Parents' fury after photographer erases mark for nursery school portrait

I would not have removed it but having read the story it seems that the photography has made a genuine error, that can happen, I've edited the wrong photo in the past :bang: yet the parent's seem keen to hang the guy out to dry over a error that anyone one of us could have made, he has offered a replacement print, I think maybe I would have offered a replacement print and maybe a package upgrade for free :thumbs:

I think that the key thing here is why did the parent's got to the press and I think that the key to this is what to they want, clearly they want to get something out of this, I'm of the opinion that they want to get compensation, but that is probably an issue in itself where some some people think that they need to be paid for every perceived wrong that has been done to them :shake: :bang:

Matt
MWHCVT
 
Its typical of the "Americanisms" of this country, people trying to get money or something for free. I'm surprised they didnt try and sue him. Its a disgrace that this has gone to a paper.

The photographer has made a mistake, admited it, end of story.
Now, the OPs question, would I have done it? To be honest, I would have to have a look at the original image. The mark may have appeared lighter in the image (looking at the picture the parents took, its very light anyway) and he may have thought it was a small mark, you know how kids like to "rough and touble". I know he said it was a mistake, and to be honest that could be a lie althought I'm not saying it is. Without seeing the original, I'm not sure if I would have or not.

Either way, people make me sick!
 
I can see fault both ways. Yes, the tog has admitted a mistake BUT it seems a pretty silly mistake to make! Firstly, if a customer agrees a proof, why change it - as the customer is not getting what they ordered. Also, I would never remove marks like spots or scratches etc... unless the parents asked first. It is easy to say after the event it was a human error mistake but I dont believe that - like I say, two mistakes have happened there and they are both basic mistakes!

That said, I do not see why so much fuss needs to be made over it. But I guess if I was the parent I would be annoyed too.
 
cambsno said:
That said, I do not see why so much fuss needs to be made over it. But I guess if I was the parent I would be annoyed too.
Click to expand...

But to the point of going to a national paper?
 
It actually made Radio 2 this morning and a 10 minute debate followed

I feel for this guy I really do :shrug:


Les :'(
 
Good old Daily Fail, another none story not even worthy of a local rag.

I wouldn't have edited it out.

If that is the photographers picture on the right then I can still see the birthmark in the badly scanned image, so I expect you can see it on the print too. The Photographer ought to now go after the Daily Mail for unauthorised use of the scanned image too!

Whining parents probably just after fame or compo.
 
cambsno said:
Firstly, if a customer agrees a proof, why change it - as the customer is not getting what they ordered.
Click to expand...

Did you read the story in full?

He didn't change it from the proof deliberately. Another customer requested removal of a mark and he mistakingly removed the mark from the wrong photo.
 
Lez325 said:
It actually made Radio 2 this morning and a 10 minute debate followed

I feel for this guy I really do :shrug:


Les :'(
Click to expand...

Yes heard it on the way back, Vine is the Daily Mail on the radio anyway so no surprises.
Business offered to put it right, job done but hardly a story.

Maybe the Daily Mail should fill their editorial with stories about phone hacking instead....;)
 
Lez325 said:
It actually made Radio 2 this morning and a 10 minute debate followed

I feel for this guy I really do :shrug:


Les :'(
Click to expand...

Disgusting!
I would be straight on to the people on Radio 2, and also I would be in contact with the daily mail and ask for compensation. If everyones business mistakes were highlighted in the daily fish wrapper, there would be no businesses!
 
joescrivens said:
Did you read the story in full?

He didn't change it from the proof deliberately. Another customer requested removal of a mark and he mistakingly removed the mark from the wrong photo.
Click to expand...

I am experienced enough not to believe everything you read. That may have been the case, but it is also a good excuse. Ok, I dont do schools, and the volume of pics he does, and mistakes do happen, but to do serious editing like that I would want to be sure I am doing the right one.
 
It is every paper not just the Daily Mail....why don't you all pick on another paper too, you lot are so Mailist (:thinking:) it is untrue.....

As for the OP's question, I would have given them 2 versions...original and edit.

By the way could anyone get 3 down in the prize crossword today..it has me stumped?
 
cambsno said:
I am experienced enough not to believe everything you read. That may have been the case, but it is also a good excuse. Ok, I dont do schools, and the volume of pics he does, and mistakes do happen, but to do serious editing like that I would want to be sure I am doing the right one.
Click to expand...

doesn't it make sense that this could really be the only reason though.

Like you say why would anyone make major changes to a file once the proofs had been approved and ordered? People make small changes and little improvements but to remove something huge over a third of the face after it had been accepted is very unlikely
 
Would I do the same? Not to that extent but I've cloned out certain features (spots and small moles) and regularly tidy up stuff like yellowed teeth, bloodshot eyes etc. But it's stuff that isn't always permanent.... but in some cases, I'm sure it may be easy to overlook something like a birthmark and mistake it for a temporary skin discolouration. I'm sure the tog in question hgad more than just this job on so I understand how things could have got muddled.

I like his last comment:

"I thought the family were OK with the situation but obviously not."

They probably were until the DM needled the parents....
 
Marcel said:
Besides, she called her child Omnee, she needs a hoof in the giblets :p
Click to expand...

Yeh, she banged her leg on the table at the registrar's. :shrug:
 
Reminds me why I no longer buy newspapers, apart from Ma and Pa Omnee who gives a flying
 
Last edited:
Dictionary definition:

Omnee

Also know as OJ (Orange Juice)
Word for a very good friend, and a person who likes to talk about themselves a lot.

I need some omnee

If I had a child called Omnee I would keep quiet about it, or maybe her father was a bus spotter.... Omnibus?
 
I would have consulted the parents as to whether they wanted it removing. Its the same with people who wear glasses....Don't assume they want their photograph taken with their glasses off...

Common sense really...
 
lol, i have visions of photographers walking up to people wearing glasses and just stripping them from their face before they take the photo :lol:
 
One person's greed has potentially ruined another person's livelihood, sad times.

I think the morals of the parents should be held into question, not the photographer.
 
Jeremy Vine had the photographer on his show today on Radio 2, and the photographer explained that a genuine mistake was made and the father happy with the explanation and apology. He also pointed out that he was a small company with 2 employees trying to make a living against large companies, and had received praise from parents for years etc. He also questioned if the BBC and Daily Mail should really be putting pressure on him and his company by reporting a non-story, especially in the current economic environment.

He had a very valid point in my opinion
 
AndrewA123 said:
Jeremy Vine had the photographer on his show today on Radio 2, and the photographer explained that a genuine mistake was made and the father happy with the explanation and apology. He also pointed out that he was a small company with 2 employees trying to make a living against large companies, and had received praise from parents for years etc. He also questioned if the BBC and Daily Mail should really be putting pressure on him and his company by reporting a non-story, especially in the current economic environment.

He had a very valid point in my opinion
Click to expand...

And I totally agree! makes me sick, really does! That could be 3 people now out of work because of that, all for the price of a packet of fags (or whatever the Daily mail paid the parents).

Why is there so much negative press about this sort of thing?
Yes, war, famine and all other stuff is negative, but this is a non-story that could ruin 3 peoples lives..... and the knock on effect may ruin even more!
 
joescrivens said:
hold up, you can't crit the guys work when he's not a member on here. it's not allowed
Click to expand...

Not only that, you cant say that was the final image. It could have been cropped, plus its no doubt a scan or even a photo of the photo
 
couple of things...

I routinely remove spots and blemishes, and I have never had a complaint. I removed bad acne from a teenager today, I didn't even think about it However something like a large birthmark is something I would not routinely remove, as it is a permanent part of the person

What does strike me is the "quality" of the finished image
 
Yv said:
no, I wouldn't have done the same unless it was requested, but if it was genuine mistake, and he has apologised, it seems a shame that Daily Mail are once again running non stories that could kill someones livelihood. Mind you, pressumably someone had to tell the DM the story was there..... :suspect:
Click to expand...

Agree with you another Daily crap non story,probably picked up by,a local paper,then passed on to the mail :(
 
Daryl said:
She is proberbly a mother from mumstrailerpparknet.com.

All they ever do is bitch and moan. Stop their benefits and send their kids to sweat shops and clean chimneys...... Stop their booze n fags.

Policies for a happier Britain!!!! ;)
Click to expand...

:lol: Daryl, please never stop posting...
 
Yv said:
no, I wouldn't have done the same unless it was requested, but if it was genuine mistake, and he has apologised, it seems a shame that Daily Mail are once again running non stories that could kill someones livelihood. Mind you, pressumably someone had to tell the DM the story was there..... :suspect:
Click to expand...

The local paper is a subsidary of the Fail - nicknamed the excessive error by some staff (real name the Express and Echo) and tends to show similar views and has the same standards of journalism. I would guess that one of their researchers found the story and passed it up the line to the Fail, possibly hoping for some recompense?
 
Daryl said:
Don't tell me........ The kid has a brother.... and their names are Moet and Chandon?

Next they use names like Samson? 'No his name is Samsung! Innit!'

Let the tyres down on their trailers!!!
Click to expand...

:lol: :lol: More likly to be Lambrini and While Lighting geeza
 
Daryl said:
Don't tell me........ The kid has a brother.... and their names are Moet and Chandon?

Next they use names like Samson? 'No his name is Samsung! Innit!'

Let the tyres down on their trailers!!!
Click to expand...

:lol:
Thanks Daryl, a bit of comic perspective on the whole sordid story. Unfortunately, I have "outlaws" - non blood relations, who revel in trying to get one over on someone, and have used various ploys to get compensation from quite innocent situations.
 
The Public... who'd deal with them? :thumbsdown:
 
Mustardpics said:
The big offence here was taking such a cr@p photo in the first place!!
Click to expand...

As mentioned, it's hardly fair to critique a photo when the photographers original isn't available, nor the photographer here to defend himself.

Also that image really looks like the the parents have only handed over a passport sized image and the local rag have badly scanned it and enlarged it.

Depending on his contract 'd be after the Daily mail for unauthorised use.
After all it's not like they have a history of...... Oh! ;)

Edit for links:
http://www.bjp-online.com/tag/daily-mail

http://www.wonderlandblog.com/wonde...hotos-despite-my-denying-them-permission.html
 
Last edited:
Byker28i said:
As mentioned, it's hardly fair to critique a photo when the photographers original isn't available, nor the photographer here to defend himself.

Also that image really looks like the the parents have only handed over a passport sized image and the local rag have badly scanned it and enlarged it.

Depending on his contract 'd be after the Daily mail for unauthorised use.
After all it's not like they have a history of...... Oh! ;)

Edit for links:
http://www.bjp-online.com/tag/daily-mail

http://www.wonderlandblog.com/wonde...hotos-despite-my-denying-them-permission.html
Click to expand...

IT IS NOT JUST THE DAILY MAIL.... ALL THE PAPERS COVERED IT...... GIVE THE OTHER PAPERS SOME STICK TOO
 
Byker28i said:
As mentioned, it's hardly fair to critique a photo when the photographers original isn't available, nor the photographer here to defend himself.

Also that image really looks like the the parents have only handed over a passport sized image and the local rag have badly scanned it and enlarged it.

Depending on his contract 'd be after the Daily mail for unauthorised use.
After all it's not like they have a history of...... Oh! ;)

Edit for links:
http://www.bjp-online.com/tag/daily-mail

http://www.wonderlandblog.com/wonde...hotos-despite-my-denying-them-permission.html
Click to expand...

exactly!! the daily fail are scum defined!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top