Wedding photographer

Ath_Wat

Sandtree said:

Ath_Wat said:

Undervalued said:

Ath_Wat said:

Sandtree said:

Ath_Wat said:

Sandtree said:

Lavendyr said:
something goes wrong on your wedding day it isn't something that can be recreated. 

Technically it can, or at least photographer insurance covers the cost to restage the event in the event of lost photos etc

Seriously?  "Hi, thanks for coming to our wedding last month, however the photos have all gone wrong so can you all turn up again next Saturday in the same clothes so we can  shoot a load more?  Thanks."

Has this ever happened?  I can't see it would possibly work.  

Yes, though most are pragmatic and will be just inviting key people and not the cast of thousands... restaging the event isn't a full rerun with food/drinks etc. As others have said, it'll never be the same so no point trying to get everyone.

It's not so much "it will never be the same", it's just "some photos of some of the people who came to our wedding".

But what is the alternative? As I said earlier it is either this or financial compensation (or a combination of both).

I don't think there is any alternative to financial compensation. Asking friends and family to give up their time for a set of artificially staged photographs  is to me a nonsensical non-solution.

For the photographer that is certainly the preferred outcome, their insurance pays out and they move on. Whilst their insurer will payout on the cost of rehiring the church etc to repeat the photos the photographer themselves has to reinvest a lot of time in taking and editing the photos etc.

It comes down a lot to how you view photos... would you rather tell the grandkids that the photos were lost after the tog had their bag stolen or would you rather show them the photo of you in the dress (its up to you if you elaborate on the fact its a restaging) 

Somebody will have photos of you in the dress.  Why bother producing a faked "official" one when there will be hundreds of genuine, if not professional, ones should anyone really want to see it?

I get that some people might want to but they'd have to rely on everyone else being prepared to give their time up as well, and I just can't see that happening.  People travel to weddings, especially the important people.

If everyone happens to live locally and happens to be free then maybe, but I've never been to a wedding where that could possibly have been the case.

Also, I doubt the insurer would pay out anything like the sum for rehiring everything and covering travelling expenses of guests, as they know any court would award compensation that was far, far lower than that.  It would just be a full refund of the photography fee and a small sum for damages.

Undervalued

Sandtree said:

Ath_Wat said:

Undervalued said:

Ath_Wat said:

Sandtree said:

Ath_Wat said:

Sandtree said:

Lavendyr said:
something goes wrong on your wedding day it isn't something that can be recreated. 

Technically it can, or at least photographer insurance covers the cost to restage the event in the event of lost photos etc

Seriously?  "Hi, thanks for coming to our wedding last month, however the photos have all gone wrong so can you all turn up again next Saturday in the same clothes so we can  shoot a load more?  Thanks."

Has this ever happened?  I can't see it would possibly work.  

Yes, though most are pragmatic and will be just inviting key people and not the cast of thousands... restaging the event isn't a full rerun with food/drinks etc. As others have said, it'll never be the same so no point trying to get everyone.

It's not so much "it will never be the same", it's just "some photos of some of the people who came to our wedding".

But what is the alternative? As I said earlier it is either this or financial compensation (or a combination of both).

I don't think there is any alternative to financial compensation. Asking friends and family to give up their time for a set of artificially staged photographs  is to me a nonsensical non-solution.

For the photographer that is certainly the preferred outcome, their insurance pays out and they move on. Whilst their insurer will payout on the cost of rehiring the church etc to repeat the photos the photographer themselves has to reinvest a lot of time in taking and editing the photos etc.

It comes down a lot to how you view photos... would you rather tell the grandkids that the photos were lost after the tog had their bag stolen or would you rather show them the photo of you in the dress (its up to you if you elaborate on the fact its a restaging) 

Assuming the photographer has professional indemnity insurance (in addition to their public liability, cover which they would be stupid not to have). Plus the insurance would need to cover whatever error / natural disaster or act of God caused the problem.

user1977

Ath_Wat said:

Sandtree said:

Ath_Wat said:

Undervalued said:

Ath_Wat said:

Sandtree said:

Ath_Wat said:

Sandtree said:

Lavendyr said:
something goes wrong on your wedding day it isn't something that can be recreated. 

Technically it can, or at least photographer insurance covers the cost to restage the event in the event of lost photos etc

Seriously?  "Hi, thanks for coming to our wedding last month, however the photos have all gone wrong so can you all turn up again next Saturday in the same clothes so we can  shoot a load more?  Thanks."

Has this ever happened?  I can't see it would possibly work.  

Yes, though most are pragmatic and will be just inviting key people and not the cast of thousands... restaging the event isn't a full rerun with food/drinks etc. As others have said, it'll never be the same so no point trying to get everyone.

It's not so much "it will never be the same", it's just "some photos of some of the people who came to our wedding".

But what is the alternative? As I said earlier it is either this or financial compensation (or a combination of both).

I don't think there is any alternative to financial compensation. Asking friends and family to give up their time for a set of artificially staged photographs  is to me a nonsensical non-solution.

For the photographer that is certainly the preferred outcome, their insurance pays out and they move on. Whilst their insurer will payout on the cost of rehiring the church etc to repeat the photos the photographer themselves has to reinvest a lot of time in taking and editing the photos etc.

It comes down a lot to how you view photos... would you rather tell the grandkids that the photos were lost after the tog had their bag stolen or would you rather show them the photo of you in the dress (its up to you if you elaborate on the fact its a restaging) 

Somebody will have photos of you in the dress.  Why bother producing a faked "official" one when there will be hundreds of genuine, if not professional, ones should anyone really want to see it?

Yes, I was about to say that - it's not as if we're still in an era where the professional photographer is the only person turning up with a camera. There'll be plenty of pics of the actual event.

Sandtree

Undervalued said:
Assuming the photographer has professional indemnity insurance (in addition to their public liability, cover which they would be stupid not to have). Plus the insurance would need to cover whatever error / natural disaster or act of God caused the problem.

Like most SME businesses, there are combined policies explicitly designed for photographers that package the relevant coverages.

Unless they were an all risks policy then yes an insured peril policy needs an insured peril to have occurred but having looked at these types of policy for loss of photos the coverage is fairly extensive short of a deliberate act by the photographer... cover for their kit is more restrictive so leave the camera in the wedding car to go back for a bag or something its likely the camera wouldn't be covered but the photos would... ultimately comes down to individual policy wordings and like everything, there are budget and high quality policy options out there

SneepLife

Undervalued said:

Lavendyr said:

Sandtree said:

Lavendyr said:
something goes wrong on your wedding day it isn't something that can be recreated. 

Technically it can, or at least photographer insurance covers the cost to restage the event in the event of lost photos etc

Restaging isn't the same though, is it. You can't recapture those moments. I'm divorced now and I still see my wedding photos as a day of complete joy. While things went downhill after that, that was a day of happiness and that isn't something you can recreate after the fact. 

Indeed. However in any type of work, despite taking all the precautions that can reasonably be taken consistent with providing a cost effective service, there is a possibility of something going wrong.

If that happens with wedding photography and all images are lost, the only options are either re-staging or financial compensation.

As far as I know, no legally binding precedent has been set in the High Court about the "value" of lost wedding photos. However many years ago a County Court judge made a sensible ruling that is often used as a yardstick.

He ruled that as the couple had been willing to spend £1000 (say) on photographs of their wedding, that was the value they put on them. So, if they were totally lost they should be entitled to the same amount in compensation, plus of course a refund of anything they had paid up front.

Hello Undervalued - I don’t suppose you recall the name of the case where the county court judge said this do you (or, if not, are there any references to it online)? This is extremely relevant to a dispute that I currently have with a photographer. Many thanks! 

Undervalued

SneepLife said:

Undervalued said:

Lavendyr said:

Sandtree said:

Lavendyr said:
something goes wrong on your wedding day it isn't something that can be recreated. 

Technically it can, or at least photographer insurance covers the cost to restage the event in the event of lost photos etc

Restaging isn't the same though, is it. You can't recapture those moments. I'm divorced now and I still see my wedding photos as a day of complete joy. While things went downhill after that, that was a day of happiness and that isn't something you can recreate after the fact. 

Indeed. However in any type of work, despite taking all the precautions that can reasonably be taken consistent with providing a cost effective service, there is a possibility of something going wrong.

If that happens with wedding photography and all images are lost, the only options are either re-staging or financial compensation.

As far as I know, no legally binding precedent has been set in the High Court about the "value" of lost wedding photos. However many years ago a County Court judge made a sensible ruling that is often used as a yardstick.

He ruled that as the couple had been willing to spend £1000 (say) on photographs of their wedding, that was the value they put on them. So, if they were totally lost they should be entitled to the same amount in compensation, plus of course a refund of anything they had paid up front.

Hello Undervalued - I don’t suppose you recall the name of the case where the county court judge said this do you (or, if not, are there any references to it online)? This is extremely relevant to a dispute that I currently have with a photographer. Many thanks! 

I've replied to the PM you sent me asking the same question.

For the benefit of anybody else reading, the case I was referring to was at least 20 years ago and if I remember correctly in N. Ireland (although the same laws apply to England and Wales too) - Scotland may be different.