If Client did not like your photo and decides not to pay you, is that right?

lol, so your boss photographer is paying you 150 per wedding for around 15 hours of work + YOU edit the shots yourself for free. why dont you tell your boss to **** off and get the gigs yourself? you should be paid for the editing work you do or he should edit the shots himself. if hes not happy the way you edit your shots. tell him to **** off, quit that job and tell him he can find another second shooter that works for free.
 
Change them to B&W and be done with it.

Also, if you're second shooter it's not your issue. You shouldn't even be editing in the first place, it's the main photographer's fault for being careless with his business.

Did you all miss the part where the main photographer (boss) can't edit the photos, and in fact, can't even look at the photos because he is a male? That's the unique twist to this story that makes 3/4 of the replies her irrelevant. It's no use talking about who should be making edits from a business perspective when we have a religious rule that is overriding what would normally be the proper way to run the business. The boss had to hire the photographer because she is female and relied on her to produce images the client liked and the client doesn't: the only way he can fix them is to hire another female to edit them and that's why he doesn't want to pay the photographer.

I still think the photographer should get paid and the boss should eat the costs of the photo editing. But the bosses reasoning here isn't totally because he's a jackass: he's working against some cultural restraints that make it hard for him to deal directly with the client and the photos of the client.
 
I work as an assistant wedding photographer and the bride did not like the color of her hair on some of the photos because she said it is "lighter than it should be". She demands to get the original copies of the photos but unfortunately, it was my mistake I did not have any of the original copies after editing them (which was basically brightness/contrast). I told my photographer boss that since the bride isn't happy he could deduct money from my paycheck for that wedding. I only get paid $11/hour. A wedding is usually 10-15 hours. So, I get about $100-150 per wedding. I don't get paid for the editing work I have to do after the wedding. Apparently, editing work is included already on that $100-150/wedding.
Have you discussed editing work and what is expected of you with the primary shooter? It is really odd that you would edit your shots and the main photog would be editing his or her shots. It would not produce a cohesive set at all. About the only time I'd want something like this to be done would be if the client wanted two completely different style photographers to shoot and that's never come up for me. Not inconceivable.

My photographer boss said that since I could not get him the original photos, he needs to go to someone else to fix my photos who is good in photoshop and it would cost him $100. I would end up getting paid only between $0-50. Is that right? Is that fair? They still have my photos. Not all of the photos are bad. Besides, taking photos is only half of the work and editing is the other half. I am only willing to deduct maximum 50% of my paycheck. What should I do?

At this point? I agree with Kieth. Cut your losses. The original photographer stands to lose more than $150 if these images aren't salvageable... At which point if there is no contract outlining your responsibilities for this? He or she may turn around expect that back from you. You are not in the US, so I can't fathom what is feasible for a lawsuit there, but I'd venture to guess that if you screwed up a job you were hired to do, you can be liable for the damages.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top