Reading mode: Light Dark

Angry Wedding Photog (long)

Go to last post
Normally good cynicism isn't wasted on me. Being a photographer I am pretty thick skinned, you have to be in that business. But I suggest you read your own post again. You basically made a cynical remark that painted all wedding photographers as "prima donnas" and then some; and in addition you really didn't make a point, nor did you add anything of value to the discussion.

I agree that the person in question should not have reacted the way she did, but then we just heard one part of the story. It did open up an interesting and important discussion though. There is a lot of good advice and stories in this thread you should take a look at, it seems the issue is not just black and white as you like it to be.

The wedding business is changing no doubt about it, but it actually changed to the better. B&G demand better imagery, true emotional images and quality service.

Talking to myself: "Why after all these years going to these different forums do I still get sucked into these silly discussions?" Now there is some good cynicism, or was that sarcastic?

Best,

Marcel
DennisASA said:
I don't know, Marcel. I guess outlandish cynicism is a tool I use
to make my point. Next time I'll use my softar filter to make sure
I don't upset the easily offended.

This was a simple situation that anyone who has done more than a
couple of weddings was sure to have come across in some form or
another. The people skills needed should have been intuitive, not
just to a Wedding Photog, who should be more sensitive to the
public than the general population, but to anyone who interacts
with human beings on a daily basis.

Wedding photography, like any other profession/business, needs to
adapt to the needs of an ever changing market. Digital is a big
evolution in the process. Those who have trouble dealing with
simple human interaction are going to fall behind the curve, as
tens of thousands of new, part time digital SLR owners/wedding
photographers, begin to become competent in their craft.

Any bride and groom faced with the realization that there are
alternatives to the $4000 Wedding Book, are going to look for, and
find them.

As for what I'm doing on this forum? I didn't know I needed your
permission..... oh, never mind... this is all so tedious.
Grrrrrr.....

Regards.
Click to expand...
--
Marcel
http://www.marcelsieglephoto.com
 
dbpix said:
Sorry about all the controversy. I didn't think I'd get such a
response, but at least I got a response.
Click to expand...
Relax and don't feel sorry - you don't have to. You did nothing wrong, you just happened to ba a part of some sort of the bigger picture so you got harmed a little.

This is a web forum anyway, some people say here things they would love to say in life but have no right/guts to say so no hard feelings...
 
marcel siegle said:
Normally good cynicism isn't wasted on me. Being a photographer I
am pretty thick skinned, you have to be in that business. But I
suggest you read your own post again. You basically made a cynical
remark that painted all wedding photographers as "prima donnas" and
then some; and in addition you really didn't make a point, nor did
you add anything of value to the discussion.
Click to expand...
He didn't call ALL wedding photographers prima donnas. He called HIMSELF a prima donna. If you really got THAT offended, it's only because you think of yourself as a prima donna and feel like you got called on it.

I shoot weddings ( and parties and conferences ), and I wasn't offended in the least.
 
bad_idea said:
my english may not be too good, but I kind of remeber that "hired
help" refer to an assistant.
Click to expand...
Hired help has a somewhat derogatory overtone and is usually meant to imply "servants" like maids and such.

My point was that we denigrate what we don't understand. I've seen photographers on here sneer at plumbers and electricians without understanding that both are very skilled trades. Photographers need to seem themselves (I count myself in here) as tradesmen, offering a service, with all that this entails.
 
During the ceremony, my guests should stay in their seats and not run around taking pictures and ruining the moment for everyone (i.e., slowly down the ceremony, making the bride look your way etc.). As long as they stay in their seats, I don't see the harm in them snapping a few.

I suppose if I were a more formal person, I might ban photography altogether except for the pro. Like do you really expect to shoot away when invited to the White House for a wedding. The same curtesy should be extended to the host if requested. If the bride wanted to be treated like the princess of England on her wedding day, you should oblige. But once again, we were not that formal.

Formals take a lot of time. Frankly, I didn't want to be there. I wanted to be at the reception. As the groom, I want the photographer get it over with ASAP and I am not really there to pose for the guests. The guest should be in the reception hall enjoying themselves until they are called for the formal. If they need a picture, they can buy one. Most snapshots of formal are worthless anyway. People process them at the supermarket, look at them and it gets lost. So I don't want my formals (pictures I will treasure) interrupted for someones snapshots.

With everything running smoothly, the formals are over quickly and everyone gets back to the reception where the guests should be allowed to take as many pictures as they want provided they are not impinging on the other guest's enjoyment. Stepping in front of people, blocking their view, just so you can sqeeze off a shot of the toast is really uncalled for. That's why we hired the pro - so grandma's view of the toast will not be blocked by 20 amature photographers.

Then there is all the time wasted in a frozen smile when some old aunt is trying to get her 2 megapixel camera to work. For a picture that is useless to anyone except for the aunt.

Since I am paying some lousy $200 a head for the whole affair, I expect the guest to cough up a few bucks of their own money if they want a formal photo.

So while I appreciate people trying to do good, and they may be better than the photographer I hire, they should not try to be a photographer at my wedding.

With that said - my wedding went smoothly. Not a SLR/med format in sight except for the pro and his assistant.

On the other hand, the pro is part of my wedding team. He/she acts on behalf of me. They should not be rude to any of the guest. Some of the guest are well respected members of the family and should be treated with the utmost respect.
 
Caveat Emptor said:
He didn't call ALL wedding photographers prima donnas. He called
HIMSELF a prima donna. If you really got THAT offended, it's only
because you think of yourself as a prima donna and feel like you
got called on it.
Click to expand...
I appreciate your insight, of course he was talking about himself, how could I have missed that? Oh I know my tutu was blinding me.

Cheers,

Marcel

--
Marcel
http://www.marcelsieglephoto.com
 
That way your shots aren't affected but theirs are all bown (assuming they use flash in the first place).
William Night said:
High Volume Printer said:
I though if I had this problem and I seriously WANTED to solve it
I would get a projector slave flash and create an overlay with my
web address on it and then point the affair at the guests - now any
random flash will generate an ad for my website across the images.

Obviously I would have to turn it off when I shot - but a little
electronics and you could produce a copyright control flash system.
Click to expand...
That's a hilarious idea, I wonder if it would work... I doubt you
could overlay anything legible but you could probably put an
annoying pattern of highlights in their photos...

Take an optical slave that can swivel 180 degrees. Point the sensor
at the crowd and the flash at the subject. Stand in front of it so
you don't trigger it.

Heh. Rude, but funny. Might be a good joke to play on a fellow
photographer when they weren't working.
Click to expand...
--
http://public.fotki.com/wibble/public_display/
 
marcel siegle said:
marcel siegle said:
He didn't call ALL wedding photographers prima donnas. He called
HIMSELF a prima donna. If you really got THAT offended, it's only
because you think of yourself as a prima donna and feel like you
got called on it.
Click to expand...
I appreciate your insight, of course he was talking about himself,
how could I have missed that? Oh I know my tutu was blinding me.
Click to expand...
Must be. You should find some kind of way to tie that thing back so you can see the real world. It's nice out here, and we'd love for you to join us!!
 
I think it is an important discussion to have, in fact I learned something and gotten a good insight how people feel on both sides. No need to be sorry.

Best,

Marcel
Paul_U said:
dbpix said:
Sorry about all the controversy. I didn't think I'd get such a
response, but at least I got a response.
Click to expand...
Relax and don't feel sorry - you don't have to. You did nothing
wrong, you just happened to ba a part of some sort of the bigger
picture so you got harmed a little.

This is a web forum anyway, some people say here things they would
love to say in life but have no right/guts to say so no hard
feelings...
Click to expand...
--
Marcel
http://www.marcelsieglephoto.com
 
So had a contract with the B&G stating that she was to be the exclusive photographer. Fine.

However, you did not sign a contract with her. Moreover, it was terribly rude of her to tell you not to shoot. That's really none of her business.

It should be the B&G's responsibility to see to it that they meet the terms of the contract. The appropriate course of action would be for someone associated with the wedding, such as an usher or a close family member to ask you not to take pictures.

It was terribly boorish for the photographer to confront you herself.

I can see her side of the story, but it's perfectly valid for you to think "who the hell does she thinks she is, telling me that!?" If she had an issue with you taking pictures, she should take it up with her business contacts in the B&G's family and they should have confronted you about it.

A wedding photographer has a responsibility not to leave a bad taste in any guest's mouth. Since she did leave a bad taste in your mouth, she is in the wrong. Period.
dbpix said:
Over the weekend I'm at my nephews wedding. When the ceremony was
over I watched the photographer set up the family at the alter for
the formals along with about twenty other people . I stood off to
the side about thirty feet away taking a few shots . They were not
going to be all that good since I was getting just the side view of
the family and I was not using the flash. I was standing there
with the my brother inlaw the grooms father when the photog stops
and comes walking over to me. She asked me " In what capacity are
you at this wedding for?" I told her I was a guest. She says
"your violating my contract by taking photos so please stop" I
said are you going to stop those people also? pointing out to her
about four people standing directly around her tripod with cameras.
She says and this is the good part, " no your camera is a pro
camera" and walks back to her setup. I have a D100 . And the
people all around her had Point and Shoot's . So go over to my bag
and get out the G5 and start shooting again which I'm sure also
made her angry.
So,, this person nuts or what? I'm not a pro by any means. What
threat was I to her ?
Click to expand...
 
dustin_c1 said:
So had a contract with the B&G stating that she was to be the
exclusive photographer. Fine.

However, you did not sign a contract with her. Moreover, it was
terribly rude of her to tell you not to shoot. That's really none
of her business.

It should be the B&G's responsibility to see to it that they meet
the terms of the contract. The appropriate course of action would
be for someone associated with the wedding, such as an usher or a
close family member to ask you not to take pictures.

It was terribly boorish for the photographer to confront you herself.

I can see her side of the story, but it's perfectly valid for you
to think "who the hell does she thinks she is, telling me that!?"
If she had an issue with you taking pictures, she should take it up
with her business contacts in the B&G's family and they should have
confronted you about it.

A wedding photographer has a responsibility not to leave a bad
taste in any guest's mouth. Since she did leave a bad taste in
your mouth, she is in the wrong. Period.
Click to expand...
At face value your post seems to be morally "right".... but your post has a strong aftertaste of sour grapes.

How dare anybody stop you from pestering the B&G (as well as the pro) from taking pics.....

Hey Dustin, remember that you were invited by the B&G as a GUEST, to share this lovely moment in their lives.... not to ruin it by getting in the pro's way.

I was invited to a friend's wedding recently, & was irritated by 2 "uncle Harry"-type guys who spent the best part of 3 hours pestering all & sundry, taking what they called "candids".

Not nice at all.

regards,

--
JF
 
Nope. Not sour grapes. Nobody has ever asked me not to take a photo.

I suppose the tone (probably correctly perceived) was from me empathizing with the original poster's story -- but, as I said, I've never even had a remotely similar experience.

I can certainly see both sides of the story.
Joseph_Farrugia said:
dustin_c1 said:
So had a contract with the B&G stating that she was to be the
exclusive photographer. Fine.

However, you did not sign a contract with her. Moreover, it was
terribly rude of her to tell you not to shoot. That's really none
of her business.

It should be the B&G's responsibility to see to it that they meet
the terms of the contract. The appropriate course of action would
be for someone associated with the wedding, such as an usher or a
close family member to ask you not to take pictures.

It was terribly boorish for the photographer to confront you herself.

I can see her side of the story, but it's perfectly valid for you
to think "who the hell does she thinks she is, telling me that!?"
If she had an issue with you taking pictures, she should take it up
with her business contacts in the B&G's family and they should have
confronted you about it.

A wedding photographer has a responsibility not to leave a bad
taste in any guest's mouth. Since she did leave a bad taste in
your mouth, she is in the wrong. Period.
Click to expand...
At face value your post seems to be morally "right".... but your
post has a strong aftertaste of sour grapes.

How dare anybody stop you from pestering the B&G (as well as the
pro) from taking pics.....

Hey Dustin, remember that you were invited by the B&G as a GUEST,
to share this lovely moment in their lives.... not to ruin it by
getting in the pro's way.

I was invited to a friend's wedding recently, & was irritated by 2
"uncle Harry"-type guys who spent the best part of 3 hours
pestering all & sundry, taking what they called "candids".

Not nice at all.

regards,

--
JF
Click to expand...
 
dbpix said:
Over the weekend I'm at my nephews wedding. When the ceremony was
over I watched the photographer set up the family at the alter for
the formals along with about twenty other people . I stood off to
the side about thirty feet away taking a few shots . They were not
going to be all that good since I was getting just the side view of
the family and I was not using the flash. I was standing there
with the my brother inlaw the grooms father when the photog stops
and comes walking over to me. She asked me " In what capacity are
you at this wedding for?" I told her I was a guest. She says
"your violating my contract by taking photos so please stop" I
said are you going to stop those people also? pointing out to her
about four people standing directly around her tripod with cameras.
She says and this is the good part, " no your camera is a pro
camera" and walks back to her setup. I have a D100 . And the
people all around her had Point and Shoot's . So go over to my bag
and get out the G5 and start shooting again which I'm sure also
made her angry.
So,, this person nuts or what? I'm not a pro by any means. What
threat was I to her ?
Click to expand...
--
. http://pages.quicksilver.net.nz/oberto/gallery/
 
One common ground the guests and photog should have is to contribute to the enjoyment for the couple, not to be a pest as far as we can.

It bothers me sometimes when I am outside waiting for bride to arrive alongside about a dozen guests with cameras when they should be inside. Not because they are getting in my way (which they often do) or stealing my shots (I could care less, I never pose those ones anyway, I will get in theirs, they in mine, I am normally more courteous to them than they are to me tho), but because the bride wants to make her grand entrance inside up the aisle, the guests turning aroung and gasping, the UK tabloid press was not in her girlhood dreams (no offence to the actual UK tabloid press, their job is a different one)

Sorry for the long winded rant.

We do however have a smaller-than-everyone-seems-to-think conflict of interest. That is, the guest wants his own snapshot memories, the pro need to get the required shots. It is not going to be an ideal opportunity for the guest to improve his portfolio, and a wedding is not just a pro photo shoot. The guest is taking a usually SMALL portion of potential income from the pro, most of us have learnt to live with it in some way, it is not worth getting upset about, not at the wedding anyway. I think it should not be put on the shoulders of guests or family either.

Pros, smile through your gritted teeth. (its part of our job I think) Change your package deals if you have to. (I dont stop non interfering guests and still sell reprints)

Guests, respect the B&G by being a guest. Take your photos without being a nuisance to the B&G and stay out of the pros way. Please dont set up your own formals while the B&G are still being greeted, your welcome to copy mine over my shoulder, just dont expect the B&G to be looking at your camera.
Surely we can come to that agreement?
a.
TugBoat said:
During the ceremony, my guests should stay in their seats and not
run around taking pictures and ruining the moment for everyone
(i.e., slowly down the ceremony, making the bride look your way
etc.). As long as they stay in their seats, I don't see the harm
in them snapping a few.

I suppose if I were a more formal person, I might ban photography
altogether except for the pro. Like do you really expect to shoot
away when invited to the White House for a wedding. The same
curtesy should be extended to the host if requested. If the bride
wanted to be treated like the princess of England on her wedding
day, you should oblige. But once again, we were not that formal.

Formals take a lot of time. Frankly, I didn't want to be there. I
wanted to be at the reception. As the groom, I want the
photographer get it over with ASAP and I am not really there to
pose for the guests. The guest should be in the reception hall
enjoying themselves until they are called for the formal. If they
need a picture, they can buy one. Most snapshots of formal are
worthless anyway. People process them at the supermarket, look at
them and it gets lost. So I don't want my formals (pictures I will
treasure) interrupted for someones snapshots.

With everything running smoothly, the formals are over quickly and
everyone gets back to the reception where the guests should be
allowed to take as many pictures as they want provided they are not
impinging on the other guest's enjoyment. Stepping in front of
people, blocking their view, just so you can sqeeze off a shot of
the toast is really uncalled for. That's why we hired the pro - so
grandma's view of the toast will not be blocked by 20 amature
photographers.

Then there is all the time wasted in a frozen smile when some old
aunt is trying to get her 2 megapixel camera to work. For a
picture that is useless to anyone except for the aunt.

Since I am paying some lousy $200 a head for the whole affair, I
expect the guest to cough up a few bucks of their own money if they
want a formal photo.

So while I appreciate people trying to do good, and they may be
better than the photographer I hire, they should not try to be a
photographer at my wedding.

With that said - my wedding went smoothly. Not a SLR/med format in
sight except for the pro and his assistant.

On the other hand, the pro is part of my wedding team. He/she acts
on behalf of me. They should not be rude to any of the guest.
Some of the guest are well respected members of the family and
should be treated with the utmost respect.
Click to expand...
 
There is no way to stop people from wanting to take pictures at an event like a wedding. Especially if you have them posed for group shots etc.

Since I have started working with a pro photog shooting weddings, I have counted on numerous occasions when guests, family members, brides maids, and countless others have gotten in our way when setting up a shot. We are mostly on a tight schedule working against the clock.

My problem is NOT when others are off to the side shooting.. My problem is when they walk into my shot, or even step in front of my camera so they can sneak in a shot of their own. I want to tell them to get the hell out of the way sometimes. BUT YOU CANT!!! You must always smile and have creative ways to get them politely out of your way so you can finish the shot. People will remember for a very long time how you spoke impolitely to them, even if they deserved it. As a professional shooting a wedding for hire, you must always keep a cool head ( or at least look like you do ) and keep things moving while dodging all the obstacles created by other guests and family. Remember, its a happy event and the photographer must portray that in their photos.

Well, that my take on how it should be done. I would never argue or confront any guest. Thats it.
Vaughn
dbpix said:
Over the weekend I'm at my nephews wedding. When the ceremony was
over I watched the photographer set up the family at the alter for
the formals along with about twenty other people . I stood off to
the side about thirty feet away taking a few shots . They were not
going to be all that good since I was getting just the side view of
the family and I was not using the flash. I was standing there
with the my brother inlaw the grooms father when the photog stops
and comes walking over to me. She asked me " In what capacity are
you at this wedding for?" I told her I was a guest. She says
"your violating my contract by taking photos so please stop" I
said are you going to stop those people also? pointing out to her
about four people standing directly around her tripod with cameras.
She says and this is the good part, " no your camera is a pro
camera" and walks back to her setup. I have a D100 . And the
people all around her had Point and Shoot's . So go over to my bag
and get out the G5 and start shooting again which I'm sure also
made her angry.
So,, this person nuts or what? I'm not a pro by any means. What
threat was I to her ?
Click to expand...
--
Vaughn T. Winfree
Friends Don't Let Friends Shoot Film :)

pBase supporter http://www.pBase.com/vaughn
 
eheh

yes Paul, you're right: but like a colleague said not long ago we do also have monopods :)

but in real life I see'em all nice and quite actually and many times they helped me and so did I: so in here it's all fiction.
 
eheh

I wish. And I also wish to see you all excited with your brand new gear full of accessories in one of my weddings.. I'll be the guy with a couple of monopods..you can't miss me.

good joke by the way
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top