Photographer sues over stolen photo

[LewisM]

Originally Posted by Kunama

Lewis, I too like the 'candid' approach but with weddings I found you had to give the people what they wanted and then add those images that you knew they would love.

The styles have changed so much that I would not pretend to be up with current trends having been out of it for 12 years now. In fact my daughter who is getting married this winter, is after a totally different style to what I was asked to shoot.

Matt, the style right now seems high key, sepia toned (like my shot above). NOT my desired toning, but they got what they wanted. They flat REFUSED B&W (though I snuck in 3 free), and demanded one composite shot (I may post it later). I just do what is asked, but offer MY version of events in the bargain - if they don't want them, they just stay in my portfolio - no harm, no foul.

Out of all the scripted shots the bride planned with me meticulously over 5 days (including location scouting etc), only 8 shots held to that script. The weather ruined her entire plan, but she could not be happier with the end result.

[Stardrifter_WA]

I can't believe how long this thread has been going and how some try so hard to defend their position. I have read this thread with a certain degree of amusement, I must admit, but wasn't going to weigh into the debate, until now.

Some here seem to think that photography is so easy. If so, why do I find it so hard to take quality images? As far as I can determine, it takes considerable talent and technical knowledge to take decent photographs, something I have tried to attain for 30 years and still haven't done so. And frankly, I know I am no dummy! I just don't have the necessary photographic talent, but I keep trying.

I spend my working hours trying to build student confidence in themselves and to value their knowledge and skills, so it pains me to see people who devalue their skills so easily. Having said that, yes, I do realise that many people find things come to them very easily (natural talent), however, many do not find it so easy; and some find it downright hard.

Nothing has come easily to me and I have had to work hard to attain the considerable skills that I have, which is why I value them, probably? I have never had much faith in myself, but I have never doubted my abilities; and I value them accordingly.

I have just moved to a digital SLR (Canon 60D) about six months ago and it is taking me a long time just to work out how to use this camera, let alone learning to use the processing software (Corel Photoshop). I use Photoshop as it came with the CorelDraw suite of programs, which I have used for years.

It does take talent to take decent photographs and that talent should be valued accordingly. If taking photos was so easy, why aren't we all capable of taking photos of the same quality and subject matter as Ansel Adams?

Cheers Peter

[Ausrock (Chris)]

Originally Posted by Stardrifter_WA

I can't believe how long this thread has been going and how some try so hard to defend their position. I have read this thread with a certain degree of entertainment, I must admit, but wasn't going to weigh into the debate, until now.

Some here seem to think that photography is so easy. If so, why do I find it so hard to take quality images? As far as I can determine, it takes considerable talent and technical knowledge to take decent photographs, something I have tried to attain for 30 years and still haven't done so. And frankly, I know I am no dummy! I just don't have the necessary photographic talent, but I keep trying.

I spend my working hours trying to build student confidence in themselves and to value their knowledge and skills, so it pains me to see people who devalue their skills so easily. Having said that, yes, I do realise that many people find things come to them very easily (natural talent), however, many do not find it so easy; and some find it downright hard.

Nothing has come easily to me and I have had to work hard to attain the considerable skills that I have, which is why I value them, probably? I have never had much faith in myself, but I have never doubted my abilities; and I value them accordingly.

I have just moved to a digital SLR (Canon 60D) about six months ago and it is taking me a long time just to work out how to use this camera, let alone learning to use the processing software (Corel Photoshop). I use Photoshop as it came with the CorelDraw suite of programs, which I have used for years.

It does take talent to take decent photographs and that talent should be valued accordingly. If taking photos was so easy, why aren't we all capable of taking photos of the same quality and subject matter as Ansel Adams?

Cheers Peter

Very well said.

OK, we're away from the original subject of this thread BUT it has generated some interesting debate.

At the end of the day, if a person is content with the photos they've taken and someone else is prepared to pay for those photos, then so be it. Unfortunately, it doesn't mean the person with the camera has the "talent" or ability to "qualify" as a photographer any more than it means the person forking out $$$ knows what a "good" photograph really is and whether they're really getting value for money...............this is where I believe a lot of the problem begins...........people's standards have degenerated as we've become a "throw away" society.

A few weeks ago we attended the wedding of a girl my wife works "above". I had met the bride only once before so she didn't initially recognise me walking around with camera bag over the shoulder wielding my 40D, there were two young guys looking as though they'd just walked in off the street who were they "official" photographers. All of a sudden, she realised that I was one of her bosses' husbands and her comment was "Oh sh*t, I thought you were another photographer"................all because I had an DSLR. God knows what she would have thought if I'd still been using medium format gear .

The fact is that these days it's all too easy to.......1) buy a camera that produces good quality images, 2) manipulate images on a PC to (hopefully) bring them up to a standard and 3) call yourself a photographer just because you have a DSLR, software and a facebook page or website. None of these things make a good photographer any more that having experience in a studio or darkroom and I've seen little (written or illustrated) in this thread to convince me otherwise.

Regardless of what experience (or equipment) I've had, I don't regard myself as a photographer and I sure as hell wouldn't consider taking money from someone, especially for taking candid style snaps.

[adman (Adam)]

Originally Posted by LewisM

...the bride planned with me meticulously over 5 days (including location scouting etc....

Lewis, if you put all this work in, you really do need to charge more than $500.

[LewisM]

She was an exception "time" wise - my wife's friend, so....

THe model shoots I did prior to the wedding sort of make up for it

[Barrykgerdes]

Interesting thing about wedding photos. We had studio photos done 55 years ago, because it was considered part of getting married, paid the going price. I don't think I have looked at them since. Certainly don't have any framed anywhere. What a waste of money!

Barry

[TrevorW]

Too true Barry, a trip down memory lane every now and then, thats all. Often save you money ask your friends with good digital cameras to take snaps and you can have all the shots you need for free.

[LewisM]

Studio has, for the most part, started to become VERY passe for wedding photos. And thank goodness I say.

[Stardrifter_WA]

[Stardrifter_WA]

Originally Posted by Barrykgerdes

Interesting thing about wedding photos. We had studio photos done 55 years ago, because it was considered part of getting married, paid the going price. I don't think I have looked at them since. Certainly don't have any framed anywhere. What a waste of money!

Barry

Barry, I don't have any of mine framed anywhere either.......but that only is because I don't want to be reminded