Client unhappy with large group photo...

First and foremost I am a wedding photographer. Recently a close family friend asked if I could snap a quick group photo of her husbands class reunion. They just needed on group photo at the scheduled time they had for the reunion event. I went into the venue hours before the reunion event to set up chairs, my lights, etc. I was then told at this time that instead of 50 people that will be in the photo, there will be closer to 70. Not a huge deal, but still wish I had known before the date of the event. I spent a total of 1 hour getting set up and ready to go for that evening. Once I arrived that evening to get situated for the photo I walked into the photo area to find all of my chairs re-arranged and moved completely different. I had previously let staff no to NOT move the chairs as this is how it would need to be in order to fit everyone in the photo. I quickly rearranged accordingly and the started to usher the guests into the room. Once finally arranged I snapped a few photos (while they complained the entire time about the time it was taking to get one photo without people closing their eyes or moving their heads to look to the side for whatever reason) I finally got a good one and was on my way. I still had to end up photo shopping faces forward of people who were looking to the side or eyes closed.

 

I don't normally do these types of images so I only charged 7.00 per 8x10 plus a 150.00 sitting fee which included me buying postage, stuffing envelopes, and mailing them to all 70 people. Alas I had finished my job.... only to hear back from the woman that had hired me in the first place complaining the image appeared stretched and the color was off. Honestly, I panicked as I didn't want to disappoint 70 people. I sent her the image with full print rights for free so they may print as many as they want for those people who didn't like the way the image looked and think they want to print it elsewhere. They are still unhappy and I am not sure where to go from here. Any suggestions?

 

Sounds to me as if you have been more than generous in the circumstances. If your sitting fee was shared evenly, they got a 10 x 8 (with everyone in focus I might add), delivered for less than 10 dollars. The colour looks reasonable to me, although we obviously can’t see the final print, but assuming you are happy with it, it can’t be wildly off.

I would just politely state that you are happy with the product, you are sorry that they feel it is sub standard, but you have done all that you are prepared to do address their grievance. Repeat if they come back to you again.

When they ask you again in 10 years time, they’ll be down to the fifty you agreed to!

They are still unhappy and I am not sure where to go from here. Any suggestions?

 

There are a few elements in your OP.

 

1. The business perspective first -

 

a) The initial situation:

 

To the question where to go to from here to remedy the situation - I don't think you can do much more than you have done. You've sent her 'the image' to do with as she pleases (I assume that means you've sent an Image FILE), so that could be raw or TIFF or JPEG? Depending upon which type of file she can Post Produce it more or less to her satisfaction. Logically if she is unhappy with the job, you cannot re-shoot. Logically if she is unhappy with the cost - I don't think refunding is a good course of action.

 

So in both cases, my advice is to simply quell the fire and walk away.

 

b) In Hindsight with 20-20 vision - what to do next time:

 

Don't do stuff that you don't normally do unless your are sure that you can have it under control.

 

From your OP you were not in control, neither of the situation, nor the group. These are two elements of your Photography that you need to enhance, for you to have a better, more profitable Wedding Photography Business.

 

c) Implied but not stated - it appears that you didn't have a contract. Always have a contract, especially this is sometimes more important for "Family and Friends" who ask you to do a "Quick Snap"

 

***

 

2. The photography bit second -

Assuming that the image was posted as an example of your work and logically this would reap a critique in regard to a value for money judgement for the Client.

 

a) As a general comment, I'd be happy with that group photo as a memento of the event: for $10 (assuming US$), a 10x8 Colour Print posted to me is less than two beers I would have bought at the bar.

 

b) Moving forward and learning from the experience -

Technically the image appears to be pulled without Flash and using Static Lights; it's grainy and there appears some minimal Subject Motion Blur, adding to the assumption of No Flash.

 

We must recognize that a Nikon D90 does not perform at its best at ISO1600, but I'd expect less grain than that, so I would look for evidence of some underexposure. The Subjects all seem in reasonable focus and the DoF is adequate.

 

On my Studio Monitor there appears a soft Magenta Cast, but as mentioned, we are not seeing the Final Print - and anyway nuances of Colour are often in the eye of the beholder - the Colour is OK.

 

The faces are all in shot - that's good. I think if you want to become more accomplished at shooting Larger Group Portraits you'll need to better understand Posing and Arrangement: to this end note that larger Subjects are typically not suited to be situated at the extremes of the rows.

 

Also watch clipping people - the man Rear Camera Left, is missing an arm. Getting above the group is generally a good idea to ensure that you get all the faces, but in so doing and because of the Camera Angle, you've captured Keystone Distortion (evidenced by the Brick Columns), this distortion is apparent in the faces and torsos of some of the Subjects, particularly those at rear and at the the extremes.

 

WW

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the color is indeed way off, looks like you used high ISO in available light that was not easy to control. The back row is really bad, no mid tones, very washed out. You also have depth of field issues as not everyone is in focus, did you shoot this close to wide open?

 

 

I truly don't intend to offend with the following but this is not at all a professional looking image...:-(

Edited October 16, 2018 by DB_Gallery

. . . the color is indeed way off, looks like you used high ISO in available light that was not easy to control. The back row is really bad, no mid tones, very washed out. You also have depth of field issues as not everyone is in focus, did you shoot this close to wide open?

 

Only as technical feed back for the OP - the "no mid tones" is more than likely a result of underexposing a D90 at ISO1600 in uncontrolled lighting, rather than a result of the colour balance being incorrect.

 

Regarding Aperture/DoF/ and Lens, my analysis is the shot was probably pulled with a slowish zoom lens perhaps a Kit Zoom, but using a Kit Zoom of itself does not necessarily mean poor quality results: Nikon D90 with 28mm @ F/3.2 @ 1/40th @ ISO1600, so if the Kit Zoom, then yes, wide open is a more than reasonable assumption, I expect F/3.2 was necessary to get at least 1/40th as the Tv and not wanting to bump to ISO3200.

 

WW

Only as technical feed back for the OP - the "no mid tones" is more than likely a result of underexposing a D90 at ISO1600 in uncontrolled lighting, rather than a result of the colour balance being incorrect.

 

Regarding Aperture/DoF/ and Lens, my analysis is the shot was probably pulled with a slowish zoom lens perhaps a Kit Zoom, but using a Kit Zoom of itself does not necessarily mean poor quality resukts: Nikon D90 with 28mm @ F/3.2 @ 1/40th ISO1600, so if the Kit Zoom, then yes, wide open is a more than reasonable assumption

 

While I mostly agree with what you have said, I see a fair bit of difference in the distribution of light and some pretty heavy handed post used in trying to even it up, hence some of the folks in the back row are washed out with no mids.

 

Thanks for sharing the image info, it helps tell the story.

 

To the OP, you will just have to chalk it up to a lesson learned. The lesson is that regardless what the agreed upon amount is, you have to deliver extra solid results because it is not just your bank account but your reputation that is at stake. When the light is wrong which it was here, you, the professional have to make it right. Knowing how to deal with this comes initially with education in the craft ( formal or self teaching ) and then practical experience.

 

Good luck in your future endeavors,

 

db

. . . I see a fair bit of difference in the distribution of light and some pretty heavy handed post used in trying to even it up, hence some of the folks in the back row are washed out with no mids. . .

 

I concur. Good Point. There are lots of elements in the mix.

Bloody good value Technical Feedback for the OP, IMO.

Thanks,

 

WW

reunions arent about pictues... thats just the reminder of the event, not a documentaion for a museum.

 

ive been to these milestone celebrations n if $10 is what the photo is... pay the man!

 

such pettyness for a grand time with my old buddies with gold watches in their pockets.

 

what to do next?... as WM said, put out the fires n move on... nothing more to be done about it. the client can boo hooo all she wants but her best course of action is not to use you next time.

 

btw... would a better post job make it any better for the client? give her a hi res jpeg so she can go get it worked on herself.

 

learn from your mistakes. next time charge more!

In my opinion "stretched" possible means some women look fatter than they really are, and "color off" could mean she may have thought the skin tones weren't quite right (due to yellowy orange cast)

 

I love post processing, not that I am anywhere near an expert. If this over-sharpened offering was printed whereby it would lose a little of it's sharpness, I'd be reasonably happy with the image myself. The top was cropped, the back row was burnt, mid tones were introduced, slight temperature adjustment from warm to cold, and a fair bit of sharpening to make each individual stand out

 

 

I don't have anything to say about what you should do about your customer, but rather about the technical issues.

 

Personally, given that the output prints are only 8x10", I would not be bothered by the sharpness or graininess issues - I imagine they'd be fine.

 

The color does bother me a bit, but for a $7 souvenir photo I probably wouldn't say anything to the photographer (unless they asked). I'm speaking as a guy who's spent his entire work life in photography, with a lot of lab time fixing color and process problems.

 

With respect to what's the real issue, what I see is that the skin tones are too blue. (They don't necessarily look blue, but rather are lacking some yellow that should be there.) In some people it's especially bad, giving a sort of "dead" look to the skin. But it's not strictly a white balance issue, as the whites and blacks are neutral. (I'd guess it was a result of the lights, which I'd guess are some sort of eco-fluorescents; skin tones always suffer under this sort of light.)

 

I made some fixes, I'll post if you're interested; I think they're much better. I won't say the skin tones are good, but I think I got rid of the worst of it. So there is some tonal variation in the faces now.

 

Here's the full-size image (I think):

 

https://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/18502035-orig.jpg

There sure are a lot of hypercritics in this discussion. The people got good value for a good price. As an old fogey myself, I suspect the level of dissatisfaction expressed by the subjects is LOW for such a group of senior curmudgeons.

 

The photographer, in less than ideal conditions, managed to get a satisfactory group shot of 70 people—no closed eyes, no reflections off glasses, no hidden heads, no yawns, etc.

 

For $10, you don’t get and you shouldn’t expect Annie Leibovitz results.

 

Moderator Note: Image removed. Terms and Conditions of Use

Having done many of these I can say that getting that many people to do the same thing at the same time is challenging, particularly if they have been drinking. I might have changed the tones/colors a bit and perhaps darkened it a little but otherwise I see no room for complaint regardless of cost.

 

Rick H.

There sure are a lot of hypercritics in this discussion. The people got good value for a good price. As an old fogey myself, I suspect the level of dissatisfaction expressed by the subjects is LOW for such a group of senior curmudgeons.

 

The photographer, in less than ideal conditions, managed to get a satisfactory group shot of 70 people—no closed eyes, no reflections off glasses, no hidden heads, no yawns, etc.

 

For $10, you don’t get and you shouldn’t expect Annie Leibovitz results.

 

This has nothing to do with being "Hypercritical".

 

I have been in business for 30 years, I don't really do this kind of work ( weddings, portraits, etc. ) but the same rules of do your best regardless of price still apply. If this person wants to grow their business, the best way to do that is satisfied customers talking you up to other potential customers, period. Not a website, not a lively Instagram feed, not likes and not accolades on photo.net but networking through 100% satisfied customers are what get your business off the ground and then some.

 

There are 70 people in that photograph, even if they only recommend you to 1-2 other people, that is potentially 50-200 future customers.

 

This has nothing to do with the price paid, it has everything to do with the fact that the resulting image is not at a professional quality level and that does not bode well for future business. It matters more than some of you may think.

Isn't it likely that a "quick snap" at much lower cost is likely to have flaws? I just listened to a Northrup "Picture this" podcast where they talked about all the ways they lost money on shoots over the years. It sounds like another one of those! If I have learned anything from reading or listening to these stories it's to NEVER agree to take pictures of friends' events if I have any expectation of even breaking even. It almost seems like doing it free might be a mistake. Even as a rank amateur, I've been asked to do stuff like this but have managed to avoid it.

This has nothing to do with being "Hypercritical". . . the same rules of do your best regardless of price still apply. If this person wants to grow their business, the best way to do that is satisfied customers talking you up to other potential customers, period. . .

 

I concur. Certainly not anywhere near "Hypercritical". The Business Forum is where the OP placed her question and that question has reaped, as well as other technical advice, very solid business advice.

 

I wrote "As a general comment, I'd be happy with that group photo as a memento of the event: for $10 (assuming US$), a 10x8 Colour Print posted to me is less than two beers I would have bought at the bar." and I stand by that comment, I would indeed be happy spending the price of two beers for a memento of the reunion.

 

By the same token I was encouraged to seek out the Photographer who shot my Nephew's Wedding and ask if she could assist me to cover a big gig that I had pending in the future.

 

My point being that, to her, when she first spied me at my Nephew's Wedding, I probably appeared as an "Uncle Bob" (or Uncle Bill) Photographer toting my Fuji x100s and making seemingly silly shots whilst sitting at our table and walking around at the Wedding Breakfast - but, as it turned out I was a Potential Client observing her work and later scrutinizing her product, then I was a Prospect, and since I have been her Client and I have also provided recommendations for her business.

 

WW

Isn't it likely that a "quick snap" at much lower cost is likely to have flaws? I just listened to a Northrup "Picture this" podcast where they talked about all the ways they lost money on shoots over the years. It sounds like another one of those! If I have learned anything from reading or listening to these stories it's to NEVER agree to take pictures of friends' events if I have any expectation of even breaking even. It almost seems like doing it free might be a mistake. Even as a rank amateur, I've been asked to do stuff like this but have managed to avoid it.

 

 

I agree – don’t work for family or friends. I have shot two weddings, both for members of the family that were short on funds. I considered it long and hard before agreeing to it.

 

I agreed to do it on this basis: No fee to be involved, they got what I could do and nothing more (I stressed I was not a professional photographer, and the photographs would therefore not be to the standard of a Professional). If I cocked it all up, there was no come-back, or complaint valid. They get all the pictures on a CD to distribute as they saw fit, although I would edit the better ones and produce an album as a wedding present. They were happy to proceed on this basis, and if I do say so myself, it all went rather well and I am very happy with what I produced.

 

However, had I charged even a nominal sum for this service, I would have been under significantly more pressure, and left myself open to criticism. If you charge, people expect the best, and often don’t take value for money into the equation, as they have little understanding of the real costs involved.