Client dissapointed with Images, any advice welcome please:

Hello everyone,

 

I have never had a client dissapointed with my work so far (or at least not

that they said) so I am pretty sad about this e-mail I received. Here is the

main parts of the e-mail:

 

< Hi

 

We have looked at our photos and although there are a few nice ones, we feel

very upset with the overall composition and quality of our wedding photos, and

do not feel that they are of the same quality as your website portfolio. In a

lot of the pictures there are shadows on our faces, similarly in the group

ones the sun is directly behind making the images not as clear as they could

be. Surely as professional photographers one of the skills you should have is

to use light to its best advantage?

 

For the speeches at our wedding many of them are distant ones and the pictures

you have zoomed in on highlights the back of our guest heads. We feel that you

could have taken them from any point in the room but instead took them from

the furthest point.

 

There are photo's that I would have expected to be taken but weren't for

example, there are no pictures of confetti throwing, also the line up is

another important part of the day yet the photos taken appear to be very snap

shotty.

 

I have checked on two computers and all of the images of (groom) and I, and

the one of (groom) and his best man appear blurry around the edges. My mum has

looked on line to see if they are the same but says the images are too small

to tell.

 

I have showed them to friends and family members and they are also

disappointed as they feel that you haven't captured the day as well as you

should have.

 

The price given was for an "introductory price" and when we booked you we

didn't believe we would be compromising on the quality of the images.

 

Regards >

 

The Bride whom was the only one able to do consultations at the time,

requested mainly documentary for certain moments of the day and that we be

unobtrusive during her Speeches. Short of standing in the middle of the room

in front of their table, there unfortunately was no where to go but the back

and zoom in.

 

For the receiving line, it was a last minute inclusion as they hadn't planned

on doing it. When it was receiving line time, I actually asked her where she

preferred me to stand as there was little room and it was a very dark

hallway. Suprisingly I felt the images came out very well and don't appear

snap shot like to me.

 

As the bride was on a tight budget and I was new to the area where I live I

made the mistake of offering her an introductory price/discount after

believing she was kind and needed a photographer desperately for little

budget. She paid ?450 for 4 hours and received all of her images on Dvd's in

colour (all corrected and edited) and B&W and even a special selection of

around 270 with extra corrections and some print and a web gallery/slideshow

of it all.

 

I am posting one of the groups and will post a link tomorrow when I can get

them on the server. I appreciate all advice, thank you, C<div></div>

Please excuse my mistake it should read ?450.00. Thank you, C

In that group shot where are their feet?

 

Also the skin tones are weird on my accurately calibrated and profiled monitor? Is your monitor calibrated and profiled?

If that one group shot is indicative of the entire body of work you presented, I'd say you

did really well. That's a gorgeous portrait!

<p>

I can't make any broad statements because I haven't seen all the images, and I wasn't at

the wedding to know how the interactions went. But if *I* receive that e-mail about some

of *my* images (whose quality I feel confidant in), I would respond something like this:

<p>

<i>"Dear Bride,

<p>

Thank you for sharing your concerns with me. I'm so sorry that you're not completely

thrilled with your wedding photographs!

<p>

I do not hesitate to say that the images I presented to you are absolutely indicative of my

style, and are of the same quality as the images I showed you on my website and in my

portfolio.

<p>

Because a wedding is an uncontrolled event, I cannot guarantee that I will capture every

single moment of the day. I do, however, feel very confidant that I presented you with a

beautiful overview of your day's most special memories. The photographs I delivered to

you tell a wonderful story, and I am very proud of them.

<p>

In looking at the online images, please note that those images are sized for the web, and

may appear differently on different computer monitors. Web images are a lower quality

than high-resolution digital files (which you received on your DVD), and may even appear

a bit fuzzy. I assure you that any prints you make from the high-resolution files at a high-

quality lab will meet any professional's standards.

<p>

As for the images taken during the speeches, you should have no trouble cropping them

to be a bit tighter if you like. I am sorry if I misunderstood your request that I remain

further back from the group and not be at all intrusive during these speeches. My

intention was to honor your request and be as respectful as possible of your wishes.

Again, because you have receive the high-resolution files, you will probably find that some

slight cropping will give you the frame you're looking for.

<p>

Thank you again for sharing your concerns with me! I hope that you will feel differently

about your photographs the more you look at them. There truly are some amazing

images included that you should be able to enjoy for many years.

<p>

Sincerely,

<p>

Photographer"</i>

<p>

Because you practically gave away the farm with that $450 package, I wouldn't offer ANY

sort of freebie to her, even as a consolation or courtesy. The portrait above is worth $450

all by itself, IMO.

<p>

My only question: is everyone looking at the camera in that portrait? It sort of looks like

the bride, groom, and flower girl are looking elsewhere. This would be a bigger concern

to me than any backlighting (which I think is lovely, btw).

The skin tones don't look weird to me at all.

This is a good example of both the inexperience of the client and the photographer. While this is ok if it was a second shooter capturing the moment it is not a formal shot. No one is concentrating or connecting with a viewer. It does seem very soft and poor contrast on my quite well calibrated monitor.

 

The bride thinks documentary and unobtrusive but expects clear concise group shots where people are engaged in being photographed. Frankly I think everyone expects that. The crop is odd, either go in and be waist up or full length ankle cut off always looks like it is a mistake.

 

Regarding the reception issue there are ways to be closer without being in front of anyone especially by sitting on the floor often the best place. There is a reason that when you see press photogrpahers gathered they are hunched on the floor. You get the shot and you are not in anyone's visual field.

 

What to do depends on what you have to offer. Is there a possibility that the images are not sharpened in our post process? Is the burn on the DVD/CD done at too fast a rate and the images are compromised from that?

 

Post something that you have not processed and maybe we can help suggest a way around the problem If they are all as soft as this one I can see why she is dissapointed. This looks more like a bad scan from an underexposed negative than a good digital capture.

 

Brooke

Skin tones look fine on my screen. Alot of time clients thing that they want "PJ" style photos but dont realize that alot of the photos they see on peoples website are staged. I agree with Brook where people want one thing ( Doncumentary style coverage) but expect another, perfectly lit portrait studio style shots that look unposed) but they dont want to invest the time during the say. I always tell people I can be as close up ( without being inyour face) or as far away as you prefere however without any restrictions I can get better shots.( While still respecting their space and day) Most couples tell me just to do my thing. I have only had one couple say that they didnt even want to be able to see me that day. ( And I didnt do their wedding) ;) Post a link to the rest. It sucks to get a negative letter like that.

 

Oh another thought I had is maybe the bride just dosnt feel good about herself. It's very easy to look at photos of other people and because you dont know them and wernt at their wedding it seems very fantasy like and perfect. I remeber looking at photos on my wedding photographers site seeing a tall slim blonde and beautiful bride, and thought her photos were stunning. Lol and needless to say ( although my photographer did a great job) I was still slightly dissapointed when I was still a slighly overweight brunette and the person in the photo was just me. lol rational? probably not...( but I got over it and love the photos now)

 

Umm and besides she only paid $450. Beggers cant be choosey.

I like the shot! I do also agree with a couple of points, everyone isn't looking in the same place, so take 3-4 shots of the same pose, there should be at least one where everyone is looking in the same place. And the cropping is a little off, but that's easy to fix. If I was a bride I'd be happy with this. But, all that being said, we're only seeing 1 shot. The poster with the response hit it right on the head, the images from the DVD should be the ones being critiqued, no the lo-res images. I make it very clear to my brides that the gallery is for their viewing convenience, and to use the hi-res when proofing/ordering prints.

In the posted group shot, I would say about half the people are looking off to camera left. Were there others taking photos at the same time? If so, you needed to control the situation for a shot like this and make sure that everyone is focused on your lens. There is a soft focus/filter feel to the image that may not appeal to everyone's tastes (not mine anyway). Perhaps an image with more realistic skin texture would suit her likes?

What is your web site URL Christi ?

 

Your photo has the caption "for review" ... so here goes....

 

 

In your image ... the bride, groom and flower girl are not looking at the camera. They are

looking camera left.

 

You set your 20D on Programed Landscape mode, and didn't use a flash with a backlit

subject.

 

At f/8 using 33mm focal length, everything should be in focus ... unless the Program

Landscape Mode tried to hold focus on the background also (which it is designed to do) ...

using Hyper focal distance to do that ... which can lead to reasonable focus on the

foreground subject, but not critical focus.

 

However, judging focus on a computer monitor is tricky and misleading. You didn't

mention what size the computer proofs were that they were viewing. Best to evaluate it on

a print made to size. Prints are almost always sharper looking.

 

Color is okay for a proof, a bit off but easily adjusted.

Without seeing the body of work and especially the specfic shots the bride discussed, it is hard to give any advice. The sample shown is not horrible and some would say it is lovely, but obviously not what the bride expected. It seems to boil down to expectations. Not being able to see your portfolio, it is also hard to comment about that criticism. Unless you can specifically back-up your rebuttals to her comments, I would think you are basically dealing with a situation where you need to decide if you are going to try to make her happy--how, is the question. I notice she didn't ask for anything. I would also break down each criticism and see if there is a simple misunderstanding in each that can be remedied after the fact. For instance, in her first criticism, perhaps she is confused by your applying some soft focus to the image? Perhaps you can lighten the shadows on faces. Same with cropping. However, the criticism involving missed images needs to be investigated further--why didn't you get those? And did you use a shot list or at least get in writing some of the bride's desired shots? Many dislike using shot lists, but they do help sort out expectations on both sides.

I would print some proofs that are truly representative of what you gave them. Don't cherry pick the best. Or only focus on the worst. Pick a fair sample of all of them. (I would hope that the worst would really have been edited out, and the worst that they are seeing are the merely good ones.)

 

Print them. Arrange a time to look at the prints in person.

 

You cannot control the viewing conditions on an unknown computer.

 

Control how they are viewing the proofs and see if the problem still exists.

 

 

Eric

I'm guessing that the confetti throwing was as they exited the church...how do you miss that shot??? Being unobtrusive doesn't mean that you shoot the toasts from the back of the room.....get in there and get the images. You also shouldn't need any advance notice to catch several candids of a recieving line. As Ellis noted above the cropping/composition of the shot above is less than ideal.... Looks to me like they paid for a bargain photographer and altho they were disappointed, they got what they paid for. I'm also guessing that they didn't see any full weddings and only looked at the "cherry picked" images on your website..... which is also one of the main reasons that I stay a little jaundiced with the nice slick websites of new shooters who still haven't shot more than a handful of weddings. They can also find themselves welcomed by WJPA.....

 

BTW, welcome to P-net.

Nice group photo except for the attention being in wrong place.

 

Technically it is not so good. You should have exposed for the background and used flash for the subjects.

 

Now you have a bald white sky and sick yellow grass that is way overexposed.

 

I tried working on it but there is so much info lost in the JPEG, I can`t do much.

 

If you have a raw, select the background, fix the yellow grass, and add a gradient blue behind the white sky. Or shoot a blue sky and paste it under the deleted white sky.

'We have looked at our photos and although there are a few nice ones, we feel very upset with the overall composition and quality of our wedding photos, and do not feel that they are of the same quality as your website portfolio.'

 

You?ve got very nice photos on your website but the posted image seems like it?s from a different photographer.

I'm after rich, slightly darker background tones and everyone has there own style. To me the background is over exposed, but it is a very bright sunny day. I prefer a darker green background, therefore I would have metered the background and fill flashed the group. Becuase of the background being over, the people may look washed out to the B&G. If the was shot in RAW you could perhaps layer it and correct it for them. I think it's just mainly a matter of choice.

"The price given was for an "introductory price" and when we booked you we didn't believe we would be compromising on the quality of the images."

 

 

 

Now the new bride has been "introduced" to the price she decided on...

 

 

 

 

 

(You, the wedding photographer, will have to expect a different response from each customer. No two are alike. (To worry about the edges of the groom's shot means she is not looking at the groom's face, just the edges of the image.) Good luck!

Low Dollare clients no only micro manage, (since they are used to not getting what they want without a fight), they also argue over paying or refunds, (since again, they are used to not getting what they want).

 

You will find as you master lighting, and business practices a little more, that as your clients value your work, they will pay you more, the more they pay, the more they trust you, and the less they try to get refunds, discounts etc. Quality clients know that the cheap guy pays the most. J

You cannot get blamed for people not all looking at you. You could try ask them, but there is no guarantee for that.

 

The picture should have been balanced with a flash ligthing, preferable multiple flash setup, or another form of light reflection/diffusion, using white panels, etc.

 

The time has come that a grandpa with a pocket camera will do photographs as good as the one presented here, or even better. So the bar for professional photographers was raised. The time has come that professional experience is required to provide better results, and that is what was missed in the photograph.

Here is my quick fix to the photo. All I did was brought down color levels from Red Green and Blue channels. Your photo has little contrast in it and a lot of color was reflected up from the grass to produce that nasty green. The shade added to the nasty blue tinge. To prevent this in the future, use fill flash...preset white balance to flash and manually set your aperture and shutter speed to expose for the background.

 

If you are not post-processing with a calibrated monitor...your results will look disastrous. The biggest peeve I have with LCD monitors (including the one on my camera) is that they are very inaccurate. Save for the few that are made for graphics work and cost A LOT. That's the reason I STILL to this day use a CRT monitor (Samsung 900SL to be exact). The prints from the lab I use closely matches my monitor when I tell them not to correct my photos.<div></div>

One more thing...

 

There was too much information lost in the original jpeg. I got as close to accurate color as I could for a quick fix. I mainly tried to get the flower girl's dress white but it still is a little blue. If I added more blue flesh tone's started turning yellow so...yeah.

Christi K wrote:

 

"I have never had a client dissapointed with my work so far (or at least not that they said) so I am pretty sad about this e-mail I received. "

 

Cheer up Christi - just remember: "What doesn't kill you, makes you stronger"!

 

Unfortunately, the customers perception is ALWAYS their reality - I'm sure you've already thought lots about what happened - I suggest trying to turn what happened into the basis of a "system" that you can fine-tune over the years so that you can be sure it'll never happen again.

 

Cheers,

 

Colin

Hi Christi,

 

as you missed the feet from the bottom of the photograph, maybe a closer crop would have been better?

I'm sorry the Bride isn't happy and I hope it works out. We all learn new things from every wedding.<div></div>

Christi, I like the photo and cant wait to see more.

 

David, the original posted image looks better than your quick fix.

Katy, I think cropping is a good idea - until just above the blue dresses would look nice,

cutting off three arms and a finger not so nice.

Like all the others here, I can only comment on what I see. My rules for photos like this are:

 

1. Do not have anyone in front of the Bride's dress.

 

2. Put the males (not the Groom)in dark colours on the outside of the group.

 

3. Have anyone else there stand right beside you. If they won't, clear them out.

 

4. Do something, so they all look at you.

 

There are other rules, but most have been complied with here. I am not sure that shifting the whole group forward so the shadow of the tree had more influence was possible, but the group of trees in the distance sure look tempting to me.

 

Donald.