Phony Photographers!!!

[jalcocer]

Well, I decided to start this because a while ago some things happened that made me think about the quality of many photographers here in my city. I live in a small city in Mexico (by the Gulf of Mexico) and there are many many asumed pro photographers out there, to be more specific "Event Photographers". Don't know if the place where you live suffer from the same kind of issue, would love to hear what experiences you had.

I'm going to talk about a few I knew, and I'm sure there are a lot more out there.

First of the "pro" photographer at my sister's wedding, charged like half what a real photographer charges and took awful shots, and all the time I just kept watching her with only one lens (the kit lens), on a low end sony alpha, and the on camera flash, not even an external flash mounted on the hotshoe. I used a superzoom for taking some photos (at that time I was only dreaming on having a dslr) and my best shots where way better than hers.

Another two (have to place them together since they are cousins) "event photographers", my wife happens to be friend with them, shoot only jpeg, on Auto, with on camera flash and the UV filter never comes off, kit lens, low end dslr, high prices, don't even know lightroom, photoshop, capture one, etc, just use the one bundled with the camera and I don't know what they do to the pictures but the editing makes them worse.

The thing that almost made me laugh in the face of one of them, was a conversation about cameras and lenses, he has a d60 and the kit lens, I was already started with photography, so I told him, "why don't you invest on a better lens", he told me that would be later, because first he wanted a new camera, and this is the part that almost made me fell in laughter, he told me "Maybe later, first I want a new camera, I want a D9000" (and I'm not writing it down wrong).

Another wedding I went, d60, kit lens, on camera flash, different photographer.

Another one, kit lens, on camera flash.

And so on, and so on.......

I'm planning to start my own business, and invest in order to offer a good service at competitive prices, and everytime I think about all these people I feel I have a chance to make it work, not because I'm a professional (not yet) but because as an amateur, I know way more stuff than all these "pro" photographers.

The only downside, they are a lot!, and they are the ones that charge the less and people here always goes with the cheap ones, and I really think that affects the ones that truly know what they are doing.

Posted this for the laughs, but also to know your experiences with similar people.

Regards

[michaelnotar]

couldnt agree more with every word of that. its the same up here in idaho. just seem professional clients out, which is harder to find, dont compete at their level.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Posted this for the laughs...

I am nor sure I see a reason to make fun of those people. They are just trying to make ends meet by responding to demand. If their customers are happy with the quality they get, who are we to laugh at them? One of the most universal truths, across cultures and continents, is that you get what you paid for.

I do not understand the usual put-down of kit lenses. What's so wrong with them? They are perfectly good for 80-90% of most people's needs, including weddings.

What's up with UV filters?! All of a sudden, taking them off seems like a badge of honor for "true" photographers? Yes, I know it is a hotly debated issue, and yes, I know, keeping them might (might!) lead to occasional flair issues, but I, for one, almost never take them off (and feel free to consider me a "non-true" photographer). Especially not in a wedding environment, with all the food and drinks, commotion, kids running around, drunken guests, etc. And I've seen, first-hand, front elements of lenses without filters so damaged that only professional repair would help.

If anybody should be laughed at it should be guys like me... knowing it all from reading about it (and much less doing it), wasting time on pointless forum debates, thinking about getting out and finally taking some pictures (instead of critiquing others). Knowing too much about something ofter gets in the way of actually doing it. So, hats off to those brave souls who dare to do it, even if they know "nothing" about it (but enough to make their clients happy).

Lets not forget, those clients are responding to the emotion of the moment, not technique. Have you ever witnessed someone going through a family album, over faded photographs, overexposed, underexposed, blurry, etc., with tears in their eyes? And, no they are not crying because of the poor technique, but because of the emotional connection with the subject and the moment.

[louoates]

Gotta tell this story. I attended a destination wedding of a relative in Kauai. Super "arty" photographer and videographer were hired from whatever hippie commune still exists. At the ceremony I snapped away with my little 6 megapixel camera, making sure I stayed well away from the "pros" as they worked. A few weeks later I got a call from the bride asking if I had any pictures from the wedding. Turns out the arty guys took no shots of the bridal party together. And no shots of the bride and groom together at the altar. What they did shoot was closeups of the wedding "stuff" such as flowers on the chairs and hotel porch urns...with the bride/groom/others in the background OUT OF FOCUS. The videographer was so artsy he shot everything, including the father/bride dance and the father of bride speech WITH NO SOUND.
Luckily I had shot a few usable shots the bride was able to use. I didn't have the nerve to ask her what she paid the two clowns she hired.
On the plus side, the pictures didn't make much difference. The couple divorced six months later.

[Fips]

I have to agree with Slobodan. I don't see anything wrong with a D60 and/or kit lenses. I happened to discover a very nice channel on youtube lately, run buy a guy who does some really nice stuff using relatively low-end gear (though not all the time): http://www.youtube.com/user/bigbs4. I've seen quite a few people with FF D3, 1D and whatnot cameras struggling to get anything remotely as nice.

[jalcocer]

The purpose is not to make fun of them, the laughs are for things like "I want a d9000". And I know the kit lens is capable of nice shots, and also can take good photos with any dslr, but let's be honest, to be able to take good motion shots like at the wedding party you need at least the flash and the on camera flash is not enough for that. But also bothers me how unprepared they are, and how misinformed and how just because they have a dslr they can shoot a wedding, and charge. I'm taking the time, effort and expense to start my business the right way, to offer clients a good product at an affordable price, and people like them are the ones that take work out of the real pro photographers, I know some charge way too much, but that's another topic.

As an example here is how I became victim of my same complaint, thanks to my wife who was the one who hired them for our wedding, and this is one of many shots that end up like this (now I became my self the reason to laugh), please don't mind the chubby guy on the chair (that's me)

[RSL]

Ya gotta remember, jalcocer, that the term "professional" means the woman's in business. It doesn't tell you anything about her ability to make good photographs.

[jalcocer]

Ya gotta remember, jalcocer, that the term "professional" means the woman's in business. It doesn't tell you anything about her ability to make good photographs.

Thanks for pointing that out, well, then let's say good photographers

[Dewi Sant]

Having spent 10 years as a pro wedding photographer, albeit back in the "film days" of the '90s - one thing I can tell you is that to do it properly requires hard work and dedication. The cameras I used back then were top end Canon for the 35mm shots, and Mamiya for the medium format shots - all with the best lenses that the finances of the business would sustain. A lot of people's (laymans') perception of wedding photographers is that they use the best equipment, which was one of the main reasons for me investing in good gear (apart from the fact that good cameras will usually withstand the abuse that a busy photographer subjects them to a lot better). I could have taken shots that were just as good to the untrained eye of my clients by using cheaper makes and cheaper lenses, but in such a high profile profession where most of your work comes from recommendations, you have to be seen to be using decent cameras.

The medium format shots drew a gasp almost every time the clients saw them for the first time though, they had usually only ever seen photos taken on 35mm or even the old 110 film sizes. A lot of that was down to the fact that I only ever used the best processing / printing labs, who could meet the standards required. The same thing went for the suits I wore when doing jobs - always immaculate, appearance is (or was) everything in the profession back then. Clients paid a lot of money for an exquisite album and that's what they got. The way I looked at it was: "If you can't produce shots better than 'Uncle Nobby' on his Argos special - even if he's stood beside you taking the same poses - then you're in the wrong business"    

It also pays to learn the business inside out. Before setting myself loose on the public, I attended many courses on wedding photography, covering actually taking the shots, posing etc to the running of the business and how to deal with clients. It was expensive but money well spent. I already had my City and Guilds (UK) qualifications in photography before starting out but I became a member of the Guild of Weddng Photographers, mainly for the liabilty insurance (which every wedding photographer needs) but they also ran some excellent courses. It all adds to the professionalism - right down to the design and print of the company stationery: letteheads, business cards and advertising brochures etc. Even the spare wheel cover on my 4x4 had the company name and logo on it.  

It makes me mad these days when I see the work that some of the so called "pro" photographers produce. My niece was married in New Zealand a couple of years ago, when she received the finished wedding photos she was heartbroken, but eventually managed to get the photos on disk from the photographer. She brought them back here to the UK and I then spent the next 3 weeks working away in Photoshop trying to make something half decent out them. It wasn't easy but they ended up a lot better than the originals, and when made up into an album they looked quite passable. Her face when I gave them to her was reward enough for all my work - she cried, but this time they were tears of joy. I told her if she'd paid my airfare to New Zealand for the wedding they would have been right first time )

Dewi

[jalcocer]

That's true, as an event photographer you should offer your clients the best, so, in my eyes there's not enough with a kit lens and the on camera flash, there's more to it, not only inside but outside the studio, one may start with less, but not with bad quality, not in service or final product. I know a low end dslr is enough for starting, but at least invest in a few good lenses, a couple of good lights, and with luck in no time one would have enough to improve gear and everything else.

Imagine my face when I finally took a look at my wedding photos, sadly I had no business in that decision since my wife was the one in love with the work of her friends, and that was before I started with photography and without knowing what I  know now (not a lot but we are getting there) I was aware those pictures were really bad.

But well, the best I can do is try to start my business with the most I can afford and start by offering the best quality in service and product I can give, with nice pricing, that'll get me started.

Thanks for sharing your experiences, I know many of us have.