Scammed by other photographers?

[william-porter]

<p>Nadine, the idea of not giving the client a chance to like the photos if they want to was Wally A's not mine, although I still think it's a good one. However, we're kind of talking in an info vacuum here, I think. </p>

<p>First, I'm still not sure just how bad the photos really are. So first thing I think Angel needs to do is get somebody objective to critique the photos for him or with him - not necessarily another photographer (although Angel, if you want to send me two or three representative shots back channel I'll be happy to give you my private opinion by phone or whatever), but perhaps better somebody with a non-photographer's perspective. And show them AFTER doing a bit to rescue 'em. </p>

<p>What I do know or what seems clear is that (a) Angel has not subcontracted before and (b) he know the photos he was given are not as good as the photos he would have taken himself and © he's pretty emotionally involved with the issue of how he's going to approach the client. This all speaks well of Angel. But I know that I've panicked more than once about something that turned out to be less panic-worthy than I thought.</p>

<p>And then, second, I don't know how well Angel knows what the client will say. Nadine says she usually knows. I usually have an idea, I mean, I usually know when I did a good job and when I didn't. But it's useful to remember that wedding photos aren't just about the technical matters. A mediocre photo of the bride on the happiest day of her life may be a treasure in her eyes.</p>

<p>Yes, this is a true dilemma, because Angel owes the client two duties that may be irreconcilable. He owes them the truth, of course. If the subcontractor's storage cards had all been lost, then an immediate call to the client would be in order, with the unvarnished truth and a full refund. But I think we also owe it to our clients to permit them to be as happy as they can be with the product we deliver. </p>

<p>If the photos are truly horrible - if Angel gets a second opinion and the second opinion agrees with his own - then he talks to the client and offers a refund - and then fights things out with the subcontractor. But even in this case, I wouldn't run the photos down any more than necessary. I think I would say simply that I was sorry my illness made it impossible for me to shoot the wedding myself, that I'd tried to find a competent substitute, and then I'd say simply that the photos weren't up to my own standards and that I was offering a full refund (or whatever I felt was appropriate). And I would leave it at that. In other words, I'd kind of figure out what I planned to do before I met with the client. And I'd say no more than "they're not up to my standards". That leaves the client the option of believing that your standards must be really high because the photos you're showing them are pretty good and gosh, you're giving them to them for free. The client may be unhappy. Of course they will be unhappy, because they hired Angel on the basis of Angel's no doubt impressive portfolio, and instead they got something less impressive. But it's probably the best route out of the situation for Angel.</p>

 

[picturesque]

<p><strong><em>But I think we also owe it to our clients to permit them to be as happy as they can be with the product we deliver.</em></strong><br>

<strong></strong><br>

Well said, and I agree. I also suggested that Angel have a series of offers in mind (early on), ranging from a little to a lot, depending upon how the client meeting went, and what the client ends up wanting as compensation, if anything. I think your ideas are good ones, William, but comes a point where Angel will have to use her judgement and her personal knowledge of her clients to find her way through.</p>

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p><em>"This was my original question: As a wedding photographer, when you sub-contract out another wedding photographer to shoot a wedding for you because you were hurt, or sick, etc." </em><br>

<em></em><br>

Simple, do not subcontract. If it's a last minute injury or accident there's nothing you can do. If you've got a few days after an accident/injury before the wedding, you can make some calls and give it your best shot to help them find someone else. If the clients are concerned about the risks, they'd be better off contracting with a large studio with a large stable of shooters for backup.</p>

[judy_clark]

<p>i have a d70 i bought when they first came out years ago, i shot a wedding indoors, ran the iso up thinking that would compensate the light etc. pics looked great in the screen and the histogram looked good. when i loaded my pics...they were grainy. confused, i ask my photography professor, he told me that the d70 does not shoot well in high iso. maybe that is true on the whatever the other photog was using. anyway...i do not use that camera body anymore for that very reason. i had to run the pics thru a noise program yada yada. i could print them on small prints but nothing large. a terrible lesson on my part. luckily that wedding i had used two camera bodies and my other camera worked great. sorry to hear about your problem. just thought you might like to know...</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Angel -</p>

<p>I'm going to jump into the pool here and ask -</p>

<p>How do you know they lied about their experience? Because you got photos in raw that were underexposed? Whoa Nelly...</p>

<p>I've seen expert photographers forget to check settings, under / over expose etc... Just because the images were under exposed does mean they lied to you about their experience.</p>

<p>The other thing that I would question from your posts is the equipment used... Did you ask them in advance what body they would be using? Did you offer (since you were on the sidelines) to allow them to use your equipment? D50 and D80 are hardly pro quality build camera's but both can produce excellent images when used properly. The other comment that I would question is that they shot on Tv mode. Tv is a Canon term NOT a Nikon or industry term that I'm aware of.</p>

<p>As for the bride refusing to have her photo taken in a particular location - it does happen on occasion. Good photographers will work to convince her to do some there anyway, but if she doesn't want to - the wedding is not a good place to make a scene.</p>

<p>Also - windows doesn't do anything special to the files when they are written to the CD / DVD. If you are able to see the preview file in Windows - Then the photos are Jpeg - since windows doesn't know NEF. or you're using Picasa to view the previews... Picasa does do raw previews and it also manipulates / enhances the preview.</p>

<p>Not that any of this helps with your current situation - but...</p>

<p>I'd recommend paying them - since they delivered. Refund the client the money - (so yes it'll cost you) but you'll hopefully learn from this and keep a client.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[ksenior]

<p>A question from an outsider ( self-employed ); would anyone in Angel's situation ( wrist injury too close to event scout more than he did ) have considered attending the wedding as non-shooter, stay in the background, but keep an eye on how things were going? Easy with hindsight to suggest, I know.</p>

 

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p><em>"A question from an outsider ( self-employed ); would anyone in Angel's situation ( wrist injury too close to event scout more than he did ) have considered attending the wedding as non-shooter, stay in the background, but keep an eye on how things were going" -Kim</em><br>

<em></em><br>

Excellent idea and makes very good business sense.</p>