lindsay_dobson

<p>Indeed. We used to use multiple cards but at an event a couple of years ago one of my cards went missing and was never found. Thankfully my assistant had covered most of those shots as well. We now use one or two large capacity cards instead. </p>

<p>Dave. If you had read my responses you would see that I have offered advice to Crystal along with the words of warning, and encouragement to follow a safer and more structured path to her goal of becoming a professional wedding photographer. And I have already explained to you (and more importantly to Crystal) why I feel my initial response was justified and I'm sure she appreciates where I'm coming from. </p>

<p>I may not agree with your views, but I would never criticise you for them - on the contrary, you are as entitled to express your opinion as anyone. Please afford me the same courtesy. </p>

<p>Dave Gardner:<strong> "Also IMO what Lindsay Dobson said about calling in another "experienced photographer" was rude....that's the kind of stuff you hear on other forums....i expect more from Photo.net.."</strong><br>

<strong><br /></strong><br>

Dave, my response was based on the information given - that Crystal has almost no professional people photography experience, has booked a wedding for payment, is getting nervous, is poorly equipped, and later on indicated she hadn't even considered insurance. With that in mind, my suggestion was an appropriate and fairly sensible one and I'm sure Crystal understands why I said it. It certainly was not intended as rude and should not have been read as such. </p>

<p>I'm an experienced and very well qualified portrait photographer, with a fair amount of knowledge of weddings and bridal editorial photography, but the wedding business I brought in was always referred straight to the lead wedding photographer - with me taking a back seat. And I can say that if I were asked to shoot a wedding as the sole photographer I would most likely hesitate or decline or I would seek out somebody with more wedding miles under the bonnet. I have a lot of skills, I have all the insurances, but I'm pretty sure I'd still shoot my first two or three solo weddings on an unpaid low-expectation basis, even though I think I'd do a good job. I hope that clarifies my view that a client's big day should not necessarily be seen as a vehicle for dipping one's toes in and seeing if the shoe fits, however old fashioned I may sound to you. My view remains that it is risky for an individual to accept payment for a task they are not properly equipped or prepared for. </p>

<p>Crystal's clients may be very easy-going, clients often are before the wedding, because their expectations have not yet been met, exceeded, or smashed. I will say again that effective communication is Crystal's best defence against the latter.<br>

<br /><br>

<br /></p>

<p><strong>"And with such advice no one would ever get started. Everyone, even you, has a first wedding. Instead of telling the person "don't do it" advice of what to watch for, be prepared for and helpful hints would be more appropriate."</strong><br>

<br /><br>

A strange presumption Raymond. I would hardly give that advice to a newcomer who has studied, practised, assisted, and perhaps second shot as well, because clearly they have prepared themselves for the rigours of their first wedding. Please don't assume that I ever undertook paid work without the knowledge, contingency, and training to do so. However in Crystal's case my response was based on the information provided, and that information indicates she's not really in a position to take paid wedding work yet. You've also overlooked the advice I offered - particularly the need for insurance and written documentation.</p>

<p><strong><br /></strong><strong>"I just wanted say thank you to everyone for their advice and to apologize if I disrespected anyone here. Most of all Lindsey. I will admit that I was offended by the first comment made in your post. I have read and re-read these posts and it has been bothering me they way I responded to it. I truly do appreciate all the advice, even if it wasn't what I was expecting to hear. Maybe its the Canadian in me, sometimes we tend to sugar coat things as to not hurt peoples feelings. I really do respect the honesty.</strong><br /><strong>I took William's advice and investigated where the advice came from. Lindsey your work is absolutly stunning. Your work is inspiring.</strong><br /><strong>I am 31 years old and am finally realizing who I am and what I want to be. I love photography and I realize that I do have a long road ahead of me. I hope that you all will continue help me in that journey."</strong><br>

<br /><br>

Crystal, thank you for the kind words. I'm sure all of us here have heard some tough advice through our respective photographic journeys. I'm so pleased you've gone away and had a think, and seen that the advice has been sincere and constructive - WilliamW has covered the important points perfectly. Yes, photography is a long road, and that can be frustrating when we're starting out and we're hungry to move forward. Don't be despondent - an organized approach to training and development will always pay dividends and this forum will help you with that. You've booked some weddings and that shows you're determined and enterprising (vital if you're to run your own wedding business). Add the right training and knowledge to that and there's no reason why you won't go far. But try not to run before you can walk - and I re-iterate the need for insurance - accidents do happen and if a guest were to trip over you, or your camera bag, and injure themselves then you could have a disaster on your hands. Liability and Indemnity insurance isn't all that expensive, and you do need it. Best of luck with the wedding and for the benefit of other newcomers who will read this thread do please report back afterwards.</p>

 

<p>Michael, your comparison isn't really valid - a young lawyer won't represent any clients until he/she is appropriately qualified to do so. We do not know what sort of courses Crystal has taken, I did ask her however to clarify that. My view is that you should not charge for a service unless you can competently and confidently deliver, and safeguards should always be in place (I also asked Crystal to clarify her level of insurance, just in case). If that is the case, then fine. But this is somebody's wedding day after all - there are no second chances. Yes, seeking advice is great - but I think that should be when you're learning your craft - not after you've booked your first wedding whilst suffering consequent and well justified nerves. We don't know what level Crystal's people photography is at - I don't see her website in her profile. And she has been entirely vague in what areas she needs advice on, which further compounds my fears. </p>

<p>Crystal - learning to become a professional wedding photographer can be a long road. Many assist other established pros, then second shoot, then take on small weddings of their own when they're confident with the flow and technical challenges of the day. It's good to take opportunities - but only if you're confident you can deliver. I think I asked you that in my last post - are you confident you can handle the challenges that the various parts of a wedding day will throw at you? Are you able to deal with difficult lighting situations - and people - with very little time to get the shots? Do you know how to pose people and direct them? Are you OK with lighting and using flash? Are your post production skills up to scratch? If you can answer yes to those things then I think that yes, you should take this opportunity. But if you're getting worried about handling it then I do think it might be best for you to think of your clients and suggest a pro. That is not meant to be an insult at all - but with your admission that you're not very experienced in this kind of photography it's hard to say anything else. I'm sure that's the same advice I would be given if I were to suddenly take on a job beyond my usual area of expertise. Don't take it personally. </p>

<p>It's fairly frequent Steve. Just last week one particular wedding was splashed around the papers and the photographers' names are now mud. It seems they'd taken payment but lacked experience. </p>

<p>I firmly believe that you shouldn't charge for your services until you're confident you can deliver the goods, and I didn't get that impression from Crystal's opening post. She has booked a wedding with little relevant experience and has then come on a forum asking for advice. Not advice on a particular area, but advice in general. That rings a few alarm bells.</p>

<p>I'll ask Crystal again to confirm that she will be taking out the proper insurances. And I think my point about managing client expectations is an important one. As is the need to get everything written down - in as much detail as possible - timings, locations, and the form of the final delivery and approximately when the product will be delivered etc etc. Never let clients assume anything. One of the biggest causes of arguments after weddings is down to misunderstandings and poor communication between the photographer and the client, most of which can be avoided.</p>

<p>Crystal, you implied you didn't have much experience of photographing people - but mention now that you've had training. Is that wedding related training/lighting/portraiture? Do you feel competent to shoot this wedding? If you want advice it's better to be specific - wedding photography is a big topic - if you can narrow down the areas you're worried about it will be much easier to advise you.</p>

 

<p>You've asked for advice and my advice is to do your clients a favour and find them an experienced professional who knows what they're doing. As you said, you like nature photography and a tree, flower, or bird "won't judge you when you screw up". You are not filling me with confidence, Crystal. You are taking money for a task you are woefully unprepared for - that to me is risky and potentially negligent. This is a tolerant and friendly forum - elsewhere you'd be slaughtered for this sort of post. A little more advice:</p>

<p>Stick the camera in P mode (that stands for "Professional" of course)<br />Take lots of pictures<br />Make sure you have backups of everything<br />Take more cards and batteries than you think you'll need<br />Add a disclaimer to your agreement stating that you are not a qualified or experienced wedding photographer therefore the client is proceeding on a low-expectation basis (though this may not afford much protection if things go wrong)<br />Make sure you have the right level of liability and indemnity insurance - you do have insurance, don't you?<br />Speak to the minister before the ceremony and ask what you can and can't do - most don't allow flash during key moments and some restrict photography entirely<br />Say a few prayers the night before.</p>

<p>Here in the UK the newspapers are full of cases where couples have paid inexperienced photographers to photograph their weddings - with tears (and litigation) all round. Carefully consider what you're getting in to and weigh up your clients' expectations - are they thinking they will get a set of professional wedding images like the ones they see in wedding magazines? If so, decline this outing. Otherwise, ensure they understand how little experience you really have in posing, lighting, and managing people. Clients are often easy going before the event - but they can be a nightmare afterwards.<br /> </p>

<p>In many cases copyright infringement does indeed deprive the rightful owner of something - their right to payment for use of their creations, photographs, or designs. I'm glad you agree it's wrong!</p>

<p><strong>Not stolen but copied.</strong></p>

<p>Your reasoning baffles me. Unauthorized reproduction of images to which you do not hold title is theft - as defined by law. I would also add that this person did so flagrantly. </p>

<p>This person knows exactly what she's doing. And to throw her religion around at the same time is the worst form of arrogance and hypocrisy. </p>

<p>For street and candid photography I use a Fuji X10.</p>

<p>Graeme, I get enquiries just like yours every week, as do all the other pros I know, and without exception they go straight in the trash. </p>

<p>Have you given any thought to contributing something genuinely useful for what would be a superb learning experience (on the pro's overhead)? Otherwise, learning is normally done by tuition, courses, seminars etc. There are some great courses around, have a look at Damien Lovegrove, Crash Taylor, and the training offered in the UK through bodies like the SWPP/BPPA. In fact the world-leading SWPP Convention starts in London next week, with hundreds of classes on every subject, including many on the business of weddings. You'll find more about this event on the SWPP website - if you can make it to London you'll learn more than you ever thought possible, and you'll go home with plenty of contacts too if you approach people in the right way. </p>

<p>There's a lot of business info on my Blog under the For Photographers category - on everything from wanting to 'assist' (not that you even mentioned that) to the cost of being in business. This is relevant to your question and will help you to understand some of the reactions you will encounter if you couch your approach as you did here, along with suggestions of how to move forward: <a href="http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/?p=1957">http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/?p=1957</a></p>

<p>Harry's bright idea that you purchase photos from a stock agency has left me quite speechless. </p>

<p>Jon, I have no idea who you are, as a photographer. I have no idea who your target client base might be. But in order to gain interest from potential customers you will need a credible body of work in the genre you decide to market yourself in, currently you only have a handful of images on each page which do not show any definable style. I would go back to the drawing board and think hard about what you want to be, and how you feel you can achieve that goal - and build up a portfolio which reflects that. I will also say that your product/pricing page is very generic and will almost certainly completely confuse your audience. </p>

<p>Not sure what your work schedule is, but in January the SWPP/BPPA conference is held in London each year - it's the biggest photographic event in the world and runs over about a week - with virtually every famous name speaking and heading seminars and masterclasses in every subject from portraiture, boudoir, architectural photography and more importantly photography as a business. </p>

<p>Photo.net is a unique place. Speaking of the forums as a whole, I would wager there is an answer to every photographic issue. It is a fantastic resource populated by some very experienced and knowledgeable people. For me, what has meant the most is the building of relationships over the years, just this summer I found myself working alongside another contributor, a pleasant coincidence. I agree that Nadine is a phenomenon - one who selflessly shares her considerable knowledge with all who ask, I have the utmost respect for her. </p>

<p>A bride 'unlikes' your Facebook page. So what? </p>

<p>I'm with John, it sounds like you've got a very delicate ego!! I also agree with Jeremy, regarding the statement you made about attractive people and nice settings. Quite unnecessary. Either blog your weddings or don't blog them, but be careful of cherry-picking. I think asking the bride why she 'unliked' you is taking things a little too far. </p>

<p>Having read the recent discussion about 'angry, bitter photographers' and the general demise of this forum, I have to say that the increase in trivia like this is partly why I am now an infrequent contributor. </p>

<p><strong>"How does one find the balance between being blut, polite, contructive, whilst trying to improve the value of the environment? I certainly don't know."</strong></p>

<p>By merely exercising a little judgement and common sense.</p>

<p>I have seen posts from some newcomers who clearly aren't prepared to do a little research and who expect direct, detailed tutoring via the forum. I'm inclined not to respond, but I can think of several cases where an OP has become disenchanted with the advice given because it doesn't align with their agenda - at this point I feel any educated adviser is well entitled to react bluntly. On such occasions there is nothing 'spiteful' about the reaction of the respondents, they're just fed up with being argued with, especially if an OP has little or no knowledge of the industry. </p>

<p><strong>Bruce Rubenstein: "Angry, defensive and bitter is a reasonable description for all the full time wedding photographers I personally know. I mostly second shoot / assist. When it's meal break I prefer to sit with the musicians, because they are generally cheerful people who enjoy what they're doing."</strong></p>

<p>I wonder how many photographers you second shoot for or assist, because you seem to feel that they represent the norm. Perhaps if you ever rely on wedding photography as your sole source of income you will have a better understanding of why some practitioners feel how they do, though I think this is a feature of the lower end of the market. Still, the photographers you have so much contempt for are at least proving useful to you, in that they're giving you opportunities and experience upon which you can build your own future.</p>

<p>My experience has been the complete opposite, I know a great many wedding and portrait photographers and they are the most talented, generous, positive people I could wish to meet. Many of them exist in this forum and I find the OP's comments to be nonsensical (though I will concede that other areas of Photo.net can be unsavoury).</p>

<p>Images printed onto metal can look great, and are perfect for areas like bathrooms, ditto some acrylics, but always check with the manufacturer first. </p>

<p><strong>We have also been told that she will not give us images that do not have her watermark on them. ....... by telling us to never contact her again and that she will not return our calls. Since she never gave us a contract, but we do have copies of all of our talks with her via email, what are our legal options at this point? </strong></p>

<p>It sounds like there are misunderstandings as to what would be delivered. Go through your correspondence and look at what was said/written. Were watermarks mentioned at all? If not, politely raise that fact and explain that watermarked images are not what you expected. It seems odd that you feel one thing was agreed and something totally different delivered. Do you have it in writing that she agreed to pass high resolution printable files to you? If so, that should be all the ammunition you need when you sit down and meet with her. <br>

As others have said, black and white conversion is a creative decision but also, at times, something of a necessity (if colour balance problems are proving an issue, or high amounts of noise/grain). Even if you liked the colour versions, they may be technically unacceptable to the photographer, and not the best advert for her work. Try and understand that before demanding to see the originals - despite what one other respondent wrongly stated, the images are your photographer's property and remain so. A gentle, light hearted approach might get you further however. <br>

She told you not to contact her again? That's not a normal response so I have to wonder how she might have been provoked into saying that. <br>

All this talk of finding a lawyer would be seen as nonsensical here in the UK. Whatever happened to civilized dialogue ..... if you have mentioned taking the legal route to this photographer it's little wonder the shutters have come down. That should always be your very last resort. My advice is to tread very gently at the meeting, and trade on the 'misunderstanding' position rather than taking the full-on blame route. I'm sure you'll be able to work it out. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Green, remind yourself that the client must like your work, otherwise they would not have hired you in the first place. </p>

<p>And as has been said, we are usually our own worst critics. </p>

<p>I'm afraid I cannot share your enthusiasm. I was looking forward to the very talented Tamara Lackey's presentation but I struggled to gain anything from it - simply because the speed and variable pitch of her delivery left me several sentences behind and struggling to catch up with what was being said at times. I appreciate American speech is often much faster than that in the UK, but both my assistant and I honestly couldn't understand a large portion of what she said. A shame, as I'm sure it was good stuff. </p>

<p>Andy, I think the photographer is trying to say that if no complaint has been made within 72 hours of the proofing gallery being made available, then the disc is sent out and the images are deemed to have been accepted as fit for purpose. However it seems that Lesley did not see the proofing gallery until 10pm on the day the photographer mailed the CD, thus making it hard for Lesley to act within those terms. </p>

<p>"As studio policy<br />clearly states that if proofs are accepted (and you have 72 hours to do so)<br />that legally, due to copyright infringement, of the proofs, digital files are<br />rendered and there is no refund after this and we can only offer you a reshoot.<br />I once again apologize for your dissatisfaction, but you did nothing to allow<br />us to justify or correct your complaints."</p>

<p>Lesley, this seems to be the pertinent argument, as far as she is concerned. Can you prove you had no sight of the proofs? How long after the shoot did you make your feelings known? Otherwise you are reliant on arguing the timescale, though clearly the images are nowhere near merchantable quality. I stress this has nothing to do with the camera she used, but is entirely down to the poor skills of this photographer. If your complaint lay outside the time frame, you will have to accept the re-shoot and then (if the pictures are unsatisfactory) begin the complaint process afresh and demand a refund at the proofing stage (prior to accepting the disc).</p>

<p>Edit: I've just read back and seen that you do indeed have an e-mail proving she sent the disc before you saw the proofing gallery at 10pm that night. Next time if the disc is sent first, do not accept it, have it returned unopened and send a polite note explaining why you first wish to see the online proofs, as per her contract. </p>

<p>My suppliers (albums and so forth) charge photographers in full at the point of order, because as I have said the goods are produced to my specifications as a product tailored to my client. Therefore I, and every other professional photographer I know, must charge the client in full prior to implementation of the order, to cover the costs to our suppliers and the considerable time spent acting on the design and inception. Therefore, I (rightly) do not have the option to receive goods from my suppliers and then decide I don't want them, or that I've changed my mind. I can however demand rectification if there is a fault or any damage - but I cannot make purchases on a speculative basis, and nor can my clients for a great many sound business reasons. <br /><br />In the OP's case, shoddy goods were delivered and the photographer has offered to re-shoot, which if I were the OP I would accept. If the re-shoot is unsatisfactory then pursuing a degree of refund is the next stage. But I have to say that clients are responsible for making informed decisions and if they fail to conduct adequate or even minimal research into the supplier's product then they cannot argue that the photographer has failed to match their expectations of the product. If however the OP has seen good, merchantable examples of the photographer's work, and what she received falls short of that, then her case for a refund becomes that much stronger. I do wonder on what basis the OP chose this particular photographer. </p>