http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=js7RzcdDcMs&feature=player_embedded
This has got to be one of the best videos in a long while.
"Where's your 28-70???"
This has got to be one of the best videos in a long while.
"Where's your 28-70???"
US Judge slams noob wedding photog for unprofessionalism (all should watch this)
- Thread starter sprewell
- Start date
Don't play play! This judge knows his body AND lenses!
"Where is your 1D?"
"Using Rebel XTi is professional?"
LOL! Hope we have such judges who knows about lighting and f-stops.
Thanks for the link! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
"Where is your 1D?"
"Using Rebel XTi is professional?"
LOL! Hope we have such judges who knows about lighting and f-stops.
Thanks for the link! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
1) 18-55 & 70-300 in low light church? i think quite tough lay.:sweat:
2) no survey done before going to the actual day (i feel it is ok if the photog shot there before or has lots of experience cover church wedding)?:think:
3) never listen carefully to the instruction, which is for the family & friends not to use flash as it will screw up the photog covering the wedding.:think:
4) i feel it ok to use the Rebel XTi should the photog uses fast lens.
2) no survey done before going to the actual day (i feel it is ok if the photog shot there before or has lots of experience cover church wedding)?:think:
3) never listen carefully to the instruction, which is for the family & friends not to use flash as it will screw up the photog covering the wedding.:think:
4) i feel it ok to use the Rebel XTi should the photog uses fast lens.
Cheesecake
Senior Member
When you are holding a camera for assignment. You are holding responsibilities. Your job is to meet the requirements from a customer. There is nothing wrong in using equipments like entry cameras and lens but nowadays customers are looking into what equipments you are holding. It is the impression of your professionalism other than your portfolio.
Its a court mockup and not a real court. But the cases are real and the participants have to accept the "judge's ruling". But they don't have to pay the money, the show pays on their behalf.
Anyway the judge sure is a biased one :/
Sad case, haiz....
1. From the equipment the photographer uses, it shows that she is more of a freelance and thus, it seems overcharged for the wedding.
2. She doesn't know about the glass she uses? OMG
3. Her equipment can take better photos than what the judge shows. I use 300D with 18-55 (my first digital set) and shot better photos than what is shown before...
1. From the equipment the photographer uses, it shows that she is more of a freelance and thus, it seems overcharged for the wedding.
2. She doesn't know about the glass she uses? OMG
3. Her equipment can take better photos than what the judge shows. I use 300D with 18-55 (my first digital set) and shot better photos than what is shown before...
agree,
n where is the camp of pple who always insist that its the man behind
the camera?
come support ur cause, rubbish the judge.
This is courtroom t.v. Purely for entertainment purposes though the cases and verdicts are real. They tend to sensationalise cases for viewership. Joe Brown, Judge Judy, etc all alike.
if i had those pictures for my wedding, i would be very put off indeed.
but everyone has different standards of acceptance, i guess.
this is called bound arbitration - this is not a real court.
basically the 2 parties are paid money to appear on tv, along with lodging, and an allowance.
they sign a contract which binds them to accept the judge's judgement, whatever the outcome, whether it benefits them or not. there is a limited amount he is allowed to award there, i think. the show then pays the amount due to whatever parties on their behalf.
The photographer doesn't know her stuff. Shooting with mediocre equipment/mediocre experience; be prepared to get fried.
The bride/groom didn't want to pay enough. Pay peanuts get peanuts.
The judge is biased. Not all his points were valid or crucial to the case, and he made the court case personal.
The bride/groom didn't want to pay enough. Pay peanuts get peanuts.
The judge is biased. Not all his points were valid or crucial to the case, and he made the court case personal.
the judge doesn't have to be impartial, because he isn't really a judge.
after all, it's a tv show, the focus is on the ratings and viewership.
no one really wants to see a boring real day justice bao trying to settle villagers clucking over chickens and eggs and trivial matters.... :bsmilie::bsmilie:
For those still thinking that it's truly shot inside the court,
try doing some shots in the Hi, Sub,Family court or the sc tribunal for experience sake.
Journalist covering events in these locations day in and day out should have known better.
As for my case, the Magistrate in the sc tribunal do give my client a good lecture.
For what he had said..." do not expect for what you'd pay the photographer, you will get an Oscar award each and every shot. "
The decision comes after the Magistrate had listened to the expectation of my client and viewing the end result shown to him, weighing the fees charged upon.
try doing some shots in the Hi, Sub,Family court or the sc tribunal for experience sake.
Journalist covering events in these locations day in and day out should have known better.
As for my case, the Magistrate in the sc tribunal do give my client a good lecture.
For what he had said..." do not expect for what you'd pay the photographer, you will get an Oscar award each and every shot. "
The decision comes after the Magistrate had listened to the expectation of my client and viewing the end result shown to him, weighing the fees charged upon.
Right, I know it's not real... but the show is giving a wrong impression that photographers are always in the wrong, when it's both parties that is at fault :think:
Similar threads
