Wedding Photo Misery

Just_Plain_Jane

star2sparkle wrote: »

Isn't it funny? He seemed such a great guy too and everyone loved him.

That's probably how he gets away with it. People haven't got the heart to tell him his work is sh!te.

Kildare

For the amount of time the photographer was at your wedding its a very small number of photos, but do check your contract as to what he agreed to supply. There was one photographer who I really liked and would have gone for but she stated very clearly she only supplied 100 pics on a disc - I guess these were the ones she thought best - rather than giving a bigger range.

Our wedding photographer provided 800 pics (400 in colour, same 400 in B&W) on a disk so we can make our own prints. The option was for a disc or album within his set price, we opted to pay extra to have the album on top. It's strange that you have to pay for prints from the photographer as very few still do this. It used to be how they made their money before digital but not so much now.

Also, the pre-wedding shoot should have taken place before you signed the contract. Many do this so you can see what it is like to work with them, you can then view the pics and decide if you like them. You get to keep the pics only if you book with the photographer. We did this and its really good way to decide if you are comfortable with the photographer.

andygb

Just_Plain_Jane wrote: »

That's probably how he gets away with it. People haven't got the heart to tell him his work is sh!te.

It may be worth seeing an example of his work before coming to that conclusion. There are many photographers who will back out of doing certain weddings, because they get bad vibes - usually "bridezillas" who expect a lot for not very much money, people who have delusions about their own looks/image, people who try to tell the photographer which shots they want, and then moan because the shots/composition do not look right.
Wedding photography cannot be judged on the amount of shots taken, or how big the lenses are/make of camera used.
A good place to start, is the pre wedding shoot, where you get to see the photographer's work, and most importantly what you look like together in a photo.
I have done a few weddings (but prefer not to), and one for a mate was an absolute nightmare. Immediately everyone came out of the church, they wanted to get down the pub for the reception, and they had already taken off ties and the rest, and there were children running everywhere, plus there was nearly a fight over who should stand next to who. The bride and groom were not helpful, and later said the photos were OK, but that everyone looked scruffy and miserable. I then said - "Yes, that is exactly how you were, scruffy and miserable - on the best day of your life!"
So, it is not always the photographer's fault, he/she can only work with what they are given.

Just_Plain_Jane

andygb wrote: »

A good place to start, is the pre wedding shoot, where you get to see the photographer's work

Which the OP asked for but didn't get. Speaks volumes really.

InsideInsurance

200 photos does sound low but not stupidly so, especially as some togs explicitly state the maximum number you'll get.

With out wedding photographer we got around 150 raw pictures plus a couple of dozen of those re-edited and that was from about 4 hours.

Disliked our photos but that was because of the subject matter but taken into account what our photographer had to work with he did exceptionally well.... though very clearly he is was a fashion photographer that does weddings on the side rather than an out and out wedding tog but I knew that when I booked him and ignoring the staged group photos the ideas and execution of the rest were great.

Really you need to speak to the photographer before you can go anywhere else. There can be genuine reasons for issues and a decent professional will accept that and deal with it properly. A friends' tog managed to have memory card problems and whilst hitting the agreed number of photos they still did a free second session of the couple in the park grounds etc to make up for the missing ones. My friend loved it as she'd lost weight since the wedding and had fresh, non-tear stained makeup in the new set

The fact the tog is missing is a concern but not an automatic issue. We "lost" out photos (the CD got corrupted) and so emailed about getting a duplicate and didnt hear anything for 3 weeks but then got an email back from them saying they'd been in Fiji doing a shoot and then stayed on for a couple of weeks holiday but now back and CD in the post FOC.

It would be good to get a second professional opinion on the photos to firstly substantiate your concerns and secondly to find out how salvageable they are

podperson

Star2Sparkle - have you received actual copies of them on a dvd or just a link to them on his site? If it's the latter then you might not be able to just copy them off it - I know on mine I have protection on it that (hopefully!) means people can't save the images from it. Are you meant to receive a dvd with them on?

Reading the replies I'm starting to think I work too hard :rotfl:- I always just sort through the images, take all of the decent ones, edit them all, put effects on some and then provide on a dvd - with prints and albums as extra once the couple has seen the photos. I actually wouldn't have thought to only do a few of them - seems a little pointless to me for people not to have all the piccies from their day.

InsideInsurance

If they are on the site and a visitor can see them then they can copy them off.... by the very nature they are being displayed means they aren't protected.... any "protection" is simply creates an inconvenience to saving them not a prevention.

If you want to stop people "stealing" the photos then watermarking them is a much better option but saying that, have seen people using photos despite great big watermarks all over them

andygb

Just_Plain_Jane wrote: »

Which the OP asked for but didn't get. Speaks volumes really.

It is called a "pre wedding" shoot for a reason, it happens before the wedding. The fact that it never went ahead should have been a warning. I would like to know the timescale for all this - photographer first contacted - pre wedding shoot - wedding - wedding photos.
If someone let you down on the pre wedding shoot, would you carry on and hire them for the wedding, and say that they seemed nice?

star2sparkle

In reply, no, we didn't receive them on dvd but a link to a file sharing site and there we can basically get the pictures and crop them so that the writing isn't on the bottom of them! I have already saved them.
On his actually wedding site, most of his couples had way over 300 images, often over 500 so there wasn't a limit he could do.
Incidentally this photographer was very keen to do our wedding because it was different and I certainly wasn't a bridezilla, I don't ever expect very much but to pay so much money for something that a friend could have done...(wish they had now!) with pics that often weren't complimentary. For example, our best man was stood in the rain (it did rain a little but didn't dampen spirits) beaming away so proudly that it bought a lump to my throat when I glanced at him but the photographer got a picture of him looking !!!!ed off! I never even saw our friend look annoyed the whole day!
Some of the pictures are good but not all of them and we are meant to pick out at least 100 but we can't.
Incidentally, I didn't sign a contact either...
He still hasn't got back to us. I have emailed him in detail and my husband has asked for him to ring but nothing as yet.

gadgeteer_2

Hmm, 200 for a 10 hour day does seem suspiciously low. I'm just in the middle of processing a wedding from last weekend where i was there for just 2 hours (ceremony only) and there's around 200 just for that. And that's not counting my duplicates.

For £1000 I'd certainly expect much more than 200 photos.

As for the quality of the photos it's very difficult to say without having seen them. As AndyGB said we can only work with what's there. But again it does seem strange how guests have captured smiles and photographer doesn't.