How do I convince my sister NOT to hire an MWAC?

[michael_h4]

<p>My niece is having her bat mitzvah in a few months. Her mother, my sister, wants to hire a photographer. Unfortunately, my sister plans to hire a true MWAC: a local mom with a Rebel, a kit lens, an iMac, and no insurance.<br /><br />Ms. MWAC seems to have dazzled my sis with a few beautifully printed albums (from iPhoto) and references from happy neighbors. She has also priced herself to undercut everybody else.</p>

<p>I'm just a hobbyist, but I believe that hiring this woman to capture a once-in-a-lifetime event would be a HUGE mistake. I've explained the insurance issue and I've shown her websites from some of the actual professionals in our area. Nevertheless, sis thinks that their photos are not enough of an improvement over the MWAC's albums to justify the difference in price.</p>

<p>I know this may be a lost cause. But I am posting here in the hope that some of the professionals on this forum can suggest other points that may get through to her. How do you pros differentiate yourselves to customers who lack an eye for good photography and focus on cost & personality?</p>

<p> </p>

[Member69643]

<p>You can't teach taste. The advent of digital photography has empowered the common man with the ability to get somewhat decent pictures on a regular basis, with many of those images being better than professional work from the film era. Better in that they are exposed properly, focused properly, and have generally pleasing color. That has become the new standard and as long as that standard is met, your sister will be happy.</p>

<p>On the other hand, what this mom lacks is experience, and that may or may not mean something. A pro will know where to be, ready with the camera, every time. The walk down the aisle, the kiss, the garter toss, the dance with dad. Being in the wrong place or having gear fail and lacking backup equipment are common non-pro failures. That sort of stuff costs money and MWAC typically lack. Only your sister can say if that matters. </p>

[mariosforsos]

<p>Well, have you even considered the possibility that this MWAC is actually talented? Or that her approach is exactly what your sister wants? We keep on saying that photography is about the eye, the talent and the approach, so why not give someone the benefit of a doubt?</p>

<p>Of course, all your concerns are indeed valid and everything, but sometimes, the willingness to go for something you gut tells you to comes with risks - just make sure your sister is aware, maybe try and meet this person and check for yourself and maybe shoot a few images on the day just to have something in case everything goes pear-shaped. Believe it or not, 90% of similar cases do not result in disaster...</p>

<p>I know this may not have been the answer you were hoping for, but it's reality...</p>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>Better in that they are exposed properly, focused properly, and have generally pleasing color. That has become the new standard</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />Actually, that was also the old standard. Lots of event photographers were hired simply because they got photos. I was in a lab quite a bit of the time for about ten years and saw pros bring in very mundane photos. But they knew the film had something on it and they knew where to go for decent printing.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The walk down the aisle, the kiss, the garter toss, the dance with dad.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'm pretty sure that's not going to be what happens at a bat mitzvah.</p>

<p>There are other reasons people do things that may not be what photographers think they should do. We chose not to have outsiders at our wedding, other than the JP. We were married far from where I had been living and I didn't have any photographer friends where we were married. My father took photos when he had a chance and we were fine with that. It was more important to us to know everyone at the wedding than to have the best of everything. </p>

[Matt Laur]

<p>If you have real misgivings about her actual results and the manner in which she'll conduct herself and anticipate shots, then approach it that way. Bring up the topic of how professionals arrive at such an event: with at least one backup of every piece of gear. Is MWAC prepared for what happens when Grandma bumps her and her <em>one camera</em> winds up in pieces on the floor? Look into whether or not she's considering her iPhone to be her emergency backup gear.</p>

[john_h.1]

You made your case. Now that sister is well informed, she made her decision. Now you merely disapprove of the decision. Further efforts, at this point, will no longer be helping. It will be interfering. If your sister winds up regretting the decision, then you can ponder the wisdom of saying, "I told you so."

 

The only other approach that may not amount to badgering is to offer to pay for one of these top notch photographers and that will be cutting it close.

[Member69643]

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=19592">Jeff Spirer</a> <a href="/member-status-icons"><img title="Moderator" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/mod.gif" alt="" /><img title="Subscriber" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub10plus.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/3rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Mar 22, 2013; 11:53 a.m.</p>

 

 

<blockquote>

<p>Better in that they are exposed properly, focused properly, and have generally pleasing color. That has become the new standard</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />Actually, that was also the old standard.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Indeed. I meant that we hired professionals back then because we knew they'd meet those standards, and relied upon them, because we knew our own (and fellow photographers') non-professional results were not good enough to guarantee the goods. Nowadays everyone with a digital camera can get the basics right. For a wedding or bar or bat mitzvah or any important event, knowing where to be and when to be ready with the camera might be important. As Jeff points out, deciding to have a photographer, or not, of any skill level, is 100% a personal choice. </p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>deciding to have a photographer, or not, of any skill level, is 100% a personal choice.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br />Indeed. It's not essential. People have been having these ceremonies for many years before photography was invented.</p>

[luis_g]

<p>It's her money and daughter. Also her choice. You've put in your two cents' worth. Move along.</p>

[david_henderson]

<p>I have a considerable sympathy with Luis G's post above.</p>

<p>If this thing is really costing you sleep, here's a few suggestions</p>

 

<ul>

<li>You could offer to pay for a pro photographer</li>

<li>You could offer to be the photographer , free of charge. You could make sure there was a back-up camera and so on, and if the event has to be photographed by someone insufficiently experienced, why shouldn't that photographer be free?</li>

<li>If you want to persuade your sister that bad things can happen when you hire an MWAC nothing is going to illustrate that better than the many Photo.net threads from MWAC's who have got themselves out of their depth contractually, photographically, technically, legally. You'd have a lot of these to choose from. </li>

</ul>

<p>You would of course feel absolutely terrible if you talked your sister into a different route which then went wrong, or the pictures weren't too good. Wouldn't you?</p>

[sknowles]

<p>I agree with Luis G., and now be silent, not even to say, if she is disappointed, "Gee, I guess I could tell you I told you so, but I won't." If she's happy with the results, let her be happy. Granted the MWAC will have another happy customer to claim but consider if she wasn't going to get a professional, they didn't lose anything. And if she's unhappy, hand her the list of local professionals and shut up.</p>

[qalam]

You have given your advice. It's your niece's decision. BUTT OUT!

[daverhaas]

<p>Short of offering to shoot it yourself for free - you've done everything you can and should do to prevent her from hiring the MWAC. You've made the case, anymore would be overkill and probably do more harm than good. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[john_h.1]

<p>OK, we are all on board with the 'don't go there' Dear Abby advice. I'm not sure the questions could really be answered adequately anyway. We don't know what appeals your sister other than the mention of cost and personality. As to differentiating oneself to those who "lack an eye for good photography and focus on cost & personality", I'm not sure if many even bother. A lot of energy and resources can be wasted pursuing people that are not in to what you are offering. Some value the dining experience of the Chart House. Others prefer going to Red Lobster.</p>

[JDMvW]

<blockquote>

<p>You can't teach taste.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sadly all too true, even if some do <em>try to</em> teach taste. You can teach snobbery, of course. ;)</p>

[john_h.1]

No offense to Red Lobster.

[starvy]

<p>Michael, do it yourself and show up the this mohawk or whatever it is that you are calling the lady with the Rebel. If you are better your sister would surely trust your judgement in the future. If you are not prepared to do that, sadly, you have reached a stage in relationship with the sister where she does not value your opinion much. So either learn to live with it and enjoy the show or upstage her choice!</p>

[matthew_lee6]

<p>I suggest you bring your camera to the wedding, take some nice photos and give them to your niece.</p>

[Stock-Photos]

<p>I respectfully suggest that you not try to convince her of anything.</p>

[stephen_mcpherson]

<p>Just a few random thoughts:</p>

<p>- I never do business with people who buy solely on price.</p>

<p>- I apologize to all the "gadget freaks" , but 80% of photography is about the eye behind the "gadget", 18% is in the glass in front of the "gadget" and 2% is about the "gadget" a.ka. the camera body. So who said shooting a wedding with a Rebel was a bad idea? Why not an Argus C3? It's just a "gadget".</p>

<p>- Who are we to judge?</p>

[bonniepearce]

<p>Have you actually looked at the new photographer's portfolio? She may have a really great eye and is still building the business enough to upgrade her equipment. (I don't place 100% emphasis on equipment as there are astounding images made with Quaker Oat box pinhole cameras.) She may actually have an art background, or even better yet, a photography background. Word of mouth is the best advertising and if your sister is happy, then leave it alone. I do get frustrated with those that buy a camera and then consider themselves a photographer without trying to learn the first thing about the craft. Unfortunately, you can't teach consumer's good taste or how to spot a lesser skilled artist. You can maybe make a list of questions your sister can pose to the photographer such as a few about the science and a few about the business. Maybe shot-lists, refund policies, backup equipment, etc and then stuff like white balance, optical aberrations, reciprocity failure and have them explain what they need to do to reduce image distortion. (simple but usually unknown by MWAC's)</p>

<p> </p>