A very interesting situation

[jasevk]

I would really appreciate your view on this issue I'm faced with.

I shot a wedding on new years eve, lovey couple... Amazing day was had, image coming along magnificently!

A friend of my parents was also at this wedding, who has run what she called a photography business in the past, until she realized nobody was hiring her or buying her images etc etc.

This afternoon, she posts images from her photography business page in Facebook, of the above mentioned wedding... under a folder named 'lately'.

How would you approach this?? Not an issue with anybody posting images from a personal page, but tagging the bride in images posted on a business page is hugely misleading, probably in breach of copyright laws and in my opinion, she has displayed terrible business ethics.

Tricky situation in that this person is a friend of my parents...

[JM Tran]

hmmm that is a bit complicated when it is a friend of your parents:)

personally, I would let the couple know of what she is doing and get them to have a chat or reminder to her that her guest shots should not be portrayed as professional, or as the main wedding photographer on that day. Which could look bad for you as you WERE the main photographer for the wedding if certain people might think you have taken those photos.

due to the friendship with the family etc I would just try to pursue it a bit gently at first before pulling out the business ethics card.

because who knows, she just may unaware of her actions and only proud of her shots, or trying to generate some more traffic to her work atm.

[jasevk]

Excellent advice mate... You're spot on, my biggest concern is others assuming I produced those images. Thanks for your input :)

[William W]

Is your contract fulfilled and paid up or are you selling files / prints to the guests?
The very, very minor negative impact on future business of a few guests, (if any) thinking her Facebook page is your work . . .
Leave it rest and get on with your business – if she has failed in business once . . .

WW

[FallingHorse]

It's Facebook - you could always make a comment on the image ... something along the lines of "Gee, the guests took some lovely shots. I bet they are pleased to have an amateur photographer in the family". :lol:
I tend not to take FB businesses to seriously unless someone has stolen your image and using it as their own. But then I am an amateur photographer and only do jobs on the side at the Turf Club. I don't have to worry about making a living from it

[ricktas]

I think JM summed it up well.

[jasevk]

Thanks all... yep contract has been fulfilled, apart from the handover of an album of course, but I've been paid in full, minus the potential sale of other prints etc.
Another big gripe is that she has 1500 people subscribed to her page, there are alot of people being misled, and who are leaving comments on the images.

[jasevk]

Well well well, this situation unfortunately didn't end as I'd hoped.

I spoke with the bride about my concerns, and she didn't want to touch it with a ten foot pole. I resorted to sending a very politely worded and tactful email to this person, basically saying that there were reportedly up to 70 or 80 people from the wedding guest list who were possibly being misdirected to her page while looking for the 'professional' images of theirs friends wedding, and asked if she would consider relocating them to her personal page.

Her response was far from gracious and she went into saying things like she will be happily adding hundreds of images to this Facebook album and didn't care whether people were midirected/misled or not. She became very abusive, to the point where she switched off her presumably friendly email signature, and changed it to f&@$ off!

So.... do I leave it be?

I could put the couple under pressure to do something by leveraging off the clause in the contract referring to my discretion being the be and end all with regard to photography by guests etc, and activating my right to withhold services for a breach of he contract (ie supply of images). This also may be drawing a long bow, I'm not a lawyer so I'm not 100% of my entitlements under these specific circumstances.

But, I don't think that would be wise at all, I think I'll cop this one on the chin...

[William W]

Well well well, this situation unfortunately didn't end as I'd hoped.

I spoke with the bride about my concerns, and she didn't want to touch it with a ten foot pole. I resorted to sending a very politely worded and tactful email to this person, basically saying that there were reportedly up to 70 or 80 people from the wedding guest list who were possibly being misdirected to her page while looking for the 'professional' images of theirs friends wedding, and asked if she would consider relocating them to her personal page.

Her response was far from gracious and she went into saying things like she will be happily adding hundreds of images to this Facebook album and didn't care whether people were midirected/misled or not. She became very abusive, to the point where she switched off her presumably friendly email signature, and changed it to f&@$ off!

So.... do I leave it be?

I could put the couple under pressure to do something by leveraging off the clause in the contract referring to my discretion being the be and end all with regard to photography by guests etc, and activating my right to withhold services for a breach of he contract (ie supply of images). This also may be drawing a long bow, I'm not a lawyer so I'm not 100% of my entitlements under these specific circumstances.

But, I don't think that would be wise at all, I think I'll cop this one on the chin...

Yes, leave it be.
Hindsight is useful, but sometimes painful and seemingly unfortunate in the short term.

Notwithstanding the opinion and the original advice given in Post #4, to leave it alone: it would be wise and useful to understand two key points:
That the new situation is a direct result of your actions not to leave it alone in the first inst.
To understand: What actually did happen and why.

WW

[Longshots]

Jason - definitely leave it be.

Its simply not worth the grief and hassle.

I think you're just going to have to live with this situation occurring more than once in the future. Do your job to your best, and exceed their expectations, get paid in full, and dont worry about the "feeders" trying to gain some tit bits.

It's logical that even if you're in two places at the same time during a wedding, someone is going to get a very nice shot, that you didnt. The difference will be, should be that you're going to produce a better quality image, and your overall images will tell a consistent story throughout the day.

Dont even sweat on this, as its very small stuff. Maybe you've lost some print sales, and then maybe you havent. Just start to think about the future and how this will be more of an issue, not less, and build your business model into putting more of the cost into the commission as opposed to being concerned about, and needing, the income from future print sales (which BTW, I doubt you would lose too much).

So you would look better if you gentlemanly moved on and dont let it worry you - far better to be respected for your calm approach to someone who clearly doesnt understand the word ethical.

Yep, move on, and leave it.

[Dylan & Marianne]

Jason, I think I'm with the leave it be camp particularly after the nastiness already displayed
It sounds as though pursuing this further could lead to grief from all sides and gain you potentially little
It will happen quite often in the future though I reckon - I don't shoot that many weddings but already in at least 2 of the weddings I've attended, friends or family of the B&G have been photographers looking to start out their business. In those situations, they politely asked if they could tag along with Marianne and stay out of the way. So off they went, snapping away at our set shots etc and before you know it, in both instances, images from those weddings appear on their website blog and front page with NO mention of the fact that they weren't the primary photographer.
These incidents gnaw at your insecurities but in the end, if you know you've done a good job and B&G are happy with your paid work, that's what really counts (I suspect they won't be happy if you pursue this particular issue further)

[jasevk]

Jason - definitely leave it be.

Its simply not worth the grief and hassle.

I think you're just going to have to live with this situation occurring more than once in the future. Do your job to your best, and exceed their expectations, get paid in full, and dont worry about the "feeders" trying to gain some tit bits.

It's logical that even if you're in two places at the same time during a wedding, someone is going to get a very nice shot, that you didnt. The difference will be, should be that you're going to produce a better quality image, and your overall images will tell a consistent story throughout the day.

Dont even sweat on this, as its very small stuff. Maybe you've lost some print sales, and then maybe you havent. Just start to think about the future and how this will be more of an issue, not less, and build your business model into putting more of the cost into the commission as opposed to being concerned about, and needing, the income from future print sales (which BTW, I doubt you would lose too much).

So you would look better if you gentlemanly moved on and dont let it worry you - far better to be respected for your calm approach to someone who clearly doesnt understand the word ethical.

Yep, move on, and leave it.

As usual, William, very sensible advice. Thank you, I have obviously chosen to brush this off, and accept that I will come across this more than once :)

Time to keep my head down, and bum up. I'm very glad my father taught me to never respond to an angry email until after a nap (I now realize why he had so many siestas in the home office :P)

Thanks for your time mate, I really appreciate it :)


Jason, I think I'm with the leave it be camp particularly after the nastiness already displayed
It sounds as though pursuing this further could lead to grief from all sides and gain you potentially little
It will happen quite often in the future though I reckon - I don't shoot that many weddings but already in at least 2 of the weddings I've attended, friends or family of the B&G have been photographers looking to start out their business. In those situations, they politely asked if they could tag along with Marianne and stay out of the way. So off they went, snapping away at our set shots etc and before you know it, in both instances, images from those weddings appear on their website blog and front page with NO mention of the fact that they weren't the primary photographer.
These incidents gnaw at your insecurities but in the end, if you know you've done a good job and B&G are happy with your paid work, that's what really counts (I suspect they won't be happy if you pursue this particular issue further)

Thanks dtoh, very much, this is the first time I've experienced this kind of thing, needless to say it rocked me a bit! but i've learnt a very valuable lesson here, just in time before doing something potentially very damaging to my growing business.


Yes, leave it be.
Hindsight is useful, but sometimes painful and seemingly unfortunate in the short term.

Notwithstanding the opinion and the original advice given in Post #4, to leave it alone: it would be wise and useful to understand two key points:
That the new situation is a direct result of your actions not to leave it alone in the first inst.
To understand: What actually did happen and why.

WW

William, I've responded to your message, I appreciate it :)

[farquar]

...at least 2 of the weddings I've attended, friends or family of the B&G have been photographers looking to start out their business. In those situations, they politely asked if they could tag along with Marianne and stay out of the way. So off they went, snapping away at our set shots etc and before you know it, in both instances, images from those weddings appear on their website blog and front page with NO mention of the fact that they weren't the primary photographer.
These incidents gnaw at your insecurities but in the end, if you know you've done a good job and B&G are happy with your paid work, that's what really counts (I suspect they won't be happy if you pursue this particular issue further)

I never liked this situation. What I used to do in this was try to befriend them as early on as possible so they respected my role on the day (and stayed out of the way - and the shots). Once some rapport had been built, I'd explain that what we do beyond the candid nature of the ceremony is 'created' by us not just photographed by us and therefore they were either told not to come at all or not to photograph any created moments. Sounds harsh when you read it but it's not a hard conversation to have once the ground work has been laid.

Another tip re: formal family shots. Once you've set up the group, if there are a dozen happy snappers behind/next to you all vying for position pap-style, stand back and announce "you go first guys, I'll wait until your done. Would you like me to get out of your way?" this will generally make them think about about it and you should end up with all of your subjects looking at your camera - not looking at all the others.

PS - I dont shoot weddings anymore. ;)

[jeffde]

Karma will get her in the end...

[Shelley]

I do a few photoshoots and have experienced some of what you are talking about - I mostly leave it be and hope my work speaks for me. I had a babyshoot and said it would take 4-5 weeks to process images as I was snowed under with a graduation shoot and orders. I sent one shot to her as she was chomping at the bit and then she went to another photographer for shots (a friend i think) and posted on facebook straight after showing my one shot. The shots were terrible (great family shots, but not professional). Someone asked if they were mine - I quickly went and looked and went back saying "no", they exhaled and said I thought not. I did ask a friend who knew her and indicated I hoped no one thought I took them, they immediately said something about why she went to another photographer, thinking I was upset and I laughed and said "no, no she can do what she wants, that doesn't bother me". I have no problem with not being chosen to take photos. It did worry me that others thought they were mine.

I worry more about the quality of my work than the financial side at the moment, but I must say it is wrong what she is doing as she is a photographer and should respect your turf, so as to speak.

[reaction]

I guess if she's misrepresenting it as a paid job for her...
I have nothing much to add, but another question.

What if it wasn't a fb page (and designated as 'business'), but a blog? Would everyone still feel the same way?
anyway, most ppl put a watermark on their pics, esp those trying to be a business, so I don't see anyone thinking it's your shot.

[Shelley]

anyway, most ppl put a watermark on their pics, esp those trying to be a business, so I don't see anyone thinking it's your shot.
do you give watermarked images to your client? I watermark images I post myself.

[Longshots]

do you give watermarked images to your client? I watermark images I post myself.

Professional clients who pay for your services dont appreciate watermarked images - ie its not normal.

That is from someone actually earning (trying to) as a full time photographer.

[William W]

I guess if she's misrepresenting it as a paid job for her... (*1)
I have nothing much to add, but another question.

What if it wasn't a fb page (and designated as 'business'), but a blog? Would everyone still feel the same way?(*2)


anyway, most ppl put a watermark on their pics, esp those trying to be a business, so I don't see anyone thinking it's your shot.(*3)

1. It is only one interpretation of the issue that she is misrepresenting this as a paid job.
It is confirmed that the issue will be interpreted differently, by different people, and this is indicted by the watermark comment, above.

2. If the other photographer posted her images on her blog, that one fact would not change my point of view, nor any comment on the matter – I would still have suggested to leave it be in the first inst and would hold that view for exactly the same reason as I suggested to do so here, in post #4.

3. I do not water mark many of my Photographs used as display images to Clients or Prospects.
I cannot recall ever watermarking any Wedding Photographs before releasing them for viewing: IMO that would be a counter-productive business decision.
Do you have a source which suggests that most (either Wedding Photographers or generally Professional Photographers) do watermark their images for viewing, or was that an unsubstantiated comment and based upon the fact that you do?

WW

[reaction]

Do you have a source which suggests that most (either Wedding Photographers or generally Professional Photographers) do watermark their images for viewing, or was that an unsubstantiated comment and based upon the fact that you do?

WW

I have seen that most Photographers of any sort post watermarks on any image they place on their blog/fb or any public page.
Even in forums most have watermarks except for the really newbies who haven't worked out how to set one.

The only exception is Professional Photographers flash based galleries I guess?

[reaction]

do you give watermarked images to your client? I watermark images I post myself.

I think OP said "my biggest concern is others assuming I produced those images"
I don't think OP said that the person gave her photos to the client and the client couldn't tell that she wasn't the OP.

And I think if 'she' rocked up to the client to show her photos as the official photographer given she wasn't and wasn't paid, we would be having a different sort of thread here.

The client also didn't post the images, the 'she' posted it on her own business page, so I don't know why you're so concerned about watermarked images to the client.

[William W]

I have seen that most Photographers of anysort post watermarks on any image they place on their blog/fb or any publicpage.
Even in forums most have watermarks except for the really newbies who haven'tworked out how to set one.

The only exception is Professional Photographers flash based galleries Iguess?

Understood. Thank you for answering my question.

I assume you allude to Flash Page technology lulling the owner/poster into a(false) sense of security that their images will not be pirated.

Watermarking is an interesting point and I would be interested to see the results of definitive data to account as to how many Professionals still Watermark their work for internet display.

I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) watermaking was now passé across all the spectrum: but perhaps my viewing range of Sites, Forums and Professional Photographers is too limited.

But perhaps this better left for another thread as I shall not take this conversation further here.



WW

[Shelley]

The client also didn't post the images, the 'she' posted it on her own business page, so I don't know why you're so concerned about watermarked images to the client.

Not overly concerned :), just wondering. Not really looking at discussing deeper I think my question has been answered by posters.

[jasevk]

I think OP said "my biggest concern is others assuming I produced those images"


Correct... I'm realising a trend, that for every wedding I shoot I get around 2 queries from guests for future weddings, which is converting to one booking. My concern is specifically this:

About 2 weeks after a wedding, the guests (and of course the couple) start keenly awaiting professional photos of the wedding. In this case, the bride was tagged in her friends facebook images, which means that this appears in the newsfeed of every single one of her friends - presumably a very large % of her wedding guests. If they see that the bride is tagged in these images posted by "ABC-XYZ Photography", what are they likely to think? My assumption is that they would either be impressed or unimpressed with what they see, assume these were produced by the hired-pro, and choose not to send me an enquiry or even bother watching out for more images from this wedding.

There is potential for me to miss out on my 2 queries and 1 booking here... which just annoys me. I realise that the bride may indeed eventually post images once she receives them, but by that stage, the damage may already be done.

[William W]

I'm realising a trend, that for every wedding I shoot I get around 2 queries from guests for future weddings, which is converting to one booking. My concern is specifically this:

About 2 weeks after a wedding, the guests (and of course the couple) start keenly awaiting professional photos of the wedding. In this case, the bride was tagged in her friends facebook images, which means that this appears in the newsfeed of every single one of her friends - presumably a very large % of her wedding guests. If they see that the bride is tagged in these images posted by "ABC-XYZ Photography", what are they likely to think? My assumption is that they would either be impressed or unimpressed with what they see, assume these were produced by the hired-pro, and choose not to send me an enquiry or even bother watching out for more images from this wedding.

There is potential for me to miss out on my 2 queries and 1 booking here... which just annoys me. I realise that the bride may indeed eventually post images once she receives them, but by that stage, the damage may already be done.


Why, specifically, is it not possible to have (some of your) photos posted on your website/blog/Facebook and/or sent to the Bride for her to tag and display on HER Facebook page, by the Monday evening after a Saturday Wedding?

For example 10 cracker, low res, display images PP and turned around within 48 hours from each Wedding you shoot.

WW

[reaction]

Correct... I'm realising a trend, that for every wedding I shoot I get around 2 queries from guests for future weddings, which is converting to one booking. My concern is specifically this:

About 2 weeks after a wedding, the guests (and of course the couple) start keenly awaiting professional photos of the wedding. In this case, the bride was tagged in her friends facebook images, which means that this appears in the newsfeed of every single one of her friends - presumably a very large % of her wedding guests. If they see that the bride is tagged in these images posted by "ABC-XYZ Photography", what are they likely to think? My assumption is that they would either be impressed or unimpressed with what they see, assume these were produced by the hired-pro, and choose not to send me an enquiry or even bother watching out for more images from this wedding.

There is potential for me to miss out on my 2 queries and 1 booking here... which just annoys me. I realise that the bride may indeed eventually post images once she receives them, but by that stage, the damage may already be done.

I think this is a definite concern. Eg I have some friends who NEVER posted their official photos of their wedding. We have only seen coverage by other guests, and don't even know who the official was. But none of the guests called themselves "ABC-XYZ Photography"

[jasevk]

Why, specifically, is it not possible to have (some of your) photos posted on your website/blog/Facebook and/or sent to the Bride for her to tag and display on HER Facebook page, by the Monday evening after a Saturday Wedding?


WW

This is standard practice for me, I always post a handful of nice images within a day or so of the wedding.

However, the problem in this case was that the Bride and Groom went on honeymoon, and were unable to tag themselves in the photos until a couple of days ago. Her friend on the other hand, was able to upload her images and tag the bride at the same time. So there was a 2 week window where many of her friends would not have known any better...

[jasevk]

I think this is a definite concern. Eg I have some friends who NEVER posted their official photos of their wedding. We have only seen coverage by other guests, and don't even know who the official was. But none of the guests called themselves "ABC-XYZ Photography"

Agreed, my wife chose not to post our wedding images on her Facebook profile even though we LOVED them, because she wanted to keep them private.

[William W]

This is standard practice for me, I always post a handful of nice images within a day or so of the wedding.

However, the problem in this case was that the Bride and Groom went on honeymoon, and were unable to tag themselves in the photos until a couple of days ago. Her friend on the other hand, was able to upload her images and tag the bride at the same time. So there was a 2 week window where many of her friends would not have known any better...

I understand your reply.

Thank you.