Crap wedding photographers
Discussion
Saw this on facebook, such a shame, but also amusing from an outsiders point of view.
Facebook linkey
Facebook linkey
There's a few duff shots there but what's presented doesn't look horrific, I was expecting some true photography fails when I clicked on the link. Plus having your wedding in the middle of a heavily built-up area isn't going to produce the best outdoor shots either.
I've seen some terrible wedding photographs in the past, and I guess it really is a case of you get what you pay for with these things.
I've seen some terrible wedding photographs in the past, and I guess it really is a case of you get what you pay for with these things.
Brigand said:
There's a few duff shots there but what's presented doesn't look horrific, I was expecting some true photography fails when I clicked on the link. Plus having your wedding in the middle of a heavily built-up area isn't going to produce the best outdoor shots either.
I've seen some terrible wedding photographs in the past, and I guess it really is a case of you get what you pay for with these things.
Looks like she got a mate to do it. with a camera that came out a cristmas cracker. who was hungover and drunk. I could do better with a nokia 7250.I've seen some terrible wedding photographs in the past, and I guess it really is a case of you get what you pay for with these things.
Anyone declaring an passing intrest in photography should have some idea of lighting, be able to centre the camera, prioritise the subject and hold it steady. anyone trading as a pro should be able to set up scenes that photograph well, be able to flatter difficult subjects as well as capture moments (by knowing what to look for, when to click and what to use). Guilty party linked to seems to have gone for scattergun logic- "if you take enough shots a few have to come out looking good."
Always good for a giggle.. http://youarenotaphotographer.com/ One on home page is potentially NSFW (but funny!)
You get what you pay for I suppose. Our wedding photos were taken by Mrs Bisonhead's aunty and uncle who are professional photographers. We had a couple of friends who either had a keen amatuer interest or were involved in independent film making (non-adult!!) who took snaps on the day. Often those of our friends outstripped the professionals.
There is a lot of pressure on the official snapper to set shots up, get the good location/scene etc. Often family and friends take shots in a more natural setting.
All that said, those photos are pretty awful which gets us back to my first sentence!
There is a lot of pressure on the official snapper to set shots up, get the good location/scene etc. Often family and friends take shots in a more natural setting.
All that said, those photos are pretty awful which gets us back to my first sentence!
Reading through the comments they only paid £100, in life you do get what you pay for. It does amaze me people will spend thousands on the other parts of the wedding, but the photography is so often done on the cheap, and that's the thing you will look back at in years to come, and then they complain that the pictures are crap.
From my djing days I've found the same thing. I've had people over the years ask me and I think I charge more than that for working in a club and I "ONLY" take my records. You're having a laugh if you think I'm setting aside a whole day to lug around speakers, tables, lights, turntables and music for less money.
Our Leather bound wedding album sits up on a shelf somewhere, the same place I keep the rat poison, WD-40 and the kitty litter 
Cost a fortune back in 2000 but we split in 2009.
Not bitter any more but there were times I was tempted to burn the feker
A work friend of mine does weddings and his shots are amazing. They even have the ability to make me smile like a soppy old auntie, he really captures the emotions of the day and I say that as a cynic.
Cost a fortune back in 2000 but we split in 2009.Not bitter any more but there were times I was tempted to burn the feker
A work friend of mine does weddings and his shots are amazing. They even have the ability to make me smile like a soppy old auntie, he really captures the emotions of the day and I say that as a cynic.
londonagent said:
Reading through the comments they only paid £100, in life you do get what you pay for. It does amaze me people will spend thousands on the other parts of the wedding, but the photography is so often done on the cheap, and that's the thing you will look back at in years to come, and then they complain that the pictures are crap.
I'm still somewhat shellshocked by the cost of anything that involves the word wedding, but the photographer is one thing I don't begrudge spending the cash on. we've just booked one (well a couple) which works out at nearly 15% of the total cost the wedding. I hope they're worth it.SWMBO and I opted not for an official photographer. We gathered that 90% of the guest list had a camera phone and for laughs we bought 10 disposable cameras and gave them to the guests on the proviso that once the cameras expired we got them back for developing. We ended up with a lot of candid photos of a great day, with none of this formal nonsense.
Noisy, much? Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff