I find myself in another quandry. I have to choose between a friend and my potential for future work. I have no doubt that many people might insist that this isn't much of a decision and suggest that I could easily pick one. If that were so, I wouldn't be contemplating it.
Perhaps I should start from the beginning. Around mid November, I worked with another entertainment company as a for-hire photographer and during the event, greatly impressed the owner with my self composure and resourcefulness when the equipment I was supposed to use didn't show up at the catering hall. After the event, he wanted to keep using me as a photographer for the events he had planned. Unfortunately, I was booked solid until mid December with the other DJ company that I work for.
As a solution, I offered the services of my friend, a fellow photographer, who appeared much more accomplished and skilled than I was. I wish I could give you a link to his gallery, but that would, of course, uncover my identity. Regardless, you'll have to take my word that some of the studio portrait photos that he has produced could easily be placed in many prominent magazines.
For as long as I've known him as a photographer, he has constantly experimented and expanded his abilities to produce high quality art work. Some of the work that he has done has been reproduced on posters. With these reasons, I felt comfortable recommending him as an event photographer, thinking that this was a chance for him to further expand his abilities and get him recurring work doing what he loves to do.
In fact, I even placed my reputation on the line and vouched for his ability to take good photography. I felt good about helping a friend further his work and giving him an opportunity to perform in an area he has a marked interest in. And with my recommendation, the company hired him on to do some events.
After the first event happened, I called my friend to find out how things went. I even went to his house to review the pictures that he took and everything looked good. I had a meeting with the company owner, who told me that they were not totally impressed with this person that I recommended. I told the owner that the reason might lie in the fact that this was my friend's first event and suggested that they try another before making a decision. They agreed to this additional trial. Comforted by the knowledge of my friend's abilities, I focused on the business of my life, which was approaching finals week.
As an aside, I had mentioned in a past
article (third to last paragraph) what a candid photographer can make per event. Each photographer negotiates with the company or studio that hires them to get their fee. What I didn't know is that my friend was getting significantly less than that.
I learned after the fact that my friend had gotten significantly less because he had taken my observation that I had nothing but good experiences with this company. He didn't know that you have to negotiate that fee, and took their offer without countering it. I suspect that this was the seed to the problem that grew into an enormous monster a short time later.
So, since my friend was getting less than what he felt was the value he provided, he chose to do as little post processing (read that as checking and adjusting the photos) as possible. In fact, after the second party they used his services at, he didn't even bother to process the photos. He just handed every picture he took over to them on a CD. Worst of all, the manager (not the owner) at the company tried to short my friend a portion of his already meager fee.
At this point, the company that hired my friend made a major mistake. They didn't look at the pictures on the CD and handed an unreviewed copy of the CD to the customer. The customer looked at the pictures and came back to the company furious over the quality of the photos. At that point all hell broke loose. The company owner called my friend and while I wasn't part of the conversation, I can't imagine that it was cordial.
My friend wasn't at all apologetic, nor was he flexible about the pictures he had taken because of the financial issues preceding the exchange of these pictures. The company owner probably called right after he refunded all of the money for the photography to the client and was probably upset when he spoke to my friend.
I should point out that some time between when the event happened and when the customer came back furious, I had stopped by my friend's house and saw the first thirty or so pictures. They weren't great, but most of were passable. He told me that he had taken five hundred or so pictures. Since we usually only provide about two hundred to the company, I figured there were more than enough pictures to provide the client with what they needed.
A few of the pictures he had taken had some motion blur, almost as if he moved the camera as he took the picture. I pointed out to him that the customer probably wouldn't want those. He explained that he was doing a technique called
dragging the shutter. He told me that he wanted to give a sense of motion.
I had some misgivings about this, but the event was already over, there wasn't any way to go back and redo the pictures. Considering that there were only three instances of this in the first thirty or so pictures, I let it slide. What I did not know is that he also used a second technique called
rear curtain flash as well. And that he used it during a critical point where every shot had to be perfect. This critical juncture happened to be the guest of honor's candle lighting ceremony.
If he had screwed up every picture before and after that, things would still likely have worked out OK. When there is motion blur of your daughter and Aunt So-and-so in their shining moment, you can understand why the client was furious. This is their picture perfect memory for their daughter, and they paid a significant amount of money (most of which the photographer never sees) to get that memory recorded. What my friend had forgotten is that the client was paying for a particular style of photography, which didn't coincide with what he wanted to do.
What made it worse is that he told the owner that he had intended the pictures to come out this way. Whatever else he had said to the owner, this did
not go over well with the owner. Especially when one considers that the owner had to give over hard won money back to the client because of the photos.
As you can see, all of this came to a head very quickly. Between my friend's recalcitrance and the owner's financial loss, this mix had gone entirely sour. This is where I get pulled into this quickly degenerating scenario. After not getting satisfaction over the pictures from my friend, the company owner called for a meeting with me without telling me about the situation. I walked into this fiasco unaware of how things had gone down.
At this point, the company owner showed me the entire set of photos my friend took. Initially, (keeping in mind that I saw the first thirty photos) I defended my friend by explaining that he was looking for a more artistic approach with these pictures. Then I saw the rest of the pictures. I stopped trying to defend my friend because I had no idea what he was thinking when he took the pictures. I couldn't say anything that sounded remotely plausible to explain his poor choice of camera settings.
Eighty five of the one hundred and twenty five pictures taken during the candle lighting had serious motion blur because of the latter technique my friend was using. I was horrified. This did not look like my friend's quality work and it was clear to me that my friend had chosen to make a statement with the quality of the photos he took.
Then the owner turned to me and told me that if I took pictures like that, he didn't want me to work for him anymore. I had to defend myself about the quality of my work, something I have never done before in my life. I even had to show him photos of past parties and events that I have done to prove to him that I did take quality photos.
I left that meeting with the promise to contact my friend about his photos and find out what happened. When we talked, he was as unrepentant as before. He told me that he was trying to give a sense of motion and a warmer look in his photos. At this point, he also divulged what he was really getting paid for the events he did and why he accepted such a low fee for his work. He explained that, for what he was getting paid, what he had provided to them was of equal value.
While I agreed that he was severely underpaid for doing the events, I couldn't condone the camera setting selections he had chosen to take the pictures in. I knew from his vehement tone, that he would hear nothing of the poor quality of his photos which he had provided to the company. Sadly, I have to say that any time he doesn't like what he hears, he ignores what people are saying to him.
All those good feelings I had about helping my friend evaporated in the course of twenty four hours. Both sides did some wrong and, in my eyes, pretty stupid things. Instead of talking it out, they escalated matters. They didn't act professional and above board in their dealings with each other.
On whose side would you chose after hearing all of this?
