Legal action over wedding kiss (media report)

lynnb

lynnb

Veteran
Local time
9:49 AM
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
11,006
A couple took the wedding photographer to court claiming damages for failing to capture the wedding kiss.
They also claimed costs for re-staging the wedding photos.
The photographer counter-claimed the unpaid balance of the bill plus court costs, a missed meal, and a penalty fee, according to the above report.
The court tribunal found that it was not always possible to catch the kiss, but that the photography company had failed to deliver value and should compensate the claimant. The claimant was ordered to pay for the missed meal.
Anyone doing wedding work without at least an insurance cover is taking a risk.
 
I've seen photographers miss all the high points of a wedding. Was at one recently where the photographer forgot his wide angle lens (it was in a small church - it would have been at the top of my list), and missed the cake cutting. For the price of a wedding photographer today, these things shouldn't get missed. IMHO
And yes, I've done a lot of weddings, and worked very hard not to miss the important things.
 
I've shot one wedding and that was only because if my wife and I didn't do it, there would've been no pictures at all. I don't know how people do it by themselves and cover everything, honestly. I just know that we're never doing it again! We felt like we'd ran a marathon and had been beaten severely at the finish line when it was all done.
 
My wife and I have recently started shooting weddings together. We booked about 6 this year, which isn't bad for our first year doing it. We've gotten a few clients by word-of-mouth from previous clients, too. So that means we're doing something right.

To say I hate shooting weddings would be an understatement. I don't like the pressure of all of the "one shot" moments. I don't like the lingering mothers and sisters and friends. I don't like the cell phones, point and shoots and uncles with DSLRs. And I especially don't like wedding planners.

But to miss "the kiss" is inexcusable. Missing the bride's little brother doing the worm on the dance floor because you're out photographing the groom and his posse doing whatever grooms and their posses do is one thing. But during the ceremony you have but one objective: The Kiss. That's it. Where the hell was this photographer when they were kissing? My wife and I tag-team the ceremony. I typically shoot with something wide and something semi-normal (17 and 35 or 50) and she shoots with an 85 or 70-200 or something. We stay out of each other's way and we both capture as much of it as possible from different angles. Why this photographer didn't have a second shooter or at least have their camera ON THE BRIDE AND GROOM during the ceremony is beyond me.

But I don't feel sorry for them at all. They blew it, and in my opinion, they should have to refund ALL of the money they were paid. I don't, however, think they should be responsible for giving these people a new wedding. They should just take their refund (that I think they are due) and go find another photographer to photograph them kissing at their favorite coffee shop or park or mall or whatever. It'll be a much better experience and give them a great story to share one day.

Missed the kiss... Wow.
 
matthewm said:
My wife and I have recently started shooting weddings together. We booked about 6 this year, which isn't bad for our first year doing it. We've gotten a few clients by word-of-mouth from previous clients, too. So that means we're doing something right.

To say I hate shooting weddings would be an understatement. I don't like the pressure of all of the "one shot" moments. I don't like the lingering mothers and sisters and friends. I don't like the cell phones, point and shoots and uncles with DSLRs. And I especially don't like wedding planners.

But to miss "the kiss" is inexcusable. Missing the bride's little brother doing the worm on the dance floor because you're out photographing the groom and his posse doing whatever grooms and their posses do is one thing. But during the ceremony you have but one objective: The Kiss. That's it. Where the hell was this photographer when they were kissing? My wife and I tag-team the ceremony. I typically shoot with something wide and something semi-normal (17 and 35 or 50) and she shoots with an 85 or 70-200 or something. We stay out of each other's way and we both capture as much of it as possible from different angles. Why this photographer didn't have a second shooter or at least have their camera ON THE BRIDE AND GROOM during the ceremony is beyond me.

But I don't feel sorry for them at all. They blew it, and in my opinion, they should have to refund ALL of the money they were paid. I don't, however, think they should be responsible for giving these people a new wedding. They should just take their refund (that I think they are due) and go find another photographer to photograph them kissing at their favorite coffee shop or park or mall or whatever. It'll be a much better experience and give them a great story to share one day.

Missed the kiss... Wow.
Click to expand...

Well..

As someone who has shot weddings for the past 12 years I can tell you that at some point, for some reason, you WILL miss portions of the ceremony because not all ceremonies are the same (unless you limit to doing only judeo-christian ceremonies or only Greek Orthodox or Islamic or Hindu etc. etc. etc.) - and unless you are intimately familiar with pacing of the ceremony, whether it's a full ceremony/partial ceremony or "quickie" then you could, in fact, miss something as important as the kiss OR the ring exchange (if there are rings) OR drinking of the wine or what have you.

With respect to why the shooter didn't have "second shooter" one can only surmise but try approaching some clients and explain to them that, in order for them to attain a second shooter, they require a further $400/$600 (this depends on the cost for a second shooter - put it out there and see if you had to hire a second how much it would cost for a full day). Many clients balk at this and then figure that the one photographer could actually do it themselves. If they can't, they find someone (like the person in the story) who could or who will (or at least who will SAY they can/will).

Weddings are not easy by any stretch of the imagination and just because this photographer didn't get it right doesn't mean that we all would or could under similar circumstances.

Dave
 
I was at a distant friend's wedding, who changed her mind about letting me be the photographer. She instead used a DSLR girlfriend who "was a photographer" (as of the purchase of the camera, from what I could tell). Guess what she missed? The kiss. And she was standing right there on stage. But I got it from my seat....
 
goamules said:
I was at a distant friend's wedding, who changed her mind about letting me be the photographer. She instead used a DSLR girlfriend who "was a photographer" (as of the purchase of the camera, from what I could tell). Guess what she missed? The kiss. And she was standing right there on stage. But I got it from my seat....
Click to expand...

Was the friend distant before or after the wedding? I wouldn't blame you :)
 
goamules said:
I was at a distant friend's wedding, who changed her mind about letting me be the photographer. She instead used a DSLR girlfriend who "was a photographer" (as of the purchase of the camera, from what I could tell). Guess what she missed? The kiss. And she was standing right there on stage. But I got it from my seat....
Click to expand...

People don't seem to appreciate how hard it is to do a wedding properly until after the damage is done.

I've been asked to photograph people's weddings before and I always say no...and that they should hire someone who actually does weddings for a living. Then, I make extra photos of the in-between moments and they are happy.
 
lynnb said:
A couple took the wedding photographer to court claiming damages for failing to capture the wedding kiss.
They also claimed costs for re-staging the wedding photos.
The photographer counter-claimed the unpaid balance of the bill plus court costs, a missed meal, and a penalty fee, according to the above report.
The court tribunal found that it was not always possible to catch the kiss, but that the photography company had failed to deliver value and should compensate the claimant. The claimant was ordered to pay for the missed meal.
Anyone doing wedding work without at least an insurance cover is taking a risk.
Click to expand...


That's why there should be a contract. And this is also why sometimes there's stuff in contracts that seem rather ridiculous, but it's to avoid a ridiculous situation such as this. Getting sued for missing the kiss?? I don't see a lasting future for that couple, if they're resorting to spending time and energy on this. The divorce is going to be ultra nasty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom