# Unhappy with wedding photos... help!



## amandajohill

Can anyone please recommend photo editing software that would help me artistically improve my wedding photos?  I'm looking for software that would give professional results.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler




----------



## DorkSterr

Jesus those are horrid... Wow there's not even a picture where your wearing your dress and isn't cut off. These pictures are very dull/flat. A good free software and relativity easy to use is Nikon View NX 2, bump up the exposure, contrast, a tad sharpness...ETC.

Sorry I could'nt be of anymore help.


----------



## amandajohill

@Bitter Jeweler, your message did not show up.  Just FYI.


----------



## Austin Greene

I won't say too much as to the photos, wedding photography is one of the toughest types of photography out there, and I don't think I have anywhere near the skill required to lend any serious critique to the photos. What I will say is that it looks to me like most of the photos on the link provided are "SOOC" or "Straight Out Of Camera," with little or no editing having been made. Many also look underexposed. I was a little surprised at the quality of some, and that they would even be posted in a gallery on a professional's site, but that may something about who you hired. 

In any case, I'm sorry that your special day wasn't captured as you hoped it would be. We've got some really experienced wedding photographers here on the forums, and I'm sure you'll have some quality advice soon 

Toga


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

Frankly, I think Brenda Sison did a very nice job for $1300. I have seen far worse at that price point. You should probably count your blessings and consider yourself lucky.

You might want to remove reference to her site, as links can be tracked back to here via google analytics, or various other site traffic data gathering.


----------



## cgipson1

wow... most of the shots aren't too bad.. but some of them are. Focus on  eyes is soft in most of them. Flash does not appear to be used in any  of them.. and could have been for most (indoor shots), and that would have helped a lot  with the color and sharpness issues. Kind of pretentious surroundings... and I would consider some of the poses pretty goofy.

Yep.. NX2 is free > Nikon | News | Free download of ViewNX 2 available today

So is Gimp > GIMP - The GNU Image Manipulation Program

FastStone is free too... FastStone Image Viewer - Powerful and Intuitive Photo Viewer, Editor and Batch Converter

But.. if you have no experience editing images.. it is unlikely you will be able to improve these! It takes knowledge and experience to do good editing....


----------



## amandajohill

@Bitter Jeweler, I know, I don't want to make reference to her site, but that is the only way people can see the pictures.


----------



## amandajohill

@*cgipson1*  I absolutely agree with you about the poses.  I hated them, and they felt so unnatural, and I feared what actually happened- that they showed up that way.


----------



## Austin Greene

One thing I would mention, perhaps for future reference, is that if you feel uncomfortable doing something, its important to let the photographer know. It may not be seen in the photos at the moment, but as you well know, it shows up clear as day in review.


----------



## MTVision

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> wow... most of the shots aren't too bad.. but some of them are. Focus on  eyes is soft in most of them. Flash does not appear to be used in any  of them.. and could have been for most (indoor shots), and that would have helped a lot  with the color and sharpness issues. Kind of pretentious surroundings... and I would consider some of the poses pretty goofy.
> 
> Yep.. NX2 is free > Nikon | News | Free download of ViewNX 2 available today
> 
> So is Gimp > GIMP - The GNU Image Manipulation Program
> 
> FastStone is free too... FastStone Image Viewer - Powerful and Intuitive Photo Viewer, Editor and Batch Converter
> 
> But.. if you have no experience editing images.. it is unlikely you will be able to improve these! It takes knowledge and experience to do good editing....



Can you edit another photographers photos if you don't own the copyright?? 


OP,
By posting the link to the photographers website - you are in fact leading her directly to this forum and your post.  This exact thing has happened a few other times and usually the photographer ends up showing up and posting their own "side". 

I didn't look at the pictures so I have no clue what they look like but cgipson is right about the editing. Editing itself is easy but doing a good job takes a lot of knowledge and skill. Did you have a contract with the photographer? If so, I would read through it to see what it says - about copyright, anything about post processing, editing. 

Hope everything works out.


----------



## amandajohill

*MTVision: 
I do have copyrights and she is ok with me editing them.  I just need to find a talented experienced editor.
*


----------



## SCraig

This is not the place for you to be asking for help.  We had a recent post that was similar to this that blew up into a lot of finger-pointing and I don't think that should happen again.  If you have an issue with the photographs taken by the photographer that you hired then it is my opinion that you need to take those issues up with her and not us.  It is unlikely that you are going to find someone willing to edit the photographs for you since they are copyrighted images.

Edit .. we posted at the same time but I still maintain the position that you need to take it up with her.


----------



## amandajohill

I'm totally fine if she posts her own side.  I'm just trying to be honest and getting some advice.  I have no intention of slandering anyone.  I've wanted to keep it to myself, but every time I look at the photos it just makes me want to have a do-over with a different photographer.  Don't get me wrong, she's an awesome person and I have nothing against her.


----------



## amandajohill

I now own the copyrights.


----------



## amandajohill

I would take them up with her, but she is not responding.  I appreciate all your opinions on this though.  And if this is not the correct site to post this on, would you be so kind as to direct me to the correct forum?  Thank you.


----------



## 480sparky

FYI:  If the photographer has any business sense, all those who follow the OPs link will show up on her web site as a Referral.

In other words, she will be able to easily find this thread with no problem.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

amandajohill said:


> I'm totally fine if she posts her own side.  I'm just trying to be honest and getting some advice.  I have no intention of slandering anyone.  I've wanted to keep it to myself, but every time I look at the photos it just makes me want to have a do-over with a different photographer.  Don't get me wrong, she's an awesome person and I have nothing against her.


 


amandajohill said:


> I now own the copyrights.



This all sounds so familiar. Didn't we just go through this a few weeks ago?


----------



## MTVision

amandajohill said:
			
		

> I now own the copyrights.



Are you sure though? Most (not all) photographers do not give the customer the copyrights to the photos they buy. I'm not saying you don't own the copyrights and I don't know where your from but in the US the copyright stays with the photographer unless they specifically gave it to you in a contract, I believe.  I have heard of some photographers doing so but they are usually Facebook-type photographers. 

If you can't get in touch with the photographer then you have a few options. Edit/fix them yourself if you want. Read your contract, contact a lawyer and see if the photographer broke the contract in anyway and find out what/if you can do about it.


----------



## amandajohill

wedding photographers in new orleans

You can see here that I have the copy right release.


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan

amandajohill said:


> wedding photographers in new orleans
> 
> You can see here that I have the copy right release.



Yikes! Dreadful, pretentious font.


----------



## 480sparky

amandajohill said:


> I now own the copyrights.



Technically, the copyright stays with the photographer.  What you have is a right granted from her.  I hope you have it in writing.


----------



## Tee

Are you sure you have the copyright or just unlimited printing rights?  If you have the copyright, you should get the RAW files to make the attempted butchering of her photos a little easier.   I agree with Bitter, you got a $1,300 wedding and you should be happy you didn't get a $500.  I browsed a few pages and was expecting to see horrendous photos.  I was pleasantly surprised.   I'm sorry but I can't get on the pity bandwagon.  And don't worry about high dollar editing programs.  You can still use picnik for a few more weeks.  You'll have Facebook style images in no time.  Good luck!


----------



## amandajohill

Wow, not the friendliest of people on this site... a few were nice and thank you to them.


----------



## MTVision

amandajohill said:
			
		

> wedding photographers in new orleans
> 
> You can see here that I have the copy right release.



I already saw that on the photographers site. I don't care if you own it or not but some photographers use copyright releases to allow people to print their pictures - and the website says they give you a disc and a copyright release. The photographer still retains ownership of the copyright. 

Example of another copyright release
http://www.westonphotography.net/pdf/photographycopyrightrelease.pdf

I have no idea what your copyright release says. It doesn't really matter to me if you own the rights or not. I just can't believe that a photographer - whose been in business 8 years - doesn't mind if some random person edits their work. I've seen millions of threads on other forums where photographers are complaining that someone edited their pictures.


----------



## Tee

amandajohill said:


> wedding photographers in new orleans
> 
> You can see here that I have the copy right release.



With 'copy' and 'right' separated, I'm thinking she means printing rights which is different from copyright.  That's on her to clarify.  Still, I stand by my previous post above.


----------



## amandajohill

Thank you, the picture looks better.  May I ask what you did?


----------



## amandajohill

No, she is totally fine with someone editing them.  I have her stating that in an email.


----------



## MTVision

Tee said:
			
		

> With 'copy' and 'right' separated, I'm thinking she means printing rights which is different from copyright.  That's on her to clarify.  Still, I stand by my previous post above.



And it's listed with the CD so I'm assuming it's just a release to allow printing.


----------



## Tee

amandajohill said:


> Wow, not the friendliest of people on this site... a few were nice and thank you to them.



If you're really going to get these retouched then please take my friendly advice: ask Brenda Sison for the RAW images (she'll know what you're talking about).  You're going to do yourself no favors using a resized jpeg for retouching.  See...I am friendly.


----------



## cgipson1

amandajohill said:


> Thank you, the picture looks better.  May I ask what you did?



Perspective correction, sharpening, added some contrast, and did a bit of cloning.. and did a quick one shade fill on the sky.....  not much.


----------



## cgipson1

Tee said:


> amandajohill said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, not the friendliest of people on this site... a few were nice and thank you to them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you're really going to get these retouched then please take my friendly advice: ask Brenda Sison for the RAW images (she'll know what you're talking about).  You're going to do yourself no favors using a resized jpeg for retouching.  See...I am friendly.
Click to expand...


I agree with Tee totally.. get the RAW images... don't work from the Jpegs... not worth it.


----------



## 480sparky

Again, _you do not have the copyright_.  That will always stay _with the photographer_.  Here is what you DO have:

*I hereby grant anyone in possession of images shot by Weston Photography my permission to make unlimited printed or developed photographs, for their personal use, using this CD-ROM or DVD of their portraiture/wedding/event/commercial images.*


----------



## MTVision

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> I agree with Tee totally.. get the RAW images... don't work from the Jpegs... not worth it.



FAQ on photographers website
They do not give out RAW files. They edit all photos. Once the RAW file is converted to JPEG it is gone!


----------



## amandajohill

Thank you for being friendly


----------



## cgipson1

amandajohill said:


> Thank you for being friendly



I do question the copyright issue.. as what the others have said is correct. Usually it is only the right to print... not edit, etc.... So I am going to take the examples I did down..


----------



## jake337

amandajohill said:


> Wow, not the friendliest of people on this site... a few were nice and thank you to them.



It's not that they are not friendly, just that they are photographers and would not appreciate being in the persons position that you are questioning.  Many of them would have the business sense to combat what you are doing legally if they have the right to.


----------



## MTVision

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> WRONG! I always keep a copy of my RAWs.. and you can save a Jpeg from a raw, without killing the RAW!



I was just writing what the photographer stated on her FAQ. 

A: A professional should be licensed, insured, up to date on current practices, know the venues protocols and have professional equipment. Professional equipment is one of the most important factor for stunning photos! A professional has invested in the best equipment to give you the best quality photos. A professional will also be ready for any weather, lighting and photography situation that can and will arise. While anyone can invest around $1,500 for a camera from the local electronics store, chances are it is still not a professional grade camera and not equipped to function correctly in a wedding situation. While we love and respect the semi-pro (because we were all one at some point!) most brides dont want to take any chances with their photos.

Q: Are all of my photos edited?

A: YES!

Q: How long does it take to edit my photos?

A: While edit times vary from photographer to photographer, I&rsquo;ve found that the average is 4-8 weeks. We generally try to have our weddings done in 4-6 weeks for a wedding and 2-3 weeks for a photo session. These times vary according to workload.

Q: Do I get the disc with all of the photos in high resolution?

A: Yes, you get the disc with all of the photos in .jpg form and in high resolution. (High resolution means the photo is optimized for large scale printing)

Q: Do I get the raw files?

A: No, for 2 reasons. First, not all photographers shoot in raw, a lot still shoot in .jpg. Raw is simply a way in which you can take a photo just like .jpg is.

Second, even if the photographer gave you the raw file, chances are your computer doesn&rsquo;t even have a converter to open it. In addition, if the photo is raw, its generally not edited. In our case, we do shoot raw but once the photo is edited we convert it to .jpg and the raw file is gone.

Q: How long is a photo session?


----------



## cgipson1

MTVision said:


> g)
> 
> Q: Do I get the raw files?
> 
> A: No, for 2 reasons. First, not all photographers shoot in raw, a lot still shoot in .jpg. Raw is simply a way in which you can take a photo just like .jpg is.
> 
> Second, even if the photographer gave you the raw file, chances are your computer doesn&rsquo;t even have a converter to open it. In addition, if the photo is raw, its generally not edited. In our case, we do shoot raw but *once the photo is edited we convert it to .jpg and the raw file is gone*.



Megan... I can't imagine any professional ever deleting the RAWs... so I find that hard to believe! That would be a dangerous thing to do.. what if a re-edit was needed? lol!


----------



## Tee

Once she checks the referrel links in her SmugMug stats and sees the gajillion links to here, I'm thinking she's going to change the wording of her copyright to unlimited printing.


----------



## Tee

cgipson1 said:


> Megan... I can't imagine any professional ever deleting the RAWs... so I find that hard to believe! That would be a dangerous thing to do.. what if a re-edit was needed? lol!



Was thinking the same thing.  I wonder if by giving the OP permission to edit the images it is Brenda's way of getting passed this and not worth the headache.


----------



## MTVision

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> Megan... I can't imagine any professional ever deleting the RAWs... so I find that hard to believe! That would be a dangerous thing to do.. what if a re-edit was needed? lol!



I doubt they delete it. They just don't want to give out the RAW files - how many customers are gonna know all that much about raw files and editing.


----------



## cgipson1

Tee said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Megan... I can't imagine any professional ever deleting the RAWs... so I find that hard to believe! That would be a dangerous thing to do.. what if a re-edit was needed? lol!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Was thinking the same thing.  I wonder if by giving the OP permission to edit the images it is Brenda's way of getting passed this and not worth the headache.
Click to expand...


That is what I was thinking! And that is one reason I can't imagine they would delete their RAW files...  if a re-edit was needed, they would be held responsible for quality, and a re-edited Jpeg wouldn't cut it!


----------



## amandajohill

@Jake337, I'm really confused as to what I'm doing to warrant any legal action towards me.  Why do I need to keep my mouth shut and just pretend to like my photos?


----------



## Bossy

I think you have a valid complaint, most of those are clearly not edited and that is what was agreed upon. You might think of lawyering up, maybe then she'll at least give you the RAW images and you can find a professional to edit. ​


----------



## MTVision

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> That is what I was thinking! And that is one reason I can't imagine they would delete their RAW files...  if a re-edit was needed, they would be held responsible for quality, and a re-edited Jpeg wouldn't cut it!



But....the photographer doesn't say they delete the raw file. To someone who knows nothing about photography "once the file is edited and converted to .jpg the raw file is gone" sounds plausible. I probably would've believed it at one point.


----------



## Bossy

Did you sign any contracts? What do they say regarding copyright release? ​


----------



## amandajohill

I did sign a contract and in it, it says: copyright release: included.


----------



## MTVision

amandajohill said:
			
		

> I did sign a contract and in it, it says: copyright release: included.



What does the copyright release say though?


----------



## amandajohill

I think I'm getting it with my disc in the mail... so I do not know yet.


----------



## MTVision

amandajohill said:
			
		

> I think I'm getting it with my disc in the mail... so I do not know yet.



If I were you - I'd contact a lawyer if the photographer isn't trying to remedy the issue. You can usually get a free consultation to find out what recourse you have. I would wait to have anybody do any type of editing until you have that release.  Like I said before, since it's included with the disc it probably just allows you to print. Wal-mart, Costco, etc. will not print photos unless they have a release from the photographer. 

Maybe try going to the photographers work to see her face to face and talk to her. If she won't talk to you or work with you then all you can really do is go to a lawyer.


----------



## manaheim

Almost makes me wonder if these things aren't just ploys to drive traffic to a website.

Overall those pictures are fine bordering on decent.  As someone mentioned, the focus on the eyes and such is missed and whatnot, but it's far from a hack job.


----------



## Sw1tchFX

The poses are cheesy and evidently only 6 people (including the photographer) attended this thing, but in general the photography isn't _bad_. *It's....$1300 worth.*


----------



## Bossy

I disagree that its $1300 worth. Its really relative to the area. 1300 in my hometown would've been on the high side. 1300 where I live now is on the low side, but not necessarily junk.​


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

The OP has no business complaining. The work delivered is commensurate with all the work presented on the photographers website. INCLUDING examples of the "cheesy" posing. She got what she chose, and paid for.

I have a hunch the OP, is one of "those" customers, that is never happy.
I get them them too. You design a ring, show drawings, renderings, the final wax for approval...and I wind up married too it because there is always some issue, something, anything, to complain about. FOREVER.

There is always more than one side of the story,  and I'd LOVE to hear the other side of this one.


----------



## 480sparky

manaheim said:


> Almost makes me wonder if these things aren't just ploys to drive traffic to a website.......



To what end, though?  Why advertise photography services, even in such a back-handed manner, to photographers?


----------



## Trever1t

manaheim said:


> Overall those pictures are fine bordering on decent.  As someone mentioned, the focus on the eyes and such is missed and whatnot, but it's far from a hack job.



I agree. I don't think they're horrible at all. Some poses are a little cheesy, some focus slightly off but for what you paid I didn't think what I looked at was all that bad. Honestly, I've seen a lot worse for more $ charged. Glad I wasn't your photographer!


----------



## 2WheelPhoto

Incredible thread!


----------



## Robin Usagani

A few thoughts...

1. For $1300 consider your self lucky.  These are not horrible.  They are decent...
2. I have a feeling you spent more money on your dress.  You wear it once and you wont wear it again.  Should have spent more money on wedding photog.
3. Where are the guests?????


----------



## Trever1t

On that note: How do you handle a disgruntled customer like this? Honestly, I'd be a bit crushed...I put a lot of effort into my sessions.


----------



## Robin Usagani

Trever1t said:


> On that note: How do you handle a disgruntled customer like this? Honestly, I'd be a bit crushed...I put a lot of effort into my sessions.



Move on.. don't expect referral from them


----------



## amandajohill

You may have a hunch, but you do not know me.  I am not "one of them".  If I were one of those unable to please type of people, I would not have rated most of my vendors for that day with five stars.  Since I am not happy with my photos, should I just shut up, or do have to be labeled as "one of them".  I'm not really sure why some of you feel so negatively towards someone you don't even know.  If I were so awful as you suspect, I would have told her how I felt.  I am afraid to because I don't want to hurt her feelings or have her think she is not a good photographer.  I am on this forum to get advice.  Not to be given a hard time.  Yes, I will say, I should have spent more money... you were right about that.  About the cheesy poses... I didn't like them.  I should have spoken up when we were in session, but I thought I should let the professional take over since they know more about photography than I do.


----------



## Sw1tchFX

This is just a total sh*tstorm....


----------



## Bossy

You shoot in jpg not tiff....wow. I'm speechless.


----------



## EGutierrez91

If you paid $1,300 - you have every right to call her up and say you are not happy. Do you go to a restaurant and order food and if it tastes horrendous you suck it up and pay your bill anyway? No way, you say it tastes like crap and you ask for it to be taken back (whether they spit on your next order is another story). 

Call her, explain your issue(s) with the photos and have her try to correct them. Why come to us first if you paid for a service?


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

Sw1tchFX said:


> This is just a total sh*tstorm....



This kind of thread always is. I wanted to reference the last time this happened, where the photographer actually came and gave their (very different) side of the story.
But no, the powers that be like to delete threads. Hopefully this one gets at least locked, sooner than later.


----------



## Robin Usagani

amanda....  I am serious.. she did a good job.  Are you expecting an award winning wedding photos?  You have to be really lucky and find a photographer who is about to break out.  People that constantly produce amazing photos will not be charging $2000.  Minimum $5000.  You should just leave it alone.


----------



## Alex_B

amandajohill said:


> Wow, not the friendliest of people on this site... a few were nice and thank you to them.



people are not unfriendly, just very concerned, and they want to prevent serious trouble .


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

Alex_B said:


> amandajohill said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, not the friendliest of people on this site... a few were nice and thank you to them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> people are not unfriendly, just very concerned, and they want to prevent serious trouble .
Click to expand...


And some are on the photographers side, which is not what she wants to hear.


----------



## manaheim

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Sw1tchFX said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is just a total sh*tstorm....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This kind of thread always is. I wanted to reference the last time this happened, where the photographer actually came and gave their (very different) side of the story.
> But no, the powers that be like to delete threads. Hopefully this one gets at least locked, sooner than later.
Click to expand...


They DELETED that?

Wow.


----------



## manaheim

BTW, you people going on about the copyright... it has sooooooooooooooooooo little to do with what's really going on here.


----------



## Tee

manaheim said:
			
		

> BTW, you people going on about the copyright... it has sooooooooooooooooooo little to do with what's really going on here.



There's some relevance since the OP was talking about editing the images herself. But, I'm curious as to your view of what the central issue is (not being snarky, just curious).


----------



## 480sparky

EGutierrez91 said:


> ......... Do you go to a restaurant and order food and if it tastes horrendous you suck it up and pay your bill anyway? No way, you say it tastes like crap and you ask for it to be taken back .........



Poor analogy.  You can tell if you don't like a meal on your first bite.  You don't wait until you get your hat & coat on the way out to complain.

The OP, however, did not have the ability to 'taste' her $1300 meal.


----------



## thereyougo!

480sparky said:


> EGutierrez91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ......... Do you go to a restaurant and order food and if it tastes horrendous you suck it up and pay your bill anyway? No way, you say it tastes like crap and you ask for it to be taken back .........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poor analogy.  You can tell if you don't like a meal on your first bite.  You don't wait until you get your hat & coat on the way out to complain.
> 
> The OP, however, did not have the ability to 'taste' her $1300 meal.
Click to expand...


No sane person does unless they are scamming a free or discounted meal.  However I had lunch at a pub yesterday and 1 "customer' sat and ate three courses several staff passed him during this meal and he didn't speak to one of them.  When the bill came h had a good moan about the meal and wanted to have the full meal for nothing.  In the end, the manager gave him his dessert FOC.  I would have given him nothing. The staff told him politely but firmly that he'd had plenty of opportunity to report it during his meal, yet he finished off every mouthfull.


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

480sparky said:


> The OP, however, did not have the ability to 'taste' her $1300 meal.



Are you kidding?
The photographer, Brenda Sison had oodles of images in her web portfolio. Brenda's work is consistant. Even down to  the "cheesy" poses. How the OP thought she was going to get anything different is mind boggling. This thread is idiotic at best.

This isn't a case of seeing awesome work, and recieving garbage. At all. 

The OP's proof gallery is now password protected, and the OP removed the link to the site.


----------



## Frequency

You won't hear from OP anymore, probably 

Edit: All those 76 inputs have turned baseless once the link was taken back; this is the worst thing that can happen to a discussion  thread


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

You don't have Google?


----------



## Frequency

How can I reach there


----------



## MTVision

Frequency said:
			
		

> How can I reach there



The photographers website link is still posted. Page 2 maybe...

I only saw a few of the OP's wedding photos on that site though.


----------



## Frequency

Actually i wanted to see the images that were much discussed here....


----------



## Bitter Jeweler

Frequency said:


> How can I reach there



Go too Yahoo.com, and type in Google. It should give you a link.  













Just teasing.


----------



## Tee

Frequency said:
			
		

> Actually i wanted to see the images that were much discussed here....



http://www.brendasison.com/ first preview set on homepage: Amanda and Keith.


----------



## EGutierrez91

480sparky said:


> EGutierrez91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ......... Do you go to a restaurant and order food and if it tastes horrendous you suck it up and pay your bill anyway? No way, you say it tastes like crap and you ask for it to be taken back .........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poor analogy.  You can tell if you don't like a meal on your first bite.  You don't wait until you get your hat & coat on the way out to complain.
> 
> The OP, however, did not have the ability to 'taste' her $1300 meal.
Click to expand...


You get a taste as soon as you visit the photographers site. That's sort of a sneak preview. The OPs pictures were on par with the other pictures on the site. 



Bitter Jeweler said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> 
> The OP, however, did not have the ability to 'taste' her $1300 meal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you kidding?
> The photographer, Brenda Sison had oodles of images in her web portfolio. Brenda's work is consistant. Even down to  the "cheesy" poses. How the OP thought she was going to get anything different is mind boggling. This thread is idiotic at best.
> 
> This isn't a case of seeing awesome work, and recieving garbage. At all.
> 
> The OP's proof gallery is now password protected, and the OP removed the link to the site.
Click to expand...


Exactly. The photography work on her site is consistent with the photos of the OPs wedding. 

It is still up to the OP to make the phone call and get it sorted out with the photographer.


----------



## Frequency

Bitter Jeweler said:


> Frequency said:
> 
> 
> 
> How can I reach there
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Go too Yahoo.com, and type in Google. It should give you a link.
> 
> You meant a tease...and i am torn apart  but cemented back by Tee (below)
> 
> Regards
Click to expand...


----------



## Frequency

Thank you Tee


----------



## Frequency

There are five images there of Amanda &Keith.... they are fine to my sensibility....


----------



## thereyougo!

I understand the frustrations of the OP, but I have to wonder whether the photos were the only thing to go wrong at the wedding.  I got married nearly 10 years ago, and our wedding photos were taken by the most expensive photographer within our budget.  From a technical point of view looking at the photos since the wedding took place they are fine, but not great.  They cost about £600 so about $850, so probably around $1300 in today's money.  What we did do as bride and groom though is sit down with the photographer and agree very carefully what we wanted him to do.  It's a contract, and contracts are for two parties.  If only one takes part in the engagement of the gig by giving no clear guidance then sone can expect less than stellar results are more likely.  Some of the sets on the website look a bit odd to me.  Jessica's wedding photos have a lot of cut limbs and I'm not sure that a photograph of a dress on a hanger is really part of a wedding album.  
Our photographer believed that imagewise less is more.  There is nothing drastically wrong with the images there, they are all pretty well exposed but crops could be better.  No real imagination, but that could be about the pricepoint it is at.  There are nearly 700 images in the Jessica and Ken gallery.  I'd say that was 3 x too many - at least.  The problem is that in the digital age some think that there should be more images to choose from. 

WRONG WRONG WRONG

Did I say wrong?  Photography hasn't changed simply because the media has changed.  The photographer has spread herself too thin, thinking that more images = better value.  Wrong again! Quality is everything.  That's what gets you a premium over other photographers, not how many images you can shoot and put up for sale.  Seems the OP was seduced by the perceived extra value and didn't see the real value of quality control.  Sometimes, less really IS more.

In our wedding we had 3 photographers round and interviewed them all seperately.  The one we picked ended up being the most expensive and gave the fewest images to choose from.  The other two kept telling us how many images we'd get to choose from and reluctant to show the work.  The one we hired showed us his work first, before telling us details.  He is unlikely to be hired to shoot a royal wedding but his standard was higher than the others.


----------



## manaheim

There is a real expectation by the customers these days that more pictures is better.  I noticed some of that happening on this set.  Five pictures of the same thing with slight variances where one (selected by the photographer) would have been better.


----------



## thereyougo!

manaheim said:


> There is a real expectation by the customers these days that more pictures is better.  I noticed some of that happening on this set.  Five pictures of the same thing with slight variances where one (selected by the photographer) would have been better.



Exactly.  It's the debate between MORE choice and BETTER choice.  They sound similar, but are *VERY*&#8203; different.  The pathway to more choice is littered with poor choice of mediocrity.


----------



## fokker

From what little I can see on her website the photos are fine, good even. OP you got your money's worth. If you wish to hire a professional editor to improve them you are going to be spending a significant amount of money for marginal gain, you would have been better off hiring a more expensive photographer in the first place (not to imply that more money defintely gets you better pictures, but generally speaking you get what you pay for - as in this case.)


----------



## Tony S

Shoot, I looked at the photographer's website and even looked at her Facebook page. I thought the photos looked great for the price/package range she charges in.  I thought enough of them that I sent her a link on her "contact me page" to this message thread hoping she joins the forum.

  I would really like to hear the photographer's side of this one and how she was told the customer was unhappy and what she did to try and resolve it.


----------



## Tony S

Ohhh... and maybe we need a new category to post in. "Critique my wedding/senior/baby photographer's work"


----------



## Robin Usagani

My clients do get a taste of me. I give them a free engagement session once they pay 25% down.  I tell them if they hate me, they can terminate me and I keep the 25% and they keep the s-session photos.


----------



## CCericola

Schwettylens said:


> My clients do get a taste of me. I give them a free engagement session once they pay 25% down.  I tell them if they hate me, they can terminate me and I keep the 25% and they keep the s-session photos.



Schwetty tastes better with ketchup.


----------



## Robin Usagani

CCericola said:


> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> 
> My clients do get a taste of me. I give them a free engagement session once they pay 25% down.  I tell them if they hate me, they can terminate me and I keep the 25% and they keep the s-session photos.
> 
> 
> 
> Schwetty tastes better with ketchup.
Click to expand...

Soy sauce!


----------



## cgipson1

Tony S said:


> Shoot, I looked at the photographer's website and even looked at her Facebook page. I thought the photos looked great for the price/package range she charges in.  I thought enough of them that I sent her a link on her "contact me page" to this message thread hoping she joins the forum.
> 
> I would really like to hear the photographer's side of this one and how she was told the customer was unhappy and what she did to try and resolve it.



The photographer actually joined yesterday.. and did leave a post going into some detail about the whole thing. She was professional and upbeat about it, and seemed to regret that it had come to this. Her post has since been deleted.. as was the link to her site. She did mention that her attorney had requested that it be deleted.


----------



## APHPHOTO

Ok everyone, where the heck are the photos?


----------



## MTVision

cgipson1 said:
			
		

> The photographer actually joined yesterday.. and did leave a post going into some detail about the whole thing. She was professional and upbeat about it, and seemed to regret that it had come to this. Her post has since been deleted.. as was the link to her site. She did mention that her attorney had requested that it be deleted.



And I missed it. I e-mailed the photographer yesterday giving her the link and telling her that she had an unhappy customer.  I normally wouldn't have done that but i really didn't believe the OP had tried to contact the photographer to resolve anything. Hopefully everything works out for both parties.


----------



## Mach0

Based on those few pics, I think she got a good budget job. They aren't horrible by any means and for that price, I'd count my blessings. Especially In my neck of the woods, I see rookies charging up to $1000 and I know you won't get anywhere near this.


----------



## manaheim

CCericola said:


> Schwettylens said:
> 
> 
> 
> My clients do get a taste of me. I give them a free engagement session once they pay 25% down.  I tell them if they hate me, they can terminate me and I keep the 25% and they keep the s-session photos.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Schwetty tastes better with ketchup.
Click to expand...


I was waiing for someone to say... something... 



MTVision said:


> cgipson1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The photographer actually joined yesterday.. and did leave a post going into some detail about the whole thing. She was professional and upbeat about it, and seemed to regret that it had come to this. Her post has since been deleted.. as was the link to her site. She did mention that her attorney had requested that it be deleted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And I missed it. I e-mailed the photographer yesterday giving her the link and telling her that she had an unhappy customer.  I normally wouldn't have done that but i really didn't believe the OP had tried to contact the photographer to resolve anything. Hopefully everything works out for both parties.
Click to expand...


STOOLIE!!!


----------



## Frequency

There are enough postings here every hour for us to be active


----------

