Ethics in Professional Portrait Photography

[MarkW]

...Longshots the word Stupid was not needed, I apologise for that. Naive would have been more appropriate.

Kiwi

I actually think that the word "stupid" is appropriate especially in the context of "the terminally stupid" ie for those that no matter how you try and help them, they succeed in deliberately circumventing all the safety protocols to get themselves into difficulty.

Whereas the naive have little or no life experience and need protection of society just as would a child.

[ricktas]

Kiwi

I actually think that the word "stupid" is appropriate especially in the context of "the terminally stupid" ie for those that no matter how you try and help them, they succeed in deliberately circumventing all the safety protocols to get themselves into difficulty.

Whereas the naive have little or no life experience and need protection of society just as would a child.

And in society we have both the naive and the stupid, and the law is there to protect the naive, unfortunately the stupid also can lay claims to use of the same laws.

[MarkW]

And in society we have both the naive and the stupid, and the law is there to protect the naive, unfortunately the stupid also can lay claims to use of the same laws.

But the terminally stupid are sufficiently clever in a stupid kind of fashion to by-pass the laws that protect them. For this reason the Darwin awards were created.

[Longshots]

But the terminally stupid are sufficiently clever in a stupid kind of fashion to by-pass the laws that protect them. For this reason the Darwin awards were created.

This is a clear breach of fair trading laws and I sincerely hope that those blaming the customers dont find themselves in a similar position in the future - that would be karma.

Personally I dont find this funny at all. I think this is quite sad that the photographic industry can be tarnished by such outrageously unfair business ethics. Shame on those who havent read the entire story and convince themselves that they are so much more intelligent than the recipients of this so called business!

[Gregg Bell]

Surprise, surprise. I didn't want to mention names, but...

Zeke, they haven't got there yet, but my husband will be in attendance in an official capacity when they view their photos on the 16th as I'm rather worried that they will try to con and manipulate my girl who is still rather naive in the ways of the outside world, even though she's 21.

I think what I found unethical in this whole affair, was that word "free" when it actually wasn't. One of the other things mentioned at the show stand was that part of the bargain of the "free" shoot was that they'd be able to enter her photo in a in some competition. Unfortunately I have no actual details of the verbal agreement, just what my daughter said had transpired. Until the shoot however, she hadn't signed anything which is good.

...and the prices!!! There's no framing involved there, just a straight print.

Kym, I'll mention the haggle option to Graeme, but something tells me they won't come to the party.

some of my friends in the UK were given a "free" photoshoot in London, well 3 of them, though they both went to different studios. Hannah and Lucy went there, got dolled up by the artist, and they took photos, but they had to pay for the photos to be developed. So instead they paid $200 for high-res DVD images.

Serena had a free shoot and paid $450 for a DVD and 1x 10x12" photo...

[Helen S]

I didn't get the opportunity to get back onto OCBA today, with an upset and in pain (other) daughter, but we do have all the evidence that they require. In the end it will be up to them on any legal precedings, but as long as my daughter and her friend come out unscathed (and Marie reimbursed) and not post-appointment harrassed, we should be able to call it a win.

Hopefully OCBA will rap this company over the knuckles hard for going against the assurances they made back in 2007 and that there are not too many other victims .

[Helen S]

Rang OCBA today and am a little disappointed. The fellow I got on the phone was obviously not too interested in the events that have transpired and didn't seem too fussed that my daughter had been blatantly misled by said company.

All I got was, "Write them a letter and if they don't respond satifactorily within 7 days, then we'll look at it." I have the proof in B&W and it's on their website!!! What more could they possibly want?!!!

[bigdazzler]

I just read the whole thread ... wow. Id never heard of this studio 2 bla bla in SA until now.

I dont care what anyone says, whilst not technically illegal, it is blatantly misleading, deceptive, and utterly disgraceful ..... BUT ..... at the end of the day all you need to come out of it unscathed is to show up with a little resolve and compunction, flat out refuse to purchase a damn thing, get your 95 bucks back and walk out. Seems simple to me Helen, and if I were your husband Id be VERY VERY stern about any follow up contact from their marketing hounds.

[Longshots]

Rang OCBA today and am a little disappointed. The fellow I got on the phone was obviously not too interested in the events that have transpired and didn't seem too fussed that my daughter had been blatantly misled by said company.

All I got was, "Write them a letter and if they don't respond satifactorily within 7 days, then we'll look at it." I have the proof in B&W and it's on their website!!! What more could they possibly want?!!!

Helen


If you dont write a letter, the official response will be nothing. On the other hand if you do write a single letter - with all of the details printed out and contained within that letter, the official response will have to be made. It will also assist others into stamping this type of behaviour out.

I urge you not to just waste any more time - but to actually put this into an official letter of complaint to the regulatory authorities. Without that, nothing will happen, and you will just be part of the problem as opposed the start of the cure.

[bigdazzler]

Yep i agree .. If you dont make it official, it never happened ... unfortunately.

[Helen S]

Tomorrow's the big day where they will read (and be read) the riot act. Official letter of complaint to be handed to the manager in person and a copy handed in to OCBA.

No photos will be viewed, my daughter's friend will get her $95 back and my daughter's CC details will be handed over.

[kiwi]

That's the attitude !!

[stoogest]

Keep us posted!

[pirate59]

while not related to photography, me and my wife ended up staying at a hilton reslort near seaworld in orlando, and we were called up by the front desk telling us that they have a special breakfast for first time visitors to the hilton. and they had big discounts on theme parks also. sounded too good to be true.

ended up that it was a 'buyers' seminar for the hilton timeshare. and to get the discounts we had to sit through the whole speel. and did they have that practiced well. beautiful rooms, the palce where they do the one on one presentations was quite smick. 30 inch touch screen monitors the lot. there was definately plenty of people handing over cash at the time too.

just another example of making you enter their 'buy it now chamber'...

and fyi we didnt buy the timeshare =)

[macca67]

Walking past those stupid Pixie Photo stalls in malls I always have a little chuckle. They rope you in with the complementary pic. I am by no means a pro and do not berate them for what they do, considering that the photographer is generally a subbie trying to make a living working for a higher power, however they should be more upfront with pricing. I did an in store shoot not long back for a charity store the charge was that they pay for printing. I ended up with 53 printed at 8 x 10, outsourcing to a local reputable print shop I got pro rates at 1.50 per print. Do the math, sometime I do wonder on the justification of pricing. The store was very happy with results.

[kiwi]

the price of the actual printing is meaningless

[virgal_tracy]

the price of the actual printing is meaningless

Agreed. Costs for your time, depreiation and especially skill must come into it somewhere; and if a business everything else associated with it eg insurance, advertising etc.

Not that any of that escuses the studio in the OP for charging outrageous amounts.

I hope hubby gives them hell today Helen.

[Helen S]

Thanks Folks.

Just got a phone call from Graeme, who indeed did give them hell. The general manager still insists that they did nothing wrong!!! However, CC details were destroyed in the presence of all and Marie got her $95 dollars back, but how's this? It was only after Graeme threatened to call the police as they were hedging and farting about so much.

A copy of the letter to the manager and supporting documentation is on its way to OCBA. Hopefully they're not a toothless tiger and investigate further. Will let you know how that part pans out.

[Clubmanmc]

three words...

ACA and Todaytonight...

Good luck

M

[NickMonk]

Good outcome.

Like it or not there are a disturbing number of photographic companies that run this way. I think it is about time that this type of business is read the riot act by government and the photographic 'unions'. That way people can have confidence that when they go to a photographer like Dan (Zeke) they will have a professional and enjoyable experience....people stung by the like of Studio 2000 are not likely customers of any photographic studio at all in the future.