Customer sees the photographer's orange style on the website. Customer books photographer. Customer gets orange pictures like on the website. Customer upset about orange pictures. Classic. 😂
What most likely happened was she booked this photographer bc she liked the style. As the weeks passed, someone she knew made a comment about how dumb and trendy they looked... and she goes on an egotistical rampage bc she regretted her decision, pretending she didn't get what she wanted.
I disagree - they are not reflective of her portfolio, most of which is more tastefully edited. There are only a couple examples of such muddy, heavy handed color grading. And they are in situations where it looks like more sunlight was available. Why are people defending a photographer that didn’t ask for selects and sent over 2000 finals? Nothing is more obvious to me that she has an unprofessional work flow and applied a preset without going into photos individually and taking the time to narrow things down.
@@TheShelbinator3000 this....and she has no knowledge how to operate outside her sunny beaches as far as light goes. No 2nd shooter, looks like no off cam flash. This is typical fake it till you make it.
@@bugostare if you took your car into a shop that only painted red cars would you be upset if your car was painted red? Should the shop have to re-paint your car for free because you didn't like how your car looked in red? Was the expectation to have your car painted blue? If so, why did you take your car to shop that only paints cars red?
I've been a wedding photographer for 24 years now and communication, clear and concise dialogue is key to setting expectations before, during and after. Out of these 24 years and over 700+ Weddings I've captured, I only had about 4 or 5 unhappy clients in total... and mostly its been because of either my lack of setting expectations, the couples lack of understanding of those expectations, or both.
I'm a headshot/portrait photographer. I've only had like 3 bad experiences with clients. The worst was when this client hired me for portraits. As soon as we met, the first thing she said was that she was self-conscious about her body, she was made fun of a lot, and to make her look good. As someone who is also self-conscious, I said don't worry about it I will guide you through it. She then started telling me where to stand with the camera and where to point it. I was using a prime 85mm lens and she asked me to stand like 5 feet away and photograph her head on, wanting her whole body in the frame somehow. She couldn't see what I was seeing, and that's not really how things are done, so I told her that from what she was telling me to do, her arms were being cut off at the joints and waist, which was making her look boxed in and it didn't look good. So she said ok, she let me do my thing, we did the shoot, laughed and had fun, at the end I even drove her to pick up money from the bank to pay me with, and once she selected her pictures I even retouched a few for free after she said she loved the ones I gave her. The next day, I saw I had a new review on Yelp from her saying I said her body was shaped like a box and that she was upset the entire shoot and almost cried. I responded with, that's not what I said and if you really thought I said that I wish you would've said something when it happened, or to me personally, before trying to ruin me and my reputation. She didn't care though, at all. She kept her review up for a long time using one of the shots I took as her profile picture lol. Her lying made me get off Yelp and I stopped taking pictures for a while. I eventually had to learn to let it go but still, I don't know how some people sleep at night.
@@GetOutsideYourself I can only imagine as an attorney what you deal with! It's frustrating because I've worked with hundreds of people and the bad experiences are the ones that make me take breaks or wanna quit lol. The other two involved a client wanting more pictures retouched for free, like 100 more which was a no, and then a guy I gave unfinished images to for selection purposes that posted them everywhere after I warned him not to and continued to do so after I told him to stop. The body thing was by far the worst though.
You might want to buy new eyes if you think that is a good looking edit. Yes, it's within the ballpark of her style -- she's using a preset. But her portfolio is filled with work performed in sunny settings and she unequivocally did not translate her style and tweak her present to color balance or the overcast condition and how that would muddy the edit. The results speak for themselves -- especially when you look at her portfolio and see the situations in which she has been successful.
I would guess this is another case of the client liking the photoes till someone got into her head and critizised the golden tones. A mother in law or a spiteful girl friend trying to get her down about her wedding photoes.
I quit wedding photography due to customer behavior and it just does not pay unless you are a master who can charge $25K for a wedding. One customer thought the pictures of the flowers were a different color than IRL. Good luck in questioning that. Before AI, one wanted a person removed from a picture, another, before AI, wanted a person added to a picture. And such changes were supposed to be "perfect" and free. Customers for event photography were much better.
@@Rob2000ngl the moment it left ur hand it no longer urs not allowing ppl to edit their own picture is just rude and unprofessional. It’s a wedding shoot you dont do it for ur elf you do it for the money and the clients ….. like obv u have rights to the raw image and how you like to edit them, but the moment you deliver them its no longer urs. I hope this help you being a better person and artist
@@minglingli7097 My images are displaying my work and people book me looking at my pictures, so I realy don;t want them messed up by someone else. They buy prints (like a painting) , not the negatives. That is not rude, just the way it works (at least in most of the countries).
@@minglingli7097 what are you even talking about?? a lot of professional photographers don't allow filters on, especially high-end photographers. The right to the photos still belong to the photographer, unless the copyright was BOUGHT by the client.
@@yunnapr6917 a lot of them do just be selling copyright to clients ….. imagine its ur big day and u dont own ur pic at the end of day. We spent 4k on our one day shoot including editing, and we own all of them copyright included , (not the raw, still talking to her about getting some of them)
Apparently the bride is a video colorist ... How could she hire a photographer with this style without looking at her work/style? The photographer has a consistent style. Correction - she is a make up artist.
When I saw her tik tok stories of another channel that covered it I noticed that was foolish as well. How do you do that for a living and not take that into consideration. She also loved them at first and then keep looking for issues. I'm going to Chic-Fil-A and complain that it isn't Burger King.
Is not asking for client selects and sending over 2000 finals… “right”? Is using a preset (that worked well on other sunnier shoots in her portfolio but looks very bad in overcast) and not adjusting it for the lighting conditions “right”? Is such an objectively bad color grade even at face value “right”? Is charging a client for a re-edit BUT not suppling a sample treatment for client approval before re-batch editing “right?”
@@TheShelbinator3000 "Is not asking for client selects and sending over 2000 finals… “right”?" Yes. This is typically how wedding photographers work. I will send my clients the whole gallery broken down by parts of the day. Typically things like "Getting Ready", "Bridal Party/Groomsmen Portraits", "First Look", "Ceremony", "Couple's Portraits", "Cocktail Hour", "First Dances", "Reception", "Send Off". 2,000 sounds like an ideal number for a large destination wedding. I always have a top level gallery of highlights. Gallery tools like Pic-Time and Pixie Set are made for this kind of delivery. I'm assuming this is how the photographer delivered the gallery. I never would ask for client selects. That's not a thing in wedding photography. "Is using a preset (that worked well on other sunnier shoots in her portfolio but looks very bad in overcast) and not adjusting it for the lighting conditions “right”?" Wedding photographers will typically create their own presets and apply them on photo ingest into Lightroom. I have a bunch of presets that I've created and will apply them specifically for the scene, e.g. "JSP-IndoorLight", "JSP-OutdoorSunny", "JSP-OutdoorShade". I'll then edit individual photos for exposure. That looks like what this photographer did. The color is consistent and that's intentional when you have such varied lighting conditions. The exposure on subjects is correct and even. These are far beyond applying a preset and calling it a day. Consistency is actually a lot of work. "Is such an objectively bad color grade even at face value “right”?" This is subjective. This photographer has a style, and it's entirely what her social media contains. She also sent whole wedding galleries to the client during the booking process. I don't like that warm golden style, but I've had prospects specifically request that style from me. I've had to tell them "You absolutely deserve wedding photos you love, but I am not the photographer for you." Some people ABSOLUTELY want this photographer's editing style. She's very open about her editing style, and it's a bad client that books her expecting something different. "Is charging a client for a re-edit BUT not supplying a sample treatment for client approval before re-batch editing “right?”" I think the issue is that the photographer was trying to edit the photos while still preserving her creative look. If a photographer wants to have a consistent body of work, they have to remain consistent. In this situation the client should have bought the copyright (which the photographer was willing to sell for $4,000) and take the photos to someone else to edit. In situations like this the client typically has to sign an agreement stating that they will not attribute these photos to the photographer since it no longer represents their work. That whole "client approval process" is not a thing in wedding photography. When a photographer is documenting or cataloging something for a business, sign offs make sense. When the photographer is an artist, it does not. This is not commercial photography. The client is buying a product that the photographer represented very comprehensively and truthfully. If I commissioned Picaso for a portrait, it would be ridiculous for me to ignore his style/previous body of work, and ask him for a more "true to life" representation after the work had been delivered.
All the client wanted was her raw files to edit them herself to her taste…. The photographer should have just given them up… And This would have never been a thing at all….
@@krazyk57out of curiosity do you negotiate contracts with clients? The cost of the RAW files was listed in the contract, I believe, as is usual practice. If the photographer had just given the client the RAW files what do you think the implications would be for parties signing legally binding contracts in the future?
@@tytesseract yeah the price for the RAW files were outlined in the contract. But if the photographer was to just "give" the RAW files, then that easily snowballs into the bride wanting a refund since she's going to edit the photos herself. It never ends.
Bottom line -- the images were green-yellow tinted due to incorrect white balancing in post; they looked like crap and, particularly problematic for a wedding, the skin tones were way off and grotesque. Sloughing all this off and saying "...oh, that's just her style..." misses the point.
Sorry for the wordy reply, but this is a pretty dense subject. TLDR; good customer relations, soft skills, disclosure, expectation setting, and good well-worded (and well explained) contracts are key to avoiding bad situations like Sepia Bride. I do agree that we as photographers need to educate our customers in advance of a shoot, but also that as photographers making money from our craft, we must also have solid contracts. We are business people as well as artists, and we can't neglect the legal side of our craft, no matter how tedious it might seem. You will have to consult an attorney at least once, but it will be well worth the price of the consultation and time. Legal advice is something you don't know you need until the time for needing it has already past. Expectations must be clearly set and acknowledged on both sides. For my wedding and big event customers I make sure that we have at least one face-to-face meeting prior to a contract ever being signed. Whenever possible I'll have them meet me at a neutral pubic location, like a nice coffee shop that's not overly loud and generally has a positive atmosphere (tip: always comp your customer's coffee/treats/whatever during these times, it goes a long ways to establish a relationship and it's a tax write-off). We then go over my portfolio together and discuss what they can and can't expect to see from me. If there are any concerns after this meeting, whenever possible, I ask that we have another face-to-face meeting to go over those concerns. There's way too much that can be read into an email or text, and in-person (or at least phone calls) meetings go a long ways in smoothing over issues. During our first meeting I'll go over my style, why I edit the way I do, etc, so that I'm fully representing my past work. I do have some strict contract clauses (see below) that I make sure get out in the open in an amiable and friendly way so that expectations are set on both the customer's and my side so they understand why those clauses appear in my contracts. All that being said, always follow up with an official email summarizing the meeting, what you went over and agreed to, etc, so there's a paper trail if eventually needed. I've gotten in the habit of including a clause in every contract, regardless of the type of shoot, that stipulates the customer has seen my portfolio, the location of the public facing portfolios, and an acknowledgement that the customer can expect delivery of product that matches this style and that I won't deviate from my style unless otherwise specifically agreed upon in a contract addendum. The initial deliverables are included in the initial fees, everything after that has a dollar value attached to it. I don't offer free re-edits in my contracts; they always come at a price, usually an hourly rate with a minimum buy. Charging for re-edits serves two purposes; it facilitates a free/discounted re-edit option if customer temp gets high for some reason or I need to offer a loss-leader of some kind, and it also sets actual value on the editing process and time while discouraging the idea that the editing process is not work and is not time consuming. I always recommend building "paid options" into your contract that you can later offer as "free" or "discounted," whether that's a free re-edit, a re-shoot, or even a free print if you own the means of your own printing. Since I've developed a shooting and editing workflow over the years that allows me to deliver consistent results, the editing style isn't usually a problem for me as I have years of portfolio content in the same style; that being said, I always have the above clause in my contracts and I read it with the customer and have them initial next to it to acknowledge understanding. If you've done your due diligence in establishing customer rapport and building a good foundation for a customer relationship, asking them to sign this type of contract won't be an issue. Admittedly, all of this is really only an option for people who have an established portfolio, style, and workflow; if you haven't established a history in all three you're going to have a hard time either charging for your work, or keeping your customer satisfied after they've paid you. You may have to shoot for very little, or even for free if you're just starting out, until you establish a portfolio with a consistent style and workflow you can both rely upon for most shoots and use like muscle memory (both during easy shoots and when the shizznizzle hits the fan). Take all this with a grain of salt and understand that it's just my two cents of wisdom collected over the last couple of decades having a photography business off and on, and your experience may vastly differ.
@mipmipmipmipmip oh no denying, you can still do everything right and still draw a customer who’s gonna do this kind of thing for internet clout and self-promotion. That’s why your contract should be air-tight enough and you should have follow up emails enough on all your conversations to establish a paper trail so that if someone pulls this kind of nonsense you can take them to court and easily hand them a loss. That’s precisely why I have an attorney review my contract templates. It will save more money than you spend on the consultation.
@mipmipmipmipmiptrue, but as well as the airtight legal contract many clout chasers give themselves away in face-to-faces that last more than a few minutes
I have been obsessively following the conversations surrounding this dibaacle and they have taught me a lot over the past few weeks. Photography is both and Art and a business I just cant imagine having millions of eyes critiquing my work in this way. I liked the way you both navigated this conversation without posing notes on her actual work.
Weddings are tough. Its one of the most important day in someone's life. Not only do you have to knock it out of the park with the bride and groom, but every photo has to be spot on. You only have one shot at getting it right with the bride with Aunt Wilma or the groom and Uncle Johhny.
The light was just bad, and now we're arguing about how to save the images. A growing challenge for photographers is that customers are now comparing images to those that have been created by cell phones able to alter the appearance of physics, invent pixels, and imagine colors.
Nonsense, this is not an excuse. If we are setting expectations this low then what good is the photographer for? Shouldn't a "photographer" take a better photo than a 12-year old with an iphone, no matter what? A cell phone has 72mm^2 sensor size, a FF camera has 864mm^2 and can use faster lenses. It can operate off-camera flash etc and even better AI--based computational photography tools are available to 10x stronger hardware of desktop computers. What are you saying exactly?
@@batuhancokmar7330 I think he's saying that phones these days manipulate the image and the camera is more faithful to what physics are, but people are no longer used to reality and they've been 'spoiled' by filters, apps and smartphones altered images (even though they're worse than a 35mm or a medium format camera).
@@enricomarconi8358 I understood that, its just a flawed argument however you look at it. If customer satisfaction depends on "perfectly smooth" skin tones, why fight over it? Why not give it to them? Select face skin and move texture slider, copy to all photos, done. 20 seconds on user side and maybe a cofee break until LR to find faces in each photo and applies edits. If customer wants HDR-looking oversaturated images, or some different color temperature or grading those are literally 10 second edits. No one is asking photographer to add bride's deceased relatives from BW photos or something. Any look can be imitated, anything phone does can be done to a much higher level with a proper camera and a PC.
You will never satisfy all clients. I was part of a crew that was shooting a b&w wedding. The parents and couple choose this style based on the company's portfolio and hired the company. Bridezilla was due to have a child any minute while the father was apologizing from the moment the setup began. The parents stepped in to pay while bridezilla wanted to step out after receiving the photos. It went from these are the greatest to I want all copies of everything for someone else to edit. Some people never take time to read the contract, nor do they care to. Contracts, payments in advance, cancelations or rescheduling, formal dress, travel, lodging, etc..... all cost money. Weddings can be a nightmare based on the couple. And this is the reason photographers get no respect. This is the reason I quit and will never go back! Can't fix human behavior.......................
Same for video. Client wanted their uncle removed...who was a groomsman! Bride wanted to "digitally" remove him. That wasn't in the contract. She threatened to take me to small claims, wanted the raw footage for free, and that was the last wedding I ever shot.
Wedding photographer here. My style is true to life, but it if weren't and a bride complained, I'd just remove the color grading and send her a gallery without the sepia. It's not a lot of work and yes, while it's not true to my artistic vision, it's not about me, it's about making a client happy. Just suck it up and deliver the changes the client requests.
Based on what they were saying, the photographer did exactly that, and the customer was still upset. Which goes to show the old statement by Adam Savage of Mythbusters who said that sometimes you just have to fire a customer.
Yeah, I agree, that should be the approach. I too prefer true to life. In this case the photographer should have accommodated the client and sent the photos without the color grading. Many a time, somethings grow on us and some not so much.
I always provide true to life colors when it comes to wedding photos. I may use my own style for certain pictures, but for the most part I deliver true to life colors
@@oadefisayo but again, the customer knew what she was getting from her portfolio. It's not my style either, but the photog delivered exactly predictable results, which is in my book a good thing!
Wedding photographer here. I'm always willing to work with a bride. I'll comp a 2nd edit or give a few extra pictures that I thought were throwaways if they ask for more. I don't spend thousands of dollars advertising on the knot so word of mouth is my biggest asset. Go the extra mile and make people happy. You'll get a better reputation and that leads to more money!
Exactly, offer and work with client to batch process a diff filter, colour grade, white balance etc. They were obviously batch processed anyway. Would take 15 mins and dump the pics on card. No biggy, get paid, client happy.
The photographer could give the customer a set of the same pics that are processed with "standard profile". Those would be realistic and the pink dress would actually look pink and not peach! More and more people are getting used to seeing normal pics, like those straight out of an iphone, and therefore, creative processing (that's amounts to moving sliders around on PS/LR) may fail to win the customer's approval in some cases! It's no big deal to provide a set of "standard profile" pics to a customer, that may likely win her over, in this case!
This photographer's style is not natural color. The client unfortunately didn't realize this, and I bet someone like you who knows, pointed this out to her. This is why she had buyer's remorse after some time.
@@ArnoldSzmerlingIt's the couple's wedding, not the photographer's. As wedding photographers, we're hired to create a product that the clients love. It's not about expressing yourself, being an artist or being true to your style. It's about making the images that the clients want, not those you want.
@@youknowwho9247 And there are plenty of wedding photographers that have a style that is identifiable and what many people want. It goes both ways. Don't like that style and that's what they offer, move on.
@@derbagger22 The point is that the couple's taste supercedes the photographer's style in importance, because it's their wedding, not the photographer's. The bride is being annoying for suddenly being unhappy with the look of the photographer she chose. That being said, that look is lazy editing more than an identifiable style. Make everything faded and brown so we don't have to pay attention to the light and the colours. Also beside the point. At the center of this conflict is customer service, which should be paramount even if a customer is unreasonable. Re-edit the photos and you don't take this massive hit to your reputation. This photographer probably lost tens of thousands of dollars in future booking because of this drama. Worth it? I don't think so. Oh, just a sidenote: I am a wedding photographer. If a client is unhappy for whatever reason, do better. Because unhappy clients will ruin your business in this industry. Full stop.
Honestly the customer is unhappy for whatever reason. The photos have zero value to anyone except the bride, and the day means a lot to her even if she is 100% wrong, and responsible. $4k is way too much to charge for raw files for this type of event that only has personal value. I think an agreement to not use the photographers name on any re-edit and a more reasonable fee is appropriate.
I understand the photographer has a style but I think it is important to factor in that this is wedding photography, and not a photoshoot. With a photoshoot, you are paying for art and creative decisions are a part of it, and looking at the photographers portfolio I assumed they were the special edits from weddings (like the contract is for 5-10 special edits). As a wedding is once in a lifetime even,t a photographer is there to capture the memories so I don't think it is unresonable to also request a normal-coloured set of jpegs here.I'm a hobbyist photographer, but recently got married so the photo situation is fresh in my mind, and I know what I wanted to take away from my special day. I also don't think it is okay to go to social media and throw shade around this topic. Staying amicable with emails along the lines of "Hey, I really like our photos but I'm finding the editing a bit overwhelming on all the photos. Would it be possible to have some non-graded JPEGS as well? Happy to cover the editing costs" should be enough to satisfy both parties (even with a clasue of not associating them with the photographer). I'm a stubborn mule, and if I was the photographer in this situation with my business being targeted by a disgruntled customer, I would delete the RAW files :)
I feel like in 2024 you need to research the client just as much as they research you. Nothing sketchy but linked in and IG should let you in on what to expect
Some people want real-life colors in their photos and some don't care, so it makes sense to have some brides expecting to see dress colors as they were. Women pay more attention to color in their dresses and makeup. Also it is true that most wedding photographers use heavy filters and don't know how to correctly color balance when shooting. I kind of understand the bride's point of view.
@@tytesseract She didn't realize it until later. Why is this so hard to understand? When she put a natural color photo next to one edited by this photographer she realized how bad the color was. I bet she wishes she hired a different photographer now, but it can still be easily fixed.
I am a photographer and I side with the bride on this one. The color tone on the photos is HORRIBLE (imo). Forget the "photographer's style" here, it's unnatural to have a brown dress and teeth, this is a wedding, you're there to record it as it happens - in real life - in natural colors. If you want to give her trendy shit then at the very least give her natural edits as well. The photographer could easily have removed that brown preset or reverted them all to the original color. Another alternative - she could have given a quote for Retouch Up to edit them, and provide the service at cost (some have suggested she mark up the cost of an editing service, but that's just wrong. She's fixing a problem and her time and effort should be gratis). She didn't need to give the bride any RAW files, just NATURAL COLOR JPEGS, AND THE BRIDE WOULD HAVE BEEN HAPPY. She was NOT A NIGHTMARE BRIDE, the PHOTOGRAPHER WAS A NIGHTMARE to work with. It doesn't matter if the bride thought she would like her wedding pictures brown when she hired her, she changed her mind (with good reason, imo). When you look at the photographer's portfolio you're only looking at her photos with no natural colors as a comparison, so the brown tone isn't obvious. This was an easy mistake for a bride to make, the posing and photos are nice, but it's the color that's wrong. She realized her wedding dress was brown after she compared it to the video and cell phone photos. ANY PHOTOGRAPHER who edits in anything other than natural tones should also provide the original color photos because ten years from now even the photographer will question what they were thinking with an edit like that. The photographer mentioned several mistakes she made in her response to the bride. Possibly a sign of inexperience, or just making the wrong decisions. This poor bride has this to look back on whenever she thinks of her wedding and It could have all been prevented. I understand this is my opinion and others may disagree. Be the professional that you were hired to be. I hope the photographer doesn't listen to all the photographers who are telling her she did nothing wrong and stay on that high horse she's on. She needs to do the right thing and fix this for the bride. Give her natural color edited jpegs or give her the RAW files.
After seeing the photographers portfolio where *all* of the photos are color graded in the same style, I have to side with the photographer here. If the delivered photos were different from her normal portfolio then the bride might have a case, but the bride presumably did some research before selecting a photographer and should have known what she'd get. I don't always agree with y'all on how photographers should treat clients (I still remember the video where you said clients shouldn't print photos they paid for and it annoys me to this day), but in this case you're right.
44 years as a commercial shooter; I don’t do weddings. Thankfully. But- I’m lost on this…because Bridzilla KNEW beforehand- loved “the style”, loved the style for 30 days AFTERWARDS, and then hated it! Look, my takeaway is this: the Bride did a better job on those edits than the photographer! Lastly…I always provide the Client with a “style proof” of the proposed editing treatment; this has to be approved- before it’s applied to all the finals. At 68, this seems to work for me. 😂
I agree with your method. But it wasn't 30 days. She started talking to the photographer about reedits within days. The more she compared to natural colors the more wrong she realized they were. She is not a bridezilla, it was such an easy fix that she just couldn't get.
Apparently the photographer gave her "2000" photos...like holy crap, never in a million years. I think there was fault on both sides in this scenario, more on the bride side...but this was a cluster all around.
Nah if I’m spending $8000 on a photographer I’d expect to not look like I have jaundice 😐 Plus, it’s not sepia. Why are so many professionals keeping that narrative going
6:10 Yes! Finally someone mentions they weren't even sepia photos, just warm. I think the photographer was right overall, but she reedited the photos before seeing if the bride even liked the reedits. She should have sent a few of those to the bride to see if she even liked them. I dread this situation, things like this make me not even want to do commercial photography.
I'd always call the customer after delivering the agreed photos and ask if they are happy with them or if they have any comments, then send an email to confirm your conversation with them, If they're not happy with something (in particular with the edit style) I'd agree to re-edit a couple of shots for free and send them back. If they like those better, then agree a cost to re-edit in that new style, again documenting all conversations with them via an email.
I think slapping sepia on absolutely everything isn’t the best way to document any event unless your in the desert. I agree with taking a little more time analyzing your groupings and editing them accordingly if the colors are vibrant and beautiful it would be better to show that. If your clients house is beige maybe some sepia edits added on to accompany the rest. Simply done. No raw files just true toned and flattering.
I think this is an irrational response by the client, the style is completely consistent with the photographer's portfolio and she got exactly what she paid for. Why would you book someone whose style you don't prefer?
It doesn't matter that YOU think it's consistent with the photographer's portfolio (I don't think it is). What matters is the bride realized all the edits are brown/yellow and all the photographer had to do was remove the color tone change from the edits she delivered to the bride. The bride even told her she wouldn't share them on socials so it wouldn't change the aesthetic she was trying to promote. When you review her portfolio you don't have a side-by-side comparison to natural color. When you have video and cell phone pics with natural colors the photo edits really stand out. That's what happened.
@@wilmarwillemse239 It's that attitude that gets a client ruffled and they resort to bad reviews and airing their frustrations on tiktok. Just remove the damn preset. But you do you.
But as a good will gesture and to minimise hassles the photographer could offer to batch adjust white balance a bit for a fee, This would take 5 mins to adjust and dump on a memory card. End of story. It's obvious the images were batch processed anyway. I'd do it with the client and let them choose a colour grade and temp. No big deal.
I always stick to the actual colours. These styles of “orange tints” or washed out desaturated colours are somewhat in but at the end of the day the natural colours of what it is leaves no argument. But if your portfolio has the same style you give your client well the client imo have no valid point
I agree that she doesn't know what colograding is but I think the customer was when complaining about SOME exposures. I.e: She got mad the ocra was washoed out, but if the ocean wasnt washed out then the people wouldve been underexposed. BUT, there was one where she conplained about her eyes being dark which makes sense to me. I get the client is. A makeup artist and is porbbaly going to be more picky, but I think her eyes shoudlnt have been dark in any.
The client complained about the price of the raws being $4000, which effectively is handing over the copyright. The photographer did stipulate this option in the contract. My clientele pay double the fee for the copyright and are offered this option before a booking is made.
I don't understand what the big deal is about re-editing the images in a colour neutral way if people charge that much. 4 grand is twice what you can expect to charge here - for the entire wedding shoot, all inclusive. People who charge premium fees should provide premium services.
My guess would be that the bride was fine with most of the images to start with. She then showed them to and talked with a friend or family member that did not like the style the bride chose for her photographer. The the bride was then convinced that she no longer like them because of the peer pressure.
It's a wedding shoot. Not free personal work. You don't get the same artistic freedom with weddings as with artistic artsy or abstract pictures. If I design a social housing block I don't have the same freedom as with a museum! I do think the client should have been more aware of the personal style of the photographer. it's Tealc and Orange that this woman makes, which for a time was en vogue with independent movie makers. I personally love Tealc and orange as a color combination!
True story from my wedding photographer: We booked a wedding photographer who said her specialty was “bokeh.” I didn’t know what that meant at the time. When my wife asked for a picture of us in front of a landmark Chicago building, the photographer blew up the background, and when my wife saw the result, she asked the photographer to “sharpen” the building in the background. Looking back, we should have researched what bokeh meant, but the photographer should have understood the point of the photo was to have the building in the background, and maybe not completely blow it out of focus with a wide aperture..
The photographer delivered what you was advertising. Bride hired the photographer based on what she saw in all the examples. Bride is a bridezilla! I gave my raws out once to a friend and they she allowed one of her friends claim to be created of my images after doing a horrible retouching of my photographs.
Just a personal experience. Sepia and vintage color are over use, a good portion is because the photographer cannot white balance corrected, so they rather to be way off into another color scheme than a bit off seen as a miss. Not saying everyone is that, but a good portion are.
The client is right. You can desaturate shadows and hilights so blacks and whites won't be tinted. Standart rec709 sRGB look is the easiest to deliever. you can grade the picture without destroing it.
This was a great video. Thanks! I shot wedding for years. It's hard to please the client. even harder to please the client's "uncle". I would always pre-talk about what to expect based on my portfolio. It's the hardest photo gig out there. A clear detailed contract is important. I don't shoot weddings anymore btw. 😉
The issue is the use of the word RAW. For photographer this has a very specific meeting but I can see that a non-photographer may use this word to mean the unedited pictures. So is the photographer refusing to provide the camera raw files or the unedited raw files? In the end, I don't think that the bride is unreasonable in wanting to obtain the unedited files (png) to make her own corrections. However, I think it is reasonable for the photographer to request an addition to the contract for the ride not to poster share the raw photographs.
Even if she didn't show the bride photos in private, the photos she has available for public viewing all look the same. There wasn't a shred of misrepresentation, no room for misinterpretation. Unless the bride never even looked at one of the photographer's pictures beforehand, which I would find hard to believe, but even if true, it's still not the photographer's fault.
As a landscape photographer who edits in a naturalistic style, I don’t care for the really warm color grading - so I wouldn’t have hired this photographer! I’m actually sympathetic to the bride not liking the color grading of her photos, bc personally I think it looks muddy, but she has to understand that the person she chose to shoot her wedding edits *all* of her photos this way. What did she expect to get?!
Unfortunately throwing a discount or attempting to rectify in order to avoid more of an issue is just feeding fuel to the already entitled behavior that most people are demonstrating. Giving in is not always the answer. And actually does more harm than good.
Seen breakdowns of this, The client just wanted to see her own makeup work, failed to communicate that to the photographer. Classic obnoxious, obsessive client.
Hats off to anyone who has the GUTS to do weddings! I would maybe do funerals, if that was a thing🤣 No idiotic, intangible fantasy expectations to meet. The veil of death shuts all the peacocks DOWN.
I'm not picking sides but the photographers web site speaks volumes. Unfortunately there seems no way for the photographer to have a positive outcome now. A proper CONTRACT is very important, specifying that the photographers style of color grading, (in more civilized days, called color correction) is a core part of what was being purchased would have put that in black and white and enforceable. Specifying remedies upfront in the contract in case of disagreement can also help. I've been doing graphic output for 50 years, when I started my own business over 30 years ago I specialized in high quality stationary and invitations, the 50+% cotton paper quality, the papers that the Secret Service track. I did corporate work but not weddings, once when queried by the mother of a bride why I wouldn't do wedding invitations, I replied because of the mothers of the brides. As my business evolved I carried the film separation aspect into image editing, in the last 20 years the quality of client supplied images for their graphic projects has sunk below the basement. On some contracts I specified that I would have access to the RAW capture files. I, always specified the minimum technical resolution of the images if the photographer disagreed I would not take the job. This was significantly more important with lower resolution full frame sensors, then came crop sensors and as micro 4/3rd sensors became prominent a significantissue fron grand format outbut. All more complicated by the progression of technology, in fact I once had to have my attorney draw up a contract for the provision to me of 80 RAW files because while the photographers vision for the composition of his images was great his technical execution was severly lacking. The end result was the photographer sold rights to my client for me to edit his RAW files, he maintained his rights of distribution of his RAW and edited images. Every time my client printed his images that I edited the photographer received royalties. Both my client and the photographer receive royalties if the photographer sells prints of my edits. I received my hourly rate for the edits and had no image rights.
In re "clients telling their acquaintances that my work is subpar when the deliverables have been met within reason": honestly, I think they're doing me a solid service. We often like to associate with people that are the most like us, so it only makes sense that the people that associate with those clients from h-e-double-hockey-sticks are people I probably don't want to do business with anyways. 😅
There are legal reasons and industry standard reasons why photographers will charge thousands for raw photos. You’re lucky if you are able to get raw photos at all.
@@bunnyhophobbies I did weddign photography for several years. there are no legal reasons. it's all about ego. photographers dont' want their clients to see the originals because they see how they needed to be edited for the final product. Cull out your bad shots.
Clients do not know the technical details. Just showing images is not enough. Writing a clear product description is better: "I apply a global preset to all my images whereby all colours are shifted yellow." With layers in the adobe suite it should be easy to bring back natural details, but it will look strange. Who needs 500 photos? They will look at them twice and then life will shift the attention to everything else. The grandchildren will find them in a shoebox or an outdated harddrive with corrupt files and throw them away. Think of the amount of images that would gather if every generation had 500 images. Soon families would need large warehouses for all the old photos.
Tony and Chelsea I love you guys and I’ve been a follower for years. I’m not familiar with what is, but I know what ought to be. I think you’re WRONG 1) not many people are sophisticated enough understand what they are seeing on a website, 2) it’s natural, right or wrong, for someone to expect true colors 8n a photo, 3) the bride wanted RAW files but it doesn’t automatically mean she thought she was a Lightroom expert, she could hire an editor.
Great video guys! This is the exact reason why it terrifies me to even attempt to shoot weddings. I turn down offers to shoot weddings because people are just way too hard to please. I will stick to my landscape and wildlife photography because trees and animals don't talk back. 😅😂 Thanks again, you both are super awesome, love you guys and keep up the fantastic work!
So you know, arbitration is not good for photographers. In arbitration, the parties pay the judge. In considerable experience with arbitrations, it only helps large companies that are trying to dissuade people from suing the large companies. I prefer the good Citizens of Cook County to pay for a judge in my cases.
"the customer is always right" its half a "quote" The real one actually makes a bit of sense. It's " in matter of taste . the customer is always right" !
@@egestroemExactly… So in this situation, the customer is allowed to have their own taste, but having seen the photographer’s portfolio, hiring the photographer to do work like that portfolio, getting images that are consistent with the photographer’s portfolio… if they want their taste and preference as it is now being expressed met, that can be met… for the right fee. The customer is always right in matters of taste… not that they get what they want for free.
@@JeremyTaylorNZ ofcause not, there’s no such thing as a free lunch. But I do get that a dress of a color can be very important. And I would not charge to fix that staying within the grade. Changing a vivid magenta dress into a more pinkish tone to satisfy the client is not a big stretch. All the other stuff is of-cause ridiculous. Im not in the wedding business and never will , dealing with private clients as in this example is a nightmare.
People are batshit crazy. You can’t please everyone. There are also wedding ‘photographers’ who have no business selling their (lack of) services. In the end you get what you pay for. There are great, moderate, and lousy photographers. That is the Universe!
I watched videos about both sides of this. The client was very into her own appearance and would likely not have been happy with anything that didn't fit her inflated idea of her own beauty. Since she was very concerned about her makeup looking accurate, perhaps she planned to use the pictures in her make up business? The color filter is a current trend on wedding photography that is going to look very dated in about five minutes. I don't like it but that's what the photographer showed and that's what she delivered. I side with the photographer generally-there are some clients you can never do enough for. I think the photographer could have easily removed the filter to please the customer, rather than sticking to her guns about her style, although, who knows whether the client would have been happy with that? I have shot enough weddings to know that they are a seething pit of insecurities and emotion.
The bride should have been more discerning with the photographer she chose. Her website very clearly shows the style that she should have expected to get, and did get.
Customer is king, if your customer doesn't like the delivered product then do something to fix it. Instead of holding on to your ego. This Photographer could have easily changed the tone as per their customer's requirement. But no, he needs the golden tone for his portfolio images. Is this a joke, customer is trashed here.
I think the client has a cool skin undertone and made the mistake of hiring a photographer who leans heavily toward warm tones. We can all learn from this.
This kind of thing is why I only take photos for myself these days. If people like them they can purchase them... if not they don't purchase them. Easy.
I think, certainly with weddings, when you employ a photographer to take the photos for you, the hirer should own the rights to the photos. This is how it is in most industries, if I as a hired a self employed sub contractor software developer for my company, the code he write will be owned by my company, not the sub contractor. So same should apply to photos.
I can see the bride's point somewhat. I often use my Lumix cameras and am happy with the photos. But then I use my Canon camera and I like the colors better because then the Lumix photos look a bit bluish. So the wedding photos can look fine at first but when comparing them to "normal" wedding photos she might have realized she doesn't have any natural-looking photos.
Tony: On that "brown teeth comment" from you: My wife who worked at a print shop for 10 years have a problem adjusting to colorgraded photos. I'm the photographer and can grade the sh*t out of a photo and the second she sees it so goes: I don't like the skin tone, it's to brown/yellow/whatever. "Yes honey, thats the point...it's graded". She also commented on the blue look of Twilight saying they all look sick/dead.
This is the thing. The photos were taken on an overcast day and the trees look brown and sickly. But if you look on the website there is a photo taken in good lighting. It is still sepia but the tree in the background is green. Clearly there is a disconnect and an expectation wasn't met. It was unfortunate neither party could control the weather but the photographer should have warned the bride well in advance the photos weren't going to look like her standard work on the website. If you have to colour grade differently for overcast days this should have been made clear well before starting to the bulk of the 2000 photo edits. Clearly there was no sign off process or discussion with the clients. If you work in other creative industries like graphic design or website design, things get signed off.
Why are we conflating a bulk preset with a style and artistry when it looks so awful? Why are you both advocating for this color grade as a successful edit? She used a preset -- of course it's going to match on some level. That does NOT mean that it was a successful edit. This should be an educational moment on the pitfalls of using presets and an actual LACK of style or professional editing in service of a cohesive look. So yes, the color grade matches her other work... that's a given. And it's to be expected. But much of that works appears to have been performed in sunny conditions. Can you not see how sort of dampened and muddy and unnatural this color grade looks when blanketed over an overcast day? If it matches any of her work, it matches the worst of it. It is a really bad edit and we need to be honest with ourselves.
Theyre Both wrong. The photographer should have had some samplers of the wedding and negotiated how to process the batch. If the womanwanted correct colors she should have asked for a more natural process.
One of the perennial issues is the viewing differences between media? Different monitors and smart phones & the various papers that have difference white and black points? This is beyond the photographer's particular style.
Being retired, I wouldn’t even think about the stress of wedding photography. That said, I have to admit that I get the most upset and defensive when, in the back of my mind, I know that at least part of the problem is something I’ve done or failed to do. This applies to both parties in a conflict.
When I got married 20 years ago, we hired a professional photography company, they were the most recommended in the region. The day went great we got the pictures back and they were all slightly out of focus. This I personally did not notice at the time. The "company" reached out and said they would, and did, refund us. without us saying anything. This is an example of what to do.
This is an interesting topic. Not only does it affect weddings but really, any photographer/client relationship, whether it be event photography, portraits or whatever. When it comes down to it, the photographer seems to be on the back foot a bit, I think. I don't know the full story but going by what Chelsea and Tony were saying, it sounds like the expectations, needs and so on weren't fully laid out in the contract. I'm a retired power industry technician. I took up photography as a hobby. I was also sick post-retirement and during this period I was pretty much housebound. So, I lapped up everything that I could on photography and other subjects of interest. RU-vid was my savior insofar as my sanity went. But what I watched certainly opened my eyes regards the industry and in particular, the shit shows/bunfights that could occur between the shooter and the clients. I couldn't be a pro-photographer (skills, or lack thereof, aside) and having to deal with people. Photography, it seems to me, to be around 10 percent technical, 10 percent application and 80 percent art. I have the first 10 percent OK, I think. It's the rest that eludes me. Thanks again for your videos, C&T.
Many customers have unrealistic expectations. I've had brides bring me celeb couple pics from Hello magazine. I want my pics to look like this she'll say. OK fair enough, but your getting married in a town centre registry office, not a castle. Second you don't look like Brad and Angelina. You want Hello pics, book the Hello magazine team. And a castle......
Use your eyes, people. The style of the photographer is warm, sunny, etc -- but there are FEW examples in her portfolio that are so muddy, so heavy-handed, and so unnatural looking. I don't think these photos look good -- and it's painful to see anyone suggest otherwise. Obviously this photographer works off a preset AND while she IS talented, she did not do a good job of translating her style and her preset into an overcast day. The white balance is so off, even within her style and preset. ANYONE who is charging $8k should be more skilled at color grading and I do agree that the client received some of the worst examples of this photographer's work to date. In important clue that the photographer did not do a good job on the first edit or provide a professional workflow: 2,000 finals. Any professional photographer knows that this is ridiculous and that there is no way she spent enough time narrowing down photos, either by herself or with the client, which she should have done. Even at 2, 3, 400 photos, it is incredibly time-consuming to go in and tailor each image. When the client asked and PAID for a re-edit, did the photographer submit an example photo for the client of what the new treatment would look like? No, she did not. The client got a bad edit that is not reflective of the photographer's portfolio. And then on top of that, the client was subject to an unprofessional workflow and lazy experience post-wedding. She got swindled.
I’m still going to say working with people is a huge part of the job. Clearly she didn’t like the sepia tone. You can dig your heels in and battle this lady or you could easily batch edit to remove the color grade and potentially charge a reasonable re-edit. When I hear she charges $4k for raw photos you already know it’s one of these people that charge outrageous fees for a little extra work. I’m sure she already had a large investment in a huge moment in their life and want it to be just right. It’s not that hard to tweak the final step to deliver what they want.
Yeah, our photographer gave us files with dirt and dust all over the sky and orange tints on everything. Had to import JPEGs into lightroom and fix the photos. Couldn’t get the raw unfortunately.
I had a similar experience with a bride. Luckily before social media was big. She was a friend of a friend. After the wedding she said she didn't like the photos and wanted her money back. Eventually I agreed to do a free bridal shoot for her. After that, she was telling people what a great photographer I was. Honestly you can't shame the shameless. That bride trying to publicly shame the photographer is pure evil.
While I can see both sides of this, I don’t think the bride did her due diligence and took in the warm style. Personally I don’t particularly care for this photographers style, I like my photos to look like the original scene, but that’s me I would have never chose this photographer. No offence intended to her. Also more power to the wedding photographer to do what she does, I couldn’t do it, I have only ever shot 3 weddings as favours to people who couldn’t afford to go elsewhere, I was nervous the whole.
