This video has been making the rounds on the forums. Thanks to Adrian for posting it. I have my thoughts about it…what are yours?
Viewing one post | view all recent posts
Welcome to Michael’s Blog!
Welcome to Michael’s blog. Michael Andrew, (aka Michael The Maven) is a freelance
producer, photography instructor, tech innovator, and when needed, disaster aid
specialist. Disclaimer: Michael is a participant in Bhphoto & Amazon affiliate programs
that provides an advertising commission if you purchase through links on this website.
first off, Joe brown is an idiot. but after watching this again, the photographer didn’t do herself any favors by telling the client "meet me at the walmart parking lot to get your pictures". Develop the pictures at walmart if you have to, and then present them to the client in a custom envelope or box. I don’t mean to put this off on the photographer, but she set up the scenario where the customer would be disappointed because she is revealing what is going on behind the curtain. leave some mystery and always make a professional presentation of your wares.
This is awesome! I love Judge Joe! See this is why I always ask brides to get rules of the church/location before hand. That way everybody knows upfront what they are allowed/not allowed to do. So Great!
Do you think this video on Youtube will help this photographer get work in the future???? WOW, very unprofessional.
wow, joe browns intense haha! im no professional here but if im gonna charge $1,300 for a wedding Im gonna at least know some f-stops. BTW, im doing my first wedding in a couple of months, any advice anyone? I would appreciate it!
I don’t like Joe Brown he speaks more than he actually listens…
I don’t think she was professional. For someone who claims to have done over 100 weddings.
You’ve shot in churches before have they ever told the professional photographer not to use a flash?
I perform weddings all the time. I ask the photographer not to take pictues during the ceremony, because the flash interferes with the moment. The pictures are taken before or after the ceremony.
I think Judge Joe was just showing off his knowledge of photography. He had his mind made up from the start. The bride may have won the case anyway…but that photographer definitely did not do herself any favors giving the judge attitude like that! I love the irrelevant points both parties were strongly arguing!
I thought the total shoot cost $2500 and the bride was only asking for $1300 back. Very reasonable considering the circumstances. The photographer came across as ill prepared, unkowledgable and totally unprofessional. I agree that the camera body probably does not make too much of a difference but if you are shooting with entry level kit you are going to be limited by your equipment.
I’ve been a court reporter for 30 years. I’ve taken testimony mostly in depositions but have also done trials. What took place in this courtroom would never happen in this fashion. The photographer was certainly sloppy in her appearance and disrespectful to the judge, which is never a good thing. But as far as "Judge" joe brown, he acted more like a bloated show off than someone who is fit to wear a black robe. He did not ask any questions to the photographer that pertained to the case at all. AND any questions he did ask, it was obvious he wasn’t interested in the answers. The photographer may have been sloppy and maybe even unprofessional in her attitude, but that is not evidence as to her skills. The "judge" never attempted to discover the real truth which is why he’s there. This was a show and that’s why it’s on TV. Don’t believe any of these "judge" shows.
I am not sure if the judge acted appropriately or not. However, I think if you are going to shoot a wedding (a very precious day for many couples) you should have a very good knowledge of photography – not just a basic knowledge as you may face tricky situations like low light and bad weather etc…. This is even more imprtant if you charge money. This "photographer" does not seem to have a love of photography or even understand the basics. She is clearly in it for the money – always a bad idea.
It never came into question that the bride got what she paid for. Was the photographers work ‘worse’ than what she showed the bride when the bride booked her? Did she deliver sub-standard work compared to what she advertised she could do?
I don’t think the photographer did herself any justice by her apperance and lack of being able to recite knowledge off the top of her head, agree she was not as prepared as she should have been. But did she deliver what she sold? What she sold and what the bride bought might be sub-par work compared to other standards but THIS photographer compared to THIS photographer, did she deliver what she said she would? If her skill level is only a 3 and she marketed it as a 3, and delivered a 3 then that’s what you get! The judge was way out of line in my opinion. "How fast is your lens?" Well depends on the camera setting.
There’s an old saying You get what you pay for. I don’t want to throw this lady under the bus so to speak, but….
Well said, Christine. At the least, this photographer deserves a retrial. If this kind of conduct really took place in a "real courtroom," the judge would be gone in a NY minute.
Thanks everyone for your comments- I saw this last night and thought it was just a train wreck on so many different levels.
Per the Photographer- In my opinion, it was not her photography, nor her gear, that got her into this situation, it were other less tangible things. Its not in human nature to sue someone you really like, and I think this where the problem lay. She did something to tick her customer off BIG time, so it was just a matter of the customer identifying any reason she wanted to sue her (in this case her images and gear). It didnt help that she didnt know the aperture range of a 70-300 and was rough around the edges personality wise. That said, I thought Judge Joe was extremely rude to her and cut her off so many times it was just inexcusable. He seemed to know a little bit about photography, and he also seemed totally ignorant about many aspects of it. A Canon Rebel XTi is completely adequate for "professional" (enough) images. The talent of the photographer is much more important. Adequate light is more important than lenses, etc, etc. The original job was for $1300, he gave a $2500 judgment? I thought this was totally unfair to the photographer. Lastly, what the heck was the customer expecting for $1300? For the amount of work involved, she got what she paid for.
PS- And yes…it is VERY common to not be allowed to use flash during a ceremony. This is why we love lenses with very wide apertures, and the new Canon sensors that allow us to bump up the ISO without too much grain.
I don’t do weddings or do I ever plan on it – way too stressful but I was always under the assumption the general rule is no flash during the ceremony so lighting would ALWAYS be an issue. The photographer definitely wasn’t ‘likable’, have to agree on that for sure. But you don’t necessarily have to LIKE everyone you are in business with so agree there’s more to the story but she wasn’t allowed to tell it ’cause good ol’ judge decided to blab about what he knows… there were some holes in his knowledge as well and a court of law isn’t about what HE knows. Ok, off my soap box now….
Ps. If that is ever the case… candelight NO Flash. Shoot the entire rehersal Lights up or W/Flash. They did their rhersal a few hours before the actual ceremony so we could get them in their wedding attire.
I completely agree Michael. Though legal action is not currently as prevelant in Canada as it is in the US, sadly I’m sure it will come. I truly doubt the photographers equipment had anything to do with the issue at hand, but rather the issue was much more likely a personality issue. It was pretty obvious the decision was made before the case began and I found it rather pitiful to hear what the judge felt to be fact, the equipment was adequate. I’m sure there was much more to the story, sadly the judge never gave the photographer a chance to really say anything. (whether what she did was right or wrong, she still should have had an opportunity to speak) The case does bring an important point though – taking on a job of photographing a wedding is very serious – these are some of the biggest memories in a persons life, and tensions are high prior to, and during their Big Day. As the photographer, one of your greatest assets to bring with you on the day of the wedding is a positive and excited personality…and have a contract – there is no way this case could have had this type of ruling if a legal contract was signed.
I don’t understand why she ever thought she should go on national television to solve this… She has pulled down her website and she is now famous for all the wrong reasons.