Printing from a photo cd - is it illegal?

Richie-from-the-Boro

fitshase, sorry, watched the England match.

1-"" He doesn't seem to get that if you ask and pay for high res images on a CD with printing rights, a photographer will give them to you ""#
I do and in this thread have advocated it at the initial consultation, they should be FOC or you don't get two grand and no contract

2- ""Most of the time they are low res for printing anything bigger than 7" x 5" ""
Exactly my point, why won't you give what I pay for, you took my money and give my family non original rubbish
If it's watermarked it's non original in law

3 -"" He also doesn't seem to get that the £2000 ""
I wouldn't mind paying £3000 if I get what I pay for but watermarked low res is not what you took with your camera

4. -"" a photographer has the right to set their own terms and conditions ""
Your right they do, but so does the neglected person getting married, and the neglected person is paying the wonkas

5.- "" all photographers are bad ""
I never said that, I said you were as skilled as a plumber / mechanic / house painter no more no less
I pay the plumber / mechanic / house painter and expect them to leave me with a job done not a facsimile of a job done

6. - "" I suggest that if any photographer comes across Richie wanting some photos taken, steer well clear. It's just not worth the hassle ""
I suggest anyone getting married should steer clear of any photographer who will not agree in writing to give a high res printable CD, of a common standard the boot, and please tell all your friends not to use his services.

Treat them no different to wheel clampers, will writers et al

I particularly wish that Martins researchers would look at the legal but less than ethical practices of wedding photographers. There may well be a lot that needs closer scrutiny - any moderators following this thread ?

Richie-from-the-Boro

PasturesNew,

It's not "" creating a masterpiece in oils "" its a moment in time captured by a mechanical device, The photographer has originated nothing, in fact the original content is created by the bride / groom / family & friends.

The photographer provides equipment and a very mediocre level of skill
The family provide the content
The software and bog standard wholesalers provide the wherewithal
And the photographer claims copyright on the content generated by the family

Don't you get the irony of your own industry ?

lucylucky

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

PasturesNew,

It's not "" creating a masterpiece in oils "" its a moment in time captured by a mechanical device, The photographer has originated nothing, in fact the original content is created by the bride / groom / family & friends.

The photographer provides equipment and a very mediocre level of skill
The family provide the content
The software and bog standard wholesalers provide the wherewithal
And the photographer claims copyright on the content generated by the family

Don't you get the irony of your own industry ?

For some reason you have got one hell of a chip on your shoulder.

Were you frightened by a photographer as a child?

spud17

Did they have this type of discussion in the pre-digital days, when the wedding photographer didn't hand over the negatives with the finished album?

Richie, I'm usually with you, but I'm afraid, not in this case.

I'll repeat, if you don't agree with the T&Cs, then take your custom elsewhere.

Richie-from-the-Boro

spud17 wrote: »

Did they have this type of discussion in the pre-digital days, when the wedding photographer didn't hand over the negatives with the finished album?

Richie, I'm usually with you, but I'm afraid, not in this case.

I'll repeat, if you don't agree with the T&Cs, then take your custom elsewhere.

Thanks spud17, your input is much appreciated.

KimYeovil

What a miserable, thieving, git. Richie, if you want high-res photos then pay for them. Stop trying to steal them. If you do not want to pay a photographer for their services then take the snapshots yourself.

You have not provided any argument that the practice is less than ethical. It is you who is lacking in ethics.

Richie-from-the-Boro

KimYeovil wrote: »

What a miserable, thieving, git. Richie, if you want high-res photos then pay for them. Stop trying to steal them. If you do not want to pay a photographer for their services then take the snapshots yourself.

You have not provided any argument that the practice is less than ethical. It is you who is lacking in ethics.

Thanks KimYeovil for your input its much appreciated !

Aiadi

KimYeovil wrote: »

if you want high-res photos then pay for them. Stop trying to steal them. If you do not want to pay .....

Well, you are the one who is a stupid and miserable git. Moreover you do sound like a thief yourself. The whole point you idiot is that we are talking about people who are PAYING for the service you moron.

Aiadi

KimYeovil wrote: »

What a miserable, thieving, git. Richie, if you want high-res photos then pay for them. Stop trying to steal them. If you do not want to pay a photographer for their services then take the snapshots yourself.

You have not provided any argument that the practice is less than ethical. It is you who is lacking in ethics.

I have also quoted your post in case you decided to delete it once you sober up so the mods can see the attitude some of the posters unfortunately have.

Aiadi

Richie-from-the-Boro wrote: »

Thanks KimYeovil for your input its much appreciated !

You are much more restrained (and civilised) than myself sir....... Thanks for persevering in your effort to expose this practice but I think that you should now let go and leave the dogs barking.