Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Bad Wedding Photographer

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

pulsar69
pulsar69  101611 forum posts United Kingdom6 Constructive Critique Points
21 May 2012 - 6:44 PM

As much as it pains me to say this , and as much as that photographers work is not worth 2k or even half that , we are fuelling the fire by linking to her website in a forum and driving her viewing stats and hence her rating up. I sometimes think it is better left unsaid and in private as far as naming and shaming as it just does the opposite. Like the wedding tog who managed to make front page headlines after being sued , then getting even more business through the advertising .... the old saying ' Any publicity is good publicity ' can ring true in all professions.

And Alexandra i would suggest hitting AV and TV modes as a better option than trying to go full manual for a wedding unless your used to it , in some cases by the time you have got the settings your looking for the shot has gone , and the light meters in todays camera do a good job, its knowing when they are going to get it wrong thats the trick and then take over from them and do it manual. For me anways as I am more interested in nailing the moment than nailing the setting , every wedding tog will see it different though.

Andrew

Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
21 May 2012 - 6:44 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139392 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
21 May 2012 - 6:55 PM


Quote: we are fuelling the fire by linking to her website in a forum and driving her viewing stats and hence her rating up. I sometimes think it is better left unsaid and in private as far as naming and shaming as it just does the opposite. Like the wedding tog who managed to make front page headlines after being sued , then getting even more business through the advertising .... the old saying ' Any publicity is good publicity ' can ring true in all professions.

I do see what you are saying. And it is certainly true that stuff on EPZ seems to find its way to Google in the blink of an eye............ so well done to whoever did the SEO on the site! Wink

But I don't think it should inhibit discussion.

jimthistle73
22 May 2012 - 1:17 AM

I don't think we've anything to worry about in terms of pushing her site up the ranks. You really would have to be exceptionally stupid to pay more than perhaps 20p on wedding photography of that standard. If someone is daft enough to shell out money on the basis of that portfolio, then they deserve everything they get Smile

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139392 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
22 May 2012 - 9:19 AM


Quote: If someone is daft enough to shell out money on the basis of that portfolio, then they deserve everything they get

Good point! Grin

thewilliam
22 May 2012 - 10:41 AM

The real worry is when a newbie snapper has stolen pix from an established photographer's site, bought them from a library or taken them at a "portfolio day". Then, the poor punter doesn't stand a chance of avoiding what is no better than a scam.

The bridal mags give good advice like always meeting the prospective photographer on his or her own turf so that the physical address is known. When things have gone disastrously wrong, just try serving Court papers at a web address!

What saddens me is that reputable wedding fair organisers allow exhibitors that claim the Graphi demo albums as their own work and give out business cards that carry only the snapper's business name, mobile phone number and web address. Some even have "Business cards are free at Vistaprint" on the back!

One newbie showed images taken at her own wedding until a prospect recognised her in the pix.

Last Modified By thewilliam at 22 May 2012 - 10:42 AM
mikehit
mikehit  46189 forum posts United Kingdom9 Constructive Critique Points
22 May 2012 - 12:22 PM


Quote: I think the photographer went a bit OTT with filters, the soft focus, spot focus, sepia etc, where as mine were clean, sharp, bright, typical fuji superia colours.

I think that is a problem with many a professional photographer. They get wrapped up in the idea that the the wedding is an oppotunity for them to show how clever they are, and forget the aim is to give the client what they want.

Overread
Overread  63746 forum posts England18 Constructive Critique Points
22 May 2012 - 12:26 PM


Quote: I think the photographer went a bit OTT with filters, the soft focus, spot focus, sepia etc, where as mine were clean, sharp, bright, typical fuji superia colours.

I think that is a problem with many a professional photographer. They get wrapped up in the idea that the the wedding is an oppotunity for them to show how clever they are, and forget the aim is to give the client what they want.

Sadly I find that many school photography courses promote the use of filters quite randomly as a means to "show artistic expression". So I can see how many newer photographers get a grounding at an early stage, in the idea that random filters is "adding" something to the photos. Without ever having proper tuition in how these altered effects really adjust the visual experience of the photo.

collywobles
15 Aug 2012 - 11:20 AM

Fully agree Patrick. Also it will give you an idea how the car parking facilities are arranged. I did a wedding once where parking was impossible and where the church was opposite a football stadium with a home match going on............ - however I did manage it but by the skin of my teeth - not something that I will ever let happen again - if I get the job again I will take a driver....

Spuddie
Spuddie  6
26 Sep 2012 - 8:57 PM

I remember when I got married it was a case of (my now wife) visiting a lot of wedding fairs, seeing the pictures in the local paper and sitting down with the photographer viewing some of his previous work. He was more expenisve than some others but produced the goods, stunning images and 13 years on it was money well spent. for me the onus is on the couple to do their research!

As mentioned by Eightball it is about the responsibility of doing a wedding shoot - I for one wouldn't want tto do wedding photography as whilst I know technicality I could do it I wouldn't want the responsibility!!

mountains
mountains  545 forum posts United Kingdom
1 Oct 2012 - 9:03 AM

Slightly off topic I went to local rugby match last Sat I was told I would have to pay because i looked like a PRO I have a 550D and a Sigma 70-300mm lens luckily there was someone there who knew me and would vouch for me being a hobby photographer.

brettdrobson
brettdrobson Junior Member 1 Australia
7 Dec 2012 - 11:06 AM

Just had a read of all this and thought I would add something.

I had the rare opportunity to meet Darren Lyons, not the best name in the photography world however that aside he said something at a lecture that
I covered as the photographer ...


"Everybody can press a button ...... but not every person can take a photo"


So your guy is a button pusher were as you "Eightball" are a person who can take a photo and take pride in your work and its not all about the money
which is the way this should all work.

Back in Film days if you knew your stuff you were on the top of the pack, you couldn't see the image until it was developed so we do have luxuries in this day
and age.

Now due to digital and the internet, people are just grabbing the most expensive camera known and running about "shoot and burn" is this term I have heard.
Once they have their money they are off to the next.

You were wise in what you said, I only have worked with one person who shoots weddings and I love her work to the point I want her to shoot mine when
the day comes. She is a low light photographer and he images are amazing and I feel deeply grateful that she chooses me as a 2nd photographer when she
could call a yard arm list of others.

At the end of the day the client will see who the 'real' photographer actually is and you will get the business and the other person will get the bad rap.

Last Modified By brettdrobson at 7 Dec 2012 - 11:10 AM
ade_mcfade
ade_mcfade  1014746 forum posts England216 Constructive Critique Points
7 Dec 2012 - 11:17 AM


Quote: Slightly off topic I went to local rugby match last Sat I was told I would have to pay because i looked like a PRO I have a 550D and a Sigma 70-300mm lens luckily there was someone there who knew me and would vouch for me being a hobby photographer.

pay for what ?

thewilliam
7 Dec 2012 - 12:19 PM

Many folk assume that anybody who wields an expensive camera must be a good photographer.

About 35 years ago, my girlfriend managed a pharmacy and when staff didn't show on a Saturday, I'd get a phone call asking me to help out. One Saturday, a middle-aged man came in to buy a film and asked me to load it for him, which in those days was part of the service. He then asked me to "set the camera because I know nothing about photography". The camera in question was a Leica M4 plus Summilux!

pawelpiwosz
9 Dec 2012 - 2:52 PM

Well, a big pocket doesn't make you a great photographer...

mountains - yes, I was a few times in situation like yours. It's silly, but there is no way to explain "I am NOT working for, let's say, National Geographic!". You have a big camera with big lens, ergo, you are THE photographer. Pay!
Many times I heard I'm proffesional, because I have a... tripod...

In my opinion, beeing a good wedding photograher is not only your experience, knowledge, photographic skills. Nor how expensive your cameras are. But, and I think it's very important, the way you work. The atmosphere which is created by you.

User_Removed
11 Dec 2012 - 12:06 AM


Quote: Slightly off topic I went to local rugby match last Sat I was told I would have to pay because i looked like a PRO I have a 550D and a Sigma 70-300mm lens luckily there was someone there who knew me and would vouch for me being a hobby photographer.

pay for what ?

Surely, if anyone was going to pay for access, it should have been the amateur. A pro is there for work. You think it's OK to pay to go to work?

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.