Wedding Photographer sued despite doing a great job!!
Aug 8, 2012 09:28:54 #
I would never agree to give up the RAW files. My daughter and I take 1000 to 2000 images at a wedding. The bride only sees the best 10%, and those are carefully edited. This way, everyone thinks we are great. Of course we use a contract.
Aug 8, 2012 09:44:56 #
ziggy7 wrote:
I would never agree to give up the RAW files. My daughter and I take 1000 to 2000 images at a wedding. The bride only sees the best 10%, and those are carefully edited. This way, everyone thinks we are great. Of course we use a contract.
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Aug 8, 2012 09:48:35 #
Aug 8, 2012 09:51:09 #
The rain falleth on the Just and Unjust fella
but mostly on the Just
for the Unjust hath the Just's umbrella
but mostly on the Just
for the Unjust hath the Just's umbrella
Aug 8, 2012 09:55:58 #
I thnk if I were the photographer I would be more furious than scared. Not creating a written contract was just a flat-out mistake that I'm sure he will never make again. The fact that he gave All of the images to the client without removing the out-takes shows he was in complete compliance to the verbal agreement. Getting screen-shots of the posted photos and comments by the couples' friends about how good the pictures are should vindicate him completely because lets face it, whether a photograph is "good" or not is as much subjective as objective (to the professionals here, I am not trying to slam your profession, but just look at the comments on the pictures posted on this website to see what I mean).
What would really get me are the libelous use of threats for the purpose of extorting money from the photographer. If it were me, I would be extremely tempted to officially press charges on the grounds of extortion and/or trying to perpetrate a scam.
But I'm just mean that way I guess.
What would really get me are the libelous use of threats for the purpose of extorting money from the photographer. If it were me, I would be extremely tempted to officially press charges on the grounds of extortion and/or trying to perpetrate a scam.
But I'm just mean that way I guess.
Aug 8, 2012 10:36:50 #
Aug 8, 2012 10:38:22 #
BigD
Loc: The LEFT Coast
What's funny is that because it was totally verbal he has zero liability. He has no obligation to provide anything since all he has to say is "prove it". No contract can work both ways (although I use a contract) but rule number one is never work or an attorney OR HIS WIFE. Wait until this ends up on FOX news and they make this couple look like the trash they are in front of a few million people.
Aug 8, 2012 11:12:08 #
[quote=skidooman]. "Every effort will be made to obtain quality images. No gaurantee implied or otherwise is made".
Just a suggestion: Every REASONABLE effort will be made..." If you don't qualify the word "every," a lawyer can ask why you didn't have several more assistants, come to scout a few days ahead, shoot from a helicopter, etc. Those could be included within "every" effort, but not within "every reasonable" effort.
Just a suggestion: Every REASONABLE effort will be made..." If you don't qualify the word "every," a lawyer can ask why you didn't have several more assistants, come to scout a few days ahead, shoot from a helicopter, etc. Those could be included within "every" effort, but not within "every reasonable" effort.
Aug 8, 2012 11:26:21 #
When I was doing weddings I found that the image quality depended on the mood of the bride. If she is happy then she will be beautiful. If she is upset then there is nothing that the photographer can do.
You can't lie to the camera.
Beauty is as beauty does.
I did one wedding where the bride was drunk before the wedding. I didn't think much of the pictures.
You can't lie to the camera.
Beauty is as beauty does.
I did one wedding where the bride was drunk before the wedding. I didn't think much of the pictures.
Aug 8, 2012 11:37:08 #
Well it could have been aimed at getting the work for free, hoping that the photographer would be so anxious to end the controversy that he might decide just to walk away and forget about receiving fair payment for his work. On the other hand there is the aspect of just how subjective the appreciation of a photo can be. I once was asked to take pictures of a low key wedding between a very attractive lady in her early 40's and a man whom I perceived to be a kind of dumpy 50 yo who was marrying way out of his league. I managed to keep my mouth shut during negotiations, but when the pictures came back I was 'nailed'. No 'photographic lies' had been told that day. The images clearly revealed that in the photographer's opinion the bride was beautiful, but the groom was a dumpy 50 yo man who had managed to marry way out of his league.
Aug 8, 2012 11:53:18 #
DaveHam
Loc: Reading UK
America; synonymous with the word attorney. Any country with that many 'lawyers' has to be faced with that many idiotic and meaningless lawsuits.
Aug 8, 2012 11:53:39 #
Stupid is as stupid does, No contract,No model release= shouldn't be in this business anyway! There is only one, OK two reasons that I would ever give only the raw file up. #1. Working as a second shooter, it's not my gig and you shouldn't try to pass it off as such. #2. If I ever snap a shot that I think will be published in National Geographic or with Reuters.
Back in the day when Film was king and Digital was just a dream, I used to shoot a lot of low budget weddings. The client would buy the film( I'd make recommendations) I'd shoot the wedding and hand the film over for them to process afterwards.
That was in the past... Now I have to have liability insurance, lengthy legal contracts, releases, and the knowledge of when to say "No Thanks", and walk away. I would rather be hungry than have to deal with a client who can not be satisfied. Yes, I have clauses in the contract to deal with arbitration and limitations on amounts of damage.
And on that note... Caveat Venditor Et Caveat Emptor, You get what you pay for.
Back in the day when Film was king and Digital was just a dream, I used to shoot a lot of low budget weddings. The client would buy the film( I'd make recommendations) I'd shoot the wedding and hand the film over for them to process afterwards.
That was in the past... Now I have to have liability insurance, lengthy legal contracts, releases, and the knowledge of when to say "No Thanks", and walk away. I would rather be hungry than have to deal with a client who can not be satisfied. Yes, I have clauses in the contract to deal with arbitration and limitations on amounts of damage.
And on that note... Caveat Venditor Et Caveat Emptor, You get what you pay for.
Aug 8, 2012 12:23:37 #
I give the marriage 6 months on the outside. He is going to be sorry he ever met her.
Aug 8, 2012 12:29:27 #
philo wrote:
I give the marriage 6 months on the outside. He is going to be sorry he ever met her.
I think you got that right!!!!
Aug 8, 2012 12:40:08 #
desertRat1950 wrote:
Well it could have been aimed at getting the work ... (show quote)
PS: It's a good thing I agreed to do the pictures for free. For some strange reason, the bride loved them...the groom hated them.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.