BBC article on shooting weddings

[bill_mussett1]

<p>An interesting story from the BBC News website:</p>

<p>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8292164.stm</p>

[william-porter]

<p>Sad, but it's not really news that there are incompetent photographers shooting weddings. Next thing, they'll be discovering that some auto mechanics don't know what they're doing, and that the occasional politician is dishonest.</p>

<p>A word to brides or anybody hiring a photographer: See a portfolio - don't be persuaded by a nice web site with three or four pretty pictures. ANYBODY can take three or four decent photographs. Ask to see evidence that the photographer can actually deal with the entire wedding - evidence that the photographer's non-prize winning photographs are also well done.</p>

<p>Will</p>

[gregory_c]

<p>Sadly, some of the skill is gone out of the art of wedding photography. Now you can put the camera on "auto", shoot 1000's of shots, you are bound to get some good ones. I was raised on film & a waist level finder. Most all shots had to be perfect, did not have photoshop to "clone stamp" trash out out of the image. If shot was not good, you threw it away. Brides do not pay for skill & experience on how to handle people anymore, they are sold 1000's of shots of everything.</p>

[bob_mcbob]

<p>Looking around at a few articles with sample photos, it's obvious this guy had problems using his gear (exposure anyone?). The combination of this with uninteresting setups and poor composition is what makes his photos look a lot worse than even your average weekend warrior wedding photographer.</p>

<p>I certainly wouldn't defend his crappy work, but the versions some news outlets are running seem to have been manipulated to make them look a lot worse. Also, a lot of the "analysis" is pointing out "flaws" you'd see on most wedding photographers' sites. "Some of them aren't even straight!" on a photo that's clearly intentionally very off-axis for dramatic effect. Right...</p>

<p>That video of the ceremony where he drops the video camera and swears is pretty hilarious. I must say.</p>

[jnina]

<p><em>Brides do not pay for skill & experience on how to handle people anymore, they are sold 1000's of shots of everything.</em><br>

<em></em><br>

Gregory with all due respect "Brides do pay for skill & experience (adjusted to her budget) and you still have to be good handling people". The problem is that people don't do their homework before making a decision on who they will hire for the job. This is not only related to photography but any other decision one has to make before hiring someone to do any type of job. Even big companys with a Human Resources Dept. hire people that sooner or later they have to fire because they do not deliver the expected results. <br>

I had to advise the owner of the studio where I work as freelance Photographer and Videographer to fire or not to call again another freelance retoucher and album designer because he only retouch around 30% of the pictures and the rest he just sometimes corrected exposure and colors leaving obvious blemishes on the skin. The guy will not do the effort to correct this problems. In the market we move in, this type of error is not going to help us get more weddings since we move on the high level photography studios in our country and people that can pay around US$6,000.00 for photos and video are looking for quality.<br>

So quality does matter and depending on the customer skill and experience is a most!</p>

 

[danny_wong2]

<p>Addendum to what William Porter posted above:<br>

Anyone can steal three or four decent photographs from the internet.</p>

[ed_lemko]

<p>Jose, <br>

I think what Gregory is saying is that Brides do not want to pay for money for experience, because they do not recognize it-- the soft art of arranging people, herding cattle, negotiating, getting the good crunch pictures-- they'd rather skimp on budget and get 1000 photos on a DVD, hoping some are good-- and then get disappointed when they're not.<br>

High-end is out, service is not as important as price, but low price is creating a lot of disgruntled clients who learn, "you do indeed get what you pay for."</p>

[johnmottershaw]

<p><em><strong>"you do indeed get what you pay for."</strong></em><br /> <em><strong></strong></em><br /> I'm sorry, but I keep reading this. This couple paid a substantial amount of money and they most certainly did <strong>not</strong> get what they paid for.<br>

<br /> They were clearly conned by someone who was a good salesman and who probably showed them samples that weren't his (probably the famous Graphistudio Venice album). The fact that it ended up in court shows that this guy was completely uncooperative, was not willing to compromise and basically is a total con artist.<br>

<br /> It annoys me that some people who know a bit about photography are blaming the clients for not being experts. They went to a lot of wedding fayres and saw lots of work but still came back to this con artist, because he was good at what he does: conning people.</p>

[ed_lemko]

<p>You didn't connect the dots right. I was addressing Gregory's specific point, not the couple in this case.</p>

 

[johnmottershaw]

<p>My apologies Ed. I see what you meant now.</p>

<p>It's true though that various people have commented on various forums that this couple are to blame and that they got what they paid for. This I find hard to understand.</p>

<p>They have also said that the couple didn't do their homework or look at samples, even though it's been clearly stated that they visited lots of wedding fayres before booking this cheat.</p>

[jnina]

<p>Ed I have to desagree!<br>

People do look for quality. If they cannot pay for it then the take whatever gets close to what they expect. It seems that in the USA "photographers" is anyone with a camera. <br>

"If they try to open a business in my country they will starved to death!" Let me explain myself on this point.<br>

In America you have 300 million people. In my country, Dominican Republic, we are 10 million people or less. If you are a photographer here, you can have a camera, not know anything about pro photography and you can live by taking 2x2 photos for documents, a lot of people make a living out of doing this, but to be a wedding photographer here you have to be at least good on what you do. Everybody knows everybody. This is just like living in a little town. You start a business today, nobody knows you, but if you are good or bad everybody is going to know, you get known to be good or bad. So quality is a most. <br>

I read this forum and see a lot of postings of people that with a flash on top of the camera they call themselfs photographers. YOU ARE NOT A PHOTOGRAPHER JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE A CAMERA IN YOUR HANDS!<br>

Sorry for the caps but it seems that people believe they are photographers and Pro's just because they do weddings.</p>

 

[jnina]

<p>I'm gonna take vacations from this site for a while, it seems that I'm getting over stress from some postings, or I will need to get more selective on what I read!<br>

This is the best forum I've had access to in my life, so please don't get me wrong.</p>