This is a RANT, folks. I am totally and definitely pissed off. If you decide to read this, you will find I am not kind or reticent in my total loathing of this situation. You are warned.
(UPDATE:
There are many, many comments to this post. Seem to break into two camps: Cool that JJB took this lousy photographer to the woodshed and beat her down good. To that sentiment, I would simply say… grow up. The fact that the photographer seems to not be terribly good, or aware of what she should have been aware of does NOT reach the point that many of you may find yourself in. Namely that the work that was delivered match the work that was shown. The woman’s work was online, at the time I wrote this anyway, and it seemed to be, well, not so good. I can’t imagine the work delivered to be much better. But that is exactly the point… the work looked like what was shown. The other group seem to get it. It isn’t about the gear and all the fun toys… and feeling all superior to the woman… it is about the law, and how it was abused to ridicule and destroy someone who obviously couldn’t fight back well. Hey… maybe you wanna kick her while she’ down too.
There may be a time when this “Bride’s” complaint will come back to haunt you. It received far more showings on YouTube than it did on TV – no one really watches that stupid show… and the point that so many photographers made was that “if you don’t like your pictures, complain and get your money back… cause we got Pelican cases and 1D’s.
I don’t care what kind of gear you have, it is not relevant. There is no statutory rules or listed code of what makes a ‘good’ photograph. Believe me, you don’t want one. Soft focus? A lot of art shooters would be out of business shooting their Lomos and Dianas. Sharpness? You should take a look at the average fashion editorial.
My point is not to defend the photographer (even though that seems to be a difficult concept for some to get their thought processes around) it is to defend the rights of the photographers to not be trashed by people making assumptions that are not true, or have NO business being included in the case.
Yeah, I have seen all the photographers – some big time shooters – jump on the “hey, this is fun to beat up this woman and ruin her life and business… but I find that totally arrogant, elitist and sad. No offers to help, just a mob mentality to throw her under the bus and feel all good about themselves cause, you know, she is ‘ruining the business’ and other pure BS crap.
Seriously, is this $1300 wedding shooter – including proofs, enlargements and book – cutting into the profits of people shooting for realistic pricing? I refuse to believe it. Says more about those being ‘threatened’, than the woman with the Rebel.
And keep this in mind… lots of weddings were shot on ISO 320 with lenses at f-4 (Hasselblad’s for you new digionly folks), and in some pretty dark places. And also remember this – the camera she is shooting is BETTER than the original 1DS.
Finally, I find it repugnant that photographers find such a thrill in belittling other photographers – no matter what. Provide help, work with the shooters to get better, but laughing at a kangaroo court that probably ruined her business… unconscionable.)
Recently I was shown this video on You Tube of some TV Judge ridiculing another photographer for being less than professional. Instead of getting to the heart of the matter, the ‘judge’ decided to use the power of the bench to humiliate, denigrate and castigate the photographers for alleged ‘crimes’ against photography and the use of ‘less than professional’ gear.
I found this man to be despicable and his ravings somewhat in the “best to keep one’s mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.” I will admit to not watching a lot of TV (Burn Notice and the Closer get my vote) and especially TV where the sole purpose is to denigrate and ridicule other people. To think that those kinds of shows are popular is sickening to me. Uplifting, and good value filled programming sucks I guess. But that isn’t the point.
The point is the despicable way this man treated a fellow photographer and the despicable way other photographers then jumped on board ready to throw her under the bus. So much bad information now being disseminated as reality on forums all over the interwebs.
In the video, the photographer, not as poised or pretty as the complainant, doesn’t get a chance to even explain her side.
At 2:10 she complains that the complainant is not correct about where they met. Joe, I’ll just call him Joe because I have such contempt for him I would not ever use the word “Judge” to describe him, tells her that isn’t important to the case.
So OK to lie when you are complainant. It would be very much a part of the case if there was another place that the photographer met the woman or she could have been confused over which photographer she actually hired. Got it Joe.
At 2:35 the complainant states that the photographer had the photos done at WalMart on Fuji Paper – not professional paper. Really? I can state with certainty how many PROFESSIONAL wedding photographers charging more than this photographer uses Fuji Printers. And you all KNOW WHO YOU ARE. The Sam’s club by my home is the printer de-facto for a ton of wedding shooters doing weddings in a much higher scale than this woman.
At 3:15 he launches into what gear she was using. A Rebel XTi with a kit lens. And while that may not be the top of the line anything, I can tell you the XTi takes really good photographs. I SHOOT THAT CAMERA on all my workshops. I teach that it isn’t the camera, it is the photographer. And I will stick to that.
He asks her for the other lens and she states it is a 70-300MM and he asks what speed it is. I can understand how the answer “I don’t know” is so funny to gear heads, and lots of serious photographers. I teach workshops and consult with lots of professional photographers. When it is a graduated aperture lens, you may be surprised how many times the photographer will have to grab the lens to see.
Is this a professional response, of course not. Is it automatically damning that she doesn’t know? No way.
AT 4:00 he asks how she is going to be able to take “adequate photos with a lens this slow”? And before she can answer, he cuts her off. Hey Joe, maybe with a tripod, or upping the ISO? Lots of ways, and we may have been able to hear how she would have done it if you hadn’t cut her off.
At 4:12 here it comes… “When I do it I am prepared with the kit I have… blah blah…” Dude’s even got himself a Pelican case. OK.
At 4:45 he starts to address sharpness. Sigh… then states that they won’t be any good enlarged. Uh… he is looking at 8.5 x 11’s there… uhhh… they are, you know, enlarged. And when she starts to tell him that they are, he dismisses her. “… but that’s not what we are gonna get when we start to enlarge them on a hard copy..” His words. Looking at enlargements. Dense? You make the call.
At 5:04 it starts with the grilling… what F-Stop, what aperture, did you ‘note’ the f-stop. How many of you ‘NOTE’ the f-stops.
At 5:35 he states that the ‘natural light was soft and diffused and ideal for taking a picture…” Oh… he was there? The amount of photographic mistakes he makes in the next 25 seconds are breath taking. And when the defendant offered that there was a meeting, the jerk sits back and pontificates what the complainant was thinking. WTF? How does he know what she knew? And the dipshit audience applauds. It isn’t about what is real, it is about what is denigrating and humiliating.
And here it is: at 6:05 he makes the judgment that to be a professional photographer one must use a “1” series camera. I won’t even go there. Fool. What about 5DMKII’s – losers. D300’s – crap. (The fallacy that this represents goes much farther than some lame-ass TV show. It goes to the very core of who we are as people and what we want for others. And how much compassion we are really capable of… not much, I guess.)
“…we don’t have sharp edges…” He doesn’t allow for her to explain post-processing choices or anything else. Her frustration and anger in being lectured by this guy is now real. And it should be.
Then at 6:15 he becomes so beclowned that he starts to pontificate on the edges being soft focus because of the camera… or something. I can’t follow this illogical crap.
Then he declares that the Rebel will not make a 24 x 36 inch print. Joe, you are a total moron. It will most definitely make enlargements that big. Done every fkn day, buddy.
I will not continue down the video as it becomes so painfully stupid that it is hard to watch. Especially when he called her a liar for saying the pastor wouldn’t allow flash photography. In my brief flirtation with the genre way more than half would not allow flash during the ceremony. And I charged a boatload more than $1300.
Look… before you think I am defending bad photography, I will point to this: The question could have been easily handled: Does the work match the photographers portfolio. I can tell you that in the professional world, this type of case arises… and that is the point that the ruling is made on. Does the work match the samples. In this case of course it did. Was it great work or bad work? Does that matter? It is work that was agreed to.
But I must say this: The photographers so damn ready to throw this lady under the bus better watch out for the Karma this may bring. I can only imagine how frustrated a person would be when confronted by an angry moron with a lot of power pontificating over what they did and what HE would have done. No dialog, just him preaching.
Why would so many photographers be so ready to attack her and side with him? Why the continued hatred and anger toward this woman? My God, glass houses are obviously made much better in the digital age.
And the fact that the ‘bride’ met with the photographer, saw a portfolio, agreed to the style should have been discussed. That the ‘bride’ only wanted to spend $1300 should have been noted. The fact that there was contention between whether there was a meeting at a bridal show or whether there was a tripod used should have been addressed.
We have millions of people who are struggling to keep their homes and their families together in tough times. We just witnessed a fellow photographer have her livelihood demolished by a know-nothing fool and we are good with that? Does that make us more powerful? Does it vindicate our purchase of an over-priced camera to shoot girls on Saturday afternoons?
I hated the attack on this woman from mean-spirited people.
I loathed the response from so many photographers. Isn’t there any pride left in our profession?
End of Rant… to summarize. Don’t be so damn happy to see other people lose their business. It is not a good place to be as a human being.
UPDATE:
It is important to remember that the point of the case was whether the work that was delivered matched the work that was used to get the commission.
It is NOT about what gear was used, or the photographers ‘attitude’ or whether she knows what lens speed was what or any of that at all. None of that would have mattered if the images came out good. And supposing that the images would come out good if she had used a 1DSMKIII is wrong.
However, the judge decided to attack her on nearly everything but whether the work delivered matched the work shown to get the assignment. This sort of thing doesn’t happen to just low-end wedding photographers, it happens to some big guys as well. In real courts. With real judges. And it can be terrifying when it does.
But again, there seems to be a focus on what kind of camera she used and her knowledge of the lens speed and all that stuff that makes for great forum fodder. And if you think that protecting someone from injustice is only worthwhile if they have really neat gear and meet some sort of madeup code of professionalism then I feel that there may be no ‘discussion’ at all.
UPDATE: BIG TIME, BIG DOLLAR WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHER DAVID JAY CHECKS IN VIA TWITTER:
“LOL – I’m so glad these arrogant, rude, and pathetic excuses for professonals got their clocks cleand by Judge Joe – http://bit.ly/99QMO9”
Guess little low end photographers in small communities are really pissing him off. Jaysus…. man.
You can leave your comment here at the bottom of the page.
Well put my friend.
I hope this gets a lot of hits.
Interesting rant 🙂
I myself have stayed away from wedding photography at this early point of my career because I don’t feel like I am able to handle the responsibilities demanded by the job and because my true interests lay elsewhere. Still as you pointed out, the “Bride” knew what she was getting upfront and quite frankly got at least what she paid for and I don’t mean that in a negative sense.
You know what you are right. I felt that both the way the bride and photographer acted probably was not the best for their situation. The fact that Joe Brown seem to know about photography made the situation funny and the show is posted for entertainment not knowledge.
BUT when I thought about it from your point of view and my core point of view, especially being someone who is constantly attacked by other photographers, I realized how right you were. Even if the photographer is a bad one and has an attitude (or maybe the attitude could have been just out of anger) and even if the bride didn’t choose the right photographer, it still doesn’t mean everyone has to gang up on this photographer. I put myself in her shoes, actually I live in those shoes, but not by client’s hands, but other photographers’ hands, and realized how much it sucks to be attacked that way. I am sitting here right now trying to figure out how to get one photographer who has been attacking me for years under the guise of friendship out of my damn life. Seriously. So I realized my error in using the video as an example of how a bride shouldn’t be or a photog shouldn’t be since we don’t have the clear picture of everything that happened outside of the video. I realize my mistake because as someone who is always attacked and is still being attacked right now, I don’t ever want to sit in the seat of attacker.
Sometimes when something is on TV for entertainment, whether in poor choice or not, that can be argued in another forum, we forget how these are real people’s lives. It is hard to see what is true and what is not when there is “reality” TV, using the pain (or scripted pain etc) of others as entertainment. So it is easy to laugh. Many people laugh at American Idol auditions, Big Brother competitions and the like (kinda why I prefer scripted dramas.). Maybe the bigger issue is reality entertainment in general, and the even bigger issue is how it’s “cool” and the “norm” to be lack compassion in general.
Thanks for pointing this out so we could see the issue at a deeper level as more than humour. I appreciate your candor and am never offended by rants. 😉
Don, you are absolutely correct. Again. What an ignorant, arrogant fool this so-called judge is. Sadly, this is exactly the type of person who tends to be drawn toward positions of power.
It’s hard to believe that actual, working photographers would side with him. Can they not picture themselves on the receiving end of such injustice? Or, more likely, is their piling-on an expression of fear; if they can make themselves believe that this photographer is to blame — that they can exclude her from the ranks of “professionals” to which they themselves belong — then this *couldn’t* happen to them. Because they are the “real” professionals.
I suspect that this fear helps to explain the “blame the victim” mentality that seems to be trumping compassion and fellow-feeling in large swaths of our society today. But it damn sure doesn’t justify it; it’s ugly and inhuman.
Gordon.
I’ll take the plunge and weigh in on this. I think it’s absolutely ridiculous that a Judge can say what gear constitutes a professional or not. It’s not about the camera or the lenses (though of course better gear helps). In the right hands, a photographer could shoot a wedding with a Holga and deliver some outstanding images. So for him to spout out judgement from his own past experiences/knowledge (which could easily be accrued in one week’s worth of blog reading) is outlandish.
However, it does seem like this photographer is anything but quality. From images to service (but we never really get a good personality judge of her while she is being “judged”). I’ll confess I didn’t watch the video second-by-second, but some of the sample photos I saw looked pretty disgraceful. As in P mode point and shoot with no thought for composition, white balance, angle, lighting, etc.
However again, if the samples from the photographer’s portfolio are consistent with the images the bride was delivered, then there’s no legal case here. Simply put, you get exactly what you pay for. If anything, this case isn’t about a bad photographer screwing up wedding photos, but a referendum on bad photography in general. Couples should be educated that if they’re going to cheap out, cheap is what they’ll get. Thoughts guys?
Great article, Don.
Somebody needs to educate Joe on the law. He’s so busy educating photographers on how to be photographers, he just forgot to do HIS job. You know “Uncle Bob”? Those annoying people that show up at weddings and get in the way of the real photographer, bragging about their gear? We should start calling them “Uncle Joe”.
You’ve got to stop watching things like this, Don. It’s about as useful as arguing in an online forum.
Actually I don’t watch it at all. It was forwarded to me by a ‘photographer’ who was so impressed that the ‘judge’ guy “owned the bitch” – and when I saw it I was appalled at the statement and the responses to it. When a group then started lambasting her, I decided that I had to weigh in. Don’t argue online much anymore, left all those forums when the ‘stupid meter’ hit 8. Maybe 8 1/2…
Wow, you really made me reconsider my opinion about the photographer in the show.
I was so hung up on berating the awful job the photographer did, that I didn’t even consider:
1. what does uncle joe know
2. she was $1300
3. An XTi was my first camera – which made me automatically equate her to being an amateur
4. I’ve printed numerous things at Sam’s and have been usually pleased
5. I thought good reddens, but didn’t stop to think she may never get another photography job – meaning, her dreams, money and food on the table may have just been systematically destroyed.
I could go on and on…
Thanks for writing this article and for making me realize just how mean spirited I was being as well.
As a wedding photographer I agree with you on the point that the judge was a bit erratic with his ruling…however…I do find it beyond hard to believe she has no idea what F-stop she was shooting at or what F-stop her 70-300mm lens even is! As a PRO photographer you should know YOUR equipment inside and out. Especially with her experience. I know for a fact both lenses are bottom of the line Canon with high F-stops. I started out years ago in college with both such lenses and the same camera. I have some awesome pictures with it and loved it to death but indoors it is nearly impossible to get a quality shot without a flash and I can’t imagine thinking I could produce quality images with an ISO of maximum 1600 and F/stops wide open at 3.5 and 5.6 at a wedding. I have no doubt that the Rebel can take quality pictures but she needed to be prepared. Most churches won’t allow you to use flash…or sparingly. If the photographer has shot ‘hundreds’ of weddings you would think she could have at least re-invested 25% of her profits into equipment. At just 1K a piece says on average that’s 25K in equipment she could have purchased. I deal with this all the time with friends thinking they can shoot a quality wedding inside and out with a rebel and a lens kit…just leaving themselves open to a lawsuit. It is NOT as you said all about the camera, but having a quality camera and quality lenses help to produce images. I solely have issues with her attitude and knowledge about her own products and services.
Please do not think I am going to defend poor photography. It is not what I want to do at all.
But the point of this wasn’t that it was bad photography, it is that:
A. The photography matched the work in her book and on her web page.
B. Why would the bride expect any different.
C. The judge wasn’t there to determine what is or is not good photography, he was there to ascertain if the work presented was equal to the work promised… which it certainly looked like to me.
D. The pontification of a know-nothing person with a lot of power can be devastating when one is NOT allowed to even offer their side of the issue.
I totally agree that good equipment is important. Absolutely. But again, this wasn’t about good equipment, or what shutter speed she used. It was about a lo-level photographer being castigated for being a lo-level photographer. That is certainly not healthy for us as an industry.
I really do hope folks can see past the pixel count and the ISO and see what a travesty this was for this person. I am so sorry we have let pop-culture turn us into a coliseum full of thumbs-down elitists with a hankerin’ for the blood of others.
Don,
You make some excellent points and I agree Judge Brown made some ignorant and incorrect statements, and unfortunately knew (or “thought” he knew a little bit about photography), but the photographer is not totally without fault.
– She let her buttons get pushed a little too quickly and had a terrible attitude to start.
– Here’s my big thing…Can you shoot a wedding with an XTi and a 18-55 kit lens ? Yes, (as a backup body maybe) but “should” you be shooting a wedding with an XTi and calling yourself a “professional” wedding photographer ? Absolutely NOT. I would 100% agree that is NOT “professional” wedding gear. If I’m not mistaking…wedding equipment should be geared towards low-lit churches. And the XTi & kit lens don’t cut it. Now she doesn’t need a 1Dx like he was saying…(hell, even I can’t afford that :-). But you gotta have at least a 40D, 5D and some glass at least 2.8 in your bag.
– And should you really be going to Walmart for professional wedding prints. Ummm, NO. He made the point they could have been proofs, but something tells me….if she’s shooting weddings with an XTi, she probably is taking the cheap route on her prints too.
There are still many unknown variables that would prevent me from making a full judgement on this situation. Like he didn’t ask “what backup equipment she had”….and since the no-flash photography in the church was such a big point….I don’t remember seeing any pics from inside the church during the ceremony.
And her “Oh, she’s gonna cry now” statement didn’t seem to help her case either. LOL
Just keep in mind that the discussion of whether or not one should shoot with an XTi was not germane to the argument at hand. Oh, he made it that, and that was in and of itself outrageous.
It was whether the work delivered matched the work shown.
All other arguments are not really a consideration. Of course a slow lens is a bad choice for photographing weddings, and being prepared for low light is definitely something that one would consider when doing professional photography. But again, that was not what this complaint was about… it was about having bad images. And that, in case law, usually reverts to whether the work shown matched the work presented.
As to the Walmart thing. I would never do it. But one of the top wedding shooters in the east valley here in Phoenix does all his print work at Sam’s Club (Walmart warehouse store). All of them. I know too many professionals who do to make it a blanket statement that it isn’t professional.
I don’t, and you don’t – but there are those that do.
And keep in mind also that this is a very low end photographer. $1300 including enlargements and an album. Totally low-end photographer.
It seems to me that we should stay focused on what actually happened here: A photographer showed their work, was hired for the work shown, and then challenged in court for bad work. Not gear, not what we think ‘should’ be the gear of a photographer. I have similar agreements with you on those points, but we should keep our focus on what happened.
And what happened could happen to any photographer… Would a 5DMKII not measure up? How about a LumoPro instead of a 580EXII. An old ‘film’ camera like a Hasselblad no longer in favor and a 40D in favor?
Just too many things that keep me wondering what could happen next. (Of course it is an idiotic TV show and doesn’t represent case law, but it is terrible that it happened at all.)
But more than that… the terrible way the photographic community attacked her is so overwhelmingly sad that I find myself embarrassed by it.
I commented in that thread in the forum that prompted this/your post on LE,Don.
I posted a photo of Briana from your stream informing the readers that you took it with an XTi.
Thanks for putting this into perspective.
I don’t know which forum that would be Mark. I didn’t see it on a forum. It was emailed to me from someone who thought it was really funny. I, obviously, didn’t. Thanks.
Wizwow: “I really do hope folks can see past the pixel count and the ISO and see what a travesty this was for this person. I am so sorry we have let pop-culture turn us into a coliseum full of thumbs-down elitists with a hankerin’ for the blood of others.”
Again I don’t think the photog should be fined if the work matched the portfolio, nor should she have endured the berating. The real travesty though is a person who puts themselves out there as a professional, but can’t deliver a professional product. Also it’s a travesty that a bride’s ability to think that this work/business practice is acceptable from surface value because it’s cheap.
I agree with what you are saying about how it is too bad that non-pros go pro. But I also fear the decision that someone somewhere will set the guidelines for what ‘professional’ should be. What if it was this clown? Or someone who had a grudge against someone somewhere… and now was in power.
Not good.
Whether or not the work was good is outweighed by the fact that it was approved and commissioned based on similar work.
If we start to think that our gear will save us when someone says “I don’t like it and I don’t wanna pay for it” – well, I can tell you that won’t bode too well for us. As a group. At all.
Don, I agree with much of what you post above. “Joe” focused on the wrong points. It had nothing directly to do with the gear. He clearly doesn’t have a grasp on what can be done with digital files for enlargement. He clearly didn’t give the photographer a chance to respond. I started out with a 6mp D70 and still license those photos frequently.
However, I disagree regarding the issue of knowing the speed of her lenses. While it might not be critical for most genres, it IS critical for wedding photographers. They need to know the limits of their gear because they are frequently faced with lighting challenges.
Where I lost all hope for the photographer was when she said she arrived at the wedding venue and didn’t know ahead of time it would be so dark and she wouldn’t be allowed to use flash. That was her excuse for poor outcome on the ceremony photos (if I saw the video correctly) I’m no wedding photographer but I do know and understand the importance of preparation. Wedding photographers, contrary to “Joe’s” comment are frequently prevented from using flash. They should anticipate it. They should also contact (preferably visit) the venue ahead of time so they know the rules before the event and know what kind of lighting they’ll need to deal with.
I’ve spent enough time poking around wedding forums to know the biggest technical challenge is dealing with difficult lighting situations and the need to be prepared for them. The only way to do this is to do research on the venue, know the limitations of your equipment, and be prepared.
The comment from one of the photographers made to the plaintiff when she was crying also pushed things over the edge for me. Hell, we all think brides are overly sensitive, have unreasonable expectations, and are hard to please. However, part of the role of wedding photographer is sensitivity to these emotions and behaviors and dealing with them professionally.
It’s hard to really comment on the actual quality of the photography based on what was presented in the video. However, based on what was said, I would probably rule in favor of the plaintiff but not for the amount awarded by the judge.
In my opinion, all three parties failed. I think the ruling (perhaps not the judgment) was the right one but perhaps for the wrong reasons.
The plaintiff seems to have not done her homework very well and has the wrong idea about what constitutes a “professional” print.
The judge was a bully, thinks he knows more than he knows about photography, and looked as unprofessional as the photographer. He focused on all the wrong things in the case.
The photographer presented herself in a very unprofessional manner, didn’t do her homework prior to the event, and doesn’t know her equipment. A good lesson for other photographers…If you get your prints from Walmart or Costco, don’t have your clients meet you there in the parking lot to pick them up.
It’s a hat trick. The legal, wedding, and photography industry all took a blow. It makes for great reality tv.
Laurie,
After sitting as an ‘Expert Witness’ in two similar civil trials, I keep coming back to the same thing.
Her gear was not on trial.
Her expertise was not on trial.
Her personality was not on trial.
Her knowledge of what her lens speed was was not on trial.
What was on trial was whether the work shown at time of commission was delivered to person who commissioned it… which in this case clearly was.
She is a low-end wedding photographer who advertises her work on CL/MySpace and provides wedding photography with proofs and album enlargements for $1300. What is to be expected?
All other considerations – and most are right on – are really not part of what happened here.
And this stuff can happen to big name players… both of the trials I testified in involved some fairly heavy hitters. In both cases the work that was in the portfolios shown was what was delivered to the agencies who commissioned it. In both cases the talent, depth, knowledge, working methods, and studio space were not on trial… just the deliverable and whether they were up to par with the works shown to garner the commission.
Thanks for this. I felt the same way after having watched 15 seconds of this crap.
when I read the banner of your post I thought you were going to comment on the attrocious in-fighting that took place on the recent “PDN Most Influential Photographers of the Decade” survey. Responses from ‘photographers’ about their peers got so nasty that they deleted all of them and disabled the coments.
amen and amen!
Know your gear, know your market and WOW them with awesome work…but be up-front with everything in writing!
and one other thing – it’s OK to fire your client…we recently cancelled the contract and returned the deposit on a $5K wedding when it became very apparent that the attorney Bride -zilla was going to micromanage every shot and be impossible to satisfy The venue tour was excrutiating and that night we decided that the wedding and post-work were going to be pure hell
now where’d I stash my Zenit… I have a wedding to shoot
“I thought you were going to comment on the attrocious in-fighting that took place on the recent “PDN Most Influential Photographers of the Decade†survey. Responses from ‘photographers’ about their peers got so nasty that they deleted all of them and disabled the coments.”
There really isn’t anything more distasteful than that.
And I hear photographers say “why can’t we get together and get something done…”
Yeah, sure.
As a group, we are uncompassionate, rude and not very nice.
BTW… Annie Leibovitz was once asked what kind of camera she use to make a specific image… she had to ask her assistant. Professional? Uh… yeah!!!!
I find it really upsetting as a bride to be and a semi-pro photographer that this situation happened at all. It’s a lose-lose on both ends, and it’s not funny. The bride has few photographs of her wedding she can be proud of on one of the most special days of her life, and the pro has likely lost her business permanently, neither is funny or worth mocking.
It is very easy for us to sit back as 3rd parties and throw rocks at her for this especially via the anonymity of the internet where we often say things that we would never say to someone in person. It is scary to think that something like this could happen to me on my wedding day or happen as a result of an event I shoot. This will make me much more diligent about communication beforehand with my clients in the future.
I skipped a lot of the comments but does anyone mention that BOTH of the people on that show get a set amount of money, the “award” is take out of the losers portion and given to the winner… so she still got paid.
Doesn’t do much for someone who probably just saw her business implode… to the sound of applause.
That is so terribly sad. Who knows what will happen now. She didn’t have to pay her ‘fine’ but that will be little condolence to not having any work.
Maybe it means little to her with a husband and a great job.
And maybe it meant the world to her and her family.
But – WTF – it was all great fun watching the idiot humiliate her without ever addressing the case.
Don,
I think the whole rant can be boiled down to your one statement:
“Does the work match the photographers portfolio.”
Even more distilled is this: did this photographer use this or similar equipment on the portfolio images? If so, there’s no suit. Again, we know that it’s expected for a photographer to show their best work in their portfolio and that’s why every image has to exceed a buyer’s expectations for the relationship to work.
I endured the video then couldn’t endure your play-by-play. I’ve shot weddings too, and not all weddings are equal. I think the photographer was a bit green, but the reality is that if she shot the images that got her the job, the plaintiff got what she paid for.
And the ‘professionalism’ of equipment?!??! I am trying not to rant myself here…. Don’s already covered it…. but… but.. I’ve shot more published images with a D70 and 18-70 lens than most, hundreds of published-in-print photos out of that kit…. XTi would have been a step up. Still own it and still use it – and I don’t even remember the aperture on the lens…
Thanks for this post. I saw several tweets about how this photographer was “owned” in court. After watching it something didn’t sit right. I am new to the profession and have steered clear of weddings because of seeing things like this. I don’t want to get involved with something, or someone, that would jeopardize my vision and reputation; even as a newcomer. I agree completely with your post and others that have posted here. Nice to see someone sticking up for the little guys!
But Joe uses a Pelican case!!!!!!! End of discussion!
Don – this was very well put. I gave quite a lengthy response to the thread with this video on the Strobist group on Flickr while mentioning you in the process. Rather than just typing my thoughts on it all out again I will just quote it all verbatim:
“The response here by the people that think this is ‘awesome’ or ‘hilarious’ etc is yet another reminder of why I don’t really bother with contributing to this group too much anymore. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
Everybody should read Don’s (Wizwows) post that Mark&Manna kindly has posted a link to. It is right on point as his comments and blog post usually are.
I will add that his post says something about the work from the wedding needs to match the samples that were shown. I don’t totally agree with this (no offense to Wizwow) and here is why. If I show samples of wedding work that I shot at beaches, in big beautiful churches , exotic locations with a beautiful photogenic bride and groom etc. and then a client has their wedding in some drab ugly church, the reception in some crappy reception hall and the wedding party looks like slobs or just butt ugly in general then it is going to be impossible to match the work from that wedding to the samples shown. Does that mean that you should turn down work because the client isn’t ‘pretty’ enough or doesn’t have as much money to shoot in such a extravagant location. Hell no!
Also this Judge who thinks he knows it all should realize that sometimes churches will band wedding photographers from shooting there again if they don’t follow their rules. And one of these rules is NO FLASH PHOTOGRAPHY DURING THE CEREMONY. If the guest are doing it fine – but the professionals are expected to follow the rules for each venue — PERIOD
Also this judge gave every single freakin’ person that watched that show (that doesn’t know any better) the idea that a wedding photographer MUST have a certain type of camera in order to do good work which is absolute BS! It will leave those people that don’t know any better thinking that if a wedding photographer does not shoot with a certain camera that there work is of no value? And lets keep in mind that this guy is supposed to be a judge???
He talked as if he himself owned Canon 1dS and also mentioned about shooting a wedding with a iPhone as being wrong. I am not saying you should shoot a wedding with an iPhone but if that is your style and that is what you wanna do than so be it. It may be a bold statement — but I would be willing to take on the challenge that I could create more interesting and creative work then him with my iPhone than he could with his Canon 1Ds given the same location and circumstances — his Pelican case and all. Bring it on ‘Judge Joe’. The guy may be an awesome photographer — but he more likely is just some over paid judge that likes to spend his extra money on photography gear and then look down on people that owns gear that is of less quality than his. I have encountered people like this many times at weddings. They may not be able to create a good image for the life of them but they sure do know how to get on a high horse about their gear — freakin’ losers!
Also — one other thing that Don didn’t mention in his rant that I will include in mine. I don’t know about other photographers but in my contracts I in no way guarantee that the client will be happy with what I deliver. It just states what I will shoot and what I will deliver from said shoot along with how it will be delivered. I never guarantee a delivery date and I certainly never guarantee the clients absolute satisfaction (of course I do go to great lengths to make sure they are happy — within reason).
Why is this? Because I have had clients out right try and screw me before that’s why — even when I have delivered beautiful shots to them! They will say they’re not happy with something just in an effort to get it for free. Sadly ‘Judge Joe’ here allowed just that to happen while rewarded irresponsible behavior in the process. Something that seems to be all to common in todays government and court system as it is.
Still can’t believe some of you think it was ‘awesome’ that the judge acted this way? As a good photographer friend of mine says about the business all the time:
“What planet am I on and how the f**K did I get here?”
Rant over. “
Don, You’ll note I mentioned the inability to reach any kind of judgment based on the quality of the photos since we really weren’t shown the photos. Seeing the actual results might certainly change my position (to a degree).
I agree wholeheartedly regarding your position on the issue of gear. However, it’s the photography industry itself that’s to blame here. Once upon a time, the cost of equipment that could produce quality outcomes was beyond the budget of most. It was a valid point of differentiation. Many photographers still use the distinction of pro vs. consumer gear as a bullet point in their marketing despite the fact that it really isn’t valid anymore (again, to a degree). We shouldn’t be surprised by the general public’s perception on this point. I would argue that if the photographer in this instance had delivered service (not prints) in a way that met the client’s expectations, this case would probably have NOT been brought by the client in the first place.
Where I still disagree is the point that a professional photographer has a responsibility to know their gear and how to use it to handle difficult situations. While I have no doubt Annie L. had no specific recollection of what specific camera she used for any given shoot, I’m confident she had full confidence in her very qualified assistant to hand her a kit that was up to the task, set properly, and ready to go. If the assistant failed, I’m sure the fur would fly.
I lack any sympathy for any of the parties. I concede the photographer was beat to hell by the judge, was unfairly depicted, and was not given a proper opportunity to state her case. However, her own poor judgment is to blame.
-She didn’t scope out the venue ahead of time.
-She had a client meet her in a parking lot to pick up photos. (Who does that? It wouldn’t have cost her a dime to meet the client in a more appropriate place…perhaps a coffee shop).
-She agreed to risk her reputation by appearing on Judge Joe Brown. What responsible business person would do that? If she hadn’t seen the show before, she should have watched a few before agreeing to appear. If she did watch a few, why the hell would she agree. The show is nothing more than Jerry Springer in a mock courtroom.
Granted…she’s a low cost wedding photographer providing a lower tier service. The client may have very well been provided a print package consistent with the price paid. That doesn’t remove the responsibility of the photographer to act professionally. Our value as photographers providing consumer services (portrait, wedding, event) isn’t solely tied to the print. It’s inextricably linked to our professionalism, understanding of our clients, and valuing our products and services enough to present them in a way that speaks to that professionalism. You know full well how perceptions are influenced by many factors. Unlike many, I don’t have any problem with photographers charging whatever fee they want to charge for services. I know a lot of photographers that charge a low fee and provide an average package. They do it in a very professional way and provide a valuable service to a segment of the market that can’t afford the cream of the crop photography. Most of those photographers love what they do and take great pride in the fact they do it with the same level of professional service as the heavy hitters. What I do have issues with are photographers who behave in unprofessional ways, giving the industry as a whole, a sleazy reputation.
As I said in my original post. I think the judge made the right decision but made it for all the wrong reasons.
To these points:
LOL – absodamnlutely… but it still comes back to the expectations.
If we are to not approach it as ‘this was promised and this was delivered’ and instead focus on the extraneous parts, we can never reach a ‘verdict’ – only render an opinion. And the opinion rendered was on the tools used instead of the work delivered… his rant on softness (post) and other such was embarrassing and stupid.
I am not defending the photographer from making some boneheaded decisions, I just think that the main point was overlooked.
And keep in mind, if the work she had shown did NOT match the work she delivered, you can bet your last dollar I would be ripping her a new one.
There’s no doubt Brown was an ASS! But there’s more at work here.
It’s a scripted show, rehearsed and taped. I doubt there’s much spontaneity (well, maybe the defendant’s blood pressure). As Brown was holding up the photos, did you notice him glancing at the back of them? He was reading something (idiot notes). The unfortunate part I feel is the responsibility of the two photographers for agreeing to settle in a TV studio, kangaroo courtroom. Hope they got paid well, you can bet their local area is aware of the show. Hey, I’m going to be on Brown’s show! Did you hear? So and so is going to be on TV. Midland, MI is no metropolis. I don’t think they did their business any service by agreeing to being brow beaten by a moron. My kit is ready to go in my Pelican case… Shut Up!
I think the whole thing’s a sham. Nothing more than ill-prepared defendants standing before an even more ill-prepared excuse of leadership (pillar of society, my ass). And the worst part? It gets ratings and stays on the air! You just can’t fix stupid. Come to think of it, never heard of Springer interviewing MENSA members either.
“…You just can’t fix stupid….”
LOL – I really did. So freekin’ true.
Great post! I’m glad to see that I’m not the only one a little peeved at the Judge’s attitude. The defendant never got a chance to share her side of the story and the merits of the case were never really discussed. It was definitely a mockery of the US legal system at best.
Well put Don. I’ve read the posts on the Flickr Strobist group, and yours seems to be the most original, thought provoking one yet.
Bill if the clown didn’t argue and put crap on the judge he might have given her a chance, what she did was like arguing with a cop when he is giving you a small ticket, the more you hang crap on him the more he is gonna want to go further with you.
Ms Eye Twitch had no hope.
Given the way people react in the Strobist forum to anyone that says they’re basically biting off more than they can chew the overall reaction to this video isn’t really all that surprising.
Not saying it’s right, just expected.
Personally I felt the whole thing looked like a car crash in slow motion. You pick up fairly quickly where this is headed and you know it’s going to end in tears but all you can do is watch it all unfold.
I think the photographer made a serious mistake in showing up for this farce, but I think I can understand why she did it. As you pointed out, she delivered on her promise, the photos matched her portfolio and therefore reasonable expectations. I’m sure she thought going in it would be an open and shut case. But like most TV entertainment there has to be a good guy and a bad guy, and there’s no real way to tell ahead of time which one the producers are going to label you.
I hope they don’t lose their business over this, but I’m not confident.
The strobist flickr group is out of hand. Many of the posters for the group are downright mean at times, and I am not surprised that they attacked like mad dogs on this given the recent replies to beginner questions. It’s very disheartening as the group could be a great resource for people at all stages of photography. I’m sure David Hobby never intended such a thing to develop as his strobist website is excellent for beginners and advanced photographers alike.
“Does the work match the samples. In this case of course it did. Was it great work or bad work? Does that matter? It is work that was agreed to.”
Yep…that was absolutely the crux of the matter, and the “professional” just totally missed it. Not only was Joe off the mark, he was obnoxious and rude to boot. I guess he’s fallen for the siren song of entertainment over justice.
Keyboard heros, water cooler gossip, no one’s work is any good, and the only thing two photogs can agree on is the other photographer’s work is crap.
I feel badly that this photographer more than likely did just lose her entire business, but… that being said, maybe she’ll step back and ask herself “what went wrong”?
I would never go into a wedding, or any other shoot, without previewing the site at the time of day the event was to take place, talking to the clergy or staff about flash and restrictions they may have, and I would never use that camera for any reason inside a building without flash.
The points being made that the equipment is not the best, she didn’t know the fstop, etc… is sort of the point. She presents herself as a professional. HOW she presented that is not known for sure…. she said she never did the bridal show, but the bride did…
Is it possible that she saw another photographer’s work at the show and then had her card and got the two confused? Surely the images she showed her with her Rebel XTi in the books were the same as what she shot. I would wager that this is a mistake.
We all have our own way of doing things and are only as good as the people who are paying us think we are. I have been praised and berated all in the same day, as I am sure we all have.
I hope this photographer learns how to present herself more professionally, (for goodness sake, TV and a court room? wear a suit and present yourself) and maybe get some education in photography.
The PAS crowd have gotten good. Those cameras you can now buy at Best Buy are nice. Professional grade? no., but they are able to get a good shot here an there.
We, as professionals, have got to show the difference between us and them. This photographer did nothing to enhance that.
live and learn. Hope she does.
I think there are real problems on both sides of this case. There’s not much doubt the photographer’s work left something to be desired, and her whole approach to the job was pretty bad. She was really unprepared, (they hadn’t checked out the place to see what was needed, and turned up on the day with no fast lenses), but I will say we didn’t really get to see the quality of the actual images presented.
However, to me the really scary thing in this video is the damage done to the so called justice system. They say the law is an ass, and this just proves it. The “judge” was so totally wrong it’s beyond funny. There was no effort to discuss anything with the photographer, it seems the judge already knew everything there was to know abouit wedding photography. But even more amazing were the people in the audience. I’m sure that almost all of them had no idea what an f stop was, yet they all sat there smiling and applauding at the judge’s totally misguided rants. I saw a movie about how the Romans watched the feeding of the lions at the Coliseum that was less scary than this!
If this sort of thing is done in the name of entertainment, then it’s pathetic and has to stop. These television judges, the Browns and the Judy’s, are setting the justice system back decades.
I’ll have to admit I thought my response was measured and assessed blame both on the photographer and the judge. But after reading this I agree that the things I was critical of in regard to the photographer were not even relevant to the case.
I was totally peeved at the judge. He knew some jargon but mentioned ASA toward the end when we’re dealing with digital and not film. I’ve only shot one church wedding where flash was allowed. I’ve shot plenty where it was banned and I seemed to be the only one obeying the ban. But those are minor compared to the fact that he never heard the case. Did he see the defendant’s images on the web? She’s most definitely a $1,300.00 wedding photographer. If they’d paid me $1,300.00 I’d have shot it, but that’s all. No prints. No Album. You can buy that stuff A-la-Carte later (at a higher price than it would have been in a package deal).
The least professional person in the “court room” was da judge.
I can’t believe the photographer agreed to settle this on TV. Absolute best case scenario? She wins the case, which makes her the photographer that beat a dissatisfied client on court TV. It’s still a shady marketing campaign. Lose/lose for the photographer. She should have settled it in their small town small claims court where she would have lost the bride’s family and friends as potential clients, but not the entire country.
David… yes, you are absolutely right.
Awful marketing plan.
This scares me. I have been shooting with a Nikon D50 for the last 5 years. Does that make my photography any less professional? I don’t think so. My ability to adapt to the lighting situation maybe but not my equipment. The problem is that so many people judge photography and professionalism by that inept standard.
What upsets me is that the most important part “Was the work produced in line with the photographers portfolio?” was never addressed.
Seeing this has really deeply upset and unnerved me.
Aren’t David Jay and Jasmine the king and queen of Karma…so much for all the positive life force proselytizing. I’m with you Wiz on the rest…but David Jay tweeting his mouth off just irked me. Maybe he’d feel different if she bought one of his pre-packaged websites.
I’ve read several of the comments, read the blog and have to say that Don is spot-on about everything. There’s a nasty elitist-ism in photography, even by guys who obviously aren’t doing well enough in their own business that they have to work in a camera shop to make ends meet.
What floored me and others have made the point as well was why you would ever want to go on TV to have a ‘case’ heard in a ‘court’ like this in front of X number of viewers? Even if the photographer did win her case, her business and future reputation was put on the line and I sure as heck wouldn’t want it aired on TV.
When people begin, if they don’t join a reputable local club or national organization (like PPA) then when confronted with being professionals they may just not have the tools.
There is no doubt that she got that camera off ebay or something, took a couple of photos (see her cached website) and someone said “wow, those are good”. Then the ball kept rolling and she did a friend’s wedding for nothing and gave her the images on a CD to develop at Walmart. Then she became a “pro” and decided that is the way to make a living.
She was her own undoing. Going on that horrible show to air her dirty laundry was a very stupid and costly mistake. I am assuming she is out of business since her website can only be accessed through old caches.
Still, gives people the idea that this is how you deal with a photographer. Bad all the way around.
As much as Joe forwarded this to gear, I do not believe the printing is the issue, but if no flash was allowed she at least needed a faster prime (even a 50mm for 90 bucks), and speaking of her unproffesionality she arrived late and didnt know if she could or could not use flash.
XTI is fine, 18-55 is fine, but will be hard to get unblured pictures at f/5.6 in low light. ISO 1600 isnt really that good on the XTI.
Besides that, if the client wasnt critic at the beggining i think its late to do it afterwards
You may need to watch it again. Bride stated that she arrived early and all was fine with that. And you are right, it all comes down to garbage in garbage out. Work looks as expected. I think a lot of people think this can only happen to low-level photographers… LOL, they have no idea what really happens in the realass world of commercial photography.
LOL…perhaps that should be a topic in the workshops, Don: “Welcome to the realass world of commercial photography.”
“Welcome to the realass world of commercial photography, now sit your asses down and get out your bigass notpads!”
Kinda like the ring of that. Heh.
You say “it isn’t the camera, it is the photographer.” But in a situation like this, low light and no flash, equipment makes a huge difference. Very fast lenses and a high end DSLR make a huge difference over low end DSLRs and kit lenses.
I read this on another forum discussing this TV show: “I work at a professional studio in the city where the plaintiff lives. she brought us the photographs to see if there was any way to fix them. after looking at the EXIF data on the JPEGS that she had, we found that the defendant photographed in JPEG, medium resolution, ISO 1600, Srgb colorspace. Upon doing her edits the defendant used a free online editing program and saved over the originals. The color of the 4×6’s from WalMart were horrendous with virtually no shadow detail and color casting”
I can’t say if the above is true, but if it is, the photographer wasn’t even using the highest capacity of the camera she had.
Please rememeber: not discussing the work, or her poor photography. The point was that the judge didn’t look at the facts or the case, but made sweeping generalizations and called her a liar. This is not a good thing for any of us. It will be point of contention for future wedding users… you can bet on it.
But, still my biggest problem is the way she was treated… instead of photographers joining together to try to help, they became sharks in the water all based on what gear she used, NOT the images that were delivered.
I would say that the fellow who claims he worked at a lab would be open to a real lawsuit at this point. He had NO right to discuss what happens at his place of employment and further adds to my claim that the hatred toward this woman is over the friggin’ top. Is he for real? I don’t know, but if he is, and she finds out, she can pwn his ass… big time.
Excellent points all. However, we all know of weekend warriors ( I think this is what we have here) who profess pro status, beef up their portfolio with pro materials, then go to WAL MART and save the money and give it to the bride and groom. Keep in mind that photogs show their best work, not all of their work, so a bride is at the mercy of whats being shown. There didnt seem to be any argument over the promise of pro quality images. There did seem to be some question about whether or not this gal provided them though. Of course she loved her work, and the defendeant and JOE didnt. I wish I could hands on them to see what the issues were. Sounds to me like JOE knows a bit about photography, maybe learned for this episode…who knows. Web sites are misleading and quality of printed images shouldnt be based on what you see there. We couldnt see on Tv the quality of the images being lambasted by JOE, so thats a tough call as well. Keeping in mind your contention that the meeting place is relevant…you assume that the photog, who has a bit to lose here, is telling the truth about the meeting place, while mom said they had done “ONE” wedding show, it is totally possible that the photog may have been “mistaken” about where the meeting took place. IMO the defendant in this case shot herself in the foot with the WALMART stuff after promising pro quality images…sadly thats not usually whats produced there. I blasted this photog, rightly or not, but Ive seen a lot of these weekend warriors junk. Show you the best then provide nothing close. Fountains in focus protruding from brides heads, distracting backgrounds, poor camera angles for the bride, piss poor lighting issues, and a general sense of having nothing close to a photogs eye when it comes to taking photos. Generically your rant is well recieved, however, on a realistic note, it fails because we cant get our hands on those images to see their flaws..although one poster claims they did and the exif data supported the ruling….
Im confused by the “Did the pictures match the portfolio” arguments. On line photos are useless based on resolution etc, and its quite possible the hard copy images shown WERE on pro paper and NOT done at WALMART. None of us can argue whether or not what JOE was holding were the same, better or worse than the ones shown to the bride earlier..we dont have enough IN HAND knowledge to know. On TV the images looked satisfactory, but they may have been significantly better or worse than what the rbide was shown. The brides argument is that they were worse….
wizwow….Someone who has actually seen the images (allegedly) is giving us the only good info on the images. While I wont argue the ethics, I will argue if the info is true, its not over the top hated of the woman, its pointing out the facts. She claims pro and the exif info tells us otherwise. JOE wasnt treating her well, I ll give you that, but thats the photogs problem, she had nothing to win here and everything to lose….and IMO she wasnt doing much more than arguing the meeting place, which IMO was totally irrelevant. One of them made a mistake on where they met, the photogs mom acknowledged they did a wedding show but didnt meet this woman there…the bride said she did. That wouldnt get any case thrown from court, so its up to the photog to show shes a pro, as advertised, and she didnt.
After sitting as an ‘Expert Witness’ in two similar civil trials, I keep coming back to the same thing.
Her gear was not on trial.
**Her expertise was not on trial.
Her personality was not on trial.
**Her knowledge of what her lens speed was was not on trial.
What was on trial was whether the work shown at time of commission was delivered to person who commissioned it… which in this case clearly was.
**Actually her expertise was on trial and that includes the equipment knowledge. As for work shown and work delivered, unless you ve held them both in your hands, you cant argue it was delivered. (NOTE: I havent either so I cant argue it wasnr delivered either). Was he looking at the FUJI logo on the originals and the Copyright Notes on the portfolio? We dont know. We also dont know if the quality was the same, whether its the lighting or the paper printed on..thats the real problem here.
Finally, the photogs personality came forth when she continued to argue that the meeting place was relevant, and then (defensive mindedly I believe) she chafed at the groom. telling the judge “Shes gonna cry now” was stupid and probably what sent the award to $2500. Did the photog say it or mom? Dont know, but it was heard and it was stupdi.
The way this woman was treated by other photographers was unfair in that she became the target for what bothers other photographers about ill prepared pros. She was the poster child for how not to run a successful wedding photography business, the one photographers complain about day in and day out.
However, she isn’t running a successful photography business. She is running a $1300 one. One that, like wizwow pointed out, the bride should have compared her finished product against. Perhaps that was the plan….perhaps she wasn’t happy with how the quality was compared with what she got…but we never got to see that. All we got to see was Joe cutting her off at every turn.
The photographer didn’t know what she was doing….the photographer handled herself poorly….she is one of many in the profession. I disagree with everything about her and how she runs her business….but that wasn’t what was on trial here.
Let me tell you where I think you are a little off. In these TV court shows, the “Judge” gets full statements from both the plaintiff and the defendant and he (or she) examines the evidence. The judgment is decided (or at least mostly decided) based on that and not what happens on the show. In this case, he obviously saw the photos and determined that they were of a significantly poor quality. On the show, I think he just wanted to see if they could defend themselves, which they really couldn’t. To me, they did not sound like someone who really knew what they were doing. You are correct in that they weren’t given much time to defend themselves on air, but as I said, they would have given a complete statement before hand.
I am sure what you are saying is correct, but was anything accomplished by the humiliating way the ‘judge’ treated the woman? Could have been a teachable moment. Coulda been something valuable for all… what it ended up being was a “show-bashing” of someone for the amusement of others. Simply disgraceful in my opinion.
“On the show, I think he just wanted to see if they could defend themselves, which they really couldn’t.”
He never gave them a chance… cutting them off at every answer, making statements of what kind of gear he has, and his ‘pelican case’…
I think everyone keeps focusing on the work as the problem I have… I think the work on the site is horrible, and the images looked bad to me. I don’t care… I would imagine that they are the work that she shows to everyone.
It is the terrible and dehumanizing way she was treated… and I have seen this happen in real court with real artists. And while real judges and lawyers are not even close the the despicable moron in the video, believe me… it is terribly stressful.
And if they had given a complete statement, it apparently went past Joe as he asked for all kinds of stuff that they seemed to think they had given them.
I am not defending the photographer, I am totally dismayed by the way she was treated.
First, I have been a wedding photographer for more than 25 years. So I will point out a few thing that I feel was wrong on both parties account. The photographer should have never met the client in the Wal-Mart parking lot. That cheapen the product for the bride, no matter what the photographer said. She, in her opinion, would always have a “Wal-Mart” wedding album. Just don’t do this.
Second, the camera does not have to matter to the photographer, but it does to the bride, the groom, and their family members and friends. A professional has professional equipment and that’s that. End of story.
Third . Offer them their money back, re-shoot at your cost, whatever it takes. Make a deal that you can live with. Yes, there are bad people who look nice. But don’t commit professional suicide to argue a point. Never, ever go to court, unless it’s absolutely necessary. Then spend the money on a very, very good attorney.
I never comment on another photographer’s work, because I don’t know enough to tell what’s a good or bad photograph and I have been making them for more than 25 years. There is stuff out there I wouldn’t give two cents for, but the photographer sells thousands of copies of the image. Good for him or her.
Now about the bride: She had the crown on her side. (all the cheering ladies in the background). She was pretty and she cried. But clearly she did not understand what she was getting for her money. What she asked for and what she got was what she paid for. And on this I fault the photographer for not explaining what she was getting. (She thought she was gettting a professional photographer to shoot her wedding, and give her professional prints. Not someone with a Rebel whe gives her prints in a Wal-Mart bag.)
The bottome line is that her expectaitions were not met, and thus she was due a refund or do-over. Also, people, use a contract. Have an attorney review it so that it is legal. (I used one for ten years before I found out that there was things in it that were illegal and not enforceable.) Explain to the bride what she will get under the contract and what steps she can take for remediation if there is a problem.
Lastly, remember when you get mad and angry you automatically lose 50 points on your intelligence and you will make stupid mistakes.
(Once lost a $2500.00 wedding contract because I insisted on having a dinner break. while the bride/groom were eating.)
I didn’t think it was stupid at the time, but in hindsight….dumb and stupid.
Marc Sr.
One more thing, never, ever, go on a TV show where you are not the victim. The Villlan is a bad guy.In this episode the villlan dies and that’s you.
If you feel you must respond, do it with a letter from your attorney. That’s what why you pay them Otherwise keep your mouth shut.
Oh my… so very true, Marc.
Personally think everyone on that show was a taco short of a combo plate… for sure.
😉
I’m glad someone is out there speaking to ethical behavior. Thank You. It DOES MATTER how we treat each other. It does matter that we’re respectful, courteous, and understanding. And our BIASES don’t trump that. Frankly, I think that, in the hands of a good shooter, you can do great work with a P&S camera (I’m not advising… I’m just sayin’). ‘Joe’ is ignorant. And obviously a jerk to boot. And his notions about photography and what makes ‘good shooting’ are dead wrong. Thanks for calling him out. I’ll be curious to know if there is any response from the ‘Joe’ camp.
Thanks for a great post.
–Rich
Oh, there are a lot of people who think ‘Ol Joe is a photographic genius. I mean… he has a Pelican case.
Thanks for “getting it” – the way we treat others says a lot about who we are. Laughing at failure, denigrating someone who actually needs a bit of help, castigating someone for their mistakes instead of offering assistance… what a crazy situation.
I have known people who have lost their businesses. It isn’t pretty. It’s heartbreaking.
Was she a good photographer? Well, I’ve seen worse, and I think she should be better before going ‘pro’…
I was just sickened by the total rush to laugh while throwing her under a bus… It made me feel creepy.
Great post. I cannot help but be amazed at the number of comments even here that seem to be taking the defendant to task for her lack of professional gear, conduct, etc.
Based on the video clip, we actually have no idea what sort of contract existed between the bride and the photographer. Nothing was presented that would let us know what images were shown to the bride as examples of the photographer’s work. Nothing tells us what sort of opportunity the photographer did or did not have to review the venue in advance of the wedding (I’ve shot weddings where I simply was not given access to the officiant until moments before the ceremony, no opportunity to scout the venue in advance, etc). In face, the photographer didn’t even get a chance to say one thing, because “PhotoJoe” cut her off at every attempt. Even Joe surmised at one point that the Walmart printings could have been proofs, not finished product. Do you retouch every image from a wedding? I don’t retouch for proofs beyond basic exposure/color correction; Photoshop is reserved for the selects.
Sure, we probably all agree that we “pros” wouldn’t show up at a wedding without gear up the wazoo. Sure, I’m not worried if the officiant has a no flash policy, because I’ve got my fast glass and high-iso DSLR, and a bag of flashes for when they are allowed. That’s just great. I’d be willing to bet my gear blows the doors off Ansel Adams’ large format camera when you look at high iso performance, fast glass, and the ability to make individual cups of coffee. I’ll still be lucky if I make one image in my whole life that could be compared to Adams’ work. Yeah, I’m not shooting with an XTi or a D50, but if Adams showed up at my wedding with PhotoJoe’s Brownie that he seemed so proud of in the video clip, I’d sure as heck have him shoot my wedding.
The key issue here is that this case should have been about _contract law_ and nothing more. What did the photographer _contract_ to do, and did she meet that obligation. No more, no less. If you see lousy sample photos and hire a wedding photographer for $1300, you aren’t getting Yervant. Period. The judge turned the whole thing into a referendum on the photographer’s skills and “professional” qualifications, and not on whether she met her contracted obligations.
The problem is that this is TV. As already noted, there is a good deal of this that is undoubtedly scripted; both parties are already being paid for being there. Like most of these shoes (including Dr. Phil type talk shows), I can never figure out what possesses the people to agree to be humiliated on TV like this. However, it will falsely give clients the idea that Judge Joe has set the standard for how to judge a wedding photographer. Oddly, I have never been asked what gear I am using by a client, or how fast my lens is, or what ISO I am shooting at, or what kind of camera bag I am using. (Although I was asked by an AfricanAmerican client if I would be able to handle the contrast of her dark skin against the white dress, but I don’t think she was really looking for the answer I gave when I got into the dynamic range of the D2X I was shooting at the time…oh well).
I am also amazed at how many professional photographers are so willing to pile on to anyone they perceive as less professional than they are. Weren’t we all young and inexperienced once? I remember my first wedding. Scary as hell. However, a bride who was well informed as to our experience level (or lack thereof) who made a specific decision to ask us to shoot her wedding (over our advice to hire a more experienced photographer) because she liked our portrait work, led to a successful outcome with images that exceeded her expectations. We had “pro gear” but that didn’t make us wedding pros; it made us wedding amateurs with expensive cameras, but I would have resented a “pro” who dumped on us, because we were fully upfront with the wedding couple about our lack of experience and what we could and could not be expected to deliver. Amazingly, many local photographers have been more then encouraging, given us more advice and guidance for free than I would ever have expected, and that encouragement has advanced our skills and business way more than having a pro chastise us for any perceived shortcomings ever could have done.
I don’t really care that they didn’t use “pro” equipment, or even know what they were doing. It’s just that they charge $1300. I have a friend that is beginning in photography and she only charges $150, including 50 dollars worth of prints. And her pictures are still better than the ones from that video.
I got nothing against beginning photographers, or ones who are not “technically good.” It just makes me mad when I find out they are charging that kind of money.
I was just checking on Don’s site to make sure it was up and running and after my 5th reload, I saw the title of the video and had to watch it.
I am so upset with this judge as he took his weekend warrior knowledge and tried to apply it to this case. As Don mentioned, the gear, the attitude, and method of delivery are non factors here. Was the quality of the work equal to the photographer’s portfolio? Yes it was.
I know this is TV and normal small claims court rules don’t apply but shouldn’t the award to the plaintiff not exceed the original amount of the contract? I about threw a shoe at my screen when I heard the amount awarded to the plaintiff.
This episode will just encourage brides to sue their photographer and use poor quality as an excuse. In these economic times, this ruling sets a bad precedence for the photographic industry. I will go back to my corner, curl up and cry.
If I go to my local supermarket and buy hake because I cant afford crayfish, then complain to the store in astonishment that the hake tastes awful and nothing like crayfish, what are they going to tell me? If you wanted crayfish you should have bought crayfish.
Bride chose hake, got hake.
I’m a wedding photographer and its a tough nerve wrecking job, which I love. I find when I was first starting out that no one was prepared to help or share their knowledge with me. The only photographers that do are the ones that are self confident in their work, they dont have the fear the others do of helping someone that might take business away from them.
To the poor photographers peers that enjoyed the puplic thrashing : There is enough space in this world for all of us, dont be so insecure! It feels good to share knowledge and help someone else.
Did it occur to you that this might very well be content paid by Canon? I don’t know enough about the rules for advertising in the US, especially when product placement is involved, but it’s pretty suspicious that only Canon models are named.
Besides, what this ‘judge’ claims is pretty much what Canon, or, for that matter, any camera manufacturer, would like you to believ. They cannot make fair comparisons in their own model lineup publicly, as for their marketing department, the Rebel buyers should feel like they almost bought pro equipment, so this might very well be a good opportunity to make the case for their more expensive models.
I fully agree with your sentiments. I shared a similar opinion regarding the recently disqualification of “Story Book Wolf” in the Wildlife Photographer of the Year competition. Fellow photographers were more than happy with the outcome, yet it was based on the premise that the judges were 90% sure that it was a tame wolf.
Coming back to this case – The judge seems to imply that professionals should have high end gear. I guess artistic vision isn’t a factor these days.
When I started photography with my very limited skill and knowledge, in my eyes, I was one of the worlds best – after years of experience and learning, I realize just how far I have to go. It seems the more I learn, the more I appreciate the work of others. Joe must be in the very early stages of his photography stint.
Totally agree Don.
It’s a good thing that the only people actually watching “Judge Joe Brown” happen to be fat unemployed re-tards sitting home on their couches during the workday. I doubt we have to worry about their opinion on anything!
On a side note, it didn’t sound like anyone in that courtroom made it past 5th grade. Anyone knows that shooting with a Pelican case would have made all the difference!
Jeez…
Absolutely… I am on my way to get a Pelican case today. I figure it will clean up the edges of my photographs. Woot!
Oh man I have the mother of all pelicans in my garage I am a brilliant photographer and didnt realise it.
P.S. Jaysus L.M.A.O Don Needs to have another look through the book I think
Which book!!! I will.
you guys know it’s a tv show, right? and the theater is all about ratings? and that if this was in a “real” court (it’s binding arbitration, not an actual court…) , it probably wouldn’t have been so confrontational and they would have actually looked at the facts? i doubt actual courts are going to look to joe brown for precedent, and this isn’t exactly the most important pseudo-legal case affecting photographers today. does it say horrible things about how we as a society find entertainment in the embarrassment of other people? absolutely. so does reality television, and a bunch of the magazines at the grocery store. but just as folks are saying the client should have known what she was signing up for when she signed the contract, the photographer should have known what she was signing up for when she agreed to be on the show.
Yep. Aware that it is not a real court. Yep, idiocy reigned supreme.
But this WILL cause problems for REAL photographers because it will generate even more brides who do this. Not everyone who watches it is as aware as we are. There will be a bunch of ‘brides’ who don’t like their bridal pictures.
As to the point of enjoying other people get savaged… I don’t, and you don’t.
I just wish there had been more photographers offering assistance and help instead of joining in the glee of destruction. It is unseemly, don’t you agree.
Well thanks for marching to your own drum. Even back when you frequented the forums your opinion usually differed from the “norm”. I feel that I can be too negative sometimes which is a lot unlike how I use to be. Being overly negative though is a reflection of your own personal happiness which is obviously lacking in cases like this.
Photography is a competitive business, many photographers put down other peoples work to make themselves feel more relevant. I find myself even doing this though I keep it to myself. I already do my own thing so I don’t worry what others think of me but the last step is to criticize less.
Again thanks for this eye opening article. The trial wasn’t at all about what it should have been about and the judge knew just enough about cameras to be dangerous but to little to be rational.
It’s refreshing to see some rationality and humanity prevailing upon a topic that has had everyone all a-twitter in my field. Thank you for saying what needed to be said.
It’s refreshing to see some rationality and humanity prevailing upon a topic that has had everyone all a-twitter in my field. While the defendant’s professionalism and skill may have indeed been dubious, that’s a red herring when it comes to the bottom line, which SHOULD have been, “Did the client get what the client commissioned?” I’ve been really taken aback by some of the reactions among my peers. Thank you for saying what needed to be said.
Sorry for all the revisions there. 😉
this is what will cause brides to not like their pictures? brides do this anyway. the only difference is they’re going to ask “what camera will you be using for the shoot?” like they know now that it will make a difference. i don’t think judge joe set anything in motion that wasn’t already out there.
it sucks that we’re such a litigious society, and it sucks that photographers need to carry expensive insurance for situations like this, and that’s not a burden taken on only by photographers. but i’m not exactly sympathetic with this photographer, though. if she had a decent contract and went to an actual courtroom, and assuming this wedding was consistent with her other weddings, she might have won the case. but instead she goes on daytime reality television and expects fair and unbiased justice? really?
as for your last statement, replace “photographers” with “people” and the same thing holds true. if we were more interested in thinking outside of ourselves and helping other people instead of feeding our own egos or, as you said, stepping on others to get ahead, we’d be a way better off society. but while i think most people would agree (or at least say they agree) with that, too few actually do anything other than talk about it.
This is ridiculous the photographer did herself all the damage the judge just pointed them out…
First of all when you go to court should know how to conduct yourself gather your facts so you can clearly represent your position it is obvious that she did not.
If you do not know the speed of you lens how could you adequately shoot in low light conditions and by her own admissions she knew that most churches do not allow flash photography so she should have been prepared.
She said she has shoot hundreds of weddings (exaggerated maybe) but even 1300 x 10 is more than enough to invest in at least some good glass.
Look I cannot judge the quality of the photos based you tube vids but the quality of the photog left a lot desired…
If you have 24×36 why were they not with her???
As for the equipment that should not and is not the issue you as the photog have a right to produce quality photos with your equipment…
You are correct photogs got thrown under the bus, but this time it was by one of their own….
Thanks for sharing your opinion on this.
We are often too quick to judge, and our perspective can certainly be skewed if we don’t know the full story (on either side).
Wouldn’t it be interesting if “we” as photographers focused more on uplifting things? Imagine if photographers got this excited about something *positive* ….
“… Imagine if photographers got this excited about something *positive* …….”
Yes. It is just that negativity that has made me leave some rather popular Flickr forums. When positive and inspirtational posts were made, they immediately were targeted by negative, jealous and petty posters… Sigh.
Filling one’s mind with hate has never been a good recipe for success.
Not you Don Jaysus needs to read the book Im sure theres something about do to others as you would have done to yourself in it
I completely agree with your take on this. The fact that photographers would side with some TV judge who clearly does not understand photography is weird regardless of who the defendant is.
The images, lack of preparation and no knowledge of her gear explained her side well enough. This was not a professional and should not be posing as one.
I appreciate your view and respect it. However, I totally disagree that this shouldn’t be passed around the industry.
I got this message today from a fellow professional photographer. She wasn’t trashing the photographer, or “throwing her under the bus”, instead sending out a plea to learn your trade, get certified and know what you know before calling yourself a professional. I think that is the true message here.
Hey my fellow photog buddies…(ESPECIALLY BUDDING PHOTOGS)…
Can you be sued for printing at Sam’s and WalMart?
Is where you have your printing done considered “professional”?
Can you be sued for using a Canon Rebel?
Is the model of your camera considered “professional”?
Do you know the “speed” of your lenses?
Are you practicing as a “professional” but are actually a beginner (be honest to yourselves).
Photographers…you need to watch this brief court case (link below).
It’s always great that we look out for each other and keep each other informed.
Most clients are so fun…and a blessing.
However, we know that no matter how well we do our jobs…trouble sometimes finds us.
That’s one reason why PPA’s Indemnification Trust is such an important part of PPA membership. If you aren’t a PPA member…do it now.
http://www.ppa.com/joinppa/
And while you are at it…study and register to get certified http://www.certifiedphotographer.com !!!!
This is a court case on tv concerning a wedding photographer being sued….look out.
This sets precedent in a very public court…..WHOA!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=js7RzcdDcMs
Lemme know whatcha think about this….
Your buddy, VAL
“Filling one’s mind with hate has never been a good recipe for success.”
Wiz, that’s one of the many reasons I enjoy your forum posts, and your blog. You always find a way of bringing out the positive, or at least interject a bit of humor into a situation.
you are obviously a stupid freakin retard…no real pro would be caught in a situation…why defend shitty photography??oh, because your not a pro??go back to your full time job pushing carts or being an accountant…dipshit…that fat bitch got what she deserved…
I totally agree with you. Well reasoned and totally on the mark. If I ever get a chance to meet you in person, I will show you just how I feel about your hateful little self. Your wonderful attitude is reflected in your email address. I truly feel sorry for the hogs, dude.
If I am ever up there in Redmond, I may give you a call and you can tell me whatever you want in person. And you better damn well appreciate that I do not put your name out on the net associated with the piss poor photography you call art. Those two women can shoot circles around you. Even with their cameras. BTW… you got a lot of nerve calling THEM fat. I mean –LOL — really.
Your IP Address: 212.162.1.124 is noted.
Pissant.
Oka, we get it. you thiink she got run over…probably did somewhat, but some of thats on her as well. Ill prepared for court, took an attitude immediately, sniped about meeting location after being told it wasnt really relevant, and IMO it wasnt. Finally, not knowing anything of your equipment, professing loads of weddings and that ministers dont allow flash, doesnt bother to scope theplace out and isnt prepared for the low light issues.
Now, folks please stop saying the bride got what she paid for. There is absolutely no way to know if the photos that the judge were holding were equal to, better or worse than what the bride was shown initially. You keep saying it like its true and reality is…facts not in evidence (to us). Once again, the photog went after the bride…she didnt maintain a professional composure as a pofessional photog should, then sniped at the groom. Once again, someone at the defendants podium yelled out “Shes gonna cry now”, which tells me two things…1. Bullying behavior by the photog and momma, and 2. Probably had the bride crying before when the bride argues the quality of the images.
This photog is her own worst enemy. Shouldnt have gone on JJB, probably should stay away from SPRINGER and S WILKOS as well. Shoulda settled when she had the chance, even the bride didnt want all her money back..she said she deserved the $300 for showing up and taking the images. IMO judge gave the money based on his total time with this woman was…and, like the photos, we didnt see everything that happened that day.
Finally,, what we dont see is all the off camera silliness that happens in these shows, we dont know that the majority of the applause and laughter didnt have some other bearings to it from breaks.
Betsy, I totally agree with you. Many of these TV judges are only interested in their ratings, and they get them at the expense of someone else. They expect respect but don’t give it.
Judge Joe is wrong, as you point out, on so many fronts it is riduclous. For one most churchs I have been in do NOT allow even the photographer to use flash during the ceremony. He obviosly decided he was going to side with the plaintiff, as the TV judges usually do, before they even appeared. The biggest mistake the photographer made is expecting a fair trial by an impartial judge.
Betsy I would hope this entire thread with all the comments would be sent to judge joe.
Bil
Those lame ass photographers got exactly what they deserved. Those photos were crap. I’m impressed that the judge knew enough tot know those two were chumps. Good for him. As for the weird comments criticizing the judge. I’m truly at a loss.
Thanks for checking in with what is really a well thought out and presented position. We feel enlightened now.
WOW! I am completely beside myself here. Like you, I do not and will not promote bad photography but as you stated, ‘The Judge’ totally missed the point here. Did the final product match what was shown at the time the client and photographer entered into a contract.
There are plenty of pros in my area who get prints from Costco and I’m here to testify that Costco’s products are nothing to balk at. Even Wal-Marts printers are REAL photo printers using REAL photo paper and chemicals – not ink jet. ‘The Judge’ clearly has no idea what he’s talking about.
Speaking of which, hopefully he reads my comment and I’ll gladly challenge him to a shootout with my D40 and a kit lens while he fumbles around a 1D MkIV and we’ll see who’s photos are better. Hell, I’ll even rent a Profoto rig for him and I’ll shoot with small flash… at 2PM on a sunny afternoon!
Please excuse me while I notify the Clue Response Team for Judge Joe Brown.
There is absouletly no excuse for a photog with that many weds (hundreds according to her) under her belt to not know the speed of the lens or have better lens for that matter, she needs to invest some time and money into her craft.
What professional goes to settle a business matter on court TV???
Come on wizwow you are better than this she knew that churches did not allow flashes and still did not walk with the proper gear …
Are your endorsing unprofessional-ism here,, if so then this is truly sad…
If you have read the post, and obviously YOU DIDN’T… You may count dozens of times where I go out of my way to specifically address the legal aspects of this and say without any shadow of a doubt that it is bad photography. It is a contractual law issue, not a gear issue.
Reading. It can be learned at any age.
I don’t see the point of that kind of shows. Doesn’t one have to agree to go? Why would she?
About the quality of the job. Well, you can’t expect top quality paying the minimum fee. I mean quality is something to pay for. I’ve recently heard someone offer an amateur photographer to do a wedding for 150 euros. That’s around 180$ I think. And I bet said person expects to have incredible pics with a small cam, kit lens and no external flash unit. And 150 €. And I was like whaaaaaaat????
The gear is not the most important part. If you have a basic gear and now how to use it you can get nice pics. If you know composing, lighting, and such you can do a good job. Plus those “cheap” photographers cover a certain demand: that of the people who’s not willing to pay for quality. Quality photographers wouldn’t do a wedding for 1300$. It’s not worth the time and effort. But that girl would. And that woman chose this particular photographer because it fit her budget, so no complaining. She should looked at different photographers and saw a lot of higher rates. She now regrets and sues that girl. It’s ridiculous.
And sure, the judge should just determine if the quality of the pics matched the samples who got her the job, not if the gear was professional enough for her to do weddings. I bet he knows nothing about photography and somebody wrote everything down for him. They’re ruining her professional career by stepping out of the main question.
I believe all of the hype and arrogance of the judge is because this is TV…let’s get viewers and ratings.
I am a wedding photographer, never had a situation like this. I shoot with Olympus equipment which many are unfamiliar with (they all know Canon and Nikon). Never heard anyone complain about the equipment at all.
I would not take this too seriously, it’s TV.
I don’t know what’s more pathetic… that silly show, or silly people like you who believe its actually real. Those are actors folks… Judge Brown, Judge Judy and all the rest of those court shows are about as a real as Jerry Springer.
Your rant is why they are so successful.
Read the Rant.
If you are incapable of understanding the point of this discussion, it may be better to not be involved “fakeascanbe”. Maybe the words we used were too big. Sorry.
Doncha love people who are all powerful and hide behind anonymous email addresses. LOL.
I guess it was only a matter of time before some inerudite internet denizen stopped by to squirt out some ad hominem diarrhea. It always lends an air of dignity and credibility to one’s argument to know how to turn such impressively pithy phrases as “stupid freakin retard” and “fat bitch” to make an obtuse point, doesn’t it? I know I’m feeling enlightened, too! *eyeroll*
It is one of the delightful things about internet anonymity. They offe nothing, they don’t even read the discussion… just pop in and make a comment before their mom makes them come out of the basement and rake the leaves.
The only thing I find more ridiculous and stupid than the people who willingly sign up to be on a TV show like this are the people who watch it. I do believe this stuff along with every “reality” TV show has set back the evolution of the human race by at least 100 years. Its obvious this guy is a great judge, after all, that’s why he’s on TV and not a County, City, Circuit Court or Supreme Court Judge, right? I would not be surprised if he wasn’t aroused while making his ego tripping rant. That’s what this kind of show is about.
It also comes down the age old insistence that its the gear not the photographer. A pros camera can do things that a consumer camera cannot, for sure. But, it also can reduce your window of tolerance on a good image down to the eye of a needle.
Don-
Lots of great points here, but in the end I think all three are at fault.
1 – The photog should have never even agreed to going on this show. Regardless of whatever they may be getting paid to appear, the potential for her reputation to get damaged in a three ring circus of this type is too great. Further, if you are going to appear on such a show, then at least learn how to control your attitude instead of having a short fuse and not remaining composed and professional. How many people here would think of appearing on such a thing? …I didn’t think so.
2- The judge’s attempt to act like he knew everything about photography only made him an ass since he focused on equipment. At the same time though, the photog should understand the limits of her equipment. Now of course we don’t have indoor ceremony pictures from her portfolio (with no flash) to compare to this shoot, but the photog made it very clear that she was very green behind the ears and didn’t do her research ahead of time. If she had, she could have simply told the client “Look, if the wedding were outdoors or in a venue I could use flash, I’d do this – but low light no flash photos of a ceremony isn’t an area I am comfortable with” (or something of the sort).
3- As has already been pointed out many times, the judge didn’t focus on the real matter at hand. He should have been requesting to see the portfolio that was presented to the client, verified with the client if this in fact was the images she saw when deciding to use this photo, and then compared those images to the new ones taken. Instead, he just ignores all this and decides to go off on a rant of his own to somehow demonstrate he knows everything about photography.
4- The client was clueless for complaining about fuji paper. The judge in fact even tried to defend the photo by saying that these could have been proofs – but in the end, the contract for this shoot may have only required the photog to get these prints done. Yes, the judge was clueless when it came to enlargements and so forth as well.
All around it’s just a sad showing for everyone. The judge (or whatever he really is) needs to do a better job at being a judge, the photographers like this lady should be sure they fully understand their capabilities and how to conduct business, and clients need to do a better job at understanding how to find a qualified photog.
Something important to bring up here is that all of these TV judge shows are simply arbitration hearings. They aren’t civil suits (although they like to disguise themselves as such). Under most state laws, arbitration when a judge is named the arbiter is a legally binding process in which the parties come into the hearing having already agreed to abide by the arbiter’s ruling or decision in the matter in order to settle a dispute. Legally speaking, the “judge” in this case doesn’t have to consider contractual obligation or intent and can pretty much do whatever they want, although ethically, he should be adhering to the law. It is a subjective process. If the judge steps over the line (re: B.M. vs. D.L., see Court Decisions, Second Judicial Department, Family Court, Kings County, N.Y. L. J., Mar. 20, 2000, at 30), the Judge’s ruling during arbitration can be overturned by the higher courts, namely the appellate division. In B.M. vs. D.L., Judge Judy tried to rule on a custody issue, and that decision was overturned in appeals. She also got some very harsh words sent to her by the appeals court judge in that case. There are many other examples with other TV judges overstepping the line and then having decisions overturned. I absolutely agree that the photographer shouldn’t have agreed to arbitration at all, but she should consider a possible appeal after consulting with a local attorney to see if it’s legally feasible. The bride should have sued in civil court, not arbitration either as if she loses on appeal, she likely won’t have much of a case for a future civil suit in the same matter.
I dub thee Sir Don – ‘Rebel with a cause’
To dream the impossible dream
To fight the unbeatable foe
To bear with unbearable sorrow
To run where the brave dare not go
To right the unrightable wrong
To love pure and chaste from afar
To try when your arms are too weary
To reach the unreachable star
This is my quest
To follow that star
No matter how hopeless
No matter how far
To fight for the right
Without question or pause
To be willing to march into Hell
For a heavenly cause
And I know if I’ll only be true
To this glorious quest
That my heart will lie peaceful and calm
When I’m laid to my rest
And the world will be better for this
That one man, scorned and covered with scars
Still strove with his last ounce of courage
To reach the unreachable star
Seriously, those people are not “professional” photographers. Acted out or not, real or not, the point still stands. The only thing professional about their work or their attitude is that they were paid and wrongly so. An f4.5 70-300 for indoor no flash photography? please, get real. A dinky 18-55, come on.
One simply cannot get a full picture of what happened by this show. They have decided what makes good tv and run with that. Arguing contract law would have been a snooze compared to what they did air. What is doesn’t say is what kind of a process went into coming to this ruling. It may be that JJB carefully weighed all that you are complaining about Wiz but in the end, the producers said “great, but this is what we are airing”.
Judge Judy used to run this small print on the show and I am assuming that it is the same for JJB. Essentially is says that both parties have agreed to drop their cases and agree to follow the decision of the judge. In compensation, the parties will split $5,000 but it is offset by a decision. So if this is true for JJB, the plaintiff would get $2,500 and then both parties would split the remaining 2,500. I think 2,500 is the limit for small claims court.
keep in mind that this photographer stated that she has “taken hundreds of weddings” using this equipment. she was not claiming to be “green” as many of you seem to believe. let’s focus on that. if she’s charging $1300 a wedding and has shot even a SINGLE hundred (much less plural), that’s $130,000. she’s using a rebel with a kit lens for this? what other equipment? a 70-300mm lens? what’s the speed? no idea? how the hell do you shoot hundreds of weddings with a lens and have no idea what speed it is? how do you show up as a professional to shoot a wedding without something faster than your amateur kit’s lens? how do you make money off of “hundreds of weddings” which you claim frequently will not allow flashes without investing in a a fast lens?!
c’mon… sure, a great photographer can take great pictures with amateur gear, but this is just a load of bull. even if the lady showed up and was surprised when the pastor told her not to use a flash she had multiple options including simply shooting with the flash anyway. even if she’s religious, god will forgive her — the client won’t.
soft focus on all the shots? i have a hard time believing she did that on purpose. she just didn’t know what she was doing. the judge was no more throwing a professional photographer under the bus than she threw her client under the bus by taking terrible photos of a once in a lifetime event. he was doing everyone a favor by not allowing her to get away with fraud.
Sorry, but you come off as a gear head – focused on what gear she used.
Not what the point of the lawsuit was.
Appreciate that you are so terribly sure of your position that you used a fake email.
Cowards are kinda like that I find…
Hit – run – hide.
Whatever you think of me, I used my own name.
in the above post, I meant to say people’s court, not judge Judy re: the compensation to the people on the show.
The fact remains that the hack who wanted to call herself a professional photographer is just that… a hack. This is a prime example of someone who buys an entry level camera at WalMart (the same “lab” she uses) and decided that the rebel with the kit lens made her a professional. NOT!
The photos were garbage when professional photos were contracted for.
To have photographers call her out on it and be glad to see a fraud exposed and have to pay the price is just. Many of us have spent years, often decades learning and training before even thinking of ourselves as professional. Most won’t do weddings because it is a specialized field. Yet this amatuer jumps right in with an entry level camera and a kit lens, not even knowing anything about the other lens she claimed to have, and wants to charge people $1300 for photos that weren’t even worth $50.
JJB did not say that the XTi wouldn’t make a larger print. He did, however, say that those pictures wouldn’t. And he was right. Demaris Geese brought in the very best shots she had ever taken (if they were hers at all) and presented them. Outdoors shots with natural lighting. This showed absolutely nothing of what the actual photos were.
Why did it take a full minute for the defendant to argue where they had met? Because she saw just how badly she was already looking.
Geese claimed that flash in a wedding isn’t allowed. Bull. I use a flash all the time and the only thing ever said about flash photography is that the family and friends who are there are asked to not use a flash if they take any pctures so that the professionals aren’t having to compete with a flash from Uncle Joe or Aunt Martha.
Personally, I like seeing hacks like this thrown under the bus like this. They are promoting substandard photography and I think the only ones who don’t see anything wrong with it are doing the same.
Point. Missed.
Of course work wasn’t good.
Were you of the mind that she was being sued because her work wasn’t good?
Or her camera wasn’t good?
Sorry – the point was did she meet expectations.
Gear heads, and those who focus on that point, will NEVER Understand this.
She showed crap, did crap, and then got a bride who was so upset she wanted to get less money – but keep the crap photos.
Yes, I am quite capable of making the distinction. If you think that my point was in defending crap work, well… what can I say.
What ever happened to the phrase “make sure your shit is tight”? judge joe just “shut that shit down”. When it comes to cameras it does matter what camera you have, just don’t think you suck because “I don’t have the best camera”, or “If I had this slightly better camera I would be slightly better”.
I have no idea what you just said. Ummm… OK.
Being a Masters student of photography at Syracuse University as well as being engaged, I am one looking for photographers because I know more than my fiance. I understand that equipment plays a big part in what I am looking for, but I am also looking at their portfolios. If I like their work then I’ll choose them. Period. If I get what they claim to have, I’ll be happy. So I completely agree with the statement that its not the equipment that makes a great photograph, its the person behind it. It’s like the saying “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” The bride shouldn’t be disappointed with what she got because she knew what she was going to get. Granite, shooting a wedding with a rebel xti isn’t necessarily a great choice but like you said, they do take good pictures and can be blown up pretty big if shot in RAW. I had a lot of respect for Judge Joe Brown, but not when he completely dismisses a case because of his arrogance. It is a theme that runs through tv judges. They don’t think and review the full case before making a verdict and its very frustrating. Especially in this case, he clearly is stuck in his own views and screws out another defendant.
As a photographer with a law degree I can state that your rant is absolutely wrong on so many levels. Everything that the judge said was right on point with the law.
I do not have the time nor the interest to refute your rant point by point but I will point out a couple of things. Where the bride first met the photographer is totally irrelevant to whether the images were of a professional quality. Whether they met at a bridal show, drug store or ladies restroom has no probative value with regard to the question: are these images of a professional quality?
The law sets a standard for a person that holds themselves out as a professional. The law sets these standards based on hundreds of years of case law and experience and with the desired result to protect the public. If an electrician holds themselves out as a professional electrician and he in fact does not possess the requisite knowledge to wire a house, whole families may die if the house burns due to an electrical fire. With photography, there is not going to be personal injury or death but there can be emotional distress and damage. When it becomes obvious that the photographer cannot answer the simplest question regarding the lenses that she has chosen, she is not exhibiting the standard of what a true professional would and should know. The fact that you or other photographers know people that use cameras and take pretty pictures and have no knowledge of how their camera works or basic lens data does not even come close the refuting the judge and how he explained the standards found in the law that he must uphold.
I could go on with just about every point that you make but enough is said.
Sorry.
You are wrong.
When an artist submits a portfolio for a commission, the issue is whether the images match the portfolio submitted.
THAT is the law and case that was in front of the judge.
Your presumption that a “professional” photograph is somehow determined by a judge is simply not possible.
Would Matt Mahurin’s photographs shot on toy plastic cameras then not be professional?
Are you aware that the camera that she used makes a better digital file than an original 1DS?
Your assertion that the law sets a standard for a person that holds themselves out as a professional is simply incorrect. There is no statute that states what is or is not a professional photograph. You know that. Or you should.
The idea that the photographer was unable to answer questions based on the settings of their camera would hold no impact on the photographs in hand. Would a battlefield photographer in the midst of battle make notations on the aperture, or even what camera he/she was using? Would it matter to the final image.
Too many people are not understanding the basic problem here. It is not that the images were crap. It is not that the bride was unhappy. It was not what camera the photographer used. All of that is NOT a part of this kind of litigation. It is contractual law and it is the point of contention that the bride did or did not get what she was expecting.
What you are saying is that there is a code (electricians have building codes – and if they fail to meet those codes, or are sloppy within those codes, they can be held liable) is simply not true. That may be a problem for some people, but it is not in effect. Can you guide me to any set of code, standards, minimum gear expenditure, or simple base line of what is considered “good”? Or is it whatever someone says it is? Capricious? I mean, you bring up an industry that does INDEED have a codified set of parameters for working and then throw something that does NOT have a codified way of working (sorry Flickr)… what is that? Sorry, that won’t fly here.
Many photographers take good images on inexpensive cameras. Obviously this photographer didn’t. So what – if it is what she used to take the images in her portfolio, then the bride should have noticed that before entering into a contract with the photographer.
But all that aside… that is NOT what I was ranting about. I find it terribly disconcerting when people say they read my rant, and then seem to think that I am defending bad photography. So for the last time: I am not defending bad photography. I am pissed that someone was attacked for the WRONG shit.
1. If they had focused on the photographers work – pre wedding work – that would have shown that the work delivered was not substantially within the quality of the work that was delivered, I would not have a problem with it.
2. If the images that the photographer shown had been the images they were discussing, that would have at least been interesting. They were talking about images taken inside without flash and then the ‘judge’ goes off on daylight photographs taken outside. What was that about? I would have liked to see the poor images from the interior shots, wouldn’t you?
3. The nonsense of telling the photographer that in his experience there was no rule about not using flash at the ceremony was pure bullshit. Happens all the time… had nothing to do with the case.
4. The judge seemed more into discussing his many insights (mostly incredibly wrong, but whatever) than facing the case at hand.
5. The judge seemed to be more interested in what camera she used. OK, fair. And the fact that she couldn’t tell the speed of the lens – OK, that is not a good sign either… but that is knowledge that would make no difference to the work at hand. If the work looks bad, it is not because of the camera she used. Today’s Rebel is 5 years ago top of the line… so that is bullshit.
6. The point that you make about the judge making a ruling explaining the standards… what the heck are you referring to? He berated and humiliated her without letting her get a word in defense. He didn’t ask to see a portfolio, or discuss what was shown at the time of commission. He simply made a decision based on looking at enlargements that HE OBVIOUSLY DOESN’T GET ARE ENLARGED. Several times he refers to the 8x10s and states that they may not look good when they are enlarged. What?
Look, I know all you digital photographers are so convinced that photography started about 8 years ago, but there was a time when weddings were shot on F4 and F5.6 lenses on film speeds of ASA100 or ASA200 (now referred to as ISO). To make blanket statements is not conducive to the reality based business we work in.
Lastly… I am still shocked that so many think I am defending bad work. Good Lord. Publik Edukashun really needs a little more emphasis on reading for comprehension. I deplore bad photography. I deplore the lowering of the bar of excellence. Jeesus… did you notice there are a couple of other posts here?
So I reject your postulations. I don’t think you get it. I doubt you work in IP law…
“regard to the question: are these images of a professional quality?” wasn’t within the contract that was made, nor would it be something that could be quantified WITHOUT the discussion of what was promised. What the case involved was whether the delivered product matched what was promised base on materials produced to get the commission.
I do have some experience in that area of the law.
Don
Another great thought provoking article. I haven’t watched the video and have no intention of. However I find the comments raised about professionals need professional equipment interesting. What constitutes professional equipment. There are truckloads of amateur photographers wandering around with the latest gear and couldn’t take a photo to save themselves (have worked in a camera shop so know this first hand). Photography seems to be the only art that is concerned with equipment rathe than result. Imagine commenting to Da Vinci that his paint brush wasn’t professional. Equipment isn’t what makes a professional, behaviour is. How we behave with our clients is far more important than the gear used. The bride and groom don’t care what you use what they want you do to is photograph their wedding in a way that makes them feel special. You do that through being prepared and how you interact with the people.
It is about how we perform and performance is “the fulfillment of a claim, promise or request”. What did we claim we could do, promise we were going to deliver or what was asked of us to do? If we met these expectations then we have performed. Gear isn’t the issue here. It is about what we produced and how we behaved as we produced it. Quality is a negotiated issue.
“Quality is a negotiated issue.”
I quoted you on Twitter. So very true.
Microstock, bad shooters, weddings for a grand or lower, table top shots for $20 – it is the quality we receive and its relationship to what is promised. If I promise you crap and deliver crap… we good!
Very sad and all for television ratings. I have always had a disdain for these shows and now this episode validates my feelings to and even greater degree.
A judge is not supposed to use his “experience” to judge a case but listen to the evidence presented and rule based on the evidence presented. When he claims it is the camera that makes the shots I about came out of my chair. I have seen great photographers take unbelievable shots with cheap cameras as well as terrible shots with high end cameras. It is experience and knowledge not the camera that makes great work.
The fact that this guy never really let this photographer speaks makes me sick. It was obvious that he passed judgment before ever listening. While I am not a legal expert I have years of experience in sales and management and know that in order to properly judge a situation you must “LISTEN” before attacking and judging.
This was all for show and gave credibility to bridezillas!! Very sad indeed!!
Not that this is relevant to the case mentioned but this has been stated so many times that I think it is fair to comment.
There is some merit to the concept that it isn’t the photo gear but the person behind it. However, for some areas of photography, there is a minimum amount of gear needed.
I am a sports shooter. Look at any add for a sports shooter and it will state the minimum gear needed. There are postings all the time for second shooters needed and then a listing of minimal gear needed.
You cannot claim to be prepared to shoot a low light indoor wedding with the gear she had (being told “no flash” at the time of is no excuse). If I hire you to shoot my wedding, I am assuming that you are claiming to be a pro who can handle things like available light ceremonies, etc. A lens with a slow aperture won’t cut it if there is movement, period. While the Xti is a fine body, it cannot handle high ISO like a D3 or mark IV or 5D2 can. Sure fast glass will help but not as much as fast glass and a pro body.
Again this is meaningless if in fact the photog showed images to the client of a similar quality that she was given..but we don’t know that from the quick clip of the show.
Unfortunately this attitude seems to be pretty rampant amongst photographers. Rather than focusing on what makes their work unique or interesting, they use whatever means they can to try and deteriorate the view of other photographers.
I don’t completely get it. I shoot a lot of subject material (live music) where other photographers are there, and no doubt I feel good if I come out with the best shots of the night, but it seems strange that people attack eachother personally and become really vindictive about it. What’s the point anyway?
It seems some people have learned that if you destroy someone else, it will increase your own self worth.
Unfortunately, they are wrong in that belief. It only makes them be smaller.
Maybe the judge was a little harsh but put yourself in the shoes of that bride. I feel more sorry for her. These are images lost. You know that you and most of us would have handled this assignment differently. Forget about the Judge for a second. You would have checked the lighting conditions prior to the wedding day. If nessesary you would have rented the right equipment for the job. You would not have had your proofs processed at Walmart!
My town is full of guys with digital cameras getting paid to do weddings on the side. I have met them at parties and events and befriended some. My experience with them is that they have had no training. They purchased the camera took a few photos of friends that came out nice and because of that they decided that it is an easy way to make some extra cash. I don’t have a problem with them. But I would not hire them either and neither would you. A lot of great photographers start out this way. They get the bug and start experimenting, reading and learning about this craft. It doesn’t take long for them to realize that they need a little more practice before allowing a client to risk her wedding memories. At least the honest ones do. I have met some though that have no knowlegde and even when offered help don’t want to bother with the details. I had one lady say to me, “shoot, I’m already making money, seems to me I must be good enough.” I shrugged my shoulders and said maybe she’s right. Not for me to judge. Point is that is not the way a professional does business. Your client trust that you have the knowledge and the expertise to get the job done right. Just my two cents
Since when is it the judges job to be an expert photographer, wich he obviously isn’t since he is not aware that many of the rebel cameras are now way better then the early aces as far as resolution, sharpness and large prints are concerned. I agree that it is the photographer but not the camera, but arguably I had a 400D / XTi before upgrading to a 5D and ISO above 400 is crap in the XTi. BUT the photographs that were in fact shown in that TV show are not low light photograps, these are photograps taken outside, and photographs taken with flash after the ceremony.
This is ridiculous TV and is this even a real judge but not some lame as moron ? It is the judges job to rule in the case and hear arguments from both sides but not to act as a prosecutor and lecture over this person.
I would have to say that if this photographer doesn’t sue this TV show she is an idiot, this so called judge is not acting like a proper judge and is ridiculing the high court with this nonsense.
I completely agree with the original point, but watching part of the episode (I could only take about a minute so I skipped to 3:15 and started there) I also have to wonder if there was some expert pre-trial help to help him get his terms right. Maybe the TV “judge” happens to also be an amateur photographer, but I rather doubt it. I think it much more likely that somebody employed by the show fed him his terms, names, and numbers. I can’t help but think that he is clearly a hack of a judge, but he was a heck of a performer. Here’s a judge who should be expected to know the law and he’s laying the smack down about her equipment and choices in lighting. Great TV. The writers for Law and Order couldn’t do much better.
Now if only the defendant could haul him into a real court room because he didn’t get his degree from a top 20 school and his gavel is crap, so he’s not qualified to really judge.
“The writers for Law and Order couldn’t do much better.”
Well… there is that… heh.
What did the dumb hooker expect for $1300? $900 worth of prints shot with $20,000 worth of camera gear?! The only person more moronic than David Jay & “judge” Joe Brown is the photographer for not having a contract with the client and for even agreeing to “judge” Joe Brown’s arbitration.
Well, I don’t think it is worthwhile to disparage the woman as a hooker. We need to elevate the dialog.
“Maybe the judge was a little harsh but put yourself in the shoes of that bride. I feel more sorry for her. These are images lost.”
It is a couple’s responsibility to hire the wedding photographer who’s work they like, and that they can afford.
If she delivered the kind of images she showed them originally, then she did her job. Infact one could argue that if she were to do something completely different (and less bad) she was not shooting to her brief.
She may not be brilliant, but if she delivered the work she promised that is all that should matter under the eyes of the law.
My points has only to do with the law, nothing else. Everything else is purely subjective.
Everything that you said “is the law” is totally incorrect. It amazes me how many “jailhouse lawyers” want to quote “the law”. The one thing law students learn after three hard years of training and study is that they do NOT know what the law is. So how can folks that maybe have a high school diploma or even a BA degree know “the law”?
When a case is appealed to a higher court, the court does not RE-consider the facts; the case not litigated a second time. The only issue is whether there was a mistake in what law was used and/or a mistake in how a law was applied. If this case were appealed, the judge’s decision would be upheld.
Sorry,
Wrong again.
Not a “jailhouse lawyer”.
Never discussed appeals.
You can say whatever you want, counselor.
But, in the end… you made assertions that simply are not true.
(The arrogance and elitism simply is astounding. Have a nice day.)
I recently read an article that was entitled, “Facts No Longer Matter”. The point was that too many people today feel that their opinion is all that matters regardless of facts. If it is their “opinion” that “the world is flat”, no one should point out that they are wrong and that they have no obligation to ferret out the truth in their opinion (i.e., there is another book that comes to mind: “The Dumbing Down of America”).
You have said over and over that “that is the law”. You have said over and over that I am wrong. Where did you get your law degree?
You said, “never discussed appeals” but you did say that the judge misapplied the law. You are asserting that, whether you knew it or not, that on appeal the judge would be reversed. The fact that you did not use the actual word “appeal” doesn’t matter. And in that respect, you are wrong.
You said, “Your assertion that the law sets a standard for a person that holds themselves out as a professional is simply incorrect. There is no statute that states what is or is not a professional photograph. You know that. Or you should.” If you had studied law, you would know that “common law” or “case law” controls most of these issues NOT statutes. And yes, there are standards that have been set by cases that appear in court. Then later attorneys look to the case law on the issue to judge a particular case at hand.
One last point that you apparently are not aware of: lots of paper has been exchanged between the parties and the judge. These documents are not displayed in the TV “sound bite” type of show but the Judge had a lot more info than you might think that he had. In the pleadings there are always the plaintiffs complaint and the defendants answer and maybe counterclaim and other motions. Much of the criticism about this case is really operating in the blind for a lack of very relevant information.
A typical ploy by the uneducated is to make statements like: “But, in the end… you made assertions that simply are not true. (The arrogance and elitism simply is astounding. Have a nice day.)” Another way of saying, “I have my opinion and I don’t care to check whether my opinion is correct” (i.e., Facts no longer matter).
We now live in a world when a person educated in a certain intellectual discipline that makes a statement of fact that happens to be in opposition of someone’s opinion, the educated person is called “arrogant” and “elitist”. It is now “politically incorrect” to point out the fallacy of a person’s argument.
No, the arrogance is in your making assumptions about me personally.
“Jailhouse Lawyer” – do you even know what that means?
I have never been in jail. Ever.
Did you mean ‘armchair lawyer’?
Whatever.
I have plenty of legal knowledge.
You are the one who decided that your legal education trumped mine and my friends who are also attorneys.
In fact, they are IP attorneys.
In fact, they have litigated these kinds of cases.
You ASSUMED that I had not checked out the precedents.
You ASSUMED that I had never been intimately involved in just such a case.
You ASSUMED that your thought process was superior because I am stupid.
Assumptions are not a good thing overall.
And yeah, it was just a TV show.
Once again, thank you for commenting.
I appreciate it.
I fully agree with you. The fact is she could have bought more “pro” equipment. Hell she could even have shot medium format but then the client would have paid a hell of a lott more. The judge was right, the client doens know f-stop from ISO BUT they dont care about that in any case. All they care about is paying the minimum for maximum quality. In what capatalist country is that the way it works?
The fact is as you say. Did the end product match the quality in her portfolio and was what was delivered, accroding to the brief of the client. NOT what the speed of her lens was.
As far is the Fuji paper. In South Africa Fuji Crystal is not only professional, it is good enough for art galleries. Why the hell is it not good enough for a wedding album?
I’m so glad you pointed out that the bottom line is what the client was shown and agreed to per her budget. It has nothing to do with gear, meeting place or where the photos were printed. All too often some photographers seem to take much enjoyment in tossing another photographer under the bus. Whatever happened to the support photographers used to have for one another? Personally I feel that if you have to bad mouth another photographer because you’re not getting the work, then you should re-examine your work and position in this business and not worry about the next person. Hmph I wonder if painters and artists spend as much time bashing each other as some in the photography world?
I have watched this twice now. I don’t see any part where we are shown the photographers portfolio that the bride was shown? The bride said that the images she received were not the same quality as what they saw in the portfolio. All the images shown were of the brides wedding.
This is a TV show first, supposedly a courtroom second. It is supposed to be sensational and entertaining.
Would a defendant be able to interupt the plaintiff or the judge in a real courtroom? Would they be able to speak to the judge with that level of contempt? I doubt it.
It’s a TV show. Both parties were paid to be on it and normally the judgments are paid by the producers, so the loser is not out anything. It could have gone totally different if the bride was rude and the photographer was calm.
You can get on your high horses about how awful the photographer was treated, or how awful the photographer was. You’re just on different sides of the fence doing the same thing.
Susan: Your basic argument is that there is a
1) a legal standard for professional conduct as a photographer laid out it case law
and
2) that “judge” Joe Brown, in questioning the equipment choices of this photographer, was correctly applying that standard.
Your comparison is to an electrician but, as I’m sure you know, there is a statutory licensing requirement for electrical work. I searched my state records for the state licensing board for wedding photographers, but I can’t seem to find it.
I would very much appreciate an explanation of exactly what equipment you are required to use in order to be a professional photographer. In particular, “Judge” Brown insinuates that you must have a 1 series camera to be a professional photographer, which puts a large number of my friends at legal risk.
I’m also very worried about noted wedding photographer, blogger, and author David Ziser who goes so far as to post a lengthy discussion about the merits of the 7D, 5DMKII, and 40D for uses at weddings. Should someone contact him about seeing a lawyer to mitigate damages from the potentially huge derivative liability risk he finds himself in?
I’m with you. I found the link on Rich Legg’s blog and set to watch it cause’ it might be good for my FB or Blog. Didn’t take long to realize “No Way”. It was painful to listen to the Judge entertain himself with what he thinks he knows and dismiss the pertinent facts. What I got out of it is all photographers are now more vulnerable to anyone who watched that circus. Shame on Rich Legg for being blind himself.
I can’t imagine why they would agree to take their case to a TV judge. My wife is a fan of Judge Judy (whose voice is comparable to that of fingernails on a blackboard). The purpose of these court shows is entertainment, ratings and advertisers dollars. Besides that I am sure the cases and candidates are picked for their intelligence or lack there-of to make it even more interesting when the judge berates them and questions their educational achievements. These shows are one small step above Maury and Springer. What does that say about the viewing public who watch them enough for them to remain on the air?
So if one were to use a E1 or a Nikon D1 with lets say a 50mm lens, you cannot take good images. What about post work. Give that Rebel to David Ziser I bet you 1000% he would smoke that shoot and provide awesome work.
The camera doest make you a Professional. A professional is someone who makes money doing something. I did not make the rules, society did. I say the judge knew a little about photography and tried to toot his own horn, and empress the crowd. Did you hear him throw out all those brands, Pelican case, Gold series, Series 1, lol. A canon guy yeah right, Not even a mention of a 5d? Did he mix brands, I thought I heard him throw out a Nikon lens Like a 17mm, Hmm doesn’t matter. He was tryng to show off and make the photographers look bad, IMO he was acting like somewhat of a Bully know it all.
He started throwing out terms Like fast glass, Well fast glass is great but it will also makes Noise. I know people who prefer f4 to f2 because the noise is less. Yes you have to use a tripod and they have to stay still, however ambient light can be used with so called slow glass and take wonderful images. In the right hands!
Next is Post work. Noise can me dealt with in Photoshop with Ease. I people who can enlarge a 2 meg image to be huge. There is all kinds of way to enlarge. I know of a shop that up convert Images to large format and put up building wraps. There is software that makes it all but simple, for a price.
As to the Walmart processing. Unless you are doing exotic finishes, and at $1300 I dont think they are paying for that, you get what you pay for. Mpix will eat up $1300 like a fat kid eating a cake! I think the Judge was an Ahole!
If the photographer would of just known a little more about her gear, as well as used Walmart as proofing, (agree with the Judge from the start) things would of been way different. What would he of said If they were using a Nikon Dx1. Would they be a pro then. Those can be had with a lens of Ebay for 3-500.
If you are asked to do a wedding and have an e510, rent some good glass and go shoot it. Make a clause that they only pay for the images they like, If they like none then Pay none. I am sure if you rent a 35-100, I would do it with a e300. Why, because I am a Bad MOFO in Photoshop and Light Room.
Pros try to get all the work done in the Camera, People Like me who aren’t photographers, get it done in software.
I would Love to show up at a wedding with my Sony dsc-t2. Not only will I give them Stills, I would throw down some HD video. Take it to PS and After effects. Use C4D for some BA motion graphics, those people would be telling the world how awesome the photographer is. Am I a pro. Heck YES. I will take any JOB. The difference with me is, I wont stop working until I blow the customer away, even if I have to work close to death. I love the challenge!
I would love to see some of Joe Browns work, I bet he shoots on Auto!
Joe was not using purely the equipment against them. He looked the situation (a church that supposedly does not allow flash photography at all), applied it to the equipment they have, and understood that their equipment is clearly lacking. I don’t care how good of a photographer you are – try getting “professional” quality shots in a dark church with an 18-55 kit lens or 70-300 (aka as useful as a paperweight). In any other situation where there is a fair amount of light, then maybe, and with the right skill, you could get some decent shots.
I agree that a photographer should not be judged on his equipment alone. And I agree that, “it’s the photographer, not the camera,” to some extent. BUT! Gear certainly, without question, does have its limitations! An 18-55 kit in a low light room? Good luck getting “pro” quality shots at ISO 3200 on an XTi! A photographer that regards himself as a professional is expected to have better equipment. Not necessarily all top of the line ‘ish, but certainly not a kit lens and 70-300.
JacobThePhotographer is one example of a professional that doesn’t have all the best equipment. He shoots with a Rebel XTi, I believe. But he uses a 70-200 2.8L IS along with some, until recently, cheap hot shoe flashes and eBay triggers. JTP, as a “professional” photographer, may not have the best equipment (70-200 aside), but he understands and has the tools he needs to get the shot.
These photographers should have spoken with someone at the church in advance to see their rules and regulations regarding photography. At that point the should have understood that their equipment would not suffice and either A) buy the necessary equipment or B) decline the project and tell the client to find a more capable photographer (I do this a lot when I know I can’t handle/tackle a project – it’s the right thing to do)
AT 4:00 he asks how she is going to be able to take “adequate photos with a lens this slow� And before she can answer, he cuts her off. Hey Joe, maybe with a tripod, or upping the ISO
As I said before, good luck getting “pro” quality shots at ISO 3200. A tripod will certainly help for slower shutters, but then the subjects (people) will introduce motion that will be caught by the slow shutter.
Quote:
At 5:04 it starts with the grilling… what F-Stop, what aperture, did you ‘note’ the f-stop. How many of you ‘NOTE’ the f-stops.
I don’t expect the photogs to know exactly what f/stop, especially with varying aperture lenses. But they should have at least known the general area. For example, they should have said wide or something to that regard. If they know anything, they’d understand they wouldn’t be shooting a small aperture in a low light situation. While Joe does cut them off a lot, he did give them a chance to answer here.
There is no question that Joe coulda handled things better. But hey people, it’s FVCKING TV! He’s supposed to be like that…it’s called entertainment!
Thanks for the brilliant, if delusional comments.
There is so much wrong with your statement that I have no interest in speaking with you about it.
Love how gutless you are to not leave your name… guess we all know why that is.
I thought they got what they deserved. Those photographers were pathetic, argued with the judge, were combative against their customer and they took LOUSY photos. Just desserts is what they deserved and what they received.
OH LOOK.
Another punkass wannabee who cannot even have the guts to leave their name. I fuckin hate trolls. Stupid trolls are even more loathesom.
go back to your flickr group, creep.
I totally agree, the judge is “Uncle Bob” on steroids and a total A-Hole, it has nothing to do with the equipment (unless it’s really substandard i.e. point and shoot) one of the things I noted were the comments about not being able to use a flash in the church yet there are no example images shown!
As for the shots being out of focus, they look fine from what I can see on the poor quality video.
I don’t look kindly on the fact that she did not know her lenses, knowing your gear and exactly how to use it is an absolute must!
As everyone has said did the portfolio match the product if so there should be no case but clearly Joe is an absolute moron more intent on trying to impress with his technical jargon than actually doing what he is supposedly appointed to do… being fair and just!
Shit I’d love to meet this guy at a convention and then tell him how to “judge” actually I and many others probably would be better at it than him 😛
With that style there is no way I would be one of her clients but that’s not the point… there are many people who still love that kind of thing.
Greg.
I posted this at David Ziser site-
David is a master of self promotion. This kind of post shows that. If this wasn’t a hot button subject, David would have found something else that is equally thought provoking. I find it funny that a few of the folks have decided to tell us what David was thinking-wonder if they know what I am thinking right NOWW!!!????
Now my opinion- The quality of the camera is important, but ultimately it is a tool. Place the tool in the hands of a skilled craftsman or a talented apprentice and the results will be good to great. Could Michelangelo created his works with crayons? No, but I’ll bet they would be some damn fine refrigerator drawings. Put a Kodak instamatic in the hands of David Ziser, Joe McNally, David Hobby, Scott Kelby or any other talented photographer and you will get the results. They would have worked angles, lights, motion and a 1000 other variables into the equation and give the bride nice pictures. Now, switch it around- give a NiCanon 1dMK9 with a 200 mp sensor and a rack of speedlights and radio poppers to a person with very limited skills and knowledge and your are going to get some really great, sharp, SNAPSHOTS. It is up to the craftsman/artist/photographer to know how to use the tools that they have. This issue has been beaten for a long time. What everyone seems to want to be is “the†photographer that books the best and biggest most expensive wedding where the bride will want to buy all 500 shots custom framed at 16×20. And there are folks that cater to those folks. But what about the couple struggling to put the wedding together with a very limited budget. This may be wedding number 5 and all they want is the vows and the reception shot. Are these folks to be told “no†because they are not looking for a 5 figure layout? The â€amateurs†that are being tossed under the bus do serve a market segment. These folks deserve good work, whether it is with a medium format , a Nikon, Pentax or Canon. Did the bride deserve good work? YES! Could the photographer done a better job with different equipment? Who knows. Maybe if she was shooting fast glass in machine gun mode she could have gotten a few good one. It was the photogra[hers fault for not being educated
I would venture a guess that at some point all of you have showed your work and the person viewing says “ wow those are good! Your camera takes amazing picturesâ€
Yes, it’s the camera……
Sound that the photog is guilty of lack of prep for what she was charging for
Haskell: I disagree with David’s post, but I’ll note I didn’t claim he would agree with Don, I just claimed that he’s open to a huge lawsuit because he has recommended people use non 1-series bodies and non-professional glass which this video, coupled with the supposed case-law requirements on calling yourself a professional photographer, clearly shows to be illegal. I’ll note this necessarily implies that people who can’t afford to hire a photographer who uses 1-series bodies, pro series glass, and a pelican brand case to hold it should not get pictures of their weddings at all (since it would be illegal to take pictures with lesser equipment for cheaper).
I should also note that I’m not saying the defendant should be doing business as a photographer. Her attitude, knowledge, and work are all terrible and I wouldn’t recommend anyone use her. I am saying she should be _allowed_ to do work as a photographer so long as her portfolio is representative of her work (which it may well not be, “Judge” Brown astoundingly (if you think he’s acting as a judge, not so surprising if you think he’s acting as TV personality) never asked to see the work the contract was based on). If you like her work and think it’s worth $1300 then you’re crazy, but that shouldn’t be illegal.
“…then you’re crazy, but that shouldn’t be illegal.”
Exactly. Stupid is not illegal, it is simply stupid.
Illegal means there is a set of codes that one is judged against.
We as photographers certainly don’t want that… can you imagine?
And ‘stupid’ is not illegal at all, in fact, it seems to be a pre-requisite to holding public office these days… Heh.
😉
Christoper- I think we are in agreement. I rambled a bit there. I just think the hipocrisy of some of the “guru’s” who will teach you and I just how to get those perfect shots, sell me books, dvd’s, shake my hand at the seminars that they are charging $59 per person and asking for unpaid volunteers to help set it up because, well I am a pro and you should worship me, and then bitch because I then go out with my “non professional” camera and book a wedding based upon what they taught me, do it at a dollar amount that I beleive is a fair value for my time and skill set but less than they would charge and deliver a finished product that the bride likes. I Some of these guys are making a damn fine living at show and tell, then turn around and say that because the photographer didn’t spend $$$$ on his camera, they are not professional. I normally have a very sunny disposition,really! Hell, this is the first time I have been involved in an online discusssion – I am just getting a bit tired of the class warfare between the pros and the rest of of us.
Good article on that here-
http://www.pixelatedimage.com/blog/2010/03/not-much-of-a-pro-really/
Thanks for pointing out the broader implications. It’s crazy to think that somebody who makes big-time dough educating “amatuers” and aspiring pros is willing to chuck the same people under the bus, especially when those folks espouse such an enlightened and spiritual approach to their work and endearing and compassionate relationships with their clients. That doesn’t match up.
For me, who’s shot a few weddings for low dollar amounts (for family and friends), I’m more interested to support local established pros as a 2nd shooter, develop my skills and workflow and business structure (contracts, web presence, portfolio) and enter the market above the low-end rates and most problematic clients. And I understand that folks doing average work for bargain-shopping customers creates a general cheapening of part of the industry, I’m not so convinced it has any affect on the people who can identify and pay for quality. And if that’s the case, it shouldn’t affect the people who are working to serve that market.
“And I understand that folks doing average work for bargain-shopping customers creates a general cheapening of part of the industry, I’m not so convinced it has any affect on the people who can identify and pay for quality.”
I am not sure that average folks looking for something to be ‘good enough’ is cheapening the industry. I think the industry has plenty of people within who are doing a smashing job of cheapening the industry. Confusing being competitive with being stupidly cheap, or thinking that the gear is the defining thing. Way too many people with free websites, a logo from an online place and the term “photographer” after their name as ‘proof’ that they are indeed one.
I want to make sure that I also add to this by noting: There are a lot of people in the country for whom a $1500 wedding shoot is simply not possible. I would hate to think that we are inadvertently saying to them… ‘too bad, so sad – you are not worth getting good pictures.’ That is NOT the point of this discussion – at least not from my end.
I hope that they find a wonderful photographer – in their price range – and can give them good photographs for their day. But, that also comes with the caveat that, no, they cannot get top-of-the-line imagefy for $500. They will get what they get. I just would hope that they are happy with their photographs and that the images work well for them.
Wishing ill for those who are not fortunate enough to have $5K to spend on photographs is not something I am comfortable with.
“…it shouldn’t affect the people who are working to serve that market.”
And it doesn’t really. But it sure pisses off those wannabee’s, trolls, and forum ‘gurus’ who spent a ton for a 1DSMKIII and are somehow thinking they be pros… yeah, them folks it pisses off pretty bad.
In this case, the photographer needed to be defended from the judge even more than from the plaintiff.
That ain’t how it is supposed to done.
LOL… Brett. So true so true.
You get what you pay for. The judge was an ass. Brides pay less if the photographer is using less expensive equipment. Any professional photographer come up the ladder knows that even David Jay, that’s why I’m confussed by his snug remark. No professional photographer started out with the best equipment, who would be a big enough idiot to make a LARGE investment then run the chance of finding out that maybe you’re not cut out for the business. I have to say that by the samples that were displayed, they were not that impressive but if the girl saw the photographers portfolio and it was similar to the images that she received then it’s only expected. I agree the poor photographer couldn’t get a word in edge wise and if Jude Joe Brown was such a “professional photographer” what the hell is he doing a cheesy 3rd rate mid day program? He doesn’t know how fas the zoom lens was because he never allowed the poor woman to answer. I feel for her and agree that the ruling isn’t just…but I guess that’s what you get for allowing your case to be heard by a HOLLLYWOOD actor… HELLO…. I would have never agreed to THAT!! The bride is an idiot, all the brides I’ve photographed are well educated in photography and the most important questions to ask pertaining to the equipment. IF the bride was too stupid to do some research on her own first then she got what she deserved in the final product. Idiots, they’re all idiots! Honestly, “I don’t know” doesn’t constitute a sure answer, the photographer should have the basic knowledge of the equipment that she’s using. The wider the fstop the faster the lens…had she been quick enough on her feet she could have just told the judge it’s a 2.8 with image stabilizer, he probably wouldn’t have known the damn difference anyway and would have only made himself look like more of a donkey.
Disgusting – I’m 1000% In agreement with you wiz. Made me feel sick.
The media nowadays just panders to these public hangings. Disgusting.
As a press/editorial photographer I get “lumped in” with the media as it is perceived. Add this to the public perception of us as “steelers of privacy” , or in the UK “photographers are possible terrorists” (Im sure you have seen the debate) and the profession’s image is just tumbling down hill fast….
You know how it is “everyones a professional” – although I am surprised that a tv judge needed to make his wages up as a “weekend warrior”
As another tog said once “I would rather dig graves or fillet mackerel rather than do weddings…”
I commented before in that this is typical Hollywood drama and hype. I never liked this kind of drama and I dislike it more now.
What I find mostly disheartening are some of the nasty comments. It does not say much for today’s society. It is as if people feel that trashing others is a sport. Very sad indeed.
You are absolutely right. Personally I don’t think that anyone who buys a DSLR should automatically assume they are a Pro wedding photographer, likewise anyone passing their driving test is not automatically a racing driver.
However, I have also seen many pro photographers whose wedding work is rubbish and many new people whose shots are amazing (Dustin Diaz – one of the greatest strobist photographers on Flickr has only just started his own photography business). Therefore you sometimes need to rely on something else, a portfolio is always a good place to start. The fact that the bride saw previous work and what she got wasn’t that different to what she saw is the crux of this debate. To me there is no argument, you are right, the bride knew what she was getting and that’s what she got.
No matter what any other photographers think, this woman delivered what she said she would, nothing more, nothing less. There’s no crime there. All I can say to them is, have you ever bought something from Asda or Wall-Mart? Cheap wasn’t it? You had a choice to buy a more expensive item but you didn’t and you got what you paid for.
I have been an amateur photographer for about 20 years, and I will tell you that there is always a degree of insecurity wirh respect to my work. Does it convey what I was seeing in my mind\’s eye and experiencing emotionally? Am I being honest? Where is it weak, and how can I improve are always questions I am asking myself. Now I am not looking for praise if the work is not worthy, and I am not looking for excoriation if the image fails. What I want is good and honest criticism.
To be a professional, even at the low-end of the spectrum, does not mean being practice target for the malicious. Criticize as you would want to be criticized, and leave all the projection at the door. It is fine if a piece does not work, and it is fine to say that and to say where you felt it missed, (artistically and technically.) What is inexcusable is to cravenly attack a vulnerable person.
Cowards cannot be artists, and artists are willing to be vulnerable to advance their art and craft.
I am not a pro photographer.I am a doc.I love to take photos…I have the sense.I can feel the pain.
Look- some people think that they can buy everything by money.
Its their fault.Thats it.
The problem with photographer or painter versus a lawyer or doctor is that; the first two groups of professionals are in creative works,which cant be bought by money….
I never knew people hackle the photographers upto the court…how rubbish they can be?
Why you the photographers take assignments for marraige ?? Avoid them–yes avoid them.These BS should take their snaps their selves if they know all the things about photography….
What they think of ? They are playing in God Mode???
Don, I understand where you are coming from here. But since we did not see the sample images that were shown to the wedding client, we have no idea if the work that was delivered matched the work shown to the client. All we know about the sample images is that the wedding client said that she was very happy with what she saw. Given this fact, it would appear (based on the limited information that we have) that the shoddy work that was delivered DID NOT match the work that was originally shown to the client.
In addition, you completely ignored the nasty attitude that the photographer had towards the judge and the wedding client(s)! Granted, the photographer will likely not be in the best of moods, since she is the one being sued. But that should not excuse her belligerent behavior. If she was confident in her case, she should have been able to explain it to the judge in a clear, concise and calm manner, regardless of how foolishly the judge acted. The fact that she felt the need to resort to nasty comments speaks volumes.
Not to mention the fact that the photographer agreed to appear on national television! If she didn’t want the exposure, she should not have agreed to be on the show.
Actually, the photographer has (or at least had) a website. It was plain to see the quality of work that the photographer was showing. I checked that out BEFORE I wrote the article. It was one of the catalysts to the article.
I note in the article that her website shows the work she is capable of.
Believe me, it was worth about what the woman paid… and she included proofs, enlargements AND an album.
Add to that the fact that ‘judge’ was referring to enlargements as proofs, had no idea that the printers at WalMart are the same brand and units that are at most printers (Fuji or Mitsubishi) and ARE indeed photographic images, and his total misunderstanding of the process, I would submit that this was very very frustrating for the photographer.
And legal challenges are what the ‘judge’ is supposed to rule on… not whether or not a defendant is ‘rude’ or abrupt. We don’t set legal actions based on emotions.
As to the agreement to be on TV – agreed. Dumb beyond dumb.
Like the judge and the people in the audience and the people who watch that God forsaken trash.
That was a circus, not a court of law
I have no idea who was in the right,
because there were no facts on which to form an opinion.
Joe Soap is a self opinionated, overbearing and bullying disgrace to the legal system,
and if he is still ‘administering justice’ with that film in circulation showing clearly the kind of man he is, then it is also a stain on your society.
I first read about this case on a foto forum. What a joke a the whole show really is. I could not believe how many photographers really think photography is all about the gear. I guess some need some way to justify their new D3s. I don’t know about others but I could not pull out a print and know what apeture I used. I doubt that many remember what they used for every shot. I could tell from the print if I near to wide open or if a I was stopped well down. One issue is the message this show sends to the public and the fact they have now been rather misinformed regarding what gear is required to make decent wedding photos. What matters is the talent of the photographer and that they have backup gear that will enable them to finish the job without compromising the photos.
seems the ‘judge’ was more interested in telling us about his experience than the case itself.
i felt bad for the photographers.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh!
I just realised, this was not a court of law,
he is not in fact a judge at all, it is just a TV show!
I’m in the UK and so far, we don’t have such shows,
I do hope it stays that way!
Interesting insight. I saw this show and too felt the lady was not given the opportunity to state here case. I agree with you 100% that some photographers and people in general try to elevate there value at another individual’s expense without considering the affects on one’s life. Recent experience. I inquired about sports photography on one of the popular internet photography site. Almost immediately, there were a few, supposedly professional sport photographers, that jump in and stated that my question was “stupid†and that I threatened their lively hood as a sports photographer. Yet when I asked for their guidance and help the bashing began but I knew that it was insecurity on their part. They fear competition. How can affect their jobs…I am in a separate State or across the pond from them. I asked them how am I, a rookie, amateur – these are their words, even though they have no clue about my experience, threaten their jobs, again name calling and bashing by the same group of Fan Boys. From their reaction I knew the reason why they believe I was a threat…insecurities. I just feed off of this kind of negativity and prosper from it. Funny thing is their sports photos were not all that impressive to me.
My heart is to always be improving and learning! Would love feedback from photographer friends out there on my work and will always return comments. : )
http://www.eternalgracephotography.com/blog
I understand why some may find indignation at how this was handled in court but I feel no pity for this lady. It gets really old seeing people with no love, appreciation, knowledge or willingness to learn a trade jump into the fray and screw things up. If you think that this low level person with a camera isn’t screwing up the economy of wedding photography then you need to really stop and analyze the situation a bit better rather than getting emotional about it. She has taken a job from someone who would have known what they are doing. She took a job from someone who could have given the bride and groom the proper education on how much real photography cost for this subject matter. I hope this serves as a lesson to all people with little to no knowledge of how to actually use their camera.
Go out, learn how to meter (both for ambient *zone system* and artificial), learn composition, learn off camera lighting, study other photographers, study perspective etc. etc. Learn color theory as well. THEN go out and practice, practice, practice then go learn the business. There is more than enough information in libraries (remember those) and online. If this person or anyone else really wanted to learn the information is out there and abundant. These talentless, get money quick types do this to every industry they lay their filthy hands on. They did it to IT (remember MCSE craze anyone). They did it to real estate, and the list goes on and on. Stop excusing these locust, this women put herself out there as a professional and she wasn’t and now she had to pay the price, it happens.
I should add, that this is no excuse for gear snobbery to an extent. She could have gotten away with using a rebel but she should have used faster lenses for sure. I have seen fashion and portrait shoots done with rebels and L series glass and you would be hard pressed to tell what the image was taken with. With that said you do need certain things to get the job done and good glass is definitely one of them.
I think you got some good points in your post, I see photography as an hobby and not as a “work place” I found your tips very helpful.
Thank you.
As a pastor of 27 years and a serious amateur photographer of almost 40 years, I find many of the comments on here amusing.
In 27 years of ministry NOT ONCE has a professional photographer contacted me in advance about my photography policy. Due to a jerk (putting it mildly) who barged through the wedding party, pushing me out of the way, to get photos from behind the altar, including inserting himself into the service to get the photo of the ring exchange, I allow the photographer to take flash photographs of the entry and exit of the parties involved. The photographer is then banished to the choir loft where (s)he can take existing light photographs. I will stay as long as necessary after the worship service for the photographer to take the “do overs” (exchange of rings, declaration of marriage, etc.). The bride and groom know of these policies (and their reason) during their first visit with me as we examine the church’s WRITTEN wedding policy.
Also, in 27 years, never has a professional photographer attended the wedding rehearsal, nor come to the church in advance to “scope out the venue.” I have not watched the video, I do not watch “Judge Joe Brown,” but I have read the comments this post. So, if the woman’s failure to check out the church and flash policies prior to the wedding constitute unprofessional behavior, then every professional photographer who has ever come to my church is “unprofessional.” And, I am willing to bet, that the vast majority of professionals who have taken her to task for failing to do this, fail to do it themselves. I hope there are exceptions to the rule–I haven’t met any of them yet.
And yes, I have photographed two weddings as a favor to family members. And, no, I didn’t check out the churches’ flash policies prior to the wedding day. The wedding service is a religious/worship service and I knew in advance that I WOULD NOT take flash photographs during the service. Following my own policies, I did take flash photographs of the wedding parties entering and leaving the service and I used flash afterward in restaging the important parts of the service. I copied the photos to a cd and they chose which ones to take to Wal-Mart and have blown up.
Well, my rant is over. But if you are going to claim this woman was not professional because she did not know the flash policy and failed to visit the church prior to the service, then there are a ton of unprofessional professionals out there and don’t judge her as unprofessional if you fail to live up to the VERY same standards by which you judge her.
HERE ENDETH THE RANT (finally).
Knowing that these “court” shows are basically “reality shows” and that both parties agree to be on the show I don’t feel that this lady.
Regarding Joe, IMO he’s off base, it’s not the camera not the photographer although this photographer isn’t the best, that is not the point.
If photographers are going to use this for “marketing” to scare people into picking not a cheap photographer, I’d suggest they get their talking points straight and talk about other issues.
Good discussions!
Adam Nollmeyer
@acmephoto in twitter
I think YOU have missed the point. The point of this case was that the woman was passing herself off as a professional, Joes rants aside….CLEARLY she is not professional at any point in this case. From her gear choices, from her manner, from her attitude, to her lack of knowledge of the industry and her own gear! This was very much a kangaroo court I agree and was all done for TV to sensationalize. I do not see it as throwing other photographers under the bus, more like warning people that there are shysters out there and to be aware and careful. I too have shot with a Canon Rebel XT and have had images from this camera published in international magazines. It is a fine camera. No problems there. Even with a kit lens, a skilled photographer can get something useful from it. That is the point. This woman was NOTHING close to a skilled photographer. She was a hack. From day one. I could have and HAVE taken better images with my iPhone AT WEDDINGS! I shot a wedding as a gift to a family member who had already hired a “professional”. This guy shows up with the Hasselblad and all the amazing glass and assistants and all the gear. Clearly he was a competent photographer. When it came time to exchange the rings and the kiss, I could hear his film loader rewinding. He was so busy messing with his rig, that he missed all the shots. I of course got the shots, but he was the one that got paid almost $2,000. I did it for nothing. I cannot tell you how many weddings I have seen ruined by no talent hacks that got their gear at Best Buy. Is it throwing others under the bus? NO. I teach some of these hack in my many workshops and courses. So I am doing my part as well. But should this woman have been offering professional wedding photography? NO FRIGGIN WAY!!!! I turn down weddings cause I do not think I am good enough and I could do better than this woman with an iPhone. The industry needs to WEED out this clowns and fast or we will all get rolled into the ball with them. Hell I was a newspaper photographer when Diana died. Wanna know how many people spit on me and said I killed Diana???? People that slowed down to rubber neck a car accident and noticed me shooting. Flicking their cigarettes at me and calling me a vulture as they SLOW DOWN TO RUBBERNECK AN ACCIDENT!!!! Whatever. If they did not buy the tabloids, the editors could not offer a million dollars for ONE SHOT!
THEY killed Diana, not me!
Back to this clown. She is giving ALL of us a bad name. Your point about not knowing the F-stop? Digital cameras record all that data for you. She was reluctant to say because it would demonstrate her total lack of proper gear for this assignment. Wedding photographers shoot with THOUSANDS of dollars invested in JUST lenses! Leave that work to them. You are likely like one of these people that since you have bandaged a few of your kids scrapped knees it makes you a nurse. Let the professionals do the job or you will end up in some court somewhere being sued. Back to your original point about she got what she paid for. Is it possible that this “photographer” was perhaps showing someone else’s work? Perhaps stolen from the internet? Oh yeah, that never happens. Where was her portfolio in court??? I would have brought mine! I would have said, her wedding shots are very similar to almost every wedding I have ever shot. The clown says she has shot hundreds of weddings…..with a Rebel XT? Some pros that make their living off weddings have not even shot “hundreds” of weddings! This woman needs to take some courses, perhaps she should start with Professional Conduct.
OK, Dan.
OK.
Do understand what I am saying when I say YOU, sir missed the point.
I NEVER said she behaved in a professional manner. I stated that a court case – even with a blowhardnonothingidiotcreep like Joe cannot MAKE that declaration. You don’t want them to make that decision do you? Do you want a moron making the decision of whether someone is a professional who is looking at an 8×10 saying things like it won’t be good enough when blown up to 8×10? ??? ??? WTF?
OK… you do.
Fine.
“She was reluctant to say because it would demonstrate her total lack of proper gear for this assignment. “
Or maybe she wasn’t expecting such a lame ass question as it was NOT pertinent to the case.
“Wedding photographers shoot with THOUSANDS of dollars invested in JUST lenses!”
Some do, some don’t. Period. You cannot be speaking from a knowledgeable place to make this statement.
“You are likely like one of these people that since you have bandaged a few of your kids scrapped knees it makes you a nurse.”
Oh, there it is, the personal attack. I guess I am also a racist nazi, huh. But actually no, I do know what I am talking about.
“Let the professionals do the job or you will end up in some court somewhere being sued.”
Yep. And you will find expert witnesses… well, like me for instance, working hard to make sure there are no frauds in the business.
That people are treated fairly. That corporations DO NOT treat artists unfairly.
“Back to your original point about she got what she paid for. Is it possible that this “photographer†was perhaps showing someone else’s work?”
Well, I don’t really know how to answer that. It was TESTIFIED to that she had show images like that. Her website is (was) available for view – and I must have stated that at least a dozen times in previous comments you obviously didn’t bother to read. Her work was totally on view for anyone to see. So – you are wrong. Again.
“Perhaps stolen from the internet? Oh yeah, that never happens.”
Dude… lovin’ those leaps from reality to hypothetical.
Of course it happens. But not in this case. You see… that was the ONLY thing this case should have been about. Does her work match the samples shown. That is simple to understand.
For most people.
“The clown says she has shot hundreds of weddings…..with a Rebel XT? “
Yep. She didn’t say it was the SAME Rebel XT… That is what YOU said.
Well… I hope you feel much better now. More professional in how you do your work. More professional in how you refer to people you don’t know as ‘clown’ and ‘hack’. They must teach that at those “Professional Conduct” courses you are fond of.
Feel better?
Good. We aim to please here at LE.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of people out there who tend to feel better about themselves when they knock someone else down a notch or two. Most of your points are right on. The most important is the quality of work shown matched the quality of work delivered. Period. Case closed.
As far as Dan’s suggestion of regulating the industry, I think the consumer (in all cases) needs to educate themselves. I am a professional photographer and am planning my own wedding. I haven’t found a photographer as low as $1300 that I would consider hiring. You get what you pay for.
That’s one of the issues I have in the world of Craigslist Wedding/Senior Portrait Photographers. The customer wants Bambi Cantrell or Jasmine Star but wants to pay Migrant Worker wages for the result and expect more than most Craigslist Photographers can deliver (no offense to anyone who uses Craigslist to market yourself). I believe the customer knowingly booked the photographer knowing exactly the caliber of the photographer’s skill and received exactly what the she ordered… and the Judge is a know-it-all-wanna-be that should have seen the case for what it is… blatently stupid.
WoW…..Mr. Hebert, calm down. I can see you are a caring individual,…..”Is it throwing others under the bus? NO. I teach some of these hack (sic) in my many workshops and courses. So I am doing my part as well.”
I hope I never have to take one of your workshops. I might be too much of a “hack” for you.
BTW, I am not very impressed with your portfolio. Does that make you a hack, because you stated on your website, “Quite possibly…The worlds BEST photographer!” Pretty bold statement there.
Thank you for writing this.
I get uneasy when the determination of aesthetic success is put into the realm of the legal system. The difficulty of pinning down merit / skill an inner conflicts that any thinking photog must face. The judge’s frantic obsession with f-stops and camera bodies demonstrate that he has let marketing define beauty. He stopped thinking long ago. Great things have been made on less. The best gear never guarantees success.
He is far too sure of his ability to judge beauty.
I guess all of us need to go buy the high end hasselblad with the large digital back to be considered professional now.
Very well put. Although I get very distressed at the amount of people who know nothing about photography claiming to be photographers – the way this case was handled was just wrong. My guess is the frustration of these “pro’s” who know squat undercutting us and cheapening our work is the root behind the anger.
“…people who know nothing about photography claiming to be photographers…”
Yes, but I don’t stress it much.
That cat is out of the bag and will not be going away.
It is how we deal with what we are doing that matters the most.
I am more stressed about the people who know nothing who keep getting elected to represent us… but that is another discussion.
😉
I quoted you on Twitter. So very true.
Microstock, bad shooters, weddings for a grand or lower, table top shots for $20 – it is the quality we receive and its relationship to what is promised. If I promise you crap and deliver crap… we good!
I stumbled across this post, and while agree with some of your points and disagree with others, what I want to ask is WTF is a graduated aperture lens? I’ve been doing photography for nearly 40 years, and this is the first time I’ve heard the term.
Is that something like a muffler bearing? Something that you just made up to test people’s knowledge? If I do a google search on it, your page is the only reference I find. I know what a graduated neutral density filter is but never heard of a graduated aperture.
Graduated Aperture Lens:
Sorry if the terminology I used was a little vague.
A lens that has multiple f-stops – like an f-4.5 – f-5.6 is graduated through those apertures. At least that is how I refer to it. The aperture is not 4.5 at wide and 5.6 at tele ONLY. The f-stop slowly, well, ‘graduates’, through the apertures slowly, and with some constrained properties.
I have a few of those lenses, and after making the usual tests I do on lenses, I find that they all ‘graduate’ through the apertures a bit differently, but they all do it.
My bad if it was misunderstood, and if there is a better term for it, that would be fine. I do not find that the simple use of the word “multi’ works, as that does NOT describe with any clarity the actual property that occurs.
When I zoom the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM Lens, the aperture slowly changes from 4 – 5.6. That is what I meant.
“Is that something like a muffler bearing?”
Sure. I have maintained this blog for four years with bullshit.
“…what I want to ask is WTF is a graduated aperture lens…”
And I hope I answered the fucking question.
BTW – I have not found any mention of what to actually call that phenomenon, but open for suggestions. I figured that the context of my statement “When it is a graduated aperture lens, you may be surprised how many times the photographer will have to grab the lens to see”, would be enough. But I can see your point.
My apologies for not being clearer
As well as useful, You’re an exceedingly professional writer. We have signed up with ones nourish and appearance ahead of time in order to searching for further of the wonderful publish. Also, We’ve shared your internet-site in my web sites