Hired a Professional - Now need some help with the results

[kdeerhake]

They were not professional photographers, did you find them on Facebook ?

hey had a studio on a busy street and also specialized in framing and photography. I liked what was on their site and liked it when I spoke with them.

The exposures could be better but they're not horrible. Shooting it direct sunlight is hard to do. What it your idea or theirs to shoot/pose on that boat?
It's hard to judge the sharpness with web-sized images. They don't necessarily look tack sharp, but they don't look that blurry either.

10 years ago when we were still kids my parents had a family picture taken on the boat which they have framed and in the house. My idea was to have that "updated" for them and they could have them side by side as a comparison. Focus is pretty bad in some of the group photos, and other ones you can tell the focus was on our pants. The photographer had his choice of time of the day. This should have been a red flag from me when he didn't care what time of day, we were also willing to move the boat anywhere which could have taken us out of direct sunlight.

 

[Robin Usagani]

I just saw their work... What you got is pretty much up to the standard to what he/she has on the website. There is a big hint there "Affordable pricing". Sometimes you get amazing photos for cheaper price but the odd is against you.

 

[kdeerhake]

What is the going rate for a good family photographer, on site, one hour?

For future reference!

 

[shootermcgavin]

They don't look that sharp to me, although the shots on the boat would be hard to make good the way the light was so harsh. The one under the trees would look a lot better with a high pass. I personally don't think RAW files are that big of a deal giving out especially if you're not doing any liquify or effects that people may get mad about which I highly doubt happened in these shots cuz they barely look touched up at all. Also white is a hard color to shoot, did the photographer tell you that before hand. I don't even do photography as a money making venture and I tell everyone its best to wear solids. I think the one by the trees would've looked great in B&W but with white shirts on they might get lost in the background. Hopefully you will get something worked out with your photos.

 

[KmH]

since it was part of the agreement that the we own the images after the shoot. .

That would be highly unusual.

I suspect the agreement included a model release and a use licensing clause (essentially rental agreements), but did not include transfer of copyright, which here in the US is what defines image ownership.

The entry bar for photographers that charge for their services has gotten so low that a store front and a web site are no longer a reliable indicator of a true professional (expert) photographer.

That the photographer was not using supplimental light sources should have been a big waving red flag.

It would be interesting to know how much they charged you.

 

[DiskoJoe]

Yeah I'm cool with fixing the crooked horizon with a jpeg, but I really wanted the raws to try to help out the exposure issues.

$150 for one hour.

Johnson Photography Custom photography and framing specialists. We offer custom portrait sessions at very reasonable and affordable pricing. Explore photography without Boundaries. Custom picture and art framing in the Sandusky Ohio area is also avai
Now that I'm re-looking at their website I do see some photos that I do not like. Also not to knock other brands, but I'm used to seeing Nikon or Canons. He was shooting with an Olympus?

The site is not great but the photos you got were not even close to that. Did Bill take these photos? That is the only person I see getting any type of credit on the site. The fact that he was using olympus is not really the problem. You can still get decent quality from one of their motors. But you got skrewed. Mid day or not these were way below the par for what they advertise. This is especially low quality for someone that charges $150 an hour. Next time find a hipster kid off the street.

 

[DiskoJoe]

What is the going rate for a good family photographer, on site, one hour?

For future reference!

$150 an hour is not unusual.

 

[DiskoJoe]

I just saw their work... What you got is pretty much up to the standard to what he/she has on the website. There is a big hint there "Affordable pricing". Sometimes you get amazing photos for cheaper price but the odd is against you.

I wouldnt call $150 an hour affordable. Reasonable if they produce good work but $50 an hour is affordable.

 

[dots]

$150-200 an hour, as a guesstimate. Plus possible, additional expenses; dependent on what the getting "on-site" involves.

 

[kdeerhake]

There was no written contract ( another red flag!). I guess it's really my fault, I could have asked on here for a reference or spent more time looking.

 

[DiskoJoe]

There was no written contract ( another red flag!). I guess it's really my fault, I could have asked on here for a reference or spent more time looking.

Remember the time old saying, " If you want something done right, do it yourself."

After seeing what gear you have listed in your signature I am wondering why you didnt just set up your own gear on a tripod and shoot this yourself using a trigger. Couldnt have been any worse and you wouldnt have been out anything. Plus you have L glass. You that thing son!

 

[KmH]

The slideshow on that web site is rife with photographs that display the same poor use of light seen in yours. Some have been rescued to an extent by the use of image editing software.

I would say you did not do enough due diligence before choosing a photographer. Caveate Emptor (Buyer Beware)

By the way. By posting that link to their web site, that studio has now gotten backlinks directly to your thread here on TPF.

 

[shootermcgavin]

There was no written contract ( another red flag!). I guess it's really my fault, I could have asked on here for a reference or spent more time looking.

This a disagree with, contracts are red flags in my opinion. For a maid service, lawn mowing, any service it is a one sided contract, they are making it for them not for the customer. I talked to one wedding photographer locally to me who said in his contract it states that can't hire another photographer, to me that's ridiculous. If I buy a piece of art from someone he won't make me sign something saying I can't hang up another piece of art in my house. At the end of the day contract or no contract when they say the RAW images got lost and we only have the JPEG you're screwed. If you want a contract write it yourself, although I'd just try to find someone honest that a contract isn't needed. To me a photographer is a art service, if I'm paying and I want them to shoot on my card in Raw images and give me the card when they're done well they shouldn't have a problem with that, although the images will look like crap without processing.

 

[shootermcgavin]

The slideshow on that web site is rife with photographs that display the same poor use of light seen in yours. Some have been rescued to an extent by the use of image editing software.

I would say you did not do enough due diligence before choosing a photographer. Caveate Emptor (Buyer Beware)

By the way. By posting that link to their web site, that studio has now gotten backlinks directly to your thread here on TPF.

Yeah but they don't look technologically advanced enough to find the backlinks. For those of you interested yahoo.com (in the search area) site:http://(thenyoursite) is the quickest way I know of finding out who is back linked to my sites.

 

[e.rose]

I talked to one wedding photographer locally to me who said in his contract it states that can't hire another photographer, to me that's ridiculous.

Go shoot a wedding with another photographer constantly in your way, trying to get the same shots you are, distracting your subjects away from your camera and then talk about how ridiculous that clause is. EVERY decent and professional wedding photographer I know has that clause in their contracts and for good reason. The bride and groom can't hire another photographer while the current photographer is still employed by them. After the wedding... before the wedding... if you fire the photographer before the wedding... fine. But not during.

I fail to see how you think that's unreasonable... but that's not what this thread is about, so I'll end my hijacking here.

I apologize to the OP for this quick derailment.