Judge Joe Brown vs Wedding Photographer
I'm sure some have seen this already but if not ....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=js7RzcdDcMs&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=js7RzcdDcMs&feature=player_embedded
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Ryan Armbrust on -
HAHA, funny stuff. Just added it to the video section!
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Tigue on -
"I don't like their attitude." Still laughing.
-
Permalink Reply by JJ on -
Whooooo,,,he lit that ass up,,,,they had no idea about f/stop and lenses,,,lol,,
-
Permalink Reply by Shane E. on -
To quote the dude: "That's like ... just your opinion, man."
She told him it was just his opinion. That is a classic thing to say to a judge. I also enjoyed how he said "XTI"
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Tigue on
-
No, the classic moment was his response, "that's what we're here for ma'm."
-
Permalink Reply by Charles on -
If the noob photographerhad been using a Mac instead of a PC, she would have seen the rough edges a mile away! :)
OK.....I feel better now. I got my 'daily troll' in.
-
Permalink Reply by casey moore on -
Haha Judge Brown was killing me with his knowledge he even mentioned a brownie! I see people like this always advertising on mojo and craigslist it gives photogs such a bad name. People just assume buying what they think is a pro camera makes them pros regardless of their lack of knowledge. I feel bad charging more then 300-400 just because of my lack of experience but I'm also not getting high end weddings lol my last guy paid me in tattoo work and I believe their wedding was cheaper then the amount of tattoo work I'm getting lol
-
Permalink Reply by JJ on
-
Ok,,info found. This chick advertises on a "pro Photographer" site and has samples of her work.
http://www.photographypros.com/portrait/midland_mi/index.php
-
Permalink Reply by Charles on
-
Nice work Inspector JJ. How did you find that?
I just didn't see anything inspiring about the woman. She's processing the heck out of her photos, and apparently masking low-def shots with special effects and stuff. I also find it difficult to believe she has shot "hundreds of weddings and never had this problem". After shooting my first wedding with a digital Rebel for $1300 and getting away with it, I would have imediately scurried to the camera store as fast as my legs could carry me and upgraded to a D-series, if not a 1-series. I said "wow!" when Judge Joe said " where's your 5d?....your 7d?....your 1-series?".
The problem is, Craigslist is full of photographer's just like her. I give her credit for being a go-getter, but there is such a thing as paying ones dues, learning the craft and genuinely giving the customer what they're paying for and expecting.
-
Permalink Reply by Jacob Zimmer on -
I enjoyed the video, but I want to go back for one second to the lawsuit: It wasn't about the shooting or the wedding, it was about the prints. The client was upset that she met the photographer in the Walmart parking lot and got discount store prints. The plaintiff was willing to pay for the time, just not the prints.
Now, a few years ago I took a test pattern (color bars, grayscale, flesh tones (Caucasian and African) and black and white) and had 8x10's printed in ten places across town. When I showed all of them to other photographers, the lab tech at Murphy's and clients, the one that was always chosen as the best print was the one from Walmart.* Several photographers here have mentioned using Sam's club. In the video, they said Fuji paper was not pro, but that's what Louisville Color Lab uses.
So since the client and judge thought the prints were bad, that suggests that the photographer did a poor job and the plaintiff should have sued for more than the prints. In the end, justice was served because the judge handed down a sentence twice the damages that the plaintiff was seeking.
*I should continue the experiment by going back and seeing if any of those printers do the same quality from day to day.
© 2012 Created by Ryan Armbrust.
