# My professional photographer has me feeling jipped.



## booda303 (Jul 25, 2018)

So ... I got married last week and the next day photographer sends  photos that look  like this. Am I expecting too much ? Not a happy bride. What do you think ?


----------



## jcdeboever (Jul 25, 2018)

Hopefully it was free.


----------



## waday (Jul 25, 2018)

Not sure how we're supposed to provide based on a single photo that looks like it was cropped. Did you discuss what you expected with the photographer? Is this on par with the photographer's existing portfolio?

More information is required.


----------



## Designer (Jul 25, 2018)

Assuming that this one example is typical of all of them, you might not have received good value.

Besides the poorly arranged composition, there is a lot of disparity between the light that comes in from the left side and the right side, which makes it appear to be a very casual snapshot.  Coupled with the shallow depth of field and awkward frame, this snapshot could have been done better. 

Without knowing how much you paid, and what was specifically written into the contract, it will be difficult to evaluate the worth versus the cost. 

I understand you might not want to divulge the cost, but perhaps you can provide a link to the photographer's website so we can view the entire gallery. 

Note: online opinions will not suffice as "expert" should you feel the need to sue the photographer, so you will have to find a local expert who is willing to offer expert testimony in court. 

Good luck!


----------



## Derrel (Jul 25, 2018)

The photo looks over exposed, and poorly conceived, and poorly composed. If this is representative of what you received, then you have reason to feel upset. Feeling upset however is not to say that you got ripped off, since we have no idea how much or little you paid, and we have no idea of the level of due diligence that was performed before the photographer was hired.


----------



## booda303 (Jul 25, 2018)

waday said:


> Not sure how we're supposed to provide based on a single photo that looks like it was cropped. Did you discuss what you expected with the photographer? Is this on par with the photographer's existing portfolio?
> 
> More information is required.



I only cropped his water mark and nothing else.  Photos cost me 1,200 and they all look like that. I can’t re create my wedding day and that’s what’s so frustrating. Here are some more


----------



## SquarePeg (Jul 25, 2018)

$1200 is not that much for a wedding photographer.  Did you look at this person's portfolio prior to signing a contract with them? These are just "ring shots" and artsy type close ups of props.  What did the actual wedding photos of people look like?


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jul 25, 2018)

There seem to be plenty of 'people with cameras' out there doing wedding photography. That actually seems like a somewhat low rate but pricing seems to depend on where you live. (edit - I agree with SharonCat on that.) I see issues with composition etc. which to me shows inexperience or represents the skill level. I'm not sure what can be done other than some cropping or editing to improve some of the composition issues.

Unfortunately there aren't any particular industry standards or licensing etc. that pro photographers need to be in business. I've read about there being interest in developing some sort of quality standards, and there are pro photographer organizations who have developed their own standards for their members. Not sure what can be done after the fact since you did receive the photos, and terms of any contract may have been met.


----------



## booda303 (Jul 25, 2018)

jcdeboever said:


> Hopefully it was free.


I wish it was


----------



## booda303 (Jul 25, 2018)

SquarePeg said:


> $1200 is not that much for a wedding photographer.  Did you look at this person's portfolio prior to signing a contract with them? These are just "ring shots" and artsy type close ups of props.  What did the actual wedding photos of people look like?



The black part at the bottom I tried to erase his name.  This is one photo of wedding.


----------



## Derrel (Jul 25, 2018)

Pretty bad picture...


----------



## booda303 (Jul 25, 2018)

SquarePeg said:


> $1200 is not that much for a wedding photographer.  Did you look at this person's portfolio prior to signing a contract with them? These are just "ring shots" and artsy type close ups of props.  What did the actual wedding photos of people look like?




We did see his work


Derrel said:


> Pretty bad picture...



I did look through his portfolio before we hired him.  These are some  of the pictures he had on his site.  Brides love showing their wedding photos. In this case feeling bummed.


----------



## booda303 (Jul 25, 2018)

Designer said:


> booda303 said:
> 
> 
> > View attachment 161009 So ... I got married last week and the next day photographer sends  photos that look  like this. Am I expecting too much ? Not a happy bride. What do you think ?
> ...



Thank you for your advice.


----------



## booda303 (Jul 25, 2018)

waday said:


> Not sure how we're supposed to provide based on a single photo that looks like it was cropped. Did you discuss what you expected with the photographer? Is this on par with the photographer's existing portfolio?
> 
> More information is required.


I’ve posted some photos of his work


----------



## Derrel (Jul 25, 2018)

The photo that makes me think poorly of him is the beach sunset shot of the bride and groom...with a huge amount of top space, and *them cut off where they are sitting on the beach*...Ughhh...badly executed pose-wise. Same with your shots of your wedding...bad use of the compositional space. I can almost tell how well-trained a photographer is by seeing how they handle top space, the space above the heads in a photo...it's a very telling issue, almost as telling as a person who does Dutch tilt on photos as a matter of course. I feel bad for you, but...you know...wedding photos become less and less important as the marriage goes on. Right now, the pictures might be upsetting, but, as time passes, you'll likely not look at the photos much, if hardly ever.


----------



## ceemac (Jul 26, 2018)

Derrel is absolutely right. It's the marriage that's important. I can count on one hand the number of times I've looked at ours and it's been almost 40 years. We don't remember who half the people are and it's pretty funny seeing our fathers with sideburns to the chin. The pictures have never been removed from the album.
Spend some money and get a professional portrait of the 2 of you doing something special that you enjoy.  A nicely framed 11 X 14 for the wall.


----------



## booda303 (Jul 26, 2018)

I’m glad to know it’s not just me who didn’t like the photos. I’ve never had a professional photographer so I was a little confused. I thank you all for the wonderful advice / feedback.  I guess for my one year anniversary I will do just that , we will take pictures of us doing something fun.


----------



## snowbear (Jul 26, 2018)

booda303 said:


> I guess for my one year anniversary I will do just that , we will take pictures of us doing something fun.


This sounds like a winner.  Sorry the others didn't turn out as expected, but unfortunately, that is the way photography has turned in a lot of cases.


----------



## Light Guru (Jul 26, 2018)

booda303 said:


> Photos cost me 1,200



No offence but they look about like what I would expect from a photographer that charges that price to photograph a wedding.


----------



## terri (Jul 26, 2018)

OP: A link to his Web site might be better from here on out.    We ask that you only post images that you have copyright to, and you're also claiming that some of these aren't even from your own wedding.

"Buyer beware" is a tough lesson to learn, especially connected with a once in a lifetime event.   Budgets are personal and perhaps  $1,200 is all you wanted to spend but, if you'd shopped around and realized this was a low-cost photographer, some warning bells should have sounded.  I'm sorry you feel played, but if you couldn't or wouldn't spend more, it's not shocking to see results like this. 

Still, I'm not comfortable with you showing up here and posting someone's work to get satisfaction from watching it get trashed.  Looks like the price was commensurate with the level of experience, so you did in fact get what you paid for.


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 26, 2018)

I wonder if the photographers online portfolio was really his work (bought-and-paid for, or simply stolen off the internet).

That, or you didn't get the photographer who actually took those online shots and you ended up with a 'second shooter' or some other newbie.


----------



## booda303 (Jul 26, 2018)

terri said:


> OP: A link to his Web site might be better from here on out.    We ask that you only post images that you have copyright to, and you're also claiming that some of these aren't even from your own wedding.
> 
> "Buyer beware" is a tough lesson to learn, especially connected with a once in a lifetime event.   Budgets are personal and perhaps  $1,200 is all you wanted to spend but, if you'd shopped around and realized this was a low-cost photographer, some warning bells should have sounded.  I'm sorry you feel played, but if you couldn't or wouldn't spend more, it's not shocking to see results like this.
> 
> Still, I'm not comfortable with you showing up here and posting someone's work to get satisfaction from watching it get trashed.  Looks like the price was commensurate with the level of experience, so you did in fact get what you paid for.



Wow, satisfacción  from watching it get trashed ? All I wanted to know if it was just me expecting too much of the photos. Also , I tried to blur out his name so that no one would say that I was trashing him. I never even said I didn’t like his other work from his pictures he posted on his own website. Maybe I shouldn’t have posted his work from his portfolio  but still don’t understand  from me posting meant to you I liked watching his work get trashed. Kind of didn’t appreciate that comment nor am I on here to argue with anyone.


----------



## booda303 (Jul 26, 2018)

Light Guru said:


> booda303 said:
> 
> 
> > Photos cost me 1,200
> ...



Yeah , I know you’re right now. I didn’t even know 1200 inexpensive but it’s another new thing I’ve learned on photography.


----------



## booda303 (Jul 26, 2018)

snowbear said:


> booda303 said:
> 
> 
> > I guess for my one year anniversary I will do just that , we will take pictures of us doing something fun.
> ...


Yeah , you’re right you live and you learn.


----------



## DanOstergren (Jul 26, 2018)

booda303 said:


> terri said:
> 
> 
> > OP: A link to his Web site might be better from here on out.    We ask that you only post images that you have copyright to, and you're also claiming that some of these aren't even from your own wedding.
> ...


I can see how Terri would get that idea. I had the same notion when I first saw your post. Either way, misunderstandings are common over the internet.


----------



## Gillra (Jul 31, 2018)

booda303 said:


> So ... I got married last week and the next day photographer sends  photos that look  like this. Am I expecting too much ? Not a happy bride. What do you think ?


How do I see these pictures booda303?


----------



## booda303 (Jul 31, 2018)

Gillra said:


> booda303 said:
> 
> 
> > So ... I got married last week and the next day photographer sends  photos that look  like this. Am I expecting too much ? Not a happy bride. What do you think ?
> ...



I think this is page three of the replies. Click on the first page. It should be on there


----------



## booda303 (Jul 31, 2018)

DanOstergren said:


> booda303 said:
> 
> 
> > terri said:
> ...





DanOstergren said:


> booda303 said:
> 
> 
> > terri said:
> ...


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 31, 2018)

booda303 said:


> I think this is page three of the replies. Click on the first page. It should be on there


all the photos and links to photos were removed.

You'll need to provide a link to the photographer's website for us to see how good or not the photographer is with their online portfolio.

see post # 20 for reference on why this was done (ie, you don't own the rights to the photos)  My professional photographer has me feeling jipped.


----------



## Designer (Jul 31, 2018)

Light Guru said:


> booda303 said:
> 
> 
> > Photos cost me 1,200
> ...


Where is it written that every photographer will price his/her services at a point that coincides with their ability?  This holds true at both ends of the skill/ability/artistic spectrum. 

I have not seen much regularity in pricing.

I have read on here that the occasional newbie will shoot a wedding for free, but that's only for the newbs who are asking for advice in pricing.  Would everyone agree that $1200 is too cheap?  For some people that is a lot of money, especially for photos, which they see as just one more expenditure that they have to meet, like flowers, decorating, cake, hall rental, food and drink, and music.  Sometimes photographs will take the hit.  The couple who can fork over upwards of $7,000 for a photographer will be few and far between.


----------



## booda303 (Jul 31, 2018)

astroNikon said:


> booda303 said:
> 
> 
> > I think this is page three of the replies. Click on the first page. It should be on there
> ...



Hi Astro ,

Okay , let me post the link   One question , one of those photos were from my wedding. How come that was taken Down ? 

PORTAFOLIO


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jul 31, 2018)

Probably because in the US the photographer owns the copyright to any photos they take. A photographer may provide 'print rights' for a client to go have prints made (some labs won't print them without that). I think often a photographer will provide web sized images for social media use. Maybe check the contract.

These photos in the link to me seem fine and made me wonder if the photos in the OP were maybe taken by an assistant? Those almost looked like images that didn't turn out well that would be omitted and not sent to a client. I wonder if you got sent some of the wrong pictures by mistake. 

The pricing to me did seem low, in my area it's more like $2-3000. Your location shows NY so I'd expect that to be quite low there (for NYC that is, not necessarily in other parts of the state). I don't know, there are a lot of people with cameras listing themselves on social media and it's probably better to  look further than that and see if they have a website or set up at any wedding trade shows, etc.


----------



## waday (Jul 31, 2018)

vintagesnaps said:


> These photos in the link to me seem fine and made me wonder if the photos in the OP were maybe taken by an assistant? Those almost looked like images that didn't turn out well that would be omitted and not sent to a client. I wonder if you got sent some of the wrong pictures by mistake.


I tend to agree. Rather than photos of inanimate objects, I would have liked to see some of the pictures of the bride/groom/family to see if they were on par with the portfolio. Picking a few of the worst to compare to the photographer's best (i.e., his advertised portfolio) isn't a fair comparison.

When the wife and I got our wedding photos back, the photographer said she'd give us all the photos from the night. While I'm assuming she culled some of the worst ones, including "all the photos" is just inane. So many repeats and boring photos, not to mention photos that would NEVER make it to a portfolio for her website. When I look back at the photos, I like the pictures of us and family. I don't care about the flowers or the table settings.



vintagesnaps said:


> The pricing to me did seem low, in my area it's more like $2-3000. Your location shows NY so I'd expect that to be quite low there (for NYC that is, not necessarily in other parts of the state). I don't know, there are a lot of people with cameras listing themselves on social media and it's probably better to look further than that and see if they have a website or set up at any wedding trade shows, etc.


For what it's worth, when the wife and I got married nearly a decade ago in NYC, we paid over $5,000.


----------



## booda303 (Jul 31, 2018)

vintagesnaps said:


> Probably because in the US the photographer owns the copyright to any photos they take. A photographer may provide 'print rights' for a client to go have prints made (some labs won't print them without that). I think often a photographer will provide web sized images for social media use. Maybe check the contract.
> 
> These photos in the link to me seem fine and made me wonder if the photos in the OP were maybe taken by an assistant? Those almost looked like images that didn't turn out well that would be omitted and not sent to a client. I wonder if you got sent some of the wrong pictures by mistake.
> 
> The pricing to me did seem low, in my area it's more like $2-3000. Your location shows NY so I'd expect that to be quite low there (for NYC that is, not necessarily in other parts of the state). I don't know, there are a lot of people with cameras listing themselves on social media and it's probably better to  look further than that and see if they have a website or set up at any wedding trade shows, etc.



Hi , I thought that since it was my wedding it was okay to put them on the website being it was actually my photo, what do I know ? Lots to learn. Yes , my location is NY. I forgot to mention it was a destination wedding so we got a photographer from over there. I didn’t expect him to work miracles on me but I didn’t quite understand my photos not that I was comparing all my photos to his Portfolio ( okay maybe at least the rings) My photos just looked a little like a cell phone took them.  Nothing I can do now.


----------



## booda303 (Jul 31, 2018)

waday said:


> vintagesnaps said:
> 
> 
> > These photos in the link to me seem fine and made me wonder if the photos in the OP were maybe taken by an assistant? Those almost looked like images that didn't turn out well that would be omitted and not sent to a client. I wonder if you got sent some of the wrong pictures by mistake.
> ...



Yes,  you’re right !!!  He did give me the same repeat of the same photos.  That’s why I was like what’s Happening ? 5,000 dollars, wow! Weddings sure are expensive. I thought a portfolio was proof Enough. 

I do have some more of my wedding like the one I posted before. It has his watermark on it.


----------



## astroNikon (Jul 31, 2018)

booda303 said:


> Hi Astro ,
> 
> Okay , let me post the link   One question , one of those photos were from my wedding. How come that was taken Down ?
> 
> PORTAFOLIO


You were the client.
The photographer owns the Copyright for each photo, unless they gave you the rights in the contract.  Since we do not have nor have seen the contract (nor are we lawyers to make that decision) the Admins removed the images.

Looking at the website link, I think the photographer would have done a very good job even for $1200.  I think he would have had to work hard to screw things up like you mention.  I wonder if someone said they were them or what not.  We don't know the whole story ...


----------



## booda303 (Jul 31, 2018)

Lots for me to learn and I want to thank you for all of your replies and for having patience while I learn  about photography.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Jul 31, 2018)

I'd think about sorting/organizing and put the 'duds' in a folder and maybe not use those... Put what's usable in another folder for sharing, prints to frame, etc. 

Wade seems to have had a common enough experience these days, receiving every single photo from a photographer, which apparently many photographers do and some clients want. It seems senseless and to me, final product is provided - similar to written work, you don't provide your rough draft, you provide the finished work that you've proofread and typed neatly, etc. Typically photographers wouldn't give a photo that had missed focus, movement blur, etc. (I mean, we are human, even good photographers can get a slight blur from movement, etc.)

Since the photographer's in another country (I noticed the site wasn't in English) I'm not sure how copyright applies but I would think you'd be fine using the photos provided to you by the photographer. On this site there's a specific policy on owning the photos you post so it might depend on Terms on whatever site you might post on.

The ones you first posted looked to me like the framing was off, so chances are you got better ones of the same subject that were framed better. So at least coming on here it got figured out!


----------

