No matter what side of the issue you fall on – relating to gay marriage – this is a very interesting article and situation relating to civil rights, first amendent rights and individual rights. Read this article from PDN Online very carefully as the arguments both for and against this ruling do come down to how one interprets one’s legal rights. Who thought wedding photography would be considered a civil right but it makes you think about how we treat one another and the balance of our own rights with the rights of our fellow citizens. Where do you sit on the matter of civil rights, equal access, goverment control over your business and where these issues fall with regard to wedding photography?
Archive for the ‘Industry News’ Category
Our Changing Industry
Tuesday, December 22nd, 2009For those of you who have been in the industry for awhile, you know how much it has changed and continues to change. Mark Zucker’s recent article about “Losing 1000 pounds” was about just those challenges we are facing.
Of course his intent was never to tell everyone to just lower their prices outright but to look at the changes in the industry, re-evaluate your own business and adjust according to your market and your goals. As a wedding photographer for over 20 years and now an employee within the supply chain of our industry, I can tell you, when taken conceptually (not literally), Mark’s words do make a lot of sense. I’m not alone in analyzing the shape and changes in our industry nor am I alone in looking at the digital/information age and how it is changing nearly everything we do in life and in buisness. Check out a recent post by marketing guru Seth Godin at his blog. Think about it.
Now it’s time to take the steps to survive and thrive in our new and ever changing industry. Stay tuned as we’re here to help you.
Scott Patrick, Zookbinders Marketing & E-Community Planner
Just Say No: 10 Wedding Photography Clichés
Thursday, December 10th, 2009From the I Do For Brides Website
We understand that everyone has different aesthetics when it comes to wedding-day beauty and wedding photographs. We also understand that couples want “artistic” renderings of their wedding day. However, we have compiled a list of 10 wedding photograph clichés that we gracefully, mercifully ask couples to stop requesting, and photographers to stop taking.
1. Body-free wedding gowns hanging from doorways and curtains.
Do you really need a photograph of your dress with light shining through it?
2. Feet-free shoes.
We get it. The shoes were expensive. We don’t need a picture.
3. The under-the-veil kiss.
Kinda defeats the purpose of the veil doesn’t it? And oh, by the way: We can still see you.
4. Children in the wedding party.
We’ll just quietly step back from this one.
5. Black-and-white photos with one colored element, like the bouquet.
Stop it, photographers! 1988 called and would like this cliche back.
6. Blurred edges.
We know you know how to focus the camera.
7. Jumping bridal parties.
Why? Why are they jumping? For joy? Or because someone told them too? When was the last time you saw someone jumping (and we mean jumping, not the foot stamping you see on “The Price is Right”) for joy?
8. Tie: Doleful/Sad-looking brides and Duckfaces.
This is your wedding day. You are supposed to be happy. Happy people smile. Bridezillas don’t. And duckfaces. Seriously. You’re not an Olsen twin. Stop saying “prunes” whenever you get your picture taken. You look ridiculous.
9. The bride standing alone in a room, looking into a mirror.
What could she be thinking? “There I am as a single lady. I wonder if I’ll be able to recognize myself after I say my vows. Sigh.”
10. Groomsmen with a flask.
Nice sentiments, bros. “Dude, you’re getting married, bro! Let’s do shots before the ceremony!”
One more: We are very thankful that the Double Exposure has slipped into obscurity.
From Scott at Zookbinders: Obviously, when it comes to aesthetics there is no absolute right or wrong and nobody can tell another what to do or not. As a photographer for over 25 years, I found this article to be a bit humorous but true and very agreeable to me. However, because my clients come first, and because this is usually their first wedding, all of this stuff is new to them. If a bride wants a B&W portrait with her bouquet in color, I’ll do it for a few extra bucks for my time in Photoshop. And yes, I’ve done the monster bride and groom heads hovering over their ceremony but today, that is where I draw the line, no matter how much they pay me.
bride sues over racy photos posted online
Thursday, November 26th, 2009From Lemondrop.com, posted Nov 17th, 2009 by Lauren Fritsky
Sara Bostwick had no qualms with vowing to accept her husband for better or worse. Her wedding photos were a different story.
The New York newlywed recently lodged a lawsuit against a photographer whom she claims took revealing pictures of her on her wedding day, then posted them online. Bostwick says she suffered post-traumatic stress disorder from the exposure, detected when her husband spotted the shots on the studio Web site two months after their wedding.
The photographer being sued is Carolyn Monastra, who works for Christian Oth Inc., rated one of the top 10 wedding studios in the world by American Photo magazine. (The studio also appeared in the movie “Bride Wars.”) Bostwick alleges Monastra took photos of her in her underwear even after she told her to stop.
You could argue that if Bostwick had really wanted Monastra to lower her lens, she would have had her removed from her dressing room. But any bride will tell you that a wedding day is chaotic, and Bostwick was probably distracted. Still, no matter what Bostwick told Monastra, the written documents may matter more in court.
Dennis DiPasquale, a New Jersey wedding photographer, says it’s a dicey situation. While he agrees Monastra should have stopped snapping when Bostwick told her to, the use of the photos on the studio Web site present a different problem.
“There is usually something in the contract between the photographer and the client stating information about using pictures for promotional purposes, either on the Web site or in ads,” he said. If you don’t want that, “you look on the contract and scratch out the part where you can do that. Put a line in it. Initial it … It gets kind of tricky if it’s not on there. Is it implied? That’s something more for a lawyer than a photographer to decide.”
Update: A spokeswoman from Christian Oth got in touch last night with this statement about the lawsuit:
“We are surprised and disappointed to learn that Mrs. Bostwick has filed a lawsuit against us in which she claims that we intentionally violated her privacy. We have never posted any images of Mrs. Bostwick on our public website or in any other public venue. Client images, such as Mrs. Bostwick’s, are posted on our proofing website and are always password protected… We believe that the substance of the allegations contained in Mrs. Bostwick’s complaint are completely without merit, we emphatically deny those allegations, and we look forward to having this case dismissed.”
Click here to see the article and comments at Lemondrop.com
Zookbinders Commentary:
No matter who you think is right or wrong in this situation, this story should make all of us think about what we photograph, what and where we post our images, and how well our contracts are worded in order to protect ourselves as well as our clients in this type of any situation arising from our photography.
