wedding tog sued

Hopefully this horror story will put complete novices off future jobs :D
 
Although I feel sorry for them that they didn't get the images they required, they should have checked out his previous work before hand, as mentioned previously.

From look at the images, the overall quality and lightening, I would say a bridge camera on the cheap end?

If it is a DSLR, then it was Auto mode (although AUTO should produce better than the photos shown). What a failure.
 
DarrenToogood said:
Although I feel sorry for them that they didn't get the images they required, they should have checked out his previous work before hand, as mentioned previously.
Click to expand...

Indeed, but who's to say they weren't presented with some great shots prior to booking him? Unfortunately we can't see his website, but i would hazard a guess they booked him based on what was presented to them. That's not to say that whatever was presented to them was his own work of course.
 
Judging by the quality of his work,I need to up my prices...:eek:
 
I had that with my partner's niece. She was married out in Florida and the photographer's website is brilliant, full of top quality images. They were booked via a wedding planner from the venue.

What she got though was a batch of totally unprocessed images shot at f16 in the bright Florida sun. No attention to backgrounds with telegraph poles in the bride's head and furniture littered about the beach area (literally chairs on their sides) The whole lot shot on a Canon 1DsII on Aperture priority and ISO 400 for some odd reason.

She cried her eyes out and refused to have anything to do with the pics at all. Gran managed to get hold of the DVD and I spent about 4 days rescuing what I could from them.

Checking out the work beforehand does not always work, this guy has sent the studio assistant because they had more than one wedding booked on the day.
 
DizMatt said:
if you're a local togger to the B&G...contact them and give them a photoshoot....can't buy that sort of publicity :)
then get 1 or 2 of the shots into the local paper
although I wouldn't recommend forking out for the horse and carriage again :p
Click to expand...

On The ITv news this afternoon i am sure i heard that they have another photographer to re do the shots. the guy who helped them get this to court.
 
AliB said:
Stuff
Click to expand...

A customer paid for me to do his wedding in Italy,rather than be subjected to that very thing Alison.
 
In the video you can see a brief moment of a DSLR armed and damergous with its pop up flash :lol::bonk: I love the moment when the camera man drops the camera!
 
Just watched the vid....

I will venture to say, I would do a better job. At least in selecting the pictures...
20 weddings is not a novice. Shoddy work like that after 20 weddings is incompetence.
 
I think the point Betty is making Quaker is that there are ways to go about making sure you are as equipped as you can (and I don't mean the kit) They include but are not limited to assisting, training and second shooting.

There is plenty of material out there in terms of training, both written and AV, then there are the courses you can do with people who shoot weddings for rather large sums of money :)

Then you have assisting jobs where you don't get to shoot but learn a lot about how to set shots up and then there are the second shooting roles.

All of that CAN be undertaken before diving in at the deep end.

Having said that I do know some extraordinary togs who can and did dive in and made a success of it. Not without a lot of work though.
 
Should have used a Fuji S3/S5 for those blown highlights and crushed shadows.

*** in all seriousness this is bad stuff, *** good for professionals and those wishing to explain to potential customers that you pay peanuts you get monkies. "Yes you can find someone who will do everything including video for under £1500 but here's the general end result .. Link to metro ..."
 
Rikki said:
Should have used a Fuji S3/S5 for those blown highlights and crushed shadows.

*** in all seriousness this is bad stuff, *** good for professionals and those wishing to explain to potential customers that you pay peanuts you get monkies. "Yes you can find someone who will do everything including video for under £1500 but here's the general end result .. Link to metro ..."
Click to expand...

So would you say generally, anyone charging less than £1500 will provide this quality?

Sorry but I tend to disagree.
 
petebarnes said:
Check out his unavailable site through the magic of googles cache here, I like the 3rd image in the slideshow, I think we've all done a bit of colour isolation/pet portrait fusion before ;)
Click to expand...

:D
Genuine LOL @ that pic...I am particularly impressed by the red bow tie!
He really 'gets it' doesn't he? Thank God for creatives like him...
 
Does anyone think they should regulate the photographic industry? like financial advisors and the gas man/plumber?

I personally don't think they should & probably won't, but with all the people just picking up a camera and firing away claiming to be a pro and the gas guy picking up a spanner claiming the same?

What do you guys think? Just food for thought really.
 
You really need to feel sorry for them, 20 images of 400 use-able? Why would he give out 400 photos like that, he must of not even looked at them let alone edited them.
 
There is clearly a huge difference between the advertised work and the end result seen here; and because of this I'm surprised he wasn't fined for misrepresentation or fraud !!!

Jumping in at the deep end as a totally new Pro is surprisingly common, and I doubt many fail so spectacularly as the tog did here - any auto mode on any modern P&S could have been expected to do better, so the crap displayed shows real anti-skill at work :D

This is one of the reasons I (in my pre meeting literature) tell people to see at least one entire Wedding set, and a recent one too if poss (and if not poss, then why not ??? :suspect:)

Well at least that's one crap artist out of the game :) - until next week when he relaunches under another name :(

DD
 
Read this in the paper this morning and had to giggle... Im no expert by a long shot but c'mon I have had my younger sister take better shots than that... admittedly I have only seen the ones they have printed in the paper but from the ones I have seen I think the couple is quite right to sue for breach of contract depending on the contract and the implied standard from the photographer.

I wonder what sort of equipment he was using... perhaps kodak disposables :lol:
 
All i will say is Good riddance to an idiot like that fouling the good name of the wedding photographrer.

I mean what was he thinking putting pictures of the bridesmaid NAKED. And he at least should have edited out the footage of him dropping the camera and swearing.
 
I was worried about the standard of my work, but now I have seen these, well ....

Also, why did the judge award the B&G £100 loss of earnings? Considering they were only married one day (or less), do you get £100 / day for being married, I know marraige can be hard work, but .... I never considered it a job.
 
The sceptic in me wonders how much he gets for having all his pictures in the press??!?

Not unless of course there was somthing mentioned in his contract saying the B&G can use the photos as they please!
 
Beats me why the photographer let this go to court at all, rather than settling it. He must have known he didn't have a leg to stand on.

I don't think the couple really bear any of the responsibility for this situation. OK, caveat emptor and all that, but most people don't have any experience in dealing with wedding photographers, and it's easy to be wise after the event. How many of us have been ripped off with shoddy service, and can honestly say we asked all the right questions and insisted on recent references? Bowers had a good website, purported to be a pro and charged 1450 quid. Perhaps this isn't a great deal for a good wedding photographer (I don't know), but I'd expect competent performance for that.
 
I like to think I play safe, by not charging apenny for any weddings I do.

I have had some grateful appreciation, but its not my line of work, so it purely friends and family for me. I think this guy should have stuck to the same rules.

I would love to see the photos he DIDNT think were good enough to show the B&G.
 
As a professional wedding photographer myself I hear a lot of stories like this and they always annoy and upset me. Far too many people calling themselves photographers who really have no right to. It's why I wrote my ebook "5 Questions You Must Ask Your Wedding Photographer" available to download for free (no contact details required either) from here http://www.paulrolandwilliams.com/5questions.html .

There are enough good photographers around for this situation to be easily avoided if people know what to look for.
 
DiddyDave said:
Jumping in at the deep end as a totally new Pro is surprisingly common, and I doubt many fail so spectacularly as the tog did here - any auto mode on any modern P&S could have been expected to do better, so the crap displayed shows real anti-skill at work :D
Click to expand...

Don't think he's exactly new -
Did a quick bit of digging and it seems that he's been operating as a tog since 2007 - it's a pity his websites gone off the air - and there are no images on the wayback machine to see his standard.

He did get reported for his incompetence in packaging up kids photographs for a school - putting wrong names on all the packs of images - it seems he's still to sort that one out also.
 
PRWilliams said:
As a professional wedding photographer myself I hear a lot of stories like this and they always annoy and upset me. Far too many people calling themselves photographers who really have no right to. It's why I wrote my ebook "5 Questions You Must Ask Your Wedding Photographer" available to download for free (no contact details required either) from here http://www.paulrolandwilliams.com/5questions.html .

There are enough good photographers around for this situation to be easily avoided if people know what to look for.
Click to expand...

Thats really good and well written !
 
petebarnes said:
Check out his unavailable site through the magic of googles cache here, I like the 3rd image in the slideshow, I think we've all done a bit of colour isolation/pet portrait fusion before ;)
Click to expand...

To be fair even if I was a non photographer there's no way I'd have parted with £1500 based on what's on that site.
 
Dman said:
To be fair even if I was a non photographer there's no way I'd have parted with £1500 based on what's on that site.
Click to expand...

Yes it does tend to help if the pics arent at 45 degrees slant
 
crmcatee said:
Don't think he's exactly new -
Did a quick bit of digging and it seems that he's been operating as a tog since 2007 - it's a pity his websites gone off the air - and there are no images on the wayback machine to see his standard.

He did get reported for his incompetence in packaging up kids photographs for a school - putting wrong names on all the packs of images - it seems he's still to sort that one out also.
Click to expand...

I wasn't suggesting HE was new mate - just replying to an earlier post about newbies, while suggesting even a complete noob with an Auto camera would have struggled to do worse ;)

DD
 
It all well and good to criticise the guy, and without any doubt he produced a poor show, but if you are into the wedding business, or indeed any other photo business you should be aware, that a lot of clients will try to rip you off big time. Well you know that already.

I saw the writing on the wall years ago, presented the client with the proof package, everything was lovely, and they chose the images they wanted. A week later they collected the presentation album, went away supposedly happy, a few day later they were banging on the door, all ****ed off as the images they had chosen where Crap, so a friend had told them. And wanted their money back, as luck would have it they had brought the package with them, so as they had given me the package to show me the crap ones I retained it, and gave them their money back.
I must say they looked gobsmacked when I kept the album, I don’t think it was part of the game plan.
The guy got all stroppy, demanded the album back, tore up the cheque I had given him, she was in tears.
A few days later their Solicitor contacted me, asked to meet, heard the story, saw the torn up cheque which I had picked up, looked at the Album.
Next I heard from him, was the couple had reconsidered the matter, and would be happy to get someone to collect the album.
Shortly after that I took up stock work,less hassle

A few years ago, if my memory serves we correctly, I remember that there was a court case where the couple took the photographer to Court, as the images they had chosen were not up to standard, theyhas sent some to one of the tabloids who printed them. The net result as I recall was the Photographer was ordered to repay the couple their money, and the paper got done big time for breach of copyright
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top