What’s Your Preference?

Swisstony10 · #1 (**permalink**) 02-21-2011, 01:04 PM

Ok, it’s my turn to rant – this time about annoying “professional” photography outfits who provide such poor quality products that I believe they harm the profession in general.

My dad’s wife (my wicked stepmother I guess, except she’s not wicked) recently graduated from university with a degree in theology. She’s also been ordained into the clergy, and because I was able to attend her ordination ceremony, I naturally took a bunch of pictures of her, her colleagues, supporters, family etc outside the cathedral. Her degree graduation, however, was a little more restricted, and I couldn’t go, otherwise, she’d have decent pictures to remember that day by too.

Unfortunately, the graduation was covered by a well-known UK chain which spe******es in photographing at that kind of thing – school photos, graduation ceremonies, etc. When she went to have her photo taken in her robe with her little scoll and stuff, there was a sign by the photographer which said “NO GLASSES”. She wasn’t overly happy with that, because she’s been wearing glasses for about 50 years – they’re a part of who she is, she looks completely different (as most of us do) without them on. She insisted on keeping them on, and after several attempts at a picture, the only way the alleged professional photographer could get a shot with no glare was to have her looking downwards, at a pretty steep angle, which as could be easily forseen, has given her several extra chins. To be honest, she looks like she has no neck at all – the picture she ended up with looks nothing like her.

She was charged over £50 for the package of prints (which doesn’t include a terrific amount – a couple of 10x8s, and some smaller ones to send to relatives and so on), but wasn’t able to see the final picture first, and now has a bunch of pictures that just look horrid. Luckily, because the degree has specific colours for the robe, she had to buy it rather than rent it, so obviously next time I visit, I’ll be recreating her graduation photo for her properly.

There are several things which really bother me about this. Firstly, covering a big event like a graduation, you’re going to get a large number of people who wear glasses. I’ve been wearing them myself for over 35 years - I wouldn’t want to have my picture taken without them, because I look totally different, and I think that most full-time spectacle wearers would feel the same. Surely if you’re covering large events like that, you should make sure that your employees are actually capable of taking photographs of people, perhaps they should even be experienced in the field, and certainly shouldn’t need a sign saying “NO GLASSES”.

The photo was obviously shot using on-camera direct fully-in-the-face flash. In this day and age, with the amount of kit and control that’s available with non-prohibitive price-tags, there’s no excuse for not being able to light a booth properly so that you can take a decently-lit picture of pretty much anybody who comes along and sits down, whether they have glasses, a beard, a shiny bald head, two noses, or a bag over their head.

I appreciate that glasses can be a problem for portrait shooters who’ve never done it before, but the techniques for overcoming the glare issues should really be second nature to anybody who’s doing it as a profession.

Of course, I know perfectly well how this situation has come about – the company in question doesn’t specifically employ photographers. They regularly advertise for people to fill their “photographer” roles, and they clearly state that no photographic experience or knowledge is required, because they’ll give you all the training you need in two days before they send you off with your client list, your bookings, and your sales pack. That’s the important bit for them – sales. They pay just above minimum wage, plus commission on sales.

The problem I have with this is that they market themselves as providing professional photography services. You’d think that providing a crummy service for a not insignificant price would make it easier for those of us who are competent to charge more, and to an extent it does, but what doesn’t help is that when we try to market ourselves to people, they’ve been tainted by experiences with these barely-amateur people, and so we have to overcome the massive hurdle of “Huh, I’m not paying a professional photographer again. I had a professional picture done at my graduation, and it was awful, cost me £60 too...”

Ok, I’m done ranting. I’m off to help my dad and his wife draft a letter to the photography company concerned and see if we can’t get them their money back.

BigFuzzy · #2 (**permalink**) 02-21-2011, 01:18 PM

sorry to hear. Pretty shocking that a 'pro' couldn't get this right.

No excuse for not getting the flash off-camera.

Name and shame! Name and shame and invite them to the discussion. You should post the image as well once they're invited to this discussion so they can try (if possible) to defend themselves. NAME AND SHAME both the studio and photographer.

I can totally appreciate and understand your gripe, I'd be pissed, but what's the use if you don't name and shame and potentially save others from this fiasco?

lonni · #3 (**permalink**) 02-21-2011, 02:42 PM

My "Pro" wedding photographer gave me photos with red eye, closed eyes, out of focus, unflatering motion blur, under exposed, very heavy flash shaddow, and some very odd candid moments that made me look shocking. She also gave me some that had been badly photoshoped, she had been trying to recover some photos, my flower girl had part of her arm missing.

Out of the 170 photos she gave me only 50 were any good. She was trained at one of the big chains. Must be a trend.

Jim Bryant · #4 (**permalink**) 02-21-2011, 04:20 PM

There's a PRO born everyday...............

#5 (**permalink**) 02-21-2011, 06:27 PM

Couple thoughts...

I understand the no glasses thing. Last week I shot a corporate party in which the client wanted on-site printing of every photo immediately after it was taken (I'm one of the only photographers in town that can do that). I was supposed to only take photos of the children from 5-7 p.m., but it quickly became a free-for-all that lasted until 9:30.

I took about 200 photos (that were actually printed...there were a couple rejects). That's almost 1/minute. That's posing, composing, downloading (I shot tethered), editting (quick preset in Lightroom), and printing. Not a lot of time to get it right. And my biggest problem? Glasses. I only had one light with a big umbrella in front (two in the back on a white paper backdrop), but when you get a group of 4 engineers with glasses, it takes a while to get them all posing without glare...time that I didn't have.

However...
I agree. No excuse for not using an off-camera flash.

Edit: I should mention I'm not a full-time pro...just a weekend warrior.

andyw · #6 (**permalink**) 02-21-2011, 06:41 PM

I got this far "UK chain " and no further.

Sorry but my opinion of any of these outfits is pretty low.
Their idea of training their staff is to fix the cameras on specific settings and that is it.
It seems to me that the the vast majority of the people working for these sort of outfits are incapable of thinking for themselves and work to a specific "system".
Which is basically snap what you can no matter the quality, you are the "official" photographer so virtually everyone will buy the images purely because there is nothing else to remind them of the event.

#7 (**permalink**) 02-21-2011, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Photoboothguy

Couple thoughts...

I understand the no glasses thing. Last week I shot a corporate party in which the client wanted on-site printing of every photo immediately after it was taken (I'm one of the only photographers in town that can do that). I was supposed to only take photos of the children from 5-7 p.m., but it quickly became a free-for-all that lasted until 9:30.

I took about 200 photos (that were actually printed...there were a couple rejects). That's almost 1/minute. That's posing, composing, downloading (I shot tethered), editting (quick preset in Lightroom), and printing. Not a lot of time to get it right. And my biggest problem? Glasses. I only had one light with a big umbrella in front (two in the back on a white paper backdrop), but when you get a group of 4 engineers with glasses, it takes a while to get them all posing without glare...time that I didn't have.

However...
I agree. No excuse for not using an off-camera flash.

Edit: I should mention I'm not a full-time pro...just a weekend warrior.

Get a CPL.... easily fix the glasses issue.

10 second fix, not sure why that's so hard.