DJ Sparks Outcry from Photographers

[robbins.photo]

Would someone please define 'professional camera equipment'?

That said, the contract was between the couple and the photographer. The DJ is not a party to that contract and is under no obligation to oblige by it.

Then what would be the point of the clause? The contract was between the couple and the photographer. The contrast stipulations extend to the event itself, since that is what the contract covers. Hence, the the way I see it, the contract umbrella's over every aspect of the event. The contract isn't between the couple and the DJ, but the DJ is part of the event that the contract concerns.

This isn't a case of uncle Jeb bringing his fancy camera to snap a few photos for the scrapbook.

This guy was a paid professional who basically offered a service outside of what they were hired to do and in violation of the couple's contract with the photographer (not blaming the couple, though, they meant no harm I'm sure), used the photos to promote what appears to be the photography side of their business, and then went on social media fishing for sympathy.

Thankfully their pity party isn't going so well.

EDIT: It also seems that the photographer isn't pursuing legal action anyways - that would look awful for her business - She's just calling out unprofessional behavior, and the DJ is doing terrible damage control in the wake of his hurt feelings and business image.

So the pity party is cancelled? Great. What are we supposed to do with all these balloons?

Sent from my 306SH using Tapatalk

 

[480sparky]

What hasn't been brought to light in the matter is the following:

1. Did the DJ actually interfere with this self-righteous photographer's duty to the couple? Did she somehow miss a critical shot or two, to the detriment of her obligations? And did this make the newlyweds upset with her? Are they threatening to sue her, or demanding a refund?

2. Did this self-appointed PhotoGod even notice said DJ and his alleged 'professional camera equipment' while at the event? If she's the one that's going to be so anal about others taking photos that she feels the need to include such language in her contracts, then perhaps she needs to be on her game a bit more and not complain about it after the fact when she notices someone in the background of a photo (blurry as the background is) holding 'professional camera equipment' and THEN raising a stink about it.

3. This may be nothing more than a fake media event. Remember the motel that wanted to charge the newlyweds a fine if any of their guests left negative comments about them on their site?

4. Suppose the DJ had a clause in his contract (with the couple, mind you) that forbade anyone else from taking photos of the couple during their first dance together at the reception except the DJ himself? How would she feel, act and react to that?

 

[Designer]

Who knows if the contract the photographer used was iron-clad and really legally bulletproof; from what *I* read, it's not...

From the excerpt quoted in the article, it seems like a very poorly-written contract. If Carly Fuller wanted to be the only photographer recording the wedding, then she should have had a better contract.

She needs to sue her own lawyer.

 

[480sparky]

.........She needs to sue her own lawyer.

I got a dollar that says she wrote the contract herself.

 

[pixmedic]

What hasn't been brought to light in the matter is the following:

1. Did the DJ actually interfere with this self-righteous photographer's duty to the couple? Did she somehow miss a critical shot or two, to the detriment of her obligations? And did this make the newlyweds upset with her? Are they threatening to sue her, or demanding a refund?

2. Did this self-appointed PhotoGod even notice said DJ and his alleged 'professional camera equipment' while at the event? If she's the one that's going to be so anal about others taking photos that she feels the need to include such language in her contracts, then perhaps she needs to be on her game a bit more and not complain about it after the fact when she notices someone in the background of a photo (blurry as the background is) holding 'professional camera equipment' and THEN raising a stink about it.

3. This may be nothing more than a fake media event. Remember the motel that wanted to charge the newlyweds a fine if any of their guests left negative comments about them on their site?

4. Suppose the DJ had a clause in his contract (with the couple, mind you) that forbade anyone else from taking photos of the couple during their first dance together at the reception except the DJ himself? How would she feel, act and react to that?

in one article I read, the photographer mentioned the DJ on multiple occasions "photobombing" shots trying to get his own.
the DJ claimed that he only took pictures from his DJ booth, but some of the pictures I saw showed the DJ in other locations as well getting right in front of where the actual photographer was taking pictures.
while this is not a contractual matter between the DJ and the photographer, it IS a contractual matter between the photographer and the bride/groom. IF the photographer wanted to pursue anything, it would be against the bride and groom. this is assuming of course, that the contract is legit and lawyered up.

so far though, the only thing I got from the "news" articles were a bunch of sob stories and online mud slinging by two alleged "professionals"

 

[480sparky]

.........so far though, the only thing I got from the "news" articles were a bunch of sob stories and online mud slinging by two alleged "professionals"

I got another dollar that says us peons will never know the entire truth about the matter.

 

[pixmedic]

.........so far though, the only thing I got from the "news" articles were a bunch of sob stories and online mud slinging by two alleged "professionals"

I got another dollar that says us peons will never know the entire truth about the matter.

im fairly certain that we arent getting even 20% of the real story from either side.
but the online news rags do a good job of fluffing it up and making it into a real hatfield -vs- mccoy feud.

 

[robbins.photo]

im fairly certain that we arent getting even 20% of the real story from either side.
but the online news rags do a good job of fluffing it up and making it into a real hatfield -vs- mccoy feud.

So cage fight then?

At least that way we wouldn't have blown up all these balloons for nothing.

 

[480sparky]

............So cage fight then?

At least that way we wouldn't have blown up all these balloons for nothing.

Wait........ what?!?!?


Gorillas can blow up balloons?

 

[robbins.photo]

Wait........ what?!?!?


Gorillas can blow up balloons?

Of course. We use a.. umm.. slightly less than conventional method though. BTW you might want to wash those before you handle them. Oh, and probably best to keep them away from open flames.

Lol

 

[Designer]

I got a dollar that says she wrote the contract herself.

NO!

She found it on the internet!

 

[robbins.photo]

I got a dollar that says she wrote the contract herself.

NO!

She found it on the internet!

So she'd have to sue the internet then?

 

[Braineack]

IF the photographer wanted to pursue anything, it would be against the bride and groom. this is assuming of course, that the contract is legit and lawyered up.

pursue what?

did the photographer not get paid to take pictures of the wedding?

 

[pixmedic]

IF the photographer wanted to pursue anything, it would be against the bride and groom. this is assuming of course, that the contract is legit and lawyered up.

pursue what?

did the photographer not get paid to take pictures of the wedding?

What does anyone pursue for breach of contract? Can you say that the photographer didn't lose print sale money because of pictures the DJ gave them for free?

 

[Braineack]

What does anyone pursue for breach of contract? Can you say that the photographer didn't lose print sale money because of pictures the DJ gave them for free?

did the bride and groom pay the DJ to take pictures? Did they dub the DJ [pun intended] "official" photographer? were a certain number of print sales guaranteed as part of the service agreement and the bride and groom didn't cough up?