Editor's Note: Parts of this post have been corrected based on comments from the photographer mentioned here. I've also added any supplementary opinions that have change based on those comments.So someone in the family had booked a photographer to take some photos of the family (my wife and in-laws, nephews, nieces, etc.). We had to chip in for the $100
sitting fee which was no big deal. So we arrived in the atrium of the hotel where we were staying to meet the photographer.
UPDATE: The sitting fee was actually $25. There wa a travel fee of $50 (because the photographer drove a decent distance to get to the hotel), plus she was given another $25.The photographer arrived. She was a younger woman, and she was carrying a small SLR case, basically enough to carry the SLR itself with plenty of padding and not much else. Off her shoulder was the strap to her camera, a
Canon Rebel XTi, which is your garden-variety, entry-level, digital SLR, with a Canon Speedlite attached on the camera hotshoe. At that point I thought it was peculiar that a photographer that we were paying (in my book, if you make money being a photographer, whether it's part-time or full-time, you're considered a "professional"), had an entry-level camera.
I'm admittedly a bit of a camera snob. I judge people by the type of camera and brand of camera they use, especially people who are working photographers. I would think that someone we're paying $100 sitting fee would have a better camera. It would be the equivalent of getting your hair cut by someone using a pair of safety scissors. Mind you, a camera is just a tool and the photographer is the person using the tool to create a photograph. The photographer still determines lighting, composition, and the creation of the final product. So even if this person showed up with an old
Canon AE-1, I would still hold my opinion in check until I could see how they worked. So that's what I did.
Ed. Note: I'm going to re-state that I AM A CAMERA SNOB. A photographer's equipment is not indicative of their skill. I would think in fact if they could produce great results with lesser equipment, they're probably a better photographer to be able to manage their limitations of lesser equipment. Be that as it may, I wouldn't hire a limousine driver if their fleet consisted of pick-up trucks. Note that I *did* say in the original post that "...even if this person showed up with an old Canon AE-1, I would still hold my opinion in check...".So she began with a big group shot with all of us by a small tree in the atrium. Now, in my experience, posing by a small tree, or trees in general for that matter, have rarely led to the best results unless all the tree branches are covered by an abundance of leaves. The reason being, you have these branches that stick out, and in the resulting photograph you often have branches that appear to be sticking out of the people's heads. And in this photo, that's exactly what happened. My other concern was that even though there was a lot of natural light coming through the glass roof of the atrium, that typically results in shadows in the eyes. To counter that, you would use a flash to "fill in" those shadows (thus the type of lighting is called "fill flash") and create a nice catch light in the subject's eyes. Well, that didn't happen with our pictures because the photographer didn't use the flash she had mounted on her camera.
UPDATE: The shot of the tree that I spoke of above was not chosen by the photographer, it was suggested by the client.Now, as someone who has shot a couple of weddings and assisted on many as a 2nd shooter, I have quite a bit of experience with photography. I'm not trying to brag, but that experience counts for something. I wasn't going to point out to this photographer that she use a fill flash or pose away from the tree, because we're PAYING this person to take our pictures. I would EXPECT them to know things about posing, lighting and composition.
UPDATE: See update above about the tree photo. Also, if I were the photographer, I wouldn't take kindly to the subject telling me how to do my job, rightly or wrongly. I thought it was a courtesy that I let her do her job and we'd see how the results would come out.
Well, we moved on after the atrium shots to some other locations inside the hotel lobby. In there, you just HAD to use a flash so those photos came out better, lighting-wise.
UPDATE: She did use a flash with the photos in the lobby.Overall, the photos didn't look "professional". Now I'm not going to show you or directly link to that photographer's website because it's not my intention to completely embarrass or slam her. Now if you were to somehow find your way to the
photographer's website (linked removed at the request of the photographer), you'll see what I mean. Even to the untrained eye, the photos don't look polished, especially for
$100 $25 sitting fee. Especially when I can go to
Sears Portrait Studio and pay for a $15 sitting fee. They're not bad photos at all. Some are pretty good photos, but they're not consistently great photos.
I just don't feel we got $100 worth of photos.UPDATE: I really shouldn't say that I don't feel we got $100 worth of photos. I don't speak for anyone else but me. My critique and my opinion are mine and only mine. I don't speak for the other people involved in this. If they feel that they got their money's worth, then that's fine. In reality, we only paid a portion of the total fee. The photographer made the point that we were not making her job easy with cell phone calls and kids running around, and that is an acceptable argument to make. I think given the somewhat uncontrollable (from a photographer's point of view) setting we were in, and how everyone was distracted with what-not, she made an admirable effort in getting everyone together. That I will say, unfortunately, that resulted in the photos (which have since been taken down). I say that is an acceptable argument, but I don't know if it's a valid argument because it's the photographer's job to control and mitigate the environment. I think everyone did the best that they could, but she needed an assistant present to help her out.Now this is SOLELY my opinion. I'd like to think my limited experience as a professional photographer and as a full-time student studying the photographic arts gives some weight to those opinions. I'm not some lunatic bitching about something just to bitch about something. That's not even my style. If anything, I'd say my opinion is more of a critique than anything else, and I would say that some of the points about lighting and composition would come up if anyone with professional photographic experience reviewed those photos. Also, I have no bone to pick with this photographer. There's no grudge or ulterior motive. I'm giving my opinion just like anyone else is entitled to give.
UPDATE: I'm going to say this one more time...IT'S MY OPINION. Nobody else's. I don't speak for anyone else in the family, outside the family, or anyone in-between. Do not take my opinion as the barometer for how everyone else feels about the photos. If you are still seeing this as otherwise, that's no longer my problem.So this has led to me to do some thinking.
I KNOW I could do better, so why don't I? I FEEL that I could make a worthy try at producing photos of a higher quality. It's pretty much gotten me thinking that I could do portraiture as a side-business. These days, the only things I take pictures of are my daughter, but it's kept me in practice with everything I had learned in
photography school and my time as a photographer's assistant to some degree.
I've even posted some of my old photos from over 10 years ago (back in the day when the only DSLRs were over $10,000) on
Flickr.
Anyway, I've been thinking about it seriously and not-so-seriously. We'll see what happens.
LAST UPDATE: My opinions and observations of the actual event have changed given the points that the photographer made in her response to my posting. I did sympathize with the situation, but that's part and parcel of that type of job, especially when you're not working in a controlled environment. Beyond that, I should add in my observations that she was a very professional person to deal with.
I should apologize for not contacting her about my concerns rather than blogging about it. I mean, if you're dissatisfied with a service or product, you would try to have the service or product corrected, right? Well, I didn't give the photographer that opportunity so that is admittedly my fault. This photographer has had happy customers, produced good work, and is doing something she enjoys, and for that she should be commended.
Okay, now that we've taken care of that...my opinion on everything else still stands. One thing that is difficult in life, regardless of what you do, is hear criticism. I've studied visual arts and photography and have gone through enough critiques to get some value of them. While my opinion may have strayed beyond a professional critique, I felt I made some valid points. I know that doesn't get me a free cup of coffee anywhere, but I'm open and honest about it. I don't try to sugar-coat things because if all you hear are good reviews, that doesn't help you develop or improve as an artist. I hope the photographer got that much out of my rant (if she decides to read this). What I didn't do successfully (or at all) was point out the things she did well, such as interacting positively with everyone, getting the kids to cooperate, not getting frustrated about the setting, and being a complete professional...so it wasn't a "fair and balanced" critique.
That's all folks.
