Dublin Photogragher doesn't show up to wedding

Cabaal

Liveline from yesterday, this lads a member of Dublin Photo Club, come across very poor indeed.

The bride paid him 350e odd (which it far too small imho) and apparently he was sick according to his mother and he thought it was the week before in which he hung around 4 hours at the church trying to contact the bride, the mother come on to defend him.

A photographer comes on to say she should have known when she paid so little but then she did sign a contract

Recording from liveline

26 February 2009 23:00
A new bride confronts the mother of a photographer who did not turn up for her wedding day.

- Podcast on RTE

- Podcast on Cabaal.org (mirror)

Dragan

350eu for a Wedding would raise alarm bells anyway.

Being defended by your mother on the radio is frankly hilarious.

challengemaster

Not surprised it was so cheap to get him if that's the kind of service he has. Not even knowing when he's doing the wedding...

Cabaal

Even the bride says he was a student and she was trying to allow him to get experience, they signed a contract but then he apparently ignored txt's, calls etc

I know its only 350e but its still not on, she could still sue him I'd say.

You doesn't even have enough cuts to come on himself,

rymus

this is what you get when you dont use professionals. The couple were trying to do it on the cheap (i.e. get away with not paying someone who knows what they're doing) and got stung. Happens in every sector of business. I'd love to see the text of the contract she signed. The fact that he's contracted to the job makes him legally liable. Assuming of course he's not a minor and therefore unable to enter into a legally binding contract.

Again, just to make myself clear for any couples out there thinking of skimping on a wedding photographer, you're idiots. That is all.

Cabaal

rymus wrote: »

this is what you get when you dont use professionals. The couple were trying to do it on the cheap (i.e. get away with paying someone who knows what they're doing) and got stung. Boo hoo. Plenty more idiots where they came from.

There is that too alright, no matter what though it doesn't give an overall good impression of new photographers when people pull this ****

Paulw

Paid a deposit and signed contracts. Hmmm.

And ... he's a member of DCC. Is he a member of boards, I wonder?? Hopefully not. LOL.

Mind you, the whole thing does sound cheap.

Bad show though that his mom has to come on to defend him. LOL

elven

If only other couples would pay attention to this sort of thing and not go looking for something for nearly nothing

I'm not going to start on that this afternoon.

Fajitas!

To be honest, I feel sorry for the chap. I mean, things can go tits up, he didn't know what to do. It would have made more sense for him to start off as a second shooter, and get some experience, but you know, hindsight and all that

Not going on the radio is fair enough, it'd be incredibly embarassing, but I wouldn't have let the mother on.

Anyways, I'm sure the bride won't be trying to go cheap on 'togs in future, and I'm sure yer man learned a lesson or two. Tbh, I hope they don't sue the pants off of him.

rymus

Fajitas! wrote: »

but I wouldn't have let the mother on..

You just try and stop an Irish mammy from defending her son. It's unpossible!

Does seem that if he's lacking experience he jumped in at the deep end a little quickly alright. Should have had more sense.

Hopefully by it being on national radio, it's taught a few more soon to be wed couples a valuable lesson too!

Cabaal

Fajitas! wrote: »

I hope they don't sue the pants off of him.

If there's contracts involved they very well could, he should learn a very valuable lesson from all of this "if" he's lucky enough that they don't sue him

Paulw

He will learn a major lesson if they do decide to take him to court.

But, in fairness, the photographer should have at least contacted the couple. An excuse of a phone not answering/ringing out is lame. Voicemail works.

Mind you, his mom saying he's in hospital ... but I thought I could hear her talking to someone in whispers in the background.

rymus

who'd bother sueing for 350 euro? It'd cost at least 10 times that in legal fees alone. Anyway, unless they were getting married in a hayloft wearing t-shirts and jeans, the loss of 350 euro will barely register on the expense list. What will eat away at them is the lack of photographs however. But having said that, I'm sure uncle Bosworth or little cousin Archibald will have had an entry level dslr or a 'fancy' point and shoot and will have filled in admirably on the day.

Fajitas!

They could probably sue for stress along with some other random problems.

Paulw

Small claims court would be the way to go. That would cost (I think) €15.

But, from listening, they did get another photographer to shoot the day.

Dragan

So, other than having a camera, what do you need to do to be a member of DCC?

And what is it supposed to mean?

As it seems their vetting system let them down on that one.

rymus

Paulw wrote: »

Small claims court would be the way to go. That would cost (I think) €15

Absolutely. They'd at least get their €350 back. If I were that young fella though I'd hire a bodyguard. Pissed off brides are a law unto themselves.

Cabaal

Dragan wrote: »

So, other than having a camera, what do you need to do to be a member of DCC?
.

Isn't this the rule for any camera club...you just need a camera of some sort to take part

Covey

As a matter of interest, do people on here who shoot weddings have some kind of contingency plan for sickness, unforseen circumstances etc ?

Dragan

Cabaal wrote: »

Isn't this the rule for any camera club...you just need a camera of some sort to take part

I don't know, it's just that as you mentioned he was part of DCC i figured that was supposed to mean or imply some kind of level of professionalism?

Cabaal

Covey wrote: »

As a matter of interest, do people on here who shoot weddings ahve some kind of contingency plan for sickness, unforseen circumstances etc ?

It raises an interesting question alright, no idea about a death but for sickness you';d want to be pretty damn sick to pull out of a wedding and have to get someone else to do it (as it wouldn't look good)...least thats my view

rymus

drugs, and plenty of them.

Unless of course you're so sick you can't stand. Have a few people that can stand in if such emergencies come up.

Cabaal

Dragan wrote: »

I don't know, it's just that as you mentioned he was part of DCC i figured that was supposed to mean or imply some kind of level of professionalism?

I only mentioned it because the bride did
Perhaps the bride thinks it means something more then if he wasn't a member of a camera club?

rymus

maybe he used the initials D.C.C. after his name to imply some kind of qualification?

Cabaal

rymus wrote: »

maybe he used the initials D.C.C. after his name to imply some kind of qualification?

I've seen people do similar so wouldn't surprise me :pac:

CabanSail

I have to be careful as to what I say here in a Public Forum.

The facts are that DCC received an email from the Bride asking if any of the students would like to do some basic photography for her wedding. She did not want anything elaborate, just some shots outside the church. She was looking for someone that wanted the experience. The date of the wedding was clearly stated as 21st Feburary 2009. That email was forwarded on the Members Email list.

DCC did NOT reccommend anyone for this or any job. I doubt we will forward on emails, of this nature, again in the future.

Some of the things that were said on Liveline did not ring true to me but not knowing what was said between the parties I cannot say more than that.

Personally I can see fault on both sides here. The reason that Professionals charge what they do is because they have safegaurds in place. Then again it would not have taken much to have made a call to the bride.

Real Psycrow

Cabaal wrote: »

I only mentioned it because the bride did
Perhaps the bride thinks it means something more then if he wasn't a member of a camera club?

I think it was only mentioned in passing. If there's any reference it was to the fact that he was looking for experience etc

rymus

CabanSail wrote: »

DCC did NOT reccommend anyone for this or any job. I doubt we will forward on emails, of this nature, again in the future.

Seems like an awful shame and a waste of what I assume is an otherwise fantastic resource of members to cull this because one guy doesn't know how to work a calendar.

Cabaal

DCC did NOT recommend anyone for this or any job. I doubt we will forward on emails, of this nature, again in the future.

I didn't think they would have the same as any camera club wouldn't make recommendations

Some of the things that were said on Liveline did not ring true to me but not knowing what was said between the parties I cannot say more than that.

Fair enough, that makes sense as on the radio its he said she said with no actual proof presented so it makes sense.

Personally I can see fault on both sides here. The reason that Professionals charge what they do is because they have safegaurds in place. Then again it would not have taken much to have made a call to the bride.

Agreed on this tbh

eddie73

If you pay 350 euro for a professional photographer, he will not be a professional photographer. Expect a lot more of this type of person to appear now that times are harder; a semi or unqualified person with 2 other jobs ruining the service for the bride and groom and putting real pros out of work.

CabanSail

If this is the date your man showed up but wasn't the actual date of her wedding then its open and shut and clearly she is 100% in the wrong imho

The date he turned up on was Valentines Day ... Feburary 14th.

Dades

rymus wrote: »

Again, just to make myself clear for any couples out there thinking of skimping on a wedding photographer, you're idiots. That is all.

You'd swear she offered a couple of med students the chance to do her open-heart surgery.

She took a gamble. It backfired because the student was an idiot. She knew the risk but didn't bank on his sheer incompetence as a person rather than a photographer. I don't doubt there are plenty of people who are perfectly happy with their non-professional photographs. I wouldn't recommend it, but I can understand it.

rymus

that was kinda my point... you pays your money and takes your chances... at least with a pro you're guaranteed results.

Cabaal

CabanSail wrote: »

The date he turned up on was Valentines Day ... Feburary 14th.

Yeah sorry I misread your post and mixed up the dates I then removed that from my post when I coped it but you obviously had a cached copy :pac:

Given he mixed up the dates then he's a bloody muppet imho

I'd imagine that right about now everyone in DCC are not his biggest fans and I don't blame any of them if they aren't

Dades

rymus wrote: »

that was kinda my point... you pays your money and takes your chances...

Taking a chance doesn't automatically make you an idiot was my point.

rymus

perhaps not, but you're taking a pretty bloody big chance with the biggest and most expensive day of your life if you leave it in the hands of a guy that's just finished reading his camera manual.

So, trusting a rank amateur to do a pro's job just because you want to save a few quid is pretty stupid. It's not about taking the chance and hoping for the best when it gets to that stage. Getting into wedding photography is a process. You observe and second shoot until you get the skill and most importantly the confidence to do it yourself. If you jump into it head first, things like this happen.

Dades

I recently recommended a mate of mine in work to some friends of mine getting married this year, and they hired him. He's not a *professional* but I've seen the work he's done for his own friends' weddings (acting as main photographer) and it's quality.

Not everyone who isn't charging 3 grand is a rank amateur. I'm just saying that while it is a gamble, a bit of cop on regarding who you ask can negate the risk.

rymus

Dades wrote: »

I'm just saying that while it is a gamble, a bit of cop on regarding who you ask can negate the risk.

Yes, and like your recommendation for your friend, the risk is further negated by the fact that he can display samples of previous work to prospective clients. If the person in question was hired without even samples of previous work being shown (because presumably there were none) then it's an unreasonable risk to ask any logical person to take.

Covey

rymus wrote: »

If the person in question was hired without even samples of previous work being shown (because presumably there were none) then it's an unreasonable risk to ask any logical person to take.

Yep, but at the same time every single wedding photographer had to do their first wedding.

galwayfotogrfr

Hi
I offer lower cost wedding myself (my overheads are low so its easier to do so). I feel bad for both parties there as I am sure the photography student didnt want to make a complete b*lls of things and the bride was trying to save a few euros in really uncertain times.

Personally I have never shown up to a job unprepared, a week early or not at all. I always keep in regular contact with the bride to be in the months leading up to the wedding day. It just makes things easier in the long run. There are two of us doing weddings for our company so we can keep on top of things if one falls ill. I also have two more professional photographer/ business owner friends as emergency contacts if all else fails.

There will be more people offering wedding photography services at a lower price in the future but not all of them are going to be terrible. Some will be I grant you but if a level of professionalism is maintained by these, I think there wont be too many other stories such as the one outlined at the beginning of this thread. People make mistakes and hopefully what is on this thread isnt a sign of things to come.

quad_red

rymus wrote: »

this is what you get when you dont use professionals. The couple were trying to do it on the cheap (i.e. get away with not paying someone who knows what they're doing) and got stung. Happens in every sector of business. I'd love to see the text of the contract she signed. The fact that he's contracted to the job makes him legally liable. Assuming of course he's not a minor and therefore unable to enter into a legally binding contract.

Again, just to make myself clear for any couples out there thinking of skimping on a wedding photographer, you're idiots. That is all.

I can't help but think that's a seriously spiteful sentiment. Allot of people are stretched to the max. Allot of service providers absolutely tank it on for weddings leading people to search ways of reducing the costs.

If people don't fully understand what a professional photographer can bring to the table then they're at a disadvantage. But don't call them idiots for trying to save money when they may have had no choice in the matter.

Real keyboard warrior stuff.

PCPhoto

Covey wrote: »

Yep, but at the same time every single wedding photographer had to do their first wedding.

To quote Rymus on this one .... "Getting into wedding photography is a process. You observe and second shoot until you get the skill and most importantly the confidence to do it yourself. If you jump into it head first, things like this happen."

my view is simple - the guy messed the job up and didnt have to liathroidi to apologise and ...for want of a better phrase - "Man up"

PCPhoto

actually .... the guy is alleged to have turned up a week early (Valentines day) ..... surely there was a wedding at that church on Valentines day ? if not, why didnt he contact the bride if she was a no show on 14th ?? ....me smells porkie pies.

rymus

quad_red wrote: »

But don't call them idiots for trying to save money when they may have had no choice in the matter.

What? poor people are allowed to get married now? That's shocking!

Cabaal

PCPhoto wrote: »

actually .... the guy is alleged to have turned up a week early (Valentines day) ..... surely there was a wedding at that church on Valentines day ? if not, why didnt he contact the bride if she was a no show on 14th ?? ....me smells porkie pies.

He says (well more so his mother) he tried to reach the bride by telephone but her phone was off...I'm curious did he leave voicemails? She claims she was trying to contact him the whole week after the 14th via calls and txts to which he never responded.

During the week the bride was trying to contact him the lad claims he was sick

Fajitas!

Covey wrote: »

As a matter of interest, do people on here who shoot weddings have some kind of contingency plan for sickness, unforseen circumstances etc ?

Yep, second shooter along with several able bodies, and I'm sure I could count on 'em - It would have to be damn serious for that to happen though.

PCPhoto wrote: »

actually .... the guy is alleged to have turned up a week early (Valentines day) ..... surely there was a wedding at that church on Valentines day ? if not, why didnt he contact the bride if she was a no show on 14th ?? ....me smells porkie pies.

There seems to be something askew alright - reason enough for him not to go on air.

quad_red wrote: »

I can't help but think that's a seriously spiteful sentiment. Allot of people are stretched to the max. Allot of service providers absolutely tank it on for weddings leading people to search ways of reducing the costs.

If people don't fully understand what a professional photographer can bring to the table then they're at a disadvantage. But don't call them idiots for trying to save money when they may have had no choice in the matter.

Real keyboard warrior stuff.

I'd say it's being honest, probably bluntly honest, but there's nothing wrong with that every now and then!

rymus

you know me, I'm nothing if not bluntly honest.

Dades

rymus wrote: »

If the person in question was hired without even samples of previous work being shown (because presumably there were none) then it's an unreasonable risk to ask any logical person to take.

Agreed!

rymus wrote: »

What? poor people are allowed to get married now? That's shocking!

That's an even tougher shoot as you have make sure you get their kids in too. :pac:

CabanSail

PCPhoto wrote: »

actually .... the guy is alleged to have turned up a week early (Valentines day) ..... surely there was a wedding at that church on Valentines day ? if not, why didnt he contact the bride if she was a no show on 14th ?? ....me smells porkie pies.

You may very well think that, I could not possibly comment.

rymus

Dades wrote: »

That's an even tougher shoot as you have make sure you get their kids in too. :pac:

Hah! Just make sure you crop out the tattered 4th generation hand-me-down shoes the kids are wearing.

Fajitas!

Tbh, DCC shouldn't have been brought in to it at all, it's hardly their fault it happened.

NCAD gets quite a few phonecalls for this kind of thing (Especially cheap weddings. CHEAP weddings... ) and they'd hardly be to blame if they knew a photographer and passed him/her on. It's just a friendly referral service. It'd be a shame to see something like it go.