Thread: The difficulty of art being subjective

As some of us use photography as a livelihood I understand that sometimes the artist's vision does not necessarily meet the client's demands, and art being a subjective subject I came across an interesting article that I thought touches on this issue. - The Age article.

My boss has the subjective art of being difficult down.

Originally Posted by tdp

My boss has the subjective art of being difficult down.

Haha

Never in a million years would I put up with this. If wedding photographers were paid 6 figures, I'd consider it. But arguing with a client who feels slighted because "the kiss" wasn't captured (5 seconds out of a VERY hectic day I'm sure) would be bad enough, but then to go to court over it......jeez. I'm not the litigious type, but if I were the photog, I'd go after this couple with as much money and lawyering as I could muster. That's some petty stuff.

This kind of thing happens all the time, but doesnt usually make front page. I had a wedding photog friend or two and they lost more money than they made, at times. I would *never* consider doing it as a job. Especially these days when everyone's a critic.

Bridezilla, was not an accidental word.

Compare the photographer's work on his website with the two shots presented in the news report.
If they were typical of the work presented to the wedding couple I can understand their anger......lousy flash lighting and poor framing never mind the kiss!

Having just gone through my wedding and paid over $4K for the "basic" package, I'm with the couple. There's no reason the photographer should have missed the kiss. I'm no pro, but the photographer should have known to have anticipated the "you may now kiss the bride" moment and used a burst. I've seen some photographers use single shot on that moment and miss the moment. Inexcusable in my opinion. Couples hire pros for a reason.

I shot two weddings, and that was enough for three lifetimes. I got no complaints, but it is so nerve-wracking!