Remember this "PERFECT BRIDE" thread???

[ababysean]

Thanks guys! I shall use it

Bitter. Thanks.
Mstiwnkles, your made me laugh harder than Bitter...enough said

Schwetty, don't let Bitter get you worked up. You should be smarter than that. (that goes to everyone else around here)

OOHHH EMMM GEEEEE! The bride's dress is cut off! Blwon out hilights......What magazine posted that CRAP?!?!? Actually I'd put more examples up as I have 3 different wedding magazines sitting right next to me but I think you can do your own DD.

You know the difference between your shot and these!?!?! These were PLANNED photos, probably had lights set up, a crew, assistants, and still they took and selected this pic to put on a cover?? huh? It looks like the focus fell on the grass and not even on her face! haha

Your shot was not set up, it just happened and you took it. I think that says a lot about the photo. I'd sure as all heck use it in your gallery! It was taken on a public lawn, and she clearly waved to you. I'd even go so far as to say you would be ok putting it in your brochure, but I agree that I like the one in the gazebo better, it seems more magical!

 

[MohaimenK]

I wasn't being mean. I wasn't saying it was a bad picture. I was just saying you had a better one IMHO in the gazebo picture. And it is my opinion that one picture of a bride in a wedding section of a website would stick out with no other ones of the same wedding.

Well here's my issue with posts like that. I know we are all looking for C&C sometimes but sometimes people just go all out with C&C. Sometimes a picture can be wrong in many ways but the end result is what appeals to people and general public. Technically this image has many things wrong, sure I am not arguing w/ you and I wasn't even looking for that C&C. Especially since there was an entire thread dedicated for that previously. Only wanted to know if I should use it because of the legal issue. Now with that said, sure the image is centered but it flows to the left because of her dress, sure the dress is cut off but its not significant and I've just proven you that. If magazines are happy to post such images, I'm happy to take them as a photographer. Blown hilights? Sure but if you are advertising yourself as a photojournalist style wedding photographer then you'll come across many images like this. Sure I could have set this scene differently, told her to wait a few mins let me get my flash out and I would have my wife hold it at 45 degree angle and go at it.

The problem here is that we judge TOO hard. Way too hard.

 

[MohaimenK]

Thanks guys! I shall use it

Bitter. Thanks.
Mstiwnkles, your made me laugh harder than Bitter...enough said

Schwetty, don't let Bitter get you worked up. You should be smarter than that. (that goes to everyone else around here)

OOHHH EMMM GEEEEE! The bride's dress is cut off! Blwon out hilights......What magazine posted that CRAP?!?!? Actually I'd put more examples up as I have 3 different wedding magazines sitting right next to me but I think you can do your own DD.

You know the difference between your shot and these!?!?! These were PLANNED photos, probably had lights set up, a crew, assistants, and still they took and selected this pic to put on a cover?? huh? It looks like the focus fell on the grass and not even on her face! haha

Your shot was not set up, it just happened and you took it. I think that says a lot about the photo. I'd sure as all heck use it in your gallery! It was taken on a public lawn, and she clearly waved to you. I'd even go so far as to say you would be ok putting it in your brochure, but I agree that I like the one in the gazebo better, it seems more magical!

Yes, I like them both. ALthough this is my fav one I will probably put both of them up

 

[MichiganFarts]

Thanks guys! I shall use it

Bitter. Thanks.
Mstiwnkles, your made me laugh harder than Bitter...enough said

Schwetty, don't let Bitter get you worked up. You should be smarter than that. (that goes to everyone else around here)

OOHHH EMMM GEEEEE! The bride's dress is cut off! Blwon out hilights......What magazine posted that CRAP?!?!? Actually I'd put more examples up as I have 3 different wedding magazines sitting right next to me but I think you can do your own DD.

I don't see any reason to "scold" us, and then make fun of the person who actually gave you honest reasoning as to why they personally didn't care for it as much as some...

You're either complacent, or your not...just don't go for hypocritical!

 

[bigtwinky]

Beautiful amazing wedding photo? No, it is not. Its a nice image, love the bride's smile and the candidness of the moment, but I don't like the head space, the cut off back end of the dress and the blown out highlights in the dress. But thats me. They are minor details, but I feel that its those minor details that will take an image from being nice to being great

In terms of using the image, it depends on the laws. I have always been told (and go by) that if you want to use an image for commercial gain, then you need a release. If you are charging people for weddings, state so on your website, and have this image up on your site (whether its the main section or sub section doesn't matter), then you are using this for marketing and thus commercial gain. Anything used in an online or printed porfolio that is used to draw in new clients needs a release.

Should her wedding photographer have a say? No. As said, its a public place and you have a right to take her picture. Its what you do with the picture that requires a release. Only she can have issues with it.

If your website is just a collection of your work to showcase and you have nothing on there saying that you are taking money, then you can post it up. But again, if you are using her image to showcase you talents in hopes of getting more work, you need a release. And I would not consider someone waiving as giving you the permission to use her image for commercial gain, on t-shirts, posters, catalogues and so on.

Now your question...should you take the chance? It is your call. Seeing as she is smiling and happy and its not a horrible picture, then I doubt she would complain if its up on your site. So chances are on your side. Worse case, she asks you to take it down, you offer a print, she says no, you take it down. I dont think your reputation will be harmed by this.

The only other thing to consider are the laws that are applicable where you took the image. If the image was taken in Quebec or in France, then the photography laws are different that those in the USA. I don't know if state laws change from state to state, but its not where you live that counts, but where the image was taken. Probably does not apply to you, but thought I would throw that in there.
I'm no lawyer, but this is pretty much what I've read and been told and go by

 

[MohaimenK]

"I don't see any reason to "scold" us, and then make fun of the person who actually gave you honest reasoning as to why they personally didn't care for it as much as some...

You're either complacent, or your not...just don't go for hypocritical! "

oops wrong thing. I missread you

It wasn't "scolding" to be honest. I was just trying to say he's a jackass in a nicer way Sorry didn't mean to offend you

but if your'e talking about ms twynkle's comment there read this

Well here's my issue with posts like that. I know we are all looking for C&C sometimes but sometimes people just go all out with C&C. Sometimes a picture can be wrong in many ways but the end result is what appeals to people and general public. Technically this image has many things wrong, sure I am not arguing w/ you and I wasn't even looking for that C&C. Especially since there was an entire thread dedicated for that previously. Only wanted to know if I should use it because of the legal issue. Now with that said, sure the image is centered but it flows to the left because of her dress, sure the dress is cut off but its not significant and I've just proven you that. If magazines are happy to post such images, I'm happy to take them as a photographer. Blown hilights? Sure but if you are advertising yourself as a photojournalist style wedding photographer then you'll come across many images like this. Sure I could have set this scene differently, told her to wait a few mins let me get my flash out and I would have my wife hold it at 45 degree angle and go at it.

The problem here is that we judge TOO hard. Way too hard.

 

[vtf]

I Like it. Spontaneous capture.
I know you're emotionally attached to this girl so is my C&c too Harsh????

 

[lildlege1]

I would use it also! It sure is way better than my wedding pictures since I dont have any because the people that developed them Ruined Them ALL, SO YEP I HAVE NO WEDDING PHOTOs of my wedding!!! But we are renewing our vows in April so that we can relive the moments and have some actual pictures . I just hope I find the right photographer as it is hard to trust someone now...

 

[misstwinklytoes]

HERE is the original thread. The gazebo picture is inside for those who've not seen it yet.

 

[MohaimenK]

Thanks everyone for your input.

Bigtwinky I will check out DC's law. They're all different from state to state.

Almost all votes says to use the image. I'm going to do so.

If anyone ELSE is irked by any comments here then move on please. The decision has been made and the point of the thread has been resulted. Thanks again for your inputs everyone.

 

[MichiganFarts]

Don't get me wrong Mo, there's a reason most of us overlooked the fact that it wasn't a "perfect shot", is because A. we knew it wasn't C&C you were looking for, and B. the shot still is great in it's on right.

I wasn't offended, I only used the word "scolded" for lack of a better term!

But I just thought telling us to lay off Bitter for the same thing was slightly hypocritical...I don't think you meant to be though.

However, you're probably just more used to him than I.

 

[Syco]

I like the shot, but I'll go the other way on the original question -- I wouldn't use it. If you're taking pictures at the National Cathedral, you're living in the litigious capital of the world. It's not worth risking your business over a photo that isn't accompanied by a model release.

 

[MohaimenK]

Don't get me wrong Mo, there's a reason most of us overlooked the fact that it wasn't a "perfect shot", is because A. we knew it wasn't C&C you were looking for, and B. the shot still is great in it's on right.

I wasn't offended, I only used the word "scolded" for lack of a better term!

But I just thought telling us to lay off Bitter for the same thing was slightly hypocritical...I don't think you meant to be though.

However, you're probably just more used to him than I.

LOL Bitter! I call him Santa Have you not read that thread?? Lets put it this way, Schewetty got my point because they've been enemies since day one. Heck, he's right. Even I have sent Bitter messages thanking him and asking him questions. He just ignores them. I mean sure he's a good photographer when it comes to buildings. I'll give you that. But it's just his bitter attitude toward many that have resulted the dislike.

As for the whole "Schwetty, you know better than that" meant that as sarcasm between 2 friends. Because end of the day, we know Bitter's gonna be Bitter. :mrgreen:

Ok, no more talk about Bitter. I dont' want to change the subject to him at all.

 

[MichiganFarts]

Who?

 

[MohaimenK]

Who?

Patches O'Houlihan!