Welcome to the forum!

As an adjunct to the Tangents blog, the intention with this forum is to answer any questions, and allow a diverse discussion of topics related photography. With that, see it as an open invitation to just climb in and start threads and to respond to any threads.

if it bleeds....it leads....

 I happen to believe in innocent until proven guilty. She is one of our own and I will request a follow-up story and have sent her an email stating my support. There are always shades of gray but she was steamrolled. We don't know the full story but many judged her anyway. Lets help make it right. 

------------------

this is a copy-and-paste from Facebook:



Dear Photographer Friends. Please help make something right. I'm sure you've heard of the recent news about a photographer in Texas who was supposedly holding a brides images hostage for the price of an album cover.
Photographer's Rebuttal: http://www.blogpolito.com/?p=5757
Original Story: http://www.nbcdfw.com/…/Newlyweds-Upset-About-Wedding-Photo…

After the initial reporting by NBCDFW.com, this story was picked up by over 10 large blogs. Which, has definitely hit the photographer hard.

Well, it seems that the bride wasn't entirely truthful. Here is the rebuttal of the photographer. (linked below) I don't know which side is right, but it seems to me that NBCDFW at the very least owes the photographer the right to a fair reporting, if anything in her rebuttal is correct.

Please, if you believe that someone's business doesn't need to be destroyed on the whim of an angry customer, please go to Scott Gordon's Facebook page and request a follow-up report. This is what's right, and what's fair. Please, if you are a photographer, just request this. A follow-up can't hurt. Its just a chance to find out the truth. A follow-up is simply what is right. A bride should not have the right to destroy someone's business without making sure she is telling the truth.

Contact Scott Gordon. Or at least copy and paste this to your wall and in groups you are in.

Here is his facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/ScottGordonNBC5Scott Gordon NBC5
His twitter handle: @ScottGordonNBC5

http://www.blogpolito.com/?p=5757

Comments

  • Neil vNNeil vN Administrator
    I watched this explode on Facebook, but kept out of it because it just didn't add up. 
    So I wasn't surprised when a more sensible version came up. 
  • I wouldn't have gone the open letter route. That can do more damage than good a lot of times.
  • Yea, that rambling letter from the photographer was definitely a bad move. Makes her look unprofessional and guilty. I finally had to start skimming it, it was so long but I don't think anywhere in there does she address the alleged $150 'cover fee' that is at the center of the couple's complaint. So… was she asking for an additional $150 or not? 

    You can't blame the media travelintrevor. The reporter asked the photographer for her side of the story, looks like twice. Got a comment once but she did not comment on the alleged cover fee. A follow-up story is certainly appropriate, not because the photographer wasn't given a fair shake, but because the story calls out for a follow-up to see how this disaster ends.
  • Neil vNNeil vN Administrator
    From how I understand it, that the entire matter rests on this: 
    The client had to decide on the specific cover later, so it wasn't included in the price. It was stated as such in the contract. 

    The bad business decision here is to not have a base price for a cover, which can then be upgraded. 
    So it essentially looks like the album was offered without a cover. The contract covers this, but when explained badly, or explained in hyperbolic outrage, it seems as if the album is sold without a cover. Then there is the further "outrage" that the files are only delivered with the album .... but since the album can't be completed without the additional $150 for the cover, the bride now claims her files are being held hostage for a paltry $150. 
  • "The bad business decision here is to not have a base price for a cover, which can then be upgraded."

    Exactly this.  An album by definition has a cover. Why have a contract in place that cannot be fulfilled unless addition payment is made.  You would think that something like Neil suggested would be in place so that a basic cover would be provided if no upgrade was requested.
  • It sounds a lot like a photographer who is spending beyond her means and this is one way of recouping. Who knows how many customers just paid the extra to get their albums. Bad business for sure.
Sign In or Register to comment.