Worst wedding photos ever?

pullandbang

From The Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/howaboutthat/9216685/Are-these-the-worst-wedding-pictures-ever.html?frame=2198771

A2LUE42

A child with a vtech camera could have done a better job than that.

serjical_strike

jesus they are woeful.

CabanSail

Nothing wrong with those. They are "Creative" and that is the effect that was trying to be achieved. These are not your outdated cliché documentary of an event. Rather it's a courageous examination of the changing role of marriage in the twenty first century. These images show how many find it easy to walk away from this institution in an age where constraints of society blur the lines or responsibility. That even on the day of the wedding, separation is looming due to the many distractions of life.

Lovies, It's a work of genius!

kevohmsford

I wonder how much did they pay for the photographer

Edit: 750 pound

maddogcollins

kevohmsford wrote: »

I wonder how much did they pay for the photographer

Dailymail.co.uk says they paid £750.

colblimp

I'm with Cabansail - I think they're fabulous...

kjt

Phoaw, checked these out earlier - Lovely imagery!

Although in saying that, when I was looking through the photos I was sadly saying "I've seen worse" :eek:

Tin Foil Hat

The toy motorbike is a classic, to be fair. That's a keeper.

Zillah

I think the bike shot is absolutely classic.

challengemaster

Funny quote..

The pictures of the evening do, which hosted 120 guests, were taken without flash because one of the photographers complained about being epileptic.

K_user

challengemaster wrote: »

Funny quote..

I nearly had a fit myself when I read that!

Effects

I'm not a fan of the blurry and out of focus aesthetic myself. Surely the couple should have known what they were getting or the photograhers should have explained.

Effects

Could have been worse. Didn't William Eggleston shoot a friends wedding and present them with pictures of the sky?
Although at least they would be worth money.

lisatiffany

I'd personally strangle the photographer but then you have to wonder if the couple asked to see some of their portfolio before they signed on the dotted line. One thing is for sure that photographer won't ever shoot another wedding. The only one you could fix would be the ghost rider shot, a few passes of a clone brush and a little rotation then its okay ..but the others are a whole other story.

Mensch Maschine

Ok, before they parted with £750, did they not ask to see their other work? Seriously. I'd like to see the previous work that made the couple go. "Yes! This is our guy!"

mehfesto

Wondering if the photogrpaher made any money from the pictures in the national paper - they're all accredited to him, and he would be the sole copyright owner.

The Snipe

[sarcasm]I want him for my wedding![/Sarcasm]

Heebie

I hope they didn't expect a lot for £750. A good wedding photographer will generally cost at least a few grand.

greenbicycle

Heebie wrote: »

I hope they didn't expect a lot for £750. A good wedding photographer will generally cost at least a few grand.

My photographer cost €800 and I couldn't have been happier, two photographers on the day, 400 really good photos on a disk a month later!

desaparecidos

challengemaster wrote: »

Funny quote..

The pictures of the evening do, which hosted 120 guests, were taken without flash because one of the photographers complained about being epileptic.

Epileptic photographer, that's comedic genius.

Heebie

I certainly hope you shout their names from the rooftops every time you hear someone's looking for an event photographer!

greenbicycle wrote: »

My photographer cost €800 and I couldn't have been happier, two photographers on the day, 400 really good photos on a disk a month later!

CabanSail

You also have to feel sorry for these guys with the same name as the other business.

Their site now states;

Please note that we are in no way associated with the Westgate Photography mentioned in the article published by the Telegraph and the Mail Online on the 20th April 2012.

Kenny Logins

CabanSail wrote: »

You also have to feel sorry for these guys with the same name as the other business.

Their site now states;

Unfortunate for them, but looking through their galleries I'm not sure I'd hire them either...

(speaking purely as a punter, I don't have much experience with a camera)

Corkbah

unfortunately that's what happens when you don't do your research before booking a photographer.

The couple paid around £14,000 for their wedding and reception .... less than £1,000 on "professional" photographer ..... without seeing a portfolio !!

just more proof that with the recession hitting there are too many "cowboy" photographers claiming to be professional and too many idiots out there willing to part with their money for something based solely by a cheap price.

Photographers are NOT cheap - if you are starting out and trying to undercut other photographers with the idea that you'll get loads of business because you are cheaper than professionals and can still do the same job ...well.... the vast majority of you... cant ! .... charge proper money or change profession.

humberklog

Corkbah wrote: »

charge proper money or change profession.

I get your drift but it doesn't come down to charging proper money.

Chancers can just as easily demand "proper money".

frogcheese

The photos are really bad and definaltly not worth £7.50 never mind £750! Nobody wants bad photos like that on their wedding day.

mikerawlins

i can get much better pictures with my phone...

Bike shot could be fixed quickly with a bit of cropping.

The first group shot is clearly a test shot though, no? (considering they follow up with all the guests looking at the camera, except the young boy who ran out to the photographer?).

Again, second group shot could be cropped to be useful.

That said, the quality of the photos doesn't look very good. Not very DSLR-like. They look very rough, or smudgey or something to me. Almost like compact camera shots (obviously they weren't compact camera photos, but they don't look as 'clean' as DSLR photos tend to). Maybe it's just me?

pixbyjohn

pullandbang wrote: »

From The Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/howaboutthat/9216685/Are-these-the-worst-wedding-pictures-ever.html?frame=2198771

Great windup thread > Telegraph getting lots of entries now, hahahaha

KarmaGarda

Mensch Maschine wrote: »

Ok, before they parted with £750, did they not ask to see their other work? Seriously. I'd like to see the previous work that made the couple go. "Yes! This is our guy!"

I wonder did they mistakenly take a look at the other westgate photography site and base their judgement on that!!

tororosso

Do you ever wonder do these types of horror stories get pushed to the media by professional photographer's unions and interest groups?! They should do a similar piece showing amateur and non-union photographer's wedding images that are actually good

pullandbang

tororosso wrote: »

They should do a similar piece showing amateur and non-union photographer's wedding images that are actually good

Good news doesn't sell papers.......

pixbyjohn

pullandbang wrote: »

Good news doesn't sell papers.......

Now the Irishexaminer has it!!!!!
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/worst-wedding-photographers-exposed-191569.html

If yer auld clock wants winding

ValueInIreland

pixbyjohn wrote: »

Now the Irishexaminer has it!!!!!
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/worst-wedding-photographers-exposed-191569.html

That article is SIX DAYS old, as far as I am aware the Examiner was the first Irish paper to run it.

ValueInIreland

tororosso wrote: »

Do you ever wonder do these types of horror stories get pushed to the media by professional photographer's unions and interest groups?! They should do a similar piece showing amateur and non-union photographer's wedding images that are actually good

I spoke to a good few Photographers at PhotoFest and the majority were not happy with the publicity because they felt it tarnished the whole profession, regardless of qualifications or membership of an association.

pullandbang

ValueInIreland wrote: »

I spoke to a good few Photographers at PhotoFest and the majority were not happy with the publicity because they felt it tarnished the whole profession, regardless of qualifications or membership of an association.

I would have thought that good pros would have been happy with the publicity. Surely it highlights the pitfalls of NOT hiring a good professional on your big day?

digitaldolf

Damn, I wouldn't sleep a wink anymore if I had to deliver and after delivering work like that. It's a bummer that there is an other photography business with the same name. They must feel the pinch even with the statement on their website.

kiselomlqko

I'm not a fan of the blurry and out of focus aesthetic myself. Surely the couple should have known what they were getting or the photograhers should have explained.