botched photos, bride wants refund

<p>I would just like to know if the original images were blurred before the grain was reduced or if most of the blur is a result of not understanding how to reduce noise in the first place. I also have to agree with Nadine that we don't really have all of the information to be placing blame. A camera problem can happen to anyone and could go unnoticed. With digital we have more chance of noticing problems but it is still possible the a camera can be faulty and that not be noticed until afterwards. If all the ceremnony shots are no good then some refund maybe in order whether that a full or a partial refund I would say depends on what is agreed with the couple if the rest of the photos are very good then maybe a percentage should be refunded. Maybe the full size images can be fixed with proper processing by a more experienced person.</p>

<p>The problems with offering full refunds for equipment failiers or problems is where do you draw the line at what point do you say hey I did all I could I have good equipment and backup equipment and there was nothing I could do at that moment. The large majority of the image are fine and I have put the hours to produce these image and have to be paid for that. I doubt the DJ offers a full refund for playing some music the B&G did not like and I doubt the catering company will be offereing a full refund because some complained of cold food.</p>

<p>If you can't pay right now, tell them you will pay and why you can't.<br>

It's too late for this one, but for the ceremony and other key events, if you have two people there, you should shoot side by side to protect yourself against camera failure.</p>

<p>All - </p>

<p>I checked out the "thin red line" sample photos on another site from other Nikon shooters - It is definitely there on some sensors from Nikon - </p>

<p>However - In defense of the OP - it is not something that I would notice on first glance at a 1.5 - 2 inch lcd screen. Nor would I notice it on a small lcd at 2nd or 3rd glance. I have a 21 inch lcd monitor and I had to blow the image up 50% to get it to show clearly. I probably would have noticed it during the POST processing - but then only if it was in an area of the photo that I was looking for specifically. </p>

<p>It does appear from postings on other places that the red line is an issue with certain Nikon sensors - Particularly those in the D40, D70, D70s and D50. If memory serves me - those all use the same sensor or a variant of the same sensor. Unfortunately - once the problem pops up it doesn't fix itself or go away. </p>

<p>My guess is that if the OP does a closer examination of photos taken since the ceremony, she will find that all of her images have the thin red line in them - some are probably more pronounced than others due to colors and backgrounds - but my guess is that it is there in 100% of her photos. </p>

<p>dave</p>

<p>First, to shoot a wedding with such a poor equipment and optics(D70s) and charge - <strong>600</strong> USD is a shame, in Moscow, and <strong>for this price</strong>, one literally will get a pro with EOS-1 <strong>DsMark 3</strong> and 85/1.2L and 50/1.2L at least. <br /> Second, you must be lucky if they did not take you to court.<br /> I think you should 100% refund.<br /> In my contract, I do guarantee that <strong>EVERY shot</strong> may be printed 30 by 40 cantimeters and it is razor-sharp and has the proper while vivid color rendition. I never provide more than 300 edited shots but all are edited and retouched. One day my both batteries died at 3.30 pm, after resting for a winter and I completely refunded, though the quality of shots was fine.<br>

And... why did you ask this after almost a year?</p>

<p>"We are new to the biz and I need your advice. Should we offer her a refund? 100%? 50%? Has anything like this EVER happened to anyone else in the business? [Please say yes.] In what cases has anyone had to offer a refund before?"<br />The questions you ask here are an indication that you are indeed 'new to the biz'.<br>

This isn't a question of whether your photos can be 'fixed' or not. The real issue is the client who is not pleased with your work...<br />I would suggest to you that the decision you make now will set the tone for your business from now on...either you will be professional and forthright in your attempts to deal with people or not...<br />The fact that there is a disagreement between you and your business partner could be based on many different things (i.e he may dispute the refund because of the amount of time that has passed since the wedding was done and the request for a refund...), but if the dispute is over whether or not to make a refund when your work isn't satisfactory then you have a real problem. If you have one view on this matter and your partner has another you may be better off working on your own or with someone who shares your views.<br />Your work product is your signature for all the world to see. If you claim professional status and can't achieve it the world will let you know rather quickly...</p>

<p>I can't understand some people saying bride and groom deserve messed up photos since they only paid $600.</p>

<p> I'm not gonna value the original poster's images, but according to her she said she's been shooting wedding photos for 4 years without complaints. I assume bride and groom has seen some sample photos and maybe thought $600 is the right or great value. I think the point here is the original poster hasn't met the quality promise (maybe not as high as $2000 photographs) so she should refund money back to the customer for that reason.</p>

<p>If you really believe high cost is the only way to get your rights for refund or settlement, next time you get dirty stuff in your food from fast food restaurant don't even think about suing them since you only paid $5 for a meal and the restaurant shouldn't pay you because you made a cheap decision.</p>

<p>In some places, $600 isn't a lot for a photo workshop or class. Chalk this up to the school of hard knocks, and move on, reputation not in tatters.</p>

<p><strong>@ Sean K</strong>, you make a good point. However you wouldn't pay $5 expecting a full four course À la carte meal with wine...that is the point I think most people are trying to make re the balance between fee, deliverables & quality. And yes you should think about suing a fast food restaurant since they provided a dirty $5 meal...they have still failed to up hold the bargain struck! Suing being a bit extreme I would expect a refund at least (in full!)<br>

I don't thing the concept of deserving a failed shoot by paying $600.00 is the point either. More if you have somebody delivering a quality service and output is willing to charge a low fee*...what does this say about their perception of their ability?<br>

*<em>(the distribution of which is not known to us but lets assume $250.00 on an Album and prints. this leaves $350.00 between two (?) over 7 hrs = $25 (£16ish) per hour including expenses (fuel etc) This does not take into account the behind the scenes time which we'll for arguments sake say is another 24 man hrs this reduces the hourly rate to $9.2 (£6.10ish) that is just about minimum wage here in the UK! It does not translate into a statement of confidence and were I hiring it would have me thinking two things...1. Walk away or 2. Lest see more of thier stuff and make sure they CAN deliver.</em><br>

As an amateur or somebody who takes a professional stance part time a low fee may be acceptable. If you're looking to make a living from it, the low fee approach needs serious re-thinking! Especially if you want to cover yourself against the unfortunate, a small war chest to pay for a third party to stand in if you suddenly find you cannot make the gig or you have a catastrophe and loose a data card or whatever...or there is an issue with the camera...you at least know you can pay to get things fixed/service a refund.<br>

<strong>Reputation is everything and we're only as good as our last photo!</strong></p>

<p>For those of you still following this thread- these photographers were hired by a weddingbee blogger and this thread has been submitted to said blogger via one of her followers. The only reason I am privy to this information is I read weddingbee and this bloggers post stuck out to me. I was amazed this bride paid money for these people to shoot her wedding after seeing the photos and viewing their website. It prompted me to subscribe to the thread as I wanted to see how these photographers handled the situation- being negatively reviewed on a website that gets as much traffic as weddingbee is pretty interesting stuff. This evening, the link to this post showed up in my inbox and here I am.<br>

<strong>Another reason I am commenting on this post is because the blogger claims these photographer(s) (I'm confused about this) brought their baby to the wedding. </strong>Who the hell does that?<br>

To the poster- the ceremony shots are horrible and from her recaps it appears she has done her own editing. The blogger has photos from you and then photos taken by her Aunt on DSLR- the Aunt's ceremony photos are ten times better than yours. You missed the most important part of the wedding. For your husband not to immediately refund her money (Note: She is a client who reaches THOUSANDS of brides and grooms) is silly. From what she's posted thus far and what I've seen on your website- educating yourselves may be a good start.</p>

<p>Maureen, you've peeked my curiousity. Link please. I searched the site but couldn't find that discussion.</p>

<p><strong>Moderator Note:</strong> I am closing this discussion because the OP's question has been asked and answered. Any other issues are peripheral to the topic. If the blogger cited by Maureen wishes to post to this thread, she is welcome to contact me.</p>