User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  6
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Choice and "The Morning Show" : Wedding photography

  1. #1
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,137
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Choice and "The Morning Show" : Wedding photography

    Yesterday morning Channel 7 aired a segment on their "The Morning Show" about Wedding photographers and brought in 'Choice', the consumer advisory group to discuss wedding photography.

    During the segment the Choice spokesperson, Tom Godfrey, stated "Ask the best man or maid of honor to call the photographer telling them it will be just a party". He did so based on the assumption that wedding photographers charge more, and told consumers to LIE to the photographer about what the event is to get a better price.

    The actual segment has been pulled from the Channel 7 website, so I cannot link to it.

    The Choice facebook page has been inundated with complaints from photographers about this : https://www.facebook.com/choiceaustralia

    The entire segment on The Morning Show began with a quick comment about one photographer who is being investigated by fair trading: https://www.facebook.com/whereismihaja
    http://www.rentacam.com.au/blacklist...blacklist.html
    http://www.qls.com.au/For_the_profes..._not_to_employ

    The segment basically was then driven by this one case to give the public the mis-assumption that ALL wedding photographers are rip-offs. Needless to to say, the AIPP was not happy, along with a huge number of photographers who shoot weddings and do so professionally, in their approach, conduct, pricing and final product: https://www.facebook.com/AIPPOfficia...51721439763687

    My reason for posting this here, is that if members are in the photography business and you are approached to photograph a 'party', it might be in your interest to have a clause added to your contract along the lines of full disclosure about the type of event you will be photographing, being required. Otherwise you could find that 'party' booking you took is a 6-8 hour wedding!
    Last edited by ricktas; 24-09-2013 at 5:26am.
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  2. #2
    Member Iscariot's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Jan 2013
    Location
    Hurstville
    Posts
    126
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That is disgusting.
    Cheers Gav

    CC always welcome and encouraged
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/iscariotau/

  3. #3
    Ausphotography Veteran
    Join Date
    18 Aug 2010
    Location
    shepparton
    Posts
    2,682
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    maybe their should be a face book page started, with people finding out the dirt on prime( channel 7) employees , who have deceived people over the years and tarnish
    the whole organisation because of as few fools
    cheers macca

  4. #4
    Administrator
    Threadstarter
    ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,137
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Found out the reason the segment was pulled from the Channel 7 website. During the segment, they had a background video running of a photographer shooting a wedding. This photographer was shot for an entirely different segment some time ago, and they re-used the video footage. Thus that photographer was linked to a segment on photographers doing the wrong thing/scamming etc, when she in fact has never been accused of such, and was in no way associated with the segment that went to air yesterday.

    Very un-professional on behalf of Channel 7, The Morning Show and Choice.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    17 May 2013
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    184
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks for this information and further update Rick. It's disappointing to see such behaviour from the media; clearly this should have been better investigated with proper due diligence prior to any decision to report on this.

    And to have the Choice spokesperson actively condone misleading behaviour...very disappointing indeed. I know a few people in my circles involved in this type of business and will be sharing this with them.
    Hi! I'm Bill.

    Constructive critique on photos and suggestions and tips for editing is most welcome.
    Nikon D5100, D7000, Nikon 35mm, Nikon 50mm, Sigma 10-20mm, Sigma 17-50mm, Nikon 18-135mm, Nikon 18-200mm, Nikon 55-300mm, Tamron 70-300mm
    SB-700 Speedlight, Manfrotto MKC3-H01



  6. #6
    Administrator
    Threadstarter
    ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,137
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    someone has loaded the segment onto youtube: http://youtu.be/gT3BsSqF-IQ

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    14 Aug 2013
    Location
    Oakhurst
    Posts
    86
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thats disgusting. I heard poor words from Choice about photographers last night in regards to the PixiFoto vs. Single Mum thing so was already peeved with them. This is just unbelievable. They are disgraceful yet I know so many people who base huge, important decisions around what they hear from Choice.

    Thanks for posting this, and the update as well as the video. Not in the industry at all but I know people who are. Might pass it along.
    Still a new kid in the photography world


  8. #8
    Ausphotography Regular mechawombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 May 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    675
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You know what I get it!

    but this should not apply to photographers. I will explain

    When I was doing the wedding planning thing with the wife there was a party price and a "WEDDING PRICE". Many venues would add on an extra margin just because you were having your nuptials. So if you contact venues then sure see if they have separate list prices.

    The thing that was wrong was not just a Choice spokesperson telling you to lie but the stupidity of the matter. When you hire a wedding photographer you hire a wedding photographer. Why? because they are the best at that genre. If I want Steve Parrish to shoot my wedding sure I might some nice shots but if I hired Jerry Ghionis I am going to get #$^% AMAZING SHOTS!!

    I skimped on a photographer and had my best friend and his brother shoot my wedding. Best $400 bucks I have ever spent! but looking back I still would not have changed a thing with them shooting as they did a most excellent job as they are almost like family anyway so there was no uncle bob moments.
    Cartel Imagery
    Flickr


    Nikon D7000
    Sony a65
    Canon 5D MKII

  9. #9
    Account Closed
    Join Date
    06 Aug 2012
    Location
    Semaphore
    Posts
    530
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ooops! That was a total clanger , cheers Deb

  10. #10
    Administrator
    Threadstarter
    ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,137
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Choice issued a limited apology on the AIPP facebook page:

    Quote:

    CHOICE Thank you for your post, CHOICE recognises that comments made on the Morning Show on 23 September have upset some wedding photographers, and we would like to apologise.

    We accept that not mentioning that your event is a wedding to your photographer is not appropriate advice. Better options are to shop around and also to look for recommended providers through friends.

    Thank you for drawing our attending to the photographic industry ethical code. We are not taking issue with photographers who put in more time and effort getting paid more for the service they provide. However, we believe consumers shouldn't be charged a premium for a like-for-like service simply because they mention the word "wedding”. We have serious concerns over the “wedding” mark-up being applied across a range of industries.

    I believe they are just trying to appease those who complained the most, they have not redressed the issue with the consumers who saw it on The Morning Show, in any way. Tell the photographers they are sorry, but let the consumers who watch The Morning Show and the original segment, continue on believing it is OK to lie to photographers when conducting a business negotiation. I doubt many who saw the original segment are members of the AIPP facebook page, and thus they have no reason to believe the original advice by Choice spokesperson, Tom Godfrey, is anything other than good advice.

  11. #11
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    14,865
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Simple: DON'T come to the party (if you're the photographer).

    Well, drivel masquerading badly as substance.

    (And how about the serious/concerned/attentive visages broadly sported on that program, and others?)
    CC, Image editing OK.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    29 Dec 2009
    Location
    Fernvale
    Posts
    211
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Imagine for a moment someone organising a "party", paying the photographer and then said photographer turns up to the "wedding" and then the photographer turns arounds and walks out stating that "this is not what i was hired for". The fallout would be monumental, and all because they thought they where doing the "right" thing based on info from choice.....
    I would for one obviously have no hard feelings for the wedding party for being what would be blatant deception. If i can see that, how in hell would a supposed reputable organisation not see that this is wrong... the mind boggles
    In saying all that, i would find it hard to believe that a photographer could not see the signs along the way that they would be shooting more than just a party....

    Simon.

  13. #13
    Ausphotography irregular Mark L's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Nov 2010
    Location
    magical Mudgee
    Posts
    16,429
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by snappysi View Post
    In saying all that, i would find it hard to believe that a photographer could not see the signs along the way that they would be shooting more than just a party....
    Like that.
    If you're hired for a party, give them party photos. Renegotiate the release of the wedding photos after that.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    09 Sep 2013
    Location
    Dalmeny
    Posts
    252
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just charge more for party's.
    Jon

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    25 May 2010
    Location
    Armidale
    Posts
    444
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Unless you were hired ONLY for the wedding then the leadup to the actual event would almost have to give it away. Things like engagement photos, the 'party couple' asking for photos at somewhere other than the venue, etc, etc. If you turn up and find this is a wedding, renegotiate on the spot. If they aren't happy to pay for you to shoot a wedding, walk away. You would be better to be upfront rather than play deceitful games as your employers may have.

    Canon: 5D MkIII - 7D MkI x 2 - 1000D all gripped
    70-200mm f2.8L IS USM II, 16-35mm f4/L, 50mm f1.4, 75-300 f4, 18-55 f4 IS
    600EX RT - 430EX II Speedlites, ST-E3-RT transmitter
    Manfrotto 290s tripod
    Photoshop CS5, Lightroom
    http://www.facebook.com/OnThePipeImages - http://www.flickr.com/photos/onthepipeimages/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •