This is probably something we will see more and more of as time goes by. The "in" thing right now is "reportage" which is a fly on the wall approach to wedding photography. This is casual shooting without setting up any formal photographs with "arty" type twists and turns. Done properly it can be interesting but can be dangerous. While a photography judge at a competition will see a photograph and deem it was taken in an interesting pose at, say, a 33 degree angle a judge in court may see it as a poorly taken photograph.
So many people will ask for reportage and describe it as "unposed, casual photography" .............. if you question further you will discover what they really mean is simular to the ones that appear in the glossy bridal magazines. Truth be told all the photographs that you see in these magazines are done under ideal conditions using models who are posed to look like they were just standing around looking beautiful. Hours of work goes into these shots.
This word "reportage" seems to mean different things to different people and the customer and photographer may see it differently.
Anyway ............ that does not seem to be the case below. By NOT doing the posed family and bridal party shots which are part and parcel of every wedding and family event a photographer is leaving themselves wide open to end up like this one has done.
Read on ......
By Paul Stokes (Tuesday October 06 2009, Irish Independent.)
A newly-married couple have successfully sued their wedding photographer after paying £1,450 (€1600 ) for a "woefully inadequate" service.
Marc and Sylvia Day were presented with a disc full of pictures from the big day with heads chopped off, inattentive guests and random close-ups of vehicles and of the 400 images ...... only 22 met with their approval.
In a further insult to the occasion, Gareth Bowers, of Fresh Images photography, misspelled their names on thank you cards, bearing a variety of the pictures, which read: “Thank you Slyvia and Mark”.
They have now been awarded compensations by a judge after winning a case for breach of contract against the photographer.
Mrs Day, 50, a shop assistant, from Wakefield, West Yorkshire, said: “He seemed very reasonable, very polite and professional.
”But we were left with no alternative but to take this man to court because the service we received was absolutely appalling.”
Deputy District Judge Keith Nightingale, found in favour of the Days at Pontefract county court and criticised Mr Bowers for providing “inappropriate” photos and a “woefully inadequate” service.
Mr Bowers told the court he had been in business for four years and in that time covering just 20 weddings.
He ordered him to pay back £500 from the £1,450 to the Days with £450 in damages, £100 for their loss of earning and £170 in court fees.
Judge Nightingale told him: “It is not just the quality of the photographs, but the subject of the photos is unworthy of wedding photographs.”.
Mrs Day said things went from bad to worse after a different video operator turned up at her home on the wedding on August 24 last year and she “broke down in tears” when she saw the photographs.
She said: “There are no nice group shots with the usual, bride and groom and family and bridesmaids".
Mr Day, 48, described his experience with the wedding photographer as “a car crash” from start to finish.
He said: “Some of those memories we will never get back again. He is the Don Quixote of wedding photography - he just doesn't believe that he can't do it.”
Mr Bowers didn't wish to comment.
- Paul Stokes
© Telegraph.co.uk
1 comment:
I have seen some of the photographs since and they were a little on the weak side and were taken "on the hoof" as we say. It looks somewhat like the client and the photographer had different ideas on what reportage photography is. This is a real pity and we probably need to educate the customer and sit down longer with them and really tease out what they really mean.
Post a Comment