Wedding Photographer Sued on Judge Joe Brown...hilariously epic

[996GT2]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=js7RzcdDcMs

"Why are you using entry-level equipment? You don't have the 7D, 5D, 10D, you don't have the 1 series, and I'm looking at about the cheapest lens you can get by with on the Canon system."



Apparently Judge Joe Brown knows A LOT about photography hahaha

 

[PurdueRy]

Loved it.

Serves them right. When I was looking for wedding photographers I saw way too many people marketing themselves as professionals merely walking around with a entry level SLR with no knowledge of photography.

 

[angry hampster]

I like how the contract was never even brought up.

 

[Tristicus]

Lol, this is good.

Bitch got owned.

 

[MotF Bane]

The dude knows his shit. She got fucking owned.

Edit: LOL @ the ending.

 

[whoiswes]

Judge Joe Brown's stock just went up 10 points in my book.

Insta-classic.

 

[Spoooon]

Holy crap, too funny. Though the plaintiff needs to learn when to shut up.

 

[akugami]

I work at a professional studio in the city where the plaintiff lives. she brought us the photographs to see if there was any way to fix them. after looking at the EXIF data on the JPEGS that she had, we found that the defendant photographed in JPEG, medium resolution, ISO 1600, Srgb colorspace. Upon doing her edits the defendant used a free online editing program and saved over the originals. The color of the 4x6's from WalMart were horrendous with virtually no shadow detail and color casting

This was a comment by veeringoff on the youtube page but if it's true...wow...

I also agree with some of the youtube comments that you can get decent, even great, results from a Rebel but I don't think you can do much with a 70-300mm which I believe is f/3.5-5.6 and the Rebel kit lens handheld and in sometimes darkly lit churches.

 

[troytime]

that video made me incredibly happy.

that "photographer" looked like she had down syndrome or something. Or maybe she got her mouth stuck in a vacuum when she was younger.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Wow, that photog has the balls to charge over a grand to do a wedding with kit equipment??? Jesus.

 

[Fayd]

from what i understand, judge joe brown is saying he was a professional wedding photographer before? or at least clearly a professional photographer.

 

[Fardringle]

from what i understand, judge joe brown is saying he was a professional wedding photographer before? or at least clearly a professional photographer.

The impression I got is that he has a nice camera that he uses to take pictures on his own, and he has also officiated at weddings so he knows what real wedding photographers do. He definitely seems to know the difference between an entry level kit camera and a real pro body.

I must say that the defendant in this case is the type of person who makes it hard for some people to have confidence in real professionals. On top of that, she's a moron who didn't know when to shut up and stop arguing with (and insulting) the judge!

I am certainly not a pro, nor do I have pro equipment, but I have actually photographed two weddings for friends who could not afford the services of a pro. In both cases I used a Nikon D40 with kit lenses since that's the best equipment I have access to. I told them at the beginning that they wouldn't get studio quality pictures but that I would do my best. The results wouldn't be something you'd see in a bridal magazine but they certainly weren't grainy, soft, and out of focus like some of the photos in the video and both of the brides (and their mothers) were happy with the results. If I, as a VERY casual photographer can do that, why can't a person who has supposedly "done hundreds of weddings and never had an issue" do the same thing using Canon's XTI with basic kit lenses? For that manner, why don't they have anything better than an XTI if they really have shot hundreds of weddings?

 

[The Stigenator]

LOL.. that one is classic!

Reminds me of a friends wedding last year. The family (extended i believe) had someone do the photography, and I had a much higher end 40D than their rebel XT's and kit lenses and built in flash.

LORD.. In retrospect I should have taken out my camera and shot but I didnt cause I didnt want to super seed her inlaw's family who were putting an effort to take pictures.

The result was grainy, pumped up saturation pictures with blown highlights. Oh lord!
But evidently my friend is quite easy to please. However the picture on the mantle is the one I took.. LOL (one of the few that I took)

Edit:

Hell last year at my cousins wedding, the wedding photographer (who took pictures) didnt have 'batteries' for her flash. Apparently her daughter took them. Needless to say I gave her 8 of my batteries. Wedding photographers come in various levels.. I know if I get married, I know who I am going to ask to photograph my wedding..

Looks like the judge is a pro photographer. I love his smack down. I wonder where can I see his photowork.

 

[lstratos]

i have a d80 for 3 years, still haven't figure out how to use it.. and when i do.. by the next week, i forgot how.. hahaaha... i like to shoot porn

 

[vshah]

tagged for home, this sounds awesome.

 

[Aharami]

marked for home

 

[xchangx]

LOL.. that one is classic!

Reminds me of a friends wedding last year. The family (extended i believe) had someone do the photography, and I had a much higher end 40D than their rebel XT's and kit lenses and built in flash.

LORD.. In retrospect I should have taken out my camera and shot but I didnt cause I didnt want to super seed her inlaw's family who were putting an effort to take pictures.

The result was grainy, pumped up saturation pictures with blown highlights. Oh lord!
But evidently my friend is quite easy to please. However the picture on the mantle is the one I took.. LOL (one of the few that I took)

Edit:

Hell last year at my cousins wedding, the wedding photographer (who took pictures) didnt have 'batteries' for her flash. Apparently her daughter took them. Needless to say I gave her 8 of my batteries. Wedding photographers come in various levels.. I know if I get married, I know who I am going to ask to photograph my wedding..

Looks like the judge is a pro photographer. I love his smack down. I wonder where can I see his photowork.

I helped a friend out at my church and shot some in the back of the church. I had my D300 and a 70-200. Their paid "photographer" was using a Sony Cybershot.

The mother emailed me after seeing mine and said the paid photographer's pictures looked absolutely terrible.

 

[speedy2]

Really. Kit lenses indoors with no flash? haha. Wow. Yeah she's a pro alright.

 

[ElFenix]

eh, if it was a T2i there isn't much issue. in fact, i'd prefer an xti to a 10D.


wedding i went to last year had about 5 photographers, with 1 doing video on a 5D2 the whole time. another was carrying a 1Dsomething and a D700. the bride is a newspaper photographer, and the groom's sister is a trying to be a photographer, so i guess they know plenty of wedding photogs. they even brought a large format camera.




i really hate the constant cuts and sound effects in "reality" tv. as if my attention span wasn't short enough already.

 

[twistedlogic]

Apparently Judge Joe Brown knows A LOT about photography hahaha

The dude knows his shit. She got fucking owned.

I wouldn't go that far. He suggests they use a 10D, while bashing the XTi. He was just using buzz words to make himself look like he knows what he is talking about. At one point he mentions ASA, which made me giggle. And I fail to see how a tripod is going to help unless your only taking photos of static objects. I think the judge has just enough knowledge to be dangerous, we all know them kind of people.

The judge makes it seem like its all about the gear, which makes me wonder if she would have had a "28-70" and a 1D Mark IV and still taken crap photos would the plaintiff have won? If you remember, the only complaint from the plaintiff was the photos where printed at wal-mart.

Now I'm not defending the "photog" here, she clearly had no business photographing a wedding under the moniker of "pro" and not being prepared, but for $1300, they where probably the CHEAPEST people the could find. What should they have expected?

 

[PurdueRy]

I wouldn't go that far. He suggests they use a 10D, while bashing the XTi. He was just using buzz words to make himself look like he knows what he is talking about. At one point he mentions ASA, which made me giggle. And I fail to see how a tripod is going to help unless your only taking photos of static objects. I think the judge has just enough knowledge to be dangerous, we all know them kind of people.

The judge makes it seem like its all about the gear, which makes me wonder if she would have had a "28-70" and a 1D Mark IV and still taken crap photos would the plaintiff have won? If you remember, the only complaint from the plaintiff was the photos where printed at wal-mart.

Now I'm not defending the "photog" here, she clearly had no business photographing a wedding under the moniker of "pro" and not being prepared, but for $1300, they where probably the CHEAPEST people the could find. What should they have expected?

Agreed, we paid just around $4K for our wedding photographer. Simply put you pay for quality. People on Youtube are making $1.3K sound expensive...but really in wedding photography its really cheap. Still, that lady has no right being a wedding photographer with the equipment and knowledge she has.

 

[jpeyton]

I disagree. You can do much better for the money than what they got. True, you're not going to get top-shelf talent, but I also know several excellent photographers who wouldn't turn down $1500 to shoot a wedding.

I'm doing a wedding for much less than that for a pair of friends this summer, and I have my equipment/talent bases covered (pair of D700s, f/1.4-f/2.8 lenses, extra batteries/memory).

You pay for quality, yes. But you have to remember that everyone starts at the bottom, and if you manage to find a diamond-in-the-rough more power to you.

 

[Fayd]

I wouldn't go that far. He suggests they use a 10D, while bashing the XTi. He was just using buzz words to make himself look like he knows what he is talking about. At one point he mentions ASA, which made me giggle. And I fail to see how a tripod is going to help unless your only taking photos of static objects. I think the judge has just enough knowledge to be dangerous, we all know them kind of people.

The judge makes it seem like its all about the gear, which makes me wonder if she would have had a "28-70" and a 1D Mark IV and still taken crap photos would the plaintiff have won? If you remember, the only complaint from the plaintiff was the photos where printed at wal-mart.

Now I'm not defending the "photog" here, she clearly had no business photographing a wedding under the moniker of "pro" and not being prepared, but for $1300, they where probably the CHEAPEST people the could find. What should they have expected?

he was suggesting a tripod because it's hard to hand-hold in low light conditions when using any ASA that would yield a decent result.

she was using a kit lens, one that is not particularly fast. and given that she was hand-holding in low light (without flash), she'd have to be using an absurdly high ASA to get even properly exposed prints.

several ways around that. get a faster lens. use a tripod and take longer exposures. use a flash. or do like a professional would, and do all 3.

 

[xchangx]

he was suggesting a tripod because it's hard to hand-hold in low light conditions when using any ASA that would yield a decent result.

she was using a kit lens, one that is not particularly fast. and given that she was hand-holding in low light (without flash), she'd have to be using an absurdly high ASA to get even properly exposed prints.

several ways around that. get a faster lens. use a tripod and take longer exposures. use a flash. or do like a professional would, and do all 3.

I would have to disagree with this. A pro would have gotten a faster lens to not have to use a tripod to take a longer exposure and use a flash. Flashes during the ceremony are tacky to me as they tend to distract everyone. Now, during the reception is fine.

 

[Gooberlx2]

LOL,

Judge: "What other lenses did you use?"
Defendant: "A 70-300."
Judge: "What speed is it?"
Defendant: "I don't know." /shrug
Girl in back: