DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Individual Photograph Discussion >> Pro shot?? I dont think so!!
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 62, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 11/15/2007 04:08:35 PM · #26
I think it came out pretty good for a group mugshot.

What was their crime? Paying before they saw the image?

11/15/2007 04:13:40 PM · #27
Originally posted by bassbone:
I think it came out pretty good for a group mugshot.

What was their crime? Paying before they saw the image?

11/15/2007 04:24:25 PM · #28
Originally posted by MattO:
My question is, since the original photographer surely wasnt consulted, do you have approval of the photographer to reproduce this image to be used on the web or any other use?

And yeah its a bad photo.

MattO


Not needed IMO, as this fits "Fair Use" to a T. Anyway it would be interesting if the photog had the balls to claim this work. I don't think she/he would want to be associated with this image. Of course that would be a major reason to make sure it didn't appear on the web.... if the name were mentioned.
 11/15/2007 04:30:37 PM · #29
I was thinking the same thing - pretty clearly ok under fair use, and not likely that someone would be stepping forward to claim it ;)
 11/15/2007 04:31:30 PM · #30
You can legally reproduce a work of art if the intention is to discuss or critique it, however you then have to give credit to the original artist.
Now the question is whether he/she would like his/her name to appear with the photo, but since they sold it, they must have thought it was good enought to be worth the money.
 11/15/2007 04:32:18 PM · #31
is this for real??
 11/15/2007 04:33:14 PM · #32
Brown ribbon :/
 11/15/2007 04:36:00 PM · #33
I kinda wonder about some professional photogs.
I think some people are trained in "taking a picture" … that's one picture: a portrait of one or two people. They are not versatile enough to deal with possibilities like this -

that being said: this looks completely contrived - but not quite bad enough to be faked ;)
 11/15/2007 04:36:18 PM · #34
Originally posted by ShutterPug:
Be careful with editing the school photos - could be construed as a copyright violation. I was not at all happy with my daughter's school photos one year, so I set up and did a re-shoot at home. She liked the ones I shot much better and handed those out to her friends.


my son is 4. this year, at the school photo day, he sat in the class picture, but then said 'my Mum's a photographer, i don't the need the other ones...' cool, well done kid!
 11/15/2007 04:38:39 PM · #35
Wow a lot of comedians in this thread. Funny stuff.
 11/15/2007 04:41:06 PM · #36
Originally posted by yanko:
Wow a lot of comedians in this thread. Funny stuff.


welcome to "DPC clown training" mate ;)
 11/15/2007 04:49:55 PM · #37
bahah
 11/15/2007 05:06:56 PM · #38
This photo was taken at a portrait studio in a MALL..... kind of explains things a little. A big department store.

Yes, the friend has the copyright to the photos to do whatever she wants with them. She is NOT happy with them, but they dont have time to get that whole family back together before Christmas for another shot.

11/15/2007 05:25:26 PM · #39
A photo studio around here had some photos on display to promote their business. They were decent enough, though I was slightly underwhelmed. What really bothered me though was the use of selective desaturation in some of them - desaturated people where only their blue denim clothing was in colour, for example. I always thought the purpose of selective desat was to keep the most important part in colour!

But I've never seen anything as horrible as the photo you've posted here. I really feel for your friend getting landed with that.
 11/15/2007 05:32:56 PM · #40
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Truly horrible work, absolutely pathetic control of lighting front-to-back.

R.


Amen, however I must be thankful these mall studios exist otherwise we might be out of a job. Because if that is professional, I'm the photography copperfield. :)
11/15/2007 07:19:32 PM · #41
What a shame. I think this is worth a full refund or at the very least, a reshoot with a more experienced photographer. A group this size (can you imagine what they went through to schedule everyone?)

It's also a shame when you see ads for some of the mall studios like Sears, JCPenney, Target, etc. Advertise for photographers...no experience necessary.

11/15/2007 07:29:30 PM · #42


Coincidence? I think not. ;P

Truly awful yet personally intriguing. Makes me want to know the backstory on each person.
 11/15/2007 07:35:17 PM · #43
I own a mall studio and I would be horrified to have such a large group of people show up. We are not set up for that size group, and I wouldn't want to take their picture in studio. A group that large really begs to be done outdoors, or on location.

However. That does NOT mean we do shoddy work, or that we don't care or that we cheat people. We bend over backwards to make sure everyone who goes out the door is happy with the prints they receive.

Bear in mind also that whoever took this photo is a photographer just like all of you. They also have limitations of whatever equipment they've been given to use, which may or may not be adequate, and then a huge group of people who most likely really don't want to be there wasting time anyway.

The rest of what I want to say I'll keep to myself, cause right now I'm ticked at the blind insults being thrown.
 11/15/2007 07:36:24 PM · #44
Screenshot from a public service ad?
Movie Poster for "The Sopranos: The Younger Years"?
Sample print from the "Jumbo Photo Booth"?

that's all I got. :/

Put me on the list of angry villagers heading to the mall with torches.

edit: oops - bad timing.

Message edited by author 2007-11-15 19:37:13.
 11/15/2007 07:38:33 PM · #45
Originally posted by chesire:
I own a mall studio and I would be horrified to have such a large group of people show up. We are not set up for that size group, and I wouldn't want to take their picture in studio. A group that large really begs to be done outdoors, or on location.

However. That does NOT mean we do shoddy work, or that we don't care or that we cheat people. We bend over backwards to make sure everyone who goes out the door is happy with the prints they receive.

Bear in mind also that whoever took this photo is a photographer just like all of you. They also have limitations of whatever equipment they've been given to use, which may or may not be adequate, and then a huge group of people who most likely really don't want to be there wasting time anyway.

The rest of what I want to say I'll keep to myself, cause right now I'm ticked at the blind insults being thrown.


I understand that you are upset, but if this group scheduled with you, and you knew you didn't have the facilities or equipment to shoot them, would you still schedule them and shoot? And if you did, would it look like the shot that was posted?

I'm just curious.

11/15/2007 07:41:09 PM · #46
Originally posted by chesire:

The rest of what I want to say I'll keep to myself, cause right now I'm ticked at the blind insults being thrown.


No one was insulting you Chesire. But you do have to admit the photo was hardly professional. I doubt you would have sent a paying client home with this photo.
 11/15/2007 07:41:23 PM · #47
No I would not, I would suggest they went on location. I have sent away families when thier children were obviously NOt into the idea of having their pictures taken too. If you can't do the job DON'T.

We don't offer just in studio shots. We're not Sears or JC Penneys or Walmart. My staff is a group of artists who may not be perfect, may not be ribbon winners, BUT they do their best to please the customer. And we have our customers sign a copy of what we consider the best shot of the setting to prove it.
 11/15/2007 07:41:28 PM · #48
Don't take offense, C'Anne. Most of us are just having fun at the expense of the feelings of people we hope are not here. :)

I would tend to agree that it was their mistake to go to a mall studio for a group portrait that size.

Originally posted by chesire:
I own a mall studio and I would be horrified to have such a large group of people show up. We are not set up for that size group, and I wouldn't want to take their picture in studio. A group that large really begs to be done outdoors, or on location.


I would be interested to know if they were advised against doing the shoot there. Are you saying you would advise them against it and then do it if they insisted?

11/15/2007 07:43:01 PM · #49
You're right BAM I wouldn't.

However... All of the "Well it was a MALL Studio" comments are insulting to small studios who don't deserve it.

11/15/2007 07:48:48 PM · #50
I would suggest a different location, and probably give them a discount on our location fees if they agreed.

If they insisted it would after that offer, and yes I'd do their picture, but I sure wouldn't be happy about it.

This is a service business. ANYONE with a digital camera can take a picture... what we have to do is do it better than they can themselves. And make them FEEL like they are having fun, and it's something they want to do again and that they are getting what they want.

With a difficult subject, we would shoot, show them the pictures, then RE-shoot until we got something they liked. I think I've seen one person leave the shop unhappy, and she came back less than a week later and ordered more prints.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 07:11:08 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/18/2024 07:11:08 AM EDT.