by ANY means either.

[Justin Molush]

Originally Posted by Shaun Roemich

I don't know... that yellow lens flare is very "now"

JJ ABrams would have added it in post though.

I don't know about you but I'm a fan of blue anamorphic flares instead haha - This is pretty ridiculous though...

[Scott Brooks]

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

These were people who seemed to have a modest income, who hired a someone pretending to be a photographer for next to nothing, and got what they paid for, sadly. The location and setting were not nice, which made things worse. In my area people often hire photographers on craigslist. They do not interview the person they hire, and are often bitterly disappointed.

There is no way to protect people from themselves or from making poor choices.

Jeff ... your last sentence is spot on.

I would almost bet that the photographer just handed over all the files without bothering to go through them ... just burnt them to a DVD. And I wouldn't be a bit surprised if that's exactly what the couple asked for because we all know ... couples want to "see it all."

The fact is that there are a lot of people ... probably the majority ... that look at price first. It is very rare that I feel sorry for couples when this happens.

[Robert Benda]

Originally Posted by Scott Brooks

It is very rare that I feel sorry for couples when this happens.

Unless it was a case of fraud as in when a photog shows someone else's work as their own, or gets away with showing 6 decent photos instead of a real portfolio.

[Dave Blackhurst]

Dang, I'm biting my tongue trying not to make any "Crack" jokes... but anyway...

If the 'tog blamed the venue, I have to wonder how she could call herself a "professional" - EVERY venue is a potential nightmare, that is ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE for bad deliverables! You learn to push your gear and yourself, and deliver the goods!

I suspect that the delivery must have been "here's a disc" - lo-budget, and career suicide, to deliver unedited, uncropped, unsorted files... I have to wonder if there are SOME good shots in the lot, but those don't serve the purposes of the lawsuit, which looks to be "have another party on the 'tog"... Hopefully there ARE some good shots, and the 'tog can mount a defense by showing them? There is ALWAYS some bad pix/footage, that's how it goes, but looks to me like someone is picking the worst to tell their "side" of the story. Could be interesting to hear how it all turns out!

[Adrian Tan]

One issue that interests me is whether a court of law should be passing judgment on what is and is not an acceptable image. Frankly, I think it's subjective and none of their business! Is lens flare a good thing or a bad thing? Is out of focus a good thing or a bad thing? What about extreme cropping? There's plenty of times when I'm intentionally trying for these...

I don't have any guarantees about image 'quality', whatever that means, in my contract.

[Chris Harding]

I think the law still works on the "buyer beware" rule so IF they never looked at the guys portfolio or at least online pics and also assumably never met him then sadly they are at fault.

Even eBay has photos of the item you want to buy so shame on them for hiring a photog without viewing his work first!! Shucks even a little point and shoot will do a better job than he did ..I wonder if he maybe used his cell phone?? I'm just a videographer but I still carry a full Nikon D90 outfit with a full complement of lenses and all I shoot is some DVD cover shots!

From either a video or photo POV surely it makes sense to make a decent amount of samples available to clients? I have tons of video on my site so the bride can see lots of previous weddings and that gives her a idea what she will expect from me ...I would rather a bride thought that I was not to her liking based on my samples than have her come back after the wedding and say "These are nothing like what you promised me" ... Surely photogs do the same??

Chris

[Shaun Roemich]

The interesting thing is we don't have any idea if the shots the photog got that weren't featured in the article were any good. (Although I doubt it obviously...)

We all blow some shots here and there (I'm not a wedding guy but the principle is the same regardless) which is why I NEVER release raw footage to a client who isn't a producer I'm freelancing for.

Is is POSSIBLE, regardless of how improbable, that these are the only bad ones out of a perhaps lacklustre batch but possibly worth what the clients paid for? Is it possible the client is using the five or so bad ones that should have been culled from the deliverables to try to get out of paying the rest of the bill?

I've seen some pretty ridiculous client antics, much as I've seen some pretty foul photogs and videogs calling themselves pros...

[Don Bloom]

Buyer Beware in the case of ANYTHING! Photography and video for a wedding are very subjective. What some might perceive as art other might think of as bad framing, exposure and color.
Having said that, I would hope that the photog in question on that job gave the couple everything shot and didn't edit out the bad shots such as the ones that were shown because IF those shots were indicative of the entire wedding photography, I too would insist on some sort of money back. Of course I would have been able to determine whether or not this person was a professional by looking at previous work that had been done or at least asking some of the right questions of the photog. While I too like a good deal on any product or service I buy, I also want quality and in most cases the cheapest price is not the best quality. You need to use some good old common sense.
As I've said to people in the past, "the sweetness of low price is forgotten long before the bitterness of poor quality".

[Dave Blackhurst]

Odds are pretty good that these are the worst possible examples, and with digital photography are a small fraction of the shots taken/delivered - "news" is not always delivered unbiased...

I'd venture the average number of shots taken with digital would be in the hundreds, if not the thousands, out of which a "pro" would at least weed out the truly "bad" ones (EDITING). Having both shot and edited stills, you don't get 100% winners (at least not that often!), the ratio is better the more experienced and talented the shooter, but if you take the 5 worst shots of the day, I'm sure you could make almost any camera op look "bad"!

I could have salvaged the unbrella photo in a few seconds with a crop... and if the photog was shooting bursts, I'm sure the grooms hand moved a few milliseconds later so you could see the brides face...

Somehow I think it'll probably end in divorce in a few months anyway...