Pro photographer being awkward.

[robj20]

Had our sons school photo through and our lad isn't even in focus, computers are off and it generally just looks rubbish. I could honestly do better on my phone.

Wife has today phoned to ask for a refund as we don't want it. They're insisting they can fix it and that they won't refund until they try.
They might be able to fix the colours and underexposure but I doubt they can re-focus it.

As far as I know we should get the full costs back as well including postage as we're returning as faulty not just that we don't want it. They even tried to blame the poor focus on my son moving. Luckily is already prepped the wife so she knew how to reply to rubbish like that.

Googled them online and they look a big company but I'm shocked at the quality of this photo really.

Also were not the only ones to complain the nursery have said a few people aren't happy. They said they won't be using them again anyway as they find them difficult to work with after they had taken the photos.

 

[Crotal Bell]

Had our sons school photo through and our lad isn't even in focus, computers are off and it generally just looks rubbish. I could honestly do better on my phone.

Wife has today phoned to ask for a refund as we don't want it. They're insisting they can fix it and that they won't refund until they try.
They might be able to fix the colours and underexposure but I doubt they can re-focus it.

As far as I know we should get the full costs back as well including postage as we're returning as faulty not just that we don't want it. They even tried to blame the poor focus on my son moving. Luckily is already prepped the wife so she knew how to reply to rubbish like that.

Googled them online and they look a big company but I'm shocked at the quality of this photo really.

Also were not the only ones to complain the nursery have said a few people aren't happy. They said they won't be using them again anyway as they find them difficult to work with after they had taken the photos.

Wow that's really poor, sounds like they don't care enough, or aren't careful enough about who they employ.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

As far as I know we should get the full costs back as well including postage as we're returning as faulty not just that we don't want it.

The official advice is here: https://www.gov.uk/accepting-returns-and-giving-refunds

It looks like you'll have to prove the faults if the company argues...

When you do not have to offer a refund​

:
:
You have to offer a refund for certain items only if they’re faulty, such as:

• personalised items and custom-made items, for example curtains

 

[Box Brownie]

Sounds like a big company employing sub contractors......poor service by the sub contractors can lead to reputational damage, which they appear to be trying to mitigate, though possibly not in the most customer oriented manner?

PS oof issues in some cases can be handled by AI based software. How well that will handle childrens faces

PPS I wonder if the "model" they use is what AFAIK was used by Venture. IIRC I read that their photographers(?) were very little more than 'button pressers'..... i.e. everything on the setup and camera was fixed including the focus!

 

[benc98]

I'm sure if you paid remotely, then you have 30 days to reject the goods anyway

 

[Box Brownie]

Had our sons school photo through and our lad isn't even in focus, computers are off and it generally just looks rubbish. I could honestly do better on my phone.

Wife has today phoned to ask for a refund as we don't want it. They're insisting they can fix it and that they won't refund until they try.
They might be able to fix the colours and underexposure but I doubt they can re-focus it.

As far as I know we should get the full costs back as well including postage as we're returning as faulty not just that we don't want it. They even tried to blame the poor focus on my son moving. Luckily is already prepped the wife so she knew how to reply to rubbish like that.

Googled them online and they look a big company but I'm shocked at the quality of this photo really.

Also were not the only ones to complain the nursery have said a few people aren't happy. They said they won't be using them again anyway as they find them difficult to work with after they had taken the photos.

The official advice is here: https://www.gov.uk/accepting-returns-and-giving-refunds

It looks like you'll have to prove the faults if the company argues...

I'm sure if you paid remotely, then you have 30 days to reject the goods anyway

And if paid by credit card, does this type of product fall under Section 75 payment claims?

 

[robj20]

Already have an email with them confirming he's out of focus, they blame him for moving. See what this edit looks like when they email it over.

 

[Milo King]

Am I missing something here?

Did you not get proofs to look at first?

When we had pictures done of the kids via school/nursery we were shown proofs beforehand, then if we liked what we saw it was at this point we ordered and paid for them.

 

[robj20]

Am I missing something here?

Did you not get proofs to look at first?

When we had pictures done of the kids via school/nursery we were shown proofs beforehand, then if we liked what we saw it was at this point we ordered and paid for them.

Yes tiny little things.

 

[Milo King]

Yes tiny little things.

So enlighten me, what did I miss?

Did or did you not have the opportunity to view proofs first?

 

[Faldrax]

So enlighten me, what did I miss?

Did or did you not have the opportunity to view proofs first?

If they were like the proofs we used to receive for school photos, they were less than 2" on the long side - so for a shot of the whole class, for example, it would be very difficult to tell if a specific child was sharp, and even for individual shots it woudl not be easy (particularly if there was then a watermark plastered over them!)

 

[f/1.2]

PPS I wonder if the "model" they use is what AFAIK was used by Venture. IIRC I read that their photographers(?) were very little more than 'button pressers'..... i.e. everything on the setup and camera was fixed including the focus!

Sorry but that is completely untrue.

The guy that started Venture Photography was called David Campbell. He then offered it as franchises. As part of the franchise all of the venture photographers were very well trained.

David Campbell himself was an exceptional photographer for his time and won awards worldwide. One of the most successful if not the most successful photographers ever to come out of Northern Ireland. Many of the photographers that directly worked under him were exceptional photographers as well and went on to set up their own very successful photography businesses in all sorts of genres. The business model of Venture was always to have skilled photographers and separate very skilled sales people, photographers didn't get involved in the sales process. The sales people were ruthless, that is were Venture got their bad name from, later on down the line.

Later on down the line David sold the business off and Venture was never the same. After that there may well have been some "button pushers" in some franchises but that flies directly against the whole ethos of what the business was when it was operated by David.

I knew David personally, he sadly passed away a couple of years ago. He was way ahead of his time and revolutionised portrait photography. Many of the ideas he put in place at Venture have been adopted by other photographers worldwide including people like Megan Del Pierro who runs the 10k minimum sales plan. Venture had a bad rep yet portrait photographer are paying tens of thousands of pound to train with Megan Del Pierro who teaches exactly the same things David did way back at Venture.

 

[Box Brownie]

Sorry but that is completely untrue.

The guy that started Venture Photography was called David Campbell. He then offered it as franchises. As part of the franchise all of the venture photographers were very well trained.

David Campbell himself was an exceptional photographer for his time and won awards worldwide. One of the most successful if not the most successful photographers ever to come out of Northern Ireland. Many of the photographers that directly worked under him were exceptional photographers as well and went on to set up their own very successful photography businesses in all sorts of genres. The business model of Venture was always to have skilled photographers and separate very skilled sales people, photographers didn't get involved in the sales process. The sales people were ruthless, that is were Venture got their bad name from, later on down the line.

Later on down the line David sold the business off and Venture was never the same. After that there may well have been some "button pushers" in some franchises but that flies directly against the whole ethos of what the business was when it was operated by David.

I knew David personally, he sadly passed away a couple of years ago. He was way ahead of his time and revolutionised portrait photography. Many of the ideas he put in place at Venture have been adopted by other photographers worldwide including people like Megan Del Pierro who runs the 10k minimum sales plan. Venture had a bad rep yet portrait photographer are paying tens of thousands of pound to train with Megan Del Pierro who teaches exactly the same things David did way back at Venture.

I bow to your primary first hand experience of the "Venture" man & company he started.

Though something it seems went wrong with the service & products @robj20 received! He has not, as is appropriate, named the company but by inference they seem to have an issue with the photographer who attended that nursery (he said the nursery has had more issues than this single occasion).

As a client of any service, the operative & his/her performance will reflect directly on the "company on the business card"......how quickly and satisfactorily they resolve @robj20 and his fellow customers complaints will be how they judge the company concerned!

 

[Box Brownie]

Already have an email with them confirming he's out of focus, they blame him for moving. See what this edit looks like when they email it over.

Am I missing something here?

Did you not get proofs to look at first?

When we had pictures done of the kids via school/nursery we were shown proofs beforehand, then if we liked what we saw it was at this point we ordered and paid for them.

Yes tiny little things.

So enlighten me, what did I miss?

Did or did you not have the opportunity to view proofs first?

If they were like the proofs we used to receive for school photos, they were less than 2" on the long side - so for a shot of the whole class, for example, it would be very difficult to tell if a specific child was sharp, and even for individual shots it woudl not be easy (particularly if there was then a watermark plastered over them!)

Interesting, if the proof is not the size of the final image then what about the company QC.....do they not confirm the final print is of the highest standard? Or do they expect the customer to be the QC'er.....or do they hope that most customers don't care or notice!

Also, in the high pressure of the shooting situation and a child moves, why can't the photographer notice and take a couple of the same child???

PS @robj20 where you mention other parents were also not happy, do you know what the individual issues were?

 

[stumac]

Sorry but that is completely untrue.

The guy that started Venture Photography was called David Campbell. He then offered it as franchises. As part of the franchise all of the venture photographers were very well trained.

David Campbell himself was an exceptional photographer for his time and won awards worldwide. One of the most successful if not the most successful photographers ever to come out of Northern Ireland. Many of the photographers that directly worked under him were exceptional photographers as well and went on to set up their own very successful photography businesses in all sorts of genres. The business model of Venture was always to have skilled photographers and separate very skilled sales people, photographers didn't get involved in the sales process. The sales people were ruthless, that is were Venture got their bad name from, later on down the line.

Later on down the line David sold the business off and Venture was never the same. After that there may well have been some "button pushers" in some franchises but that flies directly against the whole ethos of what the business was when it was operated by David.

I knew David personally, he sadly passed away a couple of years ago. He was way ahead of his time and revolutionised portrait photography. Many of the ideas he put in place at Venture have been adopted by other photographers worldwide including people like Megan Del Pierro who runs the 10k minimum sales plan. Venture had a bad rep yet portrait photographer are paying tens of thousands of pound to train with Megan Del Pierro who teaches exactly the same things David did way back at Venture.

Also knew David well .....I honestly never met anyone more committed to ensuring photographers and the industry was kept to a high standard ......I would go as far as saying it was his life's work . When he spoke ....you listened as you were guaranteed to learn something.

 

[robj20]

Interesting, if the proof is not the size of the final image then what about the company QC.....do they not confirm the final print is of the highest standard? Or do they expect the customer to be the QC'er.....or do they hope that most customers don't care or notice!

Also, in the high pressure of the shooting situation and a child moves, why can't the photographer notice and take a couple of the same child???

PS @robj20 where you mention other parents were also not happy, do you know what the individual issues were?

I don't know what issues the other parents had it was just the teacher mentioning it to us.

The samples were indeed about 1" square all on one sheet.

 

[ShropshireLad]

I would ask them "Do you think the image is of "profesional quality" and would they be happy to display the image as one of theirs.?
Is this a single shot or multiple children (class shot)?
Also a profesional photographer would understand that children move and so should compensate for it at the moment of taking the image ... e.g multiple exposures ... faster shutter speed with probably better light.

 

[Box Brownie]

I don't know what issues the other parents had it was just the teacher mentioning it to us.

The samples were indeed about 1" square all on one sheet.

That reminds me of when i was making 'contact sheets' and using a magnifying loupe to select the pictures I was going to enlarge in the darkroom. NB all B&W.....my brother and I never did colour development & printing

IMO no way to make a choice from such a small proof size.....that is why I referred to the QC by the company of the chosen prints

 

[robj20]

I would ask them "Do you think the image is of "profesional quality" and would they be happy to display the image as one of theirs.?
Is this a single shot or multiple children (class shot)?
Also a profesional photographer would understand that children move and so should compensate for it at the moment of taking the image ... e.g multiple exposures ... faster shutter speed with probably better light.

It's a class shot, it's dark (clearly no effort has been made to light the subjects) it just looks like some random shot from a phone a far cry from professional in my opinion. Like you say kids move, add more light and a faster shutter speed.
I fully imagine we'll reject the re-edited version just got to wait I guess. I think with the emails we have we have proof it's "faulty" rather than just don't want it.

 

[f/1.2]

Also knew David well .....I honestly never met anyone more committed to ensuring photographers and the industry was kept to a high standard ......I would go as far as saying it was his life's work . When he spoke ....you listened as you were guaranteed to learn something.

Completely agree he genuinely cared about the photography industry it was his life’s work.

 

[snerkler]

Later on down the line David sold the business off and Venture was never the same. After that there may well have been some "button pushers" in some franchises but that flies directly against the whole ethos of what the business was when it was operated by David.

But then surely you can't say the other members post was completely untrue? Yes the ethos of the business might be against what is was and it sounds as though David was meticulous, but that doesn't mean that it's not the case now it's sold off unless I'm missing something? I'm sure some franchises are better than others

 

[snerkler]

Had our sons school photo through and our lad isn't even in focus, computers are off and it generally just looks rubbish. I could honestly do better on my phone.

Wife has today phoned to ask for a refund as we don't want it. They're insisting they can fix it and that they won't refund until they try.
They might be able to fix the colours and underexposure but I doubt they can re-focus it.

As far as I know we should get the full costs back as well including postage as we're returning as faulty not just that we don't want it. They even tried to blame the poor focus on my son moving. Luckily is already prepped the wife so she knew how to reply to rubbish like that.

Googled them online and they look a big company but I'm shocked at the quality of this photo really.

Also were not the only ones to complain the nursery have said a few people aren't happy. They said they won't be using them again anyway as they find them difficult to work with after they had taken the photos.

Already have an email with them confirming he's out of focus, they blame him for moving. See what this edit looks like when they email it over.

It should be easy enough to tell the difference between an out of focus shot and one with motion blur, but even if it's the latter then I'd still blame the photographer for using the wrong settings, pretty basic photography knowledge knowing not how to get motion blur in your shot. Out of interest, did they use a flash/strobe?

 

[robj20]

It should be easy enough to tell the difference between an out of focus shot and one with motion blur, but even if it's the latter then I'd still blame the photographer for using the wrong settings, pretty basic photography knowledge knowing not how to get motion blur in your shot. Out of interest, did they use a flash/strobe?

Not that I am aware of.
Having to send the original back and receive a new edited version before they'll even consider a refund.

 

[snerkler]

Not that I am aware of.
Having to send the original back and receive a new edited version before they'll even consider a refund.

There are anti-shake software now, and you can do this in PS but they can only help with VERY small movements and it introduces artefacts from my experience. Of course, none of this helps if they were just OOF as you believe. I don't understand why they'd waste their own time even trying to fix them rather than just offering a refund, odds are you're going to still reject them and they'll have wasted time trying to fix them.

 

[Tysonator]

Even some older DSLR's in live mode you have face detection like my Canon EOS 7Dii, so there is really no excuse not to get a face in focus regardless if the subject moved or not !
This is truly poor, poor service and QC at the office has not happened and assured all photos were fine by the Co !

 

[robj20]

Even some older DSLR's in live mode you have face detection like my Canon EOS 7Dii, so there is really no excuse not to get a face in focus regardless if the subject moved or not !
This is truly poor, poor service and QC at the office has not happened and assured all photos were fine by the Co !

A couple of the faces in the middle front row are acceptable but at either side they go OOF and the back row as well.

 

[snerkler]

A couple of the faces in the middle front row are acceptable but at either side they go OOF and the back row as well.

Oh, so it’s a group shot rather than individual portrait? Obviously back row could be too little DOF, but why either side of centre is OOF is a little harder to explain.

Field curvature could come into play I guess but I wouldn’t expect it to be that bad.

 

[gerry s]

Very much sounds like a DoF issue. If we knew camera and lens you would soon find out. Take for instance an 85mm lens at 2.8 from 10-12 feet you would have a DoF of about 6 inches which would take out anything each side of focal point. We have no idea of the competency/ability of the photographer.

 

[KIPAX]

Interesting, if the proof is not the size of the final image then what about the company QC.....do they not confirm the final print is of the highest standard? Or do they expect the customer to be the QC'er.....or do they hope that most customers don't care or notice!

Also, in the high pressure of the shooting situation and a child moves, why can't the photographer notice and take a couple of the same child???

PS @robj20 where you mention other parents were also not happy, do you know what the individual issues were?

Apparently we now find out it was a group picture.... Thus the proof being small would have had even smaller faces on ..

I wish people wouldnt drip feed us the info

 

[robj20]

Apparently we now find out it was a group picture.... Thus the proof being small would have had even smaller faces on ..

I wish people wouldnt drip feed us the info

I wish people would read previous posts before having a dig. But I guess the smiley face makes it okay.

Post #19 "It's a class shot"

 

[snerkler]

I wish people would read previous posts before having a dig. But I guess the smiley face makes it okay.

Post #19 "It's a class shot"

I must admit I missed that post too

 

[Tysonator]

A couple of the faces in the middle front row are acceptable but at either side they go OOF and the back row as well.

OK, now it makes more sense, a group shot is a lot different to sitting a child on stool and asking them to say 'cheese' ! !

 

[wilt]

Also knew David well .....I honestly never met anyone more committed to ensuring photographers and the industry was kept to a high standard ......I would go as far as saying it was his life's work . When he spoke ....you listened as you were guaranteed to learn something.

I knew David and can fully agree with both yourself and Tommy. He elevated photography and was passionate about the whole photography experience, something that was evident when he spoke. Under David, Venture was far from "button pressers"

 

[Marino]

so it's a crop from a group shot?
that's sounds bad to me..
Did you get a refund then?

 

[piper]

just skip read this thread:

Sounds like the photo was taken by an incompetant.

Experienced amateur or pro - we would all know how to set up a group shot of wriggly kids. We all understand the right and wrong lens to use, exposure, lighting and the right SS and aperture / depth of field and any particular properties if the lens we choose - such as field curvature.

Recovering major stuff in post is fine if you have just taken a snap in a hurry but a staged photo - come on.

 

[Nod]

The flip side is that in a group of 10 kids, there will be at least one who will be moving at the point of shutter release. Reshoot and it'll be another. Etc.. Or one will be blinking, looking the wrong way or there will be a different problem. How many shots is a pro expected to take to ensure a perfect one of every kid?
And the above is without the little sh*ts darlings who think it's funny to deliberately screw up a shot or 2.

 

[snerkler]

The flip side is that in a group of 10 kids, there will be at least one who will be moving at the point of shutter release. Reshoot and it'll be another. Etc.. Or one will be blinking, looking the wrong way or there will be a different problem. How many shots is a pro expected to take to ensure a perfect one of every kid?
And the above is without the little sh*ts darlings who think it's funny to deliberately screw up a shot or 2.

Blinking, looking the wrong way, pulling a face are all par for the course but out of focus shots and motion blur shouldn’t occur as these are at the control of the photographer

 

[Nod]

Without seeing the picture (and I would hope that the copyrighted photo wouldn't be publicly shared), we can't see for ourselves whether it's a focus problem or a few children moving at the crucial moment - my money's on the latter.

 

[KIPAX]

I wish people would read previous posts before having a dig. But I guess the smiley face makes it okay.

Post #19 "It's a class shot"

POST 19 should have been POST 1 .. IMHO ... No smiley face if that makes you feel better because after all I was having a dig..

 

[robj20]

Without seeing the picture (and I would hope that the copyrighted photo wouldn't be publicly shared), we can't see for ourselves whether it's a focus problem or a few children moving at the crucial moment - my money's on the latter.

Could well be movement, easy fix though for that faster shutter speeds and more light.