Worst Wedding Pictures Ever?

[cleokizzy]

i hope NO bride here in PS ever experience this!

Bride & Gloom: World''s Worst Wedding Pictures Ever?

IMHO the refund would NOT be sufficient to cover the damage that was done. i mean, it''s their WEDDING DAY and it only happens once! they won''t have any photos to look back on except for these so-so shots!

 

[Lauren8211]

Man... my pictures come out better than that!

Terrible!

 

[oddoneout]

Those are pretty terrible.

 

[D&T]

oh no

, hopefully someone else was there to capture their precious moments!.... Hope this photographer gets out the business

 

[meresal]

I''d feel better making an opinion if I could see the entire book of photos that the photog took.

I think quality of the photos is more sub par than the photos themselves. Everyone has a couple bad shots in their book, but that is to be expected. However, you don''t expect to get these grainy images.

 

[vc10um]

Oh wow. I think the worst part is the Thank You cards!

 

[Dreamgirl]

Hope they didn''t pay much!

 

[Ara Ann]

As sad as these are, I have actually seen worse...but yeah, so not good.

 

[hawaiianorangetree]

I saw this on the news last night.. they paid over 1400 pounds for the photos and the video the guy took was just shocking. It shows them walking into the church ready to get married and just as the bride gets to the alter the camera falls backwards on the tripod and all that is filmed from then is the roof.

 

[Revana03]

"woefully inadequate" pretty much sums up this photog''s job! Altho the first picture had me cracking up (which i am certain was not the intention of the photographer)

 

[sillyberry]

Date: 10/7/2009 8:14:24 PM
Author: Revana03
''woefully inadequate'' pretty much sums up this photog''s job! Altho the first picture had me cracking up (which i am certain was not the intention of the photographer)

The groom looks like a hobbit.

 

[PilsnPinkysMom]

FI & I read about this this evening. So sad

But it makes me wonder- did they do any real research before hiring their photog/videographer? I mean... There are occasionally bad photos, but for the most part you know the type of work your photog produces, no?

 

[meresal]

Date: 10/7/2009 8:14:24 PM
Author: Revana03
'woefully inadequate' pretty much sums up this photog's job! Altho the first picture had me cracking up (which i am certain was not the intention of the photographer)

This was kinda where I was going with my point. That groom doesn't seem like the guy that has a smile plastered on his face the whole time, and it was the photog's fault he never got one of him with a decent expression on his face. The guy looks about a gleeful as a sack of potatos.

As for the video. Yes, that I would be furious about, and there is no way I would pay for it. There was no video.

Does anyone ever mention the photog's name or company. I woudl really like to see some of his other work, Pilsn, I tend to think that pictures this grainy would be noticeable in any other shoots he may have done.

ETA: His website is down... but here is what the judge ordered.
"He ordered the photographer to reimburse £500 and pay £450 damages, £170 court fees and £100 compensation."

 

[tlh]

that was on the news, out of 400 photos, only 20 were usuable.. now THAT is bad!

 

[Italiahaircolor]

Did anyone else wonder where the brides arm was in the first picture? I had to look at it twice.

 

[cammy85]

Date: 10/8/2009 4:02:51 PM
Author: Italiahaircolor
Did anyone else wonder where the brides arm was in the first picture? I had to look at it twice.

TOTALLY. I was like - woah, did he photoshop her arm our or something? Her veil looked like a sleeve with no arm. Quite the optical illusion!

 

[Liane]

At first I was thinking "well that''s not so terrible" but it occurred to me that I was looking at them as I would look at non-pro pictures, not the official wedding shots.

For pro pictures, holy

Definitely did not do anyone in those photographs any favors. Weird framing, universally unflattering shots (I can''t find a single one that presents anybody in the best light), just ugh.

Meresal''s right -- it''s not really fair to evaluate the whole book from a handful of shots where we don''t know whether those are the best or the worst -- but if they are representative of the average, then yeah, I would be pretty freakin'' upset to get that back.

 

[DivaDiamond007]

Date: 10/7/2009 4:41:35 PM
Author: meresal
I''d feel better making an opinion if I could see the entire book of photos that the photog took.

I think quality of the photos is more sub par than the photos themselves. Everyone has a couple bad shots in their book, but that is to be expected. However, you don''t expect to get these grainy images.

I agree. The link only gave 7 of a reported 400 photos. I know I had some in my book that were''t very flattering; though not more than half!

 

[ckrickett]

oh geeez

 

[Haven]

My pro pics are just as bad.
And we paid something like $4,000 for the privilege.

It feels really bad to be *that* bride.

 

[jaylex]

Date: 10/8/2009 4:02:51 PM
Author: Italiahaircolor
Did anyone else wonder where the brides arm was in the first picture? I had to look at it twice.

Yeah I did catch that. How strange? I think it may be the lighting? Like she has her arm down and at her side with her hand backwards a lil holding the boquet..

I kept seeing the lower part of the veil as her sleeve...


And spelling their names wrong? "MarK" when it should be "MarC" is something I may do at work while jotting down a name.. but def not a customers name! And what is a "Slyvia"? Say it out loud. Don't these people proof read their work?

I love the red van behind the carraige pic.

Random shoe on the ground in the second one?


And I'm so sorry to hear that, Haven

. Hopefully your friends/family members got some really nice ones?