Re: Wedding Day Intruder

[P3D <bd3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'm in Digest mode, so this may have been addressed already, but it caught 
my attention.  Gary Schacker writes:

>George writes that he was angry that a wedding photographer's slave
>flash interfered with his (unauthorized) picture taking.

>I'm afraid you have things a bit turned around here my friend.

>Wedding photography is a difficult business at best.  The photographer
>must strive to make beautiful portraits under the most trying
>conditions:  stressed out subjects, swarming guests, feuding families,
>blowing winds, and drunks to name just a few.  

Agreed.  It's not for everyone.

>........................................Then there are the 
>amateurs who literally steal money out of his pocket by photographing his 
>set-ups and poses.

I can't see where an amateur taking pictures is "stealing" from the pro 
either literally or figuratively. If the amateur was *selling* his/her 
photos to the couple and they reduced their purchases from the pro as a 
result, that's a different story.  I didn't get this from George's post, 
though.  Also, if the amateur was jumping in front of the pro's setup to 
snap, before the pro shot, then the amateur would be out of line. (Maybe 
this was what GT was doing, but I don't think so) The pros I've seen 
generally fiddle about between shots though, leaving the amateur plenty of 
time to snag a few semi-posed/ semi-candids. 

>I guarantee that this poor guy was not happy about you taking pictures
>at all, (no matter how well intentioned you are).

This is not the same as an amateur walking into Joe Pro's studio and firing 
off shots of the set-ups and posed subjects.  Guests at weddings are 
expected to take pictures, aren't they?  If a professional wedding 
photographer gets upset by guests taking pictures, then I respectfully 
submit that the pro is in the wrong business, and should stay in his studio, 
where he/she can have full control of who shoots what and when.  

Granted, the weddings I've been to are those of "normal" people.  Hollywood 
or other "famous" types whose pictures could be sold to tabloids, trash TV, 
etc. operate under their own rules. 

>I hope he doesn't show up at your place of business only to complain
>that your performing your job interferes with his intrusion!

Did George complain to the pro or just to us?

>Sorry, but there are times when the old Realist should stay at home.

Most assuredly, but only if you bring the old Kodak instead.  :--)

>Gary

Best regards,
Bill Davis
mailto:bd3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxx


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