For newbie wedding photographers..

[Shelly1204]

We should make this a sticky.

Judge Joe Brown owns bad wedding photographer.

 

[IgsEMT]

AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[IgsEMT]

Good friend of mine says that PHOTOGRAPHY BUSINESS SHOULD BE REGULATED.
I Agree with that and THIS simple proves it!

 

[Overread]

but but its so contrived.....

meh the choice was made before the 10 minutes of TV fame(or shame for some) I would have preferd to see more of a defence from the photographers and a bit less of a one way bulldog in the Judge's seat.
I'm not defending the photographers but there were areas of the case where things did not seem to quite add up between the two stories presented.
I'd also have liked to see someone else view the images other than the hotfire judge...

Certianly whilst the camera body and lenses can produce decent level work and in the right hands some very good results its not what I would turn up to a wedding with if I were a professional photographer.

 

[TiaS]

oh wow, lol. Thanks for sharing

 

[clbd39]

lol saw that over on mycanikon pretty funny ish

 

[manicmike]

she printed them at wal-mart.

 

[Sbuxo]

:lmao:

 

[chammer]

i saw that monday after work and i was floored. it was both hilarious (judge joe's comments) and sad (the defendants comments). also, i gained a new level of respect for judge joe brown as he came off as quite the photographer! it was awesome lol.

 

[Shelly1204]

Man, I see at least one or two of these type of photographers a month in court. They seem to mostly advertise on craig's list. They take horrible photos and don't understand why they have to refund the bride her money AND pay her damages on top of it. Guess some people have to learn the hard way.

 

[redtippmann]

wow judge brown knows his lenses!

 

[AUS-10]

haha yeah saw this on TV the other day. There goes her "buisness". lol

 

[Johnboy2978]

Wow. Really quite surprised with that ruling. It seems like a very subjective case if you ask me. I agree that she could've used better equipment, a more expensive body, faster lenses, etc. but like we all know that doesn't make you a pro just b/c you've shelled out the cash for the gear. I've seen a lot of folks who could turn out shoddy work with a Hassie. It sounded to me like Joe just felt the need to show everyone how smart and well versed he is in the field of photography more than anything. How many people are going to remember what aperture you shot one of probably 1000 pictures at a wedding? I can give you an estimate, but I can't give you the complete EXIF on the spot. I also wouldn't print at Wal-mart, but I have to admit, that some of the images I saw in that clip are as good as some of the local pro competition around here. $1300 is a steal for a wedding as well. He complains of soft images, but I didn't see any that were obviously flawed due to being out of focus, under/over exposed, etc. It just seemed rather subjective and he ruled for the plantiff b/c she didn't use what he felt she should've used. I wonder how that would've resulted if she had the same images, but said she used a Canon 1D and L glass. Anyone else surprised by this?

 

[PhotoXopher]

You could tell all that from the YouTube video huh? How soft they were/weren't, how nice the prints were?

"I also have a 55 to 200 your honor."

"What's the speed?"

"I don't know."

That pretty much says it all right there. Anyone who's been on this site for a month knows what 'speed' their lenses are, a 'professional' photographer shouldn't even need to think about that one.

 

[Overread]

It was a 70-300mm but yes that line of her now knowing the aperture values of her own gear, when it is rather clear that she does not own that much (if she had 10-20 lenses I might accept forgetting the specific apertures of one - maybe) did clearly show that she was not as sure with her photography as her manner might otherwise lead one to belive

However I had a look at a few other vids of this guy and to be honest the defence might as well not turn up. The cases seem to be selected very clearly and presented in such a way that the defence is often given no actual defence chance and is mostly under a barrage of attacks from the "judge".

Honestly I would have expected independant viewing of the images to assess their quality - and the matter of if they were proofs or not was never raised after its initial mentioning.

It's rather like many things though; the overall tone is true and the overall generalisations are clear but the topics are hardly gone into with any depth to find out if things are the case or not. Heck most people on the forum get more chance to defend themself than in that court