User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  8
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 29

Thread: A very interesting situation

  1. #1
    Member jasevk's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Oct 2009
    Location
    Cockatoo
    Posts
    690
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    A very interesting situation

    I would really appreciate your view on this issue I'm faced with.

    I shot a wedding on new years eve, lovey couple... Amazing day was had, image coming along magnificently!

    A friend of my parents was also at this wedding, who has run what she called a photography business in the past, until she realized nobody was hiring her or buying her images etc etc.

    This afternoon, she posts images from her photography business page in Facebook, of the above mentioned wedding... under a folder named 'lately'.

    How would you approach this?? Not an issue with anybody posting images from a personal page, but tagging the bride in images posted on a business page is hugely misleading, probably in breach of copyright laws and in my opinion, she has displayed terrible business ethics.

    Tricky situation in that this person is a friend of my parents...
    Last edited by jasevk; 11-01-2012 at 4:57pm.
    Living the dream...

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    28 Aug 2008
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    1,913
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    hmmm that is a bit complicated when it is a friend of your parents

    personally, I would let the couple know of what she is doing and get them to have a chat or reminder to her that her guest shots should not be portrayed as professional, or as the main wedding photographer on that day. Which could look bad for you as you WERE the main photographer for the wedding if certain people might think you have taken those photos.

    due to the friendship with the family etc I would just try to pursue it a bit gently at first before pulling out the business ethics card.

    because who knows, she just may unaware of her actions and only proud of her shots, or trying to generate some more traffic to her work atm.

  3. #3
    Member
    Threadstarter
    jasevk's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Oct 2009
    Location
    Cockatoo
    Posts
    690
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Excellent advice mate... You're spot on, my biggest concern is others assuming I produced those images. Thanks for your input

  4. #4
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    792
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Is your contract fulfilled and paid up or are you selling files / prints to the guests?
    The very, very minor negative impact on future business of a few guests, (if any) thinking her Facebook page is your work . . .
    Leave it rest and get on with your business – if she has failed in business once . . .

    WW

  5. #5
    Ausphotography Regular FallingHorse's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Apr 2010
    Location
    Adelaide River
    Posts
    1,586
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It's Facebook - you could always make a comment on the image ... something along the lines of "Gee, the guests took some lovely shots. I bet they are pleased to have an amateur photographer in the family".
    I tend not to take FB businesses to seriously unless someone has stolen your image and using it as their own. But then I am an amateur photographer and only do jobs on the side at the Turf Club. I don't have to worry about making a living from it
    Jodie

    Gear - Canon EOS 7D, EOS 6D, 24-105 F4, 70-200 F2.8L IS, Canon EF 100mm 2.8 Macro, Sigma 10-20mm, nifty fifty, EF2xII, 580EX, 430EXII, EFx2 III and a long wishlist


  6. #6
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,128
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    I think JM summed it up well.
    "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

  7. #7
    Member
    Threadstarter
    jasevk's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Oct 2009
    Location
    Cockatoo
    Posts
    690
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks all... yep contract has been fulfilled, apart from the handover of an album of course, but I've been paid in full, minus the potential sale of other prints etc.
    Another big gripe is that she has 1500 people subscribed to her page, there are alot of people being misled, and who are leaving comments on the images.

  8. #8
    Member
    Threadstarter
    jasevk's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Oct 2009
    Location
    Cockatoo
    Posts
    690
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well well well, this situation unfortunately didn't end as I'd hoped.

    I spoke with the bride about my concerns, and she didn't want to touch it with a ten foot pole. I resorted to sending a very politely worded and tactful email to this person, basically saying that there were reportedly up to 70 or 80 people from the wedding guest list who were possibly being misdirected to her page while looking for the 'professional' images of theirs friends wedding, and asked if she would consider relocating them to her personal page.

    Her response was far from gracious and she went into saying things like she will be happily adding hundreds of images to this Facebook album and didn't care whether people were midirected/misled or not. She became very abusive, to the point where she switched off her presumably friendly email signature, and changed it to f&@$ off!

    So.... do I leave it be?

    I could put the couple under pressure to do something by leveraging off the clause in the contract referring to my discretion being the be and end all with regard to photography by guests etc, and activating my right to withhold services for a breach of he contract (ie supply of images). This also may be drawing a long bow, I'm not a lawyer so I'm not 100% of my entitlements under these specific circumstances.

    But, I don't think that would be wise at all, I think I'll cop this one on the chin...
    Last edited by jasevk; 23-01-2012 at 12:14am.

  9. #9
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    792
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jasevk View Post
    Well well well, this situation unfortunately didn't end as I'd hoped.

    I spoke with the bride about my concerns, and she didn't want to touch it with a ten foot pole. I resorted to sending a very politely worded and tactful email to this person, basically saying that there were reportedly up to 70 or 80 people from the wedding guest list who were possibly being misdirected to her page while looking for the 'professional' images of theirs friends wedding, and asked if she would consider relocating them to her personal page.

    Her response was far from gracious and she went into saying things like she will be happily adding hundreds of images to this Facebook album and didn't care whether people were midirected/misled or not. She became very abusive, to the point where she switched off her presumably friendly email signature, and changed it to f&@$ off!

    So.... do I leave it be?

    I could put the couple under pressure to do something by leveraging off the clause in the contract referring to my discretion being the be and end all with regard to photography by guests etc, and activating my right to withhold services for a breach of he contract (ie supply of images). This also may be drawing a long bow, I'm not a lawyer so I'm not 100% of my entitlements under these specific circumstances.

    But, I don't think that would be wise at all, I think I'll cop this one on the chin...
    Yes, leave it be.
    Hindsight is useful, but sometimes painful and seemingly unfortunate in the short term.

    Notwithstanding the opinion and the original advice given in Post #4, to leave it alone: it would be wise and useful to understand two key points:
    1. That the new situation is a direct result of your actions not to leave it alone in the first inst.
    2. To understand: What actually did happen and why.

    WW

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    17 Sep 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    822
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Jason - definitely leave it be.

    Its simply not worth the grief and hassle.

    I think you're just going to have to live with this situation occurring more than once in the future. Do your job to your best, and exceed their expectations, get paid in full, and dont worry about the "feeders" trying to gain some tit bits.

    It's logical that even if you're in two places at the same time during a wedding, someone is going to get a very nice shot, that you didnt. The difference will be, should be that you're going to produce a better quality image, and your overall images will tell a consistent story throughout the day.

    Dont even sweat on this, as its very small stuff. Maybe you've lost some print sales, and then maybe you havent. Just start to think about the future and how this will be more of an issue, not less, and build your business model into putting more of the cost into the commission as opposed to being concerned about, and needing, the income from future print sales (which BTW, I doubt you would lose too much).

    So you would look better if you gentlemanly moved on and dont let it worry you - far better to be respected for your calm approach to someone who clearly doesnt understand the word ethical.

    Yep, move on, and leave it.
    William

    www.longshots.com.au

    I am the PhotoWatchDog

  11. #11
    Shore Crawler Dylan & Marianne's Avatar
    Join Date
    21 Mar 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    8,381
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Jason, I think I'm with the leave it be camp particularly after the nastiness already displayed
    It sounds as though pursuing this further could lead to grief from all sides and gain you potentially little
    It will happen quite often in the future though I reckon - I don't shoot that many weddings but already in at least 2 of the weddings I've attended, friends or family of the B&G have been photographers looking to start out their business. In those situations, they politely asked if they could tag along with Marianne and stay out of the way. So off they went, snapping away at our set shots etc and before you know it, in both instances, images from those weddings appear on their website blog and front page with NO mention of the fact that they weren't the primary photographer.
    These incidents gnaw at your insecurities but in the end, if you know you've done a good job and B&G are happy with your paid work, that's what really counts (I suspect they won't be happy if you pursue this particular issue further)
    Call me Dylan! www.everlookphotography.com | www.everlookphotography.wordpress.com | www.flickr.com/photos/dmtoh
    Canon EOS 5dmk3 : 17-40 F4 L, 70-200F2.8 canon L, 24-70mm canon L, Gitzo Safari +1178 ballhead. |Canon 5dmkII, 16-35mmF2.8 II L, Gitzo 2541 )
    Singh Ray/Hitech/Lee assorted filters, Z pro modified system Cokin holder
    Post : Lightroom 3.6 catalogue -> Export as 16bit TIFF, Edited CS5 -> resized for web.

  12. #12
    Member
    Threadstarter
    jasevk's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Oct 2009
    Location
    Cockatoo
    Posts
    690
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Longshots View Post
    Jason - definitely leave it be.

    Its simply not worth the grief and hassle.

    I think you're just going to have to live with this situation occurring more than once in the future. Do your job to your best, and exceed their expectations, get paid in full, and dont worry about the "feeders" trying to gain some tit bits.

    It's logical that even if you're in two places at the same time during a wedding, someone is going to get a very nice shot, that you didnt. The difference will be, should be that you're going to produce a better quality image, and your overall images will tell a consistent story throughout the day.

    Dont even sweat on this, as its very small stuff. Maybe you've lost some print sales, and then maybe you havent. Just start to think about the future and how this will be more of an issue, not less, and build your business model into putting more of the cost into the commission as opposed to being concerned about, and needing, the income from future print sales (which BTW, I doubt you would lose too much).

    So you would look better if you gentlemanly moved on and dont let it worry you - far better to be respected for your calm approach to someone who clearly doesnt understand the word ethical.

    Yep, move on, and leave it.
    As usual, William, very sensible advice. Thank you, I have obviously chosen to brush this off, and accept that I will come across this more than once

    Time to keep my head down, and bum up. I'm very glad my father taught me to never respond to an angry email until after a nap (I now realize why he had so many siestas in the home office :P)

    Thanks for your time mate, I really appreciate it

    Quote Originally Posted by dtoh View Post
    Jason, I think I'm with the leave it be camp particularly after the nastiness already displayed
    It sounds as though pursuing this further could lead to grief from all sides and gain you potentially little
    It will happen quite often in the future though I reckon - I don't shoot that many weddings but already in at least 2 of the weddings I've attended, friends or family of the B&G have been photographers looking to start out their business. In those situations, they politely asked if they could tag along with Marianne and stay out of the way. So off they went, snapping away at our set shots etc and before you know it, in both instances, images from those weddings appear on their website blog and front page with NO mention of the fact that they weren't the primary photographer.
    These incidents gnaw at your insecurities but in the end, if you know you've done a good job and B&G are happy with your paid work, that's what really counts (I suspect they won't be happy if you pursue this particular issue further)
    Thanks dtoh, very much, this is the first time I've experienced this kind of thing, needless to say it rocked me a bit! but i've learnt a very valuable lesson here, just in time before doing something potentially very damaging to my growing business.

    Quote Originally Posted by William W View Post
    Yes, leave it be.
    Hindsight is useful, but sometimes painful and seemingly unfortunate in the short term.

    Notwithstanding the opinion and the original advice given in Post #4, to leave it alone: it would be wise and useful to understand two key points:
    1. That the new situation is a direct result of your actions not to leave it alone in the first inst.
    2. To understand: What actually did happen and why.

    WW
    William, I've responded to your message, I appreciate it

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    22 Nov 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    62
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dtoh View Post
    ...at least 2 of the weddings I've attended, friends or family of the B&G have been photographers looking to start out their business. In those situations, they politely asked if they could tag along with Marianne and stay out of the way. So off they went, snapping away at our set shots etc and before you know it, in both instances, images from those weddings appear on their website blog and front page with NO mention of the fact that they weren't the primary photographer.
    These incidents gnaw at your insecurities but in the end, if you know you've done a good job and B&G are happy with your paid work, that's what really counts (I suspect they won't be happy if you pursue this particular issue further)
    I never liked this situation. What I used to do in this was try to befriend them as early on as possible so they respected my role on the day (and stayed out of the way - and the shots). Once some rapport had been built, I'd explain that what we do beyond the candid nature of the ceremony is 'created' by us not just photographed by us and therefore they were either told not to come at all or not to photograph any created moments. Sounds harsh when you read it but it's not a hard conversation to have once the ground work has been laid.

    Another tip re: formal family shots. Once you've set up the group, if there are a dozen happy snappers behind/next to you all vying for position pap-style, stand back and announce "you go first guys, I'll wait until your done. Would you like me to get out of your way?" this will generally make them think about about it and you should end up with all of your subjects looking at your camera - not looking at all the others.

    PS - I dont shoot weddings anymore.

  14. #14
    Member jeffde's Avatar
    Join Date
    19 Nov 2006
    Location
    Central West NSW
    Posts
    509
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Karma will get her in the end...
    Jeff - Jeff D Photography
    Canon -
    http://jeffdphoto.ifp3.com/
    www.jeffdphotography.com.au


  15. #15
    are you serious? Shelley's Avatar
    Join Date
    09 Nov 2008
    Location
    Secret Harbour
    Posts
    4,387
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I do a few photoshoots and have experienced some of what you are talking about - I mostly leave it be and hope my work speaks for me. I had a babyshoot and said it would take 4-5 weeks to process images as I was snowed under with a graduation shoot and orders. I sent one shot to her as she was chomping at the bit and then she went to another photographer for shots (a friend i think) and posted on facebook straight after showing my one shot. The shots were terrible (great family shots, but not professional). Someone asked if they were mine - I quickly went and looked and went back saying "no", they exhaled and said I thought not. I did ask a friend who knew her and indicated I hoped no one thought I took them, they immediately said something about why she went to another photographer, thinking I was upset and I laughed and said "no, no she can do what she wants, that doesn't bother me". I have no problem with not being chosen to take photos. It did worry me that others thought they were mine.

    I worry more about the quality of my work than the financial side at the moment, but I must say it is wrong what she is doing as she is a photographer and should respect your turf, so as to speak.
    Shelley
    (constructive criticism welcome)

    www.shelleypearsonphotography.com


  16. #16
    Account Closed reaction's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    792
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I guess if she's misrepresenting it as a paid job for her...
    I have nothing much to add, but another question.

    What if it wasn't a fb page (and designated as 'business'), but a blog? Would everyone still feel the same way?
    anyway, most ppl put a watermark on their pics, esp those trying to be a business, so I don't see anyone thinking it's your shot.

  17. #17
    are you serious? Shelley's Avatar
    Join Date
    09 Nov 2008
    Location
    Secret Harbour
    Posts
    4,387
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by reaction View Post

    anyway, most ppl put a watermark on their pics, esp those trying to be a business, so I don't see anyone thinking it's your shot.
    do you give watermarked images to your client? I watermark images I post myself.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    17 Sep 2009
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    822
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Shelley View Post
    do you give watermarked images to your client? I watermark images I post myself.
    Professional clients who pay for your services dont appreciate watermarked images - ie its not normal.

    That is from someone actually earning (trying to) as a full time photographer.

  19. #19
    Ausphotography Regular
    Join Date
    04 Aug 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    792
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by reaction View Post
    I guess if she's misrepresenting it as a paid job for her... (*1)
    I have nothing much to add, but another question.

    What if it wasn't a fb page (and designated as 'business'), but a blog? Would everyone still feel the same way?(*2)


    anyway, most ppl put a watermark on their pics, esp those trying to be a business, so I don't see anyone thinking it's your shot.(*3)
    1. It is only one interpretation of the issue that she is misrepresenting this as a paid job.
    It is confirmed that the issue will be interpreted differently, by different people, and this is indicted by the watermark comment, above.

    2. If the other photographer posted her images on her blog, that one fact would not change my point of view, nor any comment on the matter – I would still have suggested to leave it be in the first inst and would hold that view for exactly the same reason as I suggested to do so here, in post #4.

    3. I do not water mark many of my Photographs used as display images to Clients or Prospects.
    I cannot recall ever watermarking any Wedding Photographs before releasing them for viewing: IMO that would be a counter-productive business decision.
    Do you have a source which suggests that most (either Wedding Photographers or generally Professional Photographers) do watermark their images for viewing, or was that an unsubstantiated comment and based upon the fact that you do?

    WW

  20. #20
    Account Closed reaction's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    792
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by William W View Post
    Do you have a source which suggests that most (either Wedding Photographers or generally Professional Photographers) do watermark their images for viewing, or was that an unsubstantiated comment and based upon the fact that you do?

    WW
    I have seen that most Photographers of any sort post watermarks on any image they place on their blog/fb or any public page.
    Even in forums most have watermarks except for the really newbies who haven't worked out how to set one.

    The only exception is Professional Photographers flash based galleries I guess?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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