Bridesmaid with Tattoo

<p>Hi all -</p>

<p>I shot a wedding last weekend and the Matron of Honor had a tattoo in a very conspicuous location (left breast) that her dress didn't begin to cover.</p>

<p>Question is - Do I just assume that the bride won't want it on the formals? or do I give the bride the choice? Personally - I find it distracts from the main focus of the photos - the bride and groom.</p>

<p>Thoughts?</p>

<p>Thanks in advance -</p>

<p>Dave</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Assume nothing. The bride knew about the tattoo. Provide the images as is but offer to remove the tattoo if the bride desires. I suspect she won't.</p>

<p>Provide the images as is.....but, you can let the bride know that it could be selectively removed from some shots with PS. If it turns into a project you'd also want to add an additional PS fee.</p>

<p>BTW, chances are good that the bride is well aware and OK with the tattoo. The bride or groom's parents OTOH may be your first and best PS friendly customers when it comes time for reprints :-)</p>

<p>Leave it. You never know the history of the tattoo or of the relationship between the bridesmaid and the couple. Removing it could, among other things, cause unwanted tension between the happy couple and their close friend when the friend finds out her tattoo is gone. If the bride doesn't like it and wants it gone then of course you should take it out.</p>

<p>I had the same issue a few weeks ago. Leave it as is...tattoos are part of the person. I have one on my foot and a big one on my shoulder. I would be pretty irritated if someone got rid of it as a flaw.</p>

<p>As the others have said, leave it. We don't see the image, so we don't know how complicated this may be in PhotoShop. Often times part of the tatoo is behind lace, etc. and it takes a great deal of time. If they want it removed, charge as necessary....-Aimee</p>

<p>Although I'm no tattoo fan (my daughter has a few), I agree with the others....it is a part of the "person" chosen to be the Matron of Honor; to automatically remove it would be no different than removing a pair of glasses from somebody who wears glasses - they just wouldn't look the same.</p>

<p>I would leave the tattoo for the client's pictures, but airbrush it out for yours if you plan on using any of them in your portfolio.</p>

<p>I'd ask...<br>

Adam</p>

<p>Personally I'd never remove a tattoo. If you do so you're saying there's something defective about that person. That's not very nice for your clients or their friends.</p>

<p>Thanks all for the thought provoking responses.</p>

<p>I've sent the bride an e-mail asking what her preference is regarding the tattoo and I'll deliver the photos to her however her and her husband want them.</p>

<p>If she decides to have me remove it, it will be pretty easy work... there is no lace or dress to worry about. Just skin and the strap of the gown.</p>

<p>Thanks again to all who responded.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

<p>Interesting responses.</p>

<p>I have quite definite feelings on this matter, perhaps stronger than some have mentioned.</p>

<p>With due respect to you and your decision, I would never have asked the Bride's what her preferences were - I would feel it unprofessional and impudent so to do.</p>

<p>Would the photographer ask the Bride if she wanted a necklace with a Star of David or Crucifix removed from the neck of one the Wedding Party?</p>

<p>If I used the image in my Portfolio, I would definitely not remove the tattoo, IMO that is even more presumptuous, and potentially alienating the business from prospective clients (some of whom might know the woman, just as one example).</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p>[Crikey I might be <em>so nuts</em> that I even surprised Betty with this forthright and honest answer? :)]<br>

<br /> </p>

<p>Eek David, I don't think I'd ever ask. To me, that's kind of like saying "I notice your sister has a huge nose, would you like me to tone it down?"</p>

<p>Betty -<br>

I definitely would never do that - I view tattoos as "body modification" which is done by choice - not by nature. If the tattoo was in a different location such as leg / arm elsewhere - I would not have even asked the question.<br>

William - A star of David or a cross is a religous symbol and if the bride did not want it in the photos she could / would have asked that it be removed. If the bridesmaid was wearing any jewelry the bride should approve or not approve. For something like that I would not edit out unless asked.<br>

I was not in the room when the ladies dressed so I don't know if there was any discussion regarding the tattoo or covering it with makeup.<br>

The only reason that I asked is because it is in a "sensitive" location - to me at least.</p>

 

<p>If I see tattoos at weddings I shoot them.</p>

<p><strong><em>“A star of David or a cross is a [religious] symbol”</em></strong></p>

<p>David, I know. I also know the history of Tattoo: which is why I choose those two examples (Star and Cross) specifically.</p>

<p>Some folk never remove items of religious significance: a Wedding Band as another example . . . and a tattoo cannot be removed either.</p>

<p>However, I agree many tattoos, these days, are only body adornment with little or nil traditional significance, honour, or recognition of deed or rite: but I would not presume such would always be the case, for every tattoo.</p>

<p>

<p>I understand your point of view and I understand that the location of the tattoo can be seen by some as sensitive and not in keeping with a usual image we see of a Matron of Honour at a Christian Wedding wearing low cut dress.</p>

<p>BTW, I did not want to argue with you, but merely make my point of view, which is solely predicated upon my opinion that it is both good business (and etiquette) NOT to make any assumption or initiate action (which is the act of an assumption), in matters akin to the situation you described.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p> </p>

</p>

<p>I shot one weddings where if I were to remove the tattoos that a wedding party member had, he wouldn't have a neck. If the tattoo bother the B&G that much, the person wouldn't be in the wedding. </p>

<p>As Dawn says, the bride opted for this person to be in her wedding. She could have not chosen her or selected clothing that may have covered or minimized it...-Aimee</p>

<p>It seems like most everyone is concentrating just on the bride. While it is true that the wedding is "all about her". That doesn't mean that the wedding photography can not also serve family and friends. I am pretty sure the bride is OK with the images with the tattoo, so I would leave them as is. However, I also let the bride know that there is also a PS "bag of tricks" that can manipulate images. If she gets a huge pimple on the tip of her nose that day, it can be removed, rosacea can be toned down to the point that it's not readily noticeable, teeth can be whitened, and we can take 5-20 years of her age by working the wrinkles under the eyes. We don't need to do any of these of course but I'll brighten teeth a smidge, smooth any blemish on the face, and diminish eye wrinkles by a least a hair routinely....and the brides don't even notice the changes, they just notice that they look great and the lighting must be really good.</p>

<p>Back to my point about making images available to other family/guests. It could very well be that the MOG would like her reprints of the bridal party sans tattoo.....and I'm OK with that. Several years ago the little sister of the groom got an individual portrait of her at her brother's wedding. She had a piercing in one of her eyebrows.....when the B/G came to pick up their photos, I included a 4x6 with the sister's piercing for her and I did another photo where the piercing was removed. When I gave it to them, I said this is for your parents as a little something from me. I had established a good relationship with the B/G and the parents prior to all this (it was the 3rd wedding I had shot for this set of family/friends), so I was sure they'd appreciate the effort and the B/G had a good laugh over the digital magic. Long story short, the parents were thrilled, lil' sister had a nice portrait with her piercing. I shot another wedding for the family/friends group months later and just about a year ago, the little girl got married (she had removed the piercing on her own in the meantime) and I shot her wedding as well. In fact, at her reception, there were four other brides that I had done the wedding coverage for years prior, and three of the four had babies.</p>

<p>My point is, you need to know your clients and use some good common sense with your social skills. A little digital magic can go a long way for marketing in making for happier clients that can see you as a good photographer that's responsive to producing happy images. You can also boost your studio reprint profits by some amount as well, Win/Win.</p>

<p><strong><em>"My point is, you need to know your clients and use some good common sense with your social skills."</em></strong><br>

Agree 100%: Please read this as the predicate to my views above.<br>

WW</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>