Professional wedding photographer......FAIL

Great link

link

Guess they wheren't expecting the judge to understand photography.

My favourite bit, which aperture setting did you use??? Tripod

I think the judge overstepped the mark a little when he belittled the equipment, in the right hands it would have been quite adequate.

As for the photoraphers all I can say is.....Clueless!

Well I think a judge who asks "where was your 5D, 7D, 1 series or 10D?" classing all of those as 'proffesional equipment' clearly knows little about photography.

It seems he knows little about the law too as he was not prepared to explore what the truth was when there were differences between the 2 sides - one says they met at a wedding fair the other not at a wedding fair, one says flash was allowed the other not so where were the independant witnesses to verify/refute these statements?

However for the photographer not to visit the venue and find out if flash is permitted before is a failing - likewise to have no fast lenses for indoor shooting is a kit failure; but would you expect someone who was being paid $1300 to turn up with an FA31, FA43, FA77, a couple of DA* f2.8 zooms and 2 K-7 bodies?

The judge misses the point that with digital photography fast glass is less important to acheive correct exposure in low light because we can change the ISO from frame to frame.

He asks the photographer what aperture was used in a single shot, if I take 100 shots at a wedding (as a quest) then I wouldn't know the lens/aperture/speed/iso for each one off the top of my head.

At no time was the contract between bride and photographer refered to in court - nor was the photographer permitted to show her portfolio and thus weather or not the work was to the standard, and therefore the expectation projected to the bride, of the work in that portfolio.

As I see it the whole thing was a biased character assination of the work of a budget wedding photographer who produced budget results. It completely lacked objectivity and I suspect was just recorded to titilate the American public and not to objectively explore weather or not the photographer had performed according to the contract and to the standard implied by a portfolio of work shown to the bride before the wedding.

Professional photography at 6mp. I think not. Judge was right on target.

Steven

If you think that the only measure of professional photography is the number of mega pixels in your camera, then you have a awful lot to learn about what makes someone a professional photographer.

If you say so Bob. The professional quality that I produce can not be done with a 6mp point and shoot camera unless the only size photo you are satisfied with is a 4x6 print. You can do what ever you want to with these small files and you can not get a quality print at 11x14. You sure dont want to waste your time trying to get one to 16x20. This is why I fought off the digital era so long.
Steven

It's called US TV 'entertainment'


6MP was considered GOOD many years ago, people would hanker after a Nikon D1 or EOS 1D with 3-4 MP And I think you will find legions of *istD/DL/DS and K100D enthusiasts for whom 6MP is ideal

You missed Bob's point...there are many people wandering around with 12-15-18-21-24 MP cameras with no bloody clue on how to make best use of the resolution. These people know more about labels than the actual camera itself, and let's not forget it's not just the sensor that makes the picture, it's the photographer, the lens and the processing method.

There was a point a few years ago when some thought the development peaked at 6MP and that amongst Canon users the EOS10D was the pinnacle for Canon's APS-C range, sunsequent models have been welcomed with less than warm enthusiasm by the faithful, and I repeat what I said about some *ist D users happy to stay with that model rather than buying a 'K'.

When someone asked a local professional photographer why he picked the most expensive camera he replied is that it what was needed to allow him to take photographs, day in and day out, that enthusiasts can realistically take occasionally. Why wait for the next model?

Blimey, better not tell one of our local (and highly successful) portrait and wedding photographers that he shouldn't be making money with his inadequate sensor... Hope none of his hitherto delighted clients ever finds out. He could be sued from Christmas to breakfast time.

Regards,

Andrew

I think they're all (the 'judge' included) rather objectionable stereotypical yanks. The plaintif wants something for nothing, the defendant wants to make money out of her hobby without investing in the kit and the judge thinks he's better than either of them and likes to waffle about things he doesn't really understand.

as for professional photography being impossible with a 6mp camera, who exactly do you imagine was buying the original Canon 1D in 2001?

A "pro" wouldn't show up at a wedding with only an 18-55 and 70-300 lenses. Actually, a pro wouldn't use those lenses at all, unless his "pro" lenses had been stolen and he was stuck with no choice.

Another point: the judge asked the maximum opening of the 70-300 lens, and she didn't know.

She didn't check the lighting of the church before the actual wedding.

There's a lot in that person that screams "amateur".

Which would be the reason for the (by US standards) relatively low price she charged, presumably?

It IS a court room on TV...

Imagining this was a real court, the girl would probably have no grounds for complaining. Sure the images don't look much, but hey, she hired her right? She has photos...

I wish the photographer was not in the business, but she is...

Gear is almost irrelevant, its what the togger can afford and the costumer can pay for. What you can make with the gear is the mark of a GOOD professional photographer.
If a crappy togger uses good gear poorly he can still make crappy pictures, maybe with less grain and taken more quickly, but still crappy.
Good, not professional. I mean professional as in profession, not professional as in the subjective understanding that good = pro.

Yet Ken R may have a different point of view.

link

Either way I have 24" prints from a 6MP istD that are sharp for the correct viewing distance

Regards.

What a laugh that was, thoroughly enjoyed it.