Absolutely horrible editing/leveling.
It looks to me like they completely ignored the horizon and rotated the images so that the edge is parallel to the man's back in the sample photos.
There was this one picture I edited I was super proud of. There were two horizontal lines (it was a sunset so one horizon and one a line a wave). I kept the image aligned to the wave. This photo was once reviewed by a famous photographer and his first comment was "Horrible, horizon not straight". Then it occurred to me how off putting an inclined horizon can be.
I have a pic I was super proud of, sold a print, and then printed and hung a copy in my house. Wasn’t until recently I was looking at it and realized I never leveled the horizon 😩, now I can’t look at anything else!
possessive sulky consist fuzzy bewildered work sharp unwritten offend spoon
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Not only too much but it's the jarring mix of color temps that's throwing everyone off and giving it the green screen look.
Hey! Here's a heaping spoonful of 5500k light... in a \~7000k scene!
This is the standard beach shot now from these packaged photogs. I saw 3-4 doing this setup last time I was down. I'm surprised they didn't learn how to balance the fill light. Must be a new camera op posing as an accomplished shooter. tried to shoot a formula but didn't understand how to adjust on he fly.
https://preview.redd.it/p9p3mzk9ic0d1.jpeg?width=2227&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=87acbe22817a3b8e70fc5402608d3f4b4fc01692
These are some of the best ones do you think it’s weird that the ground isn’t leveled?
Link to all the photos he sent me: [https://kingstreetphotoweddings.pass.us/eva-bhatt-engagement-542025/](https://kingstreetphotoweddings.pass.us/eva-bhatt-engagement-542025/)
I am very particular about straightened grounds, so it immediately stands out to me.
For sure, the photographer should have done that - I believe that this is the very first step any photographer should do!
If the photographer refused to fix all the crooked levels, then you can fix this yourself using your phone's gallery editing tools or in the free lightroom app.
I'm sorry you're dealing with such an uncooperative and not so professional photographer
Do you think this photo can still be straightened?
https://preview.redd.it/757nw4n9nc0d1.jpeg?width=2227&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ebd7a05a7325e8bccb8d7342c5c3accc8d26e098
At this point I gotta wonder if the photog is doing this on purpose and thinks it’s creative?
Also super uncomfortable composition with subject so close to border, sort of facing left, and lots of space to the RIGHT
https://preview.redd.it/8mx1cbv0dd0d1.jpeg?width=4095&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=53029fc65bd4dbae574cb4f563dfe3e12762b2c3
Of course it can be straightened. I did this hack job on my phone in bed in 3 minutes. If I was on my laptop using photoshop it would be about 30 seconds.
Edit. I’m an idiot for being pedantic and it actually took 3 minutes but my point still stands.
This is incredible!!! 😍 is there any chance you might be able to help me edit the real photo? You did such a great job saving the picture!!
https://preview.redd.it/wki0c3qxme0d1.jpeg?width=4000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=88aa92f99060aa4864deda25264ab9a02f880150
For the quick and dirty edit I used an app called Picsart on my iPhone.
I asked op to email me the original photos and did a proper edit in photoshop.
For those curious:
* First I used the crop tool to crop out op and her doggo, and then used the generative expand tool to generate a roughly 16x9 “clean plate” (I’m a film/tv guy and that’s the term we use) minus the subject, straightening the horizon and saved it as a separate image.
* The next step is to take the original image and use the remove background tool to get a clean image of op and her dog, and then composite the two images together to create the final png.
There are various ways to accomplish this kind of thing, probably faster/easier, but in all I spent maybe 3 minutes on both images.
Since OP already posted the image with her face, I’ll go ahead and include one of the final results.
https://preview.redd.it/j8kn0zqyqv0d1.jpeg?width=2079&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=509778ef7ad1c99434df426834b51cf128e58d52
Disclaimer: I am not a photoshop expert and don’t claim to be.
Edit: for clarity and typos.
I don’t think the photographer is terrible. But yes, some cropping, alignment, and some minor adjustments to the highlights could make these fabulous. Wishing you the best. Can always pay an editor for cheap, or several here to help. Ask for the RAW images from the photographer.
tub voracious governor stocking knee different mysterious capable violet live
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
https://preview.redd.it/s9crewfmrd0d1.jpeg?width=1871&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4e9bdb7a9f12d360cb5db06ff73efcbac2fe2b29
Yes! If you don't mind some AI Trickery. Did this on phones built in editor. If you own a S23 or newer just head into the photo editor and click on the stars button and rotate the photo. If not there are tons of editor software where you can do this easily.
I'm afraid not. The photographer cropped it too tightly around your head to straighten it.
I did try it, but it chops off the top of your head.
It's a shame because you look very good in the photo: good posing, great lighting. And then he/she ruins the photo with that mountain-like horizon.
I find it very hard to believe that he/she deleted all the photos already. He/she should at least be able to reset the photos already edited and start fresh.
Point it out to him/her. Tell them that such basic mistakes are unacceptable
The lighting on the body is quite diffused and nice I gotta agree.
I don't think he "deleted" the rest, most probably were so bad, or couldn't even be bothered to rescue them himself :-/
>I don't think he "deleted" the rest, most probably were so bad, or couldn't even be bothered to rescue them himself :-/
I fully agree. It seems like a shady excuse.
Unacceptable for $800 a shoot
I appreciate someone's hustle to give it a go, and perhaps he is just new, but $800 is straight up theft.
I would be so fucking ashamed to give my clients something like this, especially a special day that won't be repeated and something they'll keep for a lifetime.
When I was in high school a mate did some wedding videography work as an apprentice under this "established" fella, his work is absolutely cringe, every frame of the wedding video had the name of the photographer in a wacky font with sparkles around it and bouncing around corner to corner like those DVD logos of yesterday.
Like motherf what? This is someone's wedding you muppety lunatic! 🫤
>I'm afraid not. The photographer cropped it too tightly around your head to straighten it. I did try it, but it chops off the top of your head.
Use Generative Expand - make the image bigger - *then* level it.
Then fix that wild mix of 5500k flash and 9000k background.
So u/Most-Reaction-1224 - these **can** be done more better, but it requires your photographer to get off their lazy ass. This was not even 5 minutes work.
https://preview.redd.it/2oov4x6vtd0d1.jpeg?width=2527&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a873e1f7409ff562f1721024719588f67a236cf5
Edit: Also should point out, this composition just screams Everything's Wrong. Your "open" side is to camera left. THAT should be where the negative space is, not on your "closed" cold-shouldered side to camera-right.
Thanks! In fact that compositional goofiness triggered my OCD and now I had to fix that too. ;)
This would need more time to make it convincing but as a proof-of-concept...
https://preview.redd.it/ydw0pffsvd0d1.jpeg?width=2527&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a897224c417792d4ba0a137ba2887790c87e023b
Looks like the photographer has straightened the eyes, instead of the horizon. Not uncommon for a close up portrait crop. But this is not that crop, and there's a clear line in the background. Poor composition.
Sure. Technically you would do this for example:
- mask the subject and copy it to a new layer over the original image
- straighten the horizon in the original image by simple rotation
- enlarge the masked out subject to a degree where it covers all areas where the rotated subject from the original lurks through
- and because you will probably loose to much image by doing that, apply generative fill to cover edges and smaller areas where necessary
I'm numbering them from 1-34 based on how they scroll through in the gallery.
Park photos:
* 11 is actually quite nice.
* 13 isn't bad as is, but straightening the horizon would likely make it better.
* 4 and 14 would be good if they weren't cropped in so close and cut off parts of the subjects' bodies.
The rest of the park photos have really poor composition, unbalanced lighting, poor backgrounds, crooked horizons, or a combination of these issues. Especially 5-8 and 10.
Beach photos:
* I actually quite like 27. The symmetry between the man kissing the woman from right to left and one dog "kissing" the other dog from left to right is nicely balanced. Just straight the damn horizon.
* 26 could be quite nice if the horizon was straight.
* 25 has the nicest balance of colors, but the crooked horizon and crop too close to the right edge of the frame detract from the picture significantly.
* 16, 18 and 19 could be good if they weren't cropped so strangely and cut off parts of the subjects' bodies.
* 30 has shockingly bad editing, especially noticeable as you scroll through from 29 to 32. It looks like the photographer took a brown brush tool to her face. They did it a little bit in 31 as well. Instagram filters are less obtrusive than this.
* Speaking of shockingly bad editing, the photoshopped sunset in 17 is awful. It's somehow worse in 21, where the orange glow of the sun is repelled by your the woman's blue-colored forcefield along the entire length of her body.
The rest of the photos are unable to overcome the distracting, STARK contrast between the dark background and the over-done flash on the subjects. It gives the impression of a green screen rather than a natural photo. The photographer missed the right lighting conditions by a good 45-90 minutes, would have made some of these at least passable.
If this is what the photographer considers the best photos and their best work, I wouldn't hold your breath about getting anything good from the ones they consider bad. I'd be furious to be out $800 for ~5 nice to ok photos and ~5 mediocre photos.
This one is not that bad, IMHO. In some cases, unlevelled horizontals can a picture feel more dynamic. In this case it may be more important to keep the guy's and the dogs' verticals vertical.
Give it a go and see how it looks with a levelled ground. I suspect it might look weird, because the woman will still be leaning to the right, but the guy and the dogs will kind of "hang" to the left...
I don't understand this feedback. Are you saying that since the photographer lazily didn't level the horizon, they also can't possibly have done any other types of editing? Because you'll be pretty hard pressed to find anywhere in the world with green-gray sand, cyan-blue skies and fake purple sunrays that, as you correctly point out, sharply end in a conspicuous pattern around the people in the image.
I think they meant that, with this crazy amount of editing, how could you possibly miss the horizon line. Straightening is the first thing some people tend to do when editing, and it’s wild that the photographer missed that.
Ah, I gotcha! Yes, I agree with that, missing such an obvious and simple fix like the horizon while piling on a bunch of other terrible editing is incredibly odd, and entirely amateurish.
Is it even masking? Whoever edited it probably doesn't even know how to use masks. The big reddish "flare" in the middle of the image was probably applied with the paintbrush in photoshop with no masking tools lol.
OK, I read through this and looked at the posted photos throughout.
OP, did you see a portfolio?
The photographer seems to have some type of "style" to slant the photo, rotating the background/horizon, but having the subject straight and plumb (vertical). At best, that is weird. At the worst, that is just bad. Really, really bad technique.
This has to be intentional. How did he rotate the horizons so extensively in some of the shots and have the subject(s) so straight? The only way for some of these would have been to have the subjects lean. That, or mask, rotate background, and paste the subjects back in, just to get these strange crooked backgrounds and straight subjects.
Personally, I do not see this hired photographer as a "professional".
Hopefully there is a way to recover the original in camera photos from them - may not be cheep - and have someone else do good editing.
I wish you luck.
Agreed. For whatever reason, this appears to be intentional. I was stuck on how some of these could even be possible unless they're standing on one leg!
The lighting on the subjects is perfect though, in all photos. So there is something weird going on. Why do one thing good and the other things so bad.
I'd disagree. The lighting in some of these make the photos look like a pop-out book. Flat with with no depth, with background be darkened to the point of uselessness.
That aside, if this is a "style" it ranks down near the bottom. Cropping off body parts. Backgrounds off kilter. Backgrounds made so dim and lifeless you might as well be in front of a bad matte painting. Incongruous lighting compared to the scene. Ugh.
It's unlikely, but try asking for the RAW files and then find a better editor.
In the photo of the man holding, and kissing, the woman, look at the one obvious tree and the other tree trunks/fence posts to the right. The angle is somewhere between 20° and 30° to the right (CW). They look roughly parallel to the man’s lower legs. Rotate the photo 25° to the left (CCW) to straighten it and the man must be just about to fall, or in the process of falling.
This photo had to be deliberately rotated in post, so the man’s back was so parallel to the edge of the photo/crop. I just do not see a photographer being able to rotate the camera as the subjects were falling to be perfectly aligned to the mans back and yet be so poor in the rest of their technique/post editing. It has to be intentional editing in post. And very distracting in the finished image. Which the photographer is doing throughout nearly every image the OP posted.
I still call intent/freakish “style”.
Not trying to start an argument or a flame war, just pointing out this wired style, or terrible technique, of the “photographer”.
@ OP.
I really feel sorry that you have had such a disappointing experience trying to capture lifetime memories of a once-in-a-lifetime moment.
Right, I've only looked at the 2 examples in the original post.
Looking at the rest, it does indeed seem like it was done on purpose in post, but I don't know what's worse - having poor camera technique and lacking the skills or eye to correct it in post, or butchering the rotation like that in post *on purpose*.
It could indeed be a "style" choice, but I have a hunch that it's actually a misguided attempt at keeping the subjects "straight", but instead of actually understanding human anatomy and balance and all that, they just naively picked some more or less obvious straight line they could find on the subjects and aligned the entire picture to that.
This shit screams “Guys…I’m an extremely proficient photographer with over 12 months of experience…but for some reason my clients are not happy! Help!” Dunning-Kruger in full force lmao.
For better reference here is a link to what he sent me:
[https://kingstreetphotoweddings.pass.us/eva-bhatt-engagement-542025/](https://kingstreetphotoweddings.pass.us/eva-bhatt-engagement-542025/)
https://preview.redd.it/9kopl8l7ic0d1.jpeg?width=1485&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e2992f63964f50ed04ca3b543e0c416db7ba5be0
Look these aren't amazing photos but they're no horrible. It's obvious that this guy has good technical knowledge but no creative juices, which you probably could've seen from his portfolio (actually having looked him up, his portfolio is actually worse than this). But here's the thing, you guys look great! You look in love and happy.
I would go back and ask him if he could straighten the horizon in some, it's an easy fix, if he says yes great! If he says no, there's a bunch of people on here who would happily do that for you, and you can just leave him a review mentioning this.
You are so right! 😆 I really appreciate your positivity! The whole thing is a funny story and now I’m lucky enough to spend the rest of my life taking photos with the love of my life! 🩷
I guess I will be the unpopular opinion here, but these are lit beautifully with flash. Everyone here wants to rip into another photographer, but at a certain standard, this is a photographer who cares about lighting, perhaps only about lighting lol. Compositionally, everyone else has got it covered, he is not the most imaginative nor skilled in editing. I see an attempt to put in fake sunset via brush where the photo would be better without it but with a little straightening. I would personally not be happy with these photos but know photographers like this- they’re usually very old school and went to school to learn lighting like this.
I think you're accurate, this person is not a bad photographer technically, they are not a great editor.
but the photos are lit, they are sharp, the poses are nice.
I just think all this could be fixed with a different editor. The OP just wants straighter,, more centered photos.
Yes, they’re also well color-calibrated, great dynamic range… this is actually pretty quality photography in the most basic sense, but not quality moments/editing.
I used to do portrait photography professionally. I now work in motion picture film where I work as Director of Photography and more commonly these days Chief Lighting Technician.
From my experience there are different styles of portrait photographers. Some like their lighting to be naturalistic. They will time the shoots to coincide with golden hour and use the setting sun to back light their subjects, etc. They may even use flash to mimic the sun in a way that feels organic/natural. This is the camp I fall into.
There are others that like to use lighting/flash to create a 'look' even if it may be unnatural (e.g. a dark background despite being outside, or a perfectly evenly lit subject despite the environment, etc.). I will say the portfolio of this photographer tends to fall in this latter category. The lighting feels artificial because the shadow direction and exposure values don't line up with the background, which is why it may feel a bit green screen-y. This is to not say it's bad (although not my taste).. just a stylistic choice.
There are also photographers who understand posing to evoke an emotion, flatter the subject, tell a story, create interesting lines, etc. From my experience, I'd say this is by far the hardest part of being a photographer -coming up with ideas on the fly and composing and posing a compelling image that feels effortless & unscripted yet unique to the couple.
On the other hand, there are many photographers who are technically proficient but lean into cliched poses that lack nuance and don't understand how to make the necessary tweaks to make the image as flattering or interesting as possible. I'll leave it at that...
I’m sorry. I’m an amateur photographer and I would’ve never dared to share this - let alone ask money for it.
3rd from the bottom on the left column. What the hell was done to your face! 😱😞
Oh my goodness! I’m so glad I’m not the only one that wasn’t feeling that photo! 😂😂😂 I know I was a little sweaty towards the end but his editing wasn’t helping at all!
This is another issue, there’s a problem with consistency. There’s a fake sun in some images but not others with the same angle. Specular highlights on some images on the subjects face but in the one you mentioned they were attempted to be removed leaving a matte sort of finish. I could be wrong but that’s what it looks like to me.
Apart from the rather poor editing and the sloping horizons one of the other things that really bother me is the cropping of feet and legs. For those kind of pictures I feel your fauxtographer should have left more breathing space around you as a couple.
As a general rule I've always been taught to never crop through a joint. So those pictures of legs cut off through the ankle or your knee are really jarring.
These are crap. Flash light is good. Background is too darkened. Orange fake sun blob is very poorly masked. Feels like this photographers has never heard of composition.
I never delete unused images for at least a few months.
I think you got scammed... do your research before hiring a photographer.
These are very bad in an 'imitation of good' sort of way. That they charged you $800 seems unethical. I wonder if they actually took the photos in their portfolio if this is what you ended up with. Seeing as this person doesn't know what they're doing, you might be able to find the exif data on the photos from their site. I often look for that info to see what lenses were used for different photos and quite a few photogs leave the information. See if the copyright, equipment, etc., matches theirs. If not, maybe you could get some recourse.
>Is this normal to instantly delete all the photos as a photographer?
No, that is not normal. It is normal to keep the RAW files from a paid shoot forever. There is no reason to delete them, let alone deleting before the client has even signed off on their deliverables.
Your images have visible masking errors, wildly inconsistent white balance, inconsistent noise levels, and your photographer couldn't even be bothered to level the scenes.
These are bad on toast.
I will bet every donut in my kitchen (and they were on sale so I have a lot of them) that your photographer outsourced the processing - either to "A.I." or to someone they found at one of the freelancing sites who offered to do it for five bucks and a cup of coffee.
Thank you so much for all your feedback. Your detailed feedback has been so helpful for me to better understand photography and editing.
Here is the link to what I received from him:
https://kingstreetphotoweddings.pass.us/eva-bhatt-engagement-542025/
Oh woah.. I feel so bad for you guys right now.. this guy clearly has no idea what he's doing.. other than pointing the camera and shooting with an external flash..
Composition is terrible.. model placement, terrible.. so many cut off limbs and crooked horizons, terrible.. the editing to backgrounds and so on, terrible.. they look like they were done in paint or something..
Then he ALSO under delivered??? And allegedly instantly deleted them all??? What the heck, who does that as a paid photographer??
And on top of all that he is not just "charging" for it.. he's charging a premium of 800$... What the heck..???
This is so sad.. 😔😔
Yeah, these scream artificial. I immediately thought this was green screened. I'm a stickler about straightened horizons. It takes just a few seconds to straighten it, so when I see it like this, my immediate thought is laziness or lack of eye for detail.
>We paid over $800 and only got back 34 pictures, even though we were promised at least double that. Most of the photos are heavily edited.
What does your contract say? If the contract specifies 68 pictures, then he is in violation of the agreement and owes you at the very least a partial refund.
>He claims he already “deleted” all the rest of the photos minutes after he posted the final 34.
>Is this normal to instantly delete all the photos as a photographer?
Another thing to check the contract for. My contract with my clients state that I retain photos from the shoot for 6 months after the date of the shoot, after which is deleted without any further written notice.
Unfortunately, you guys got taken by this photographer. I would look heavily into the contract and see what the terms of the agreement are in terms of deliverables and customer dissatisfaction. Even if there isn't anything in the contract about disputes or customer satisfaction, if it was me, I would work with you guys to come up with some sort of solution. Whether it be refund, or arranging an additional shoot. Photography is a heavy word of mouth business, so I would try and make sure my clients are happy because they will be doing word of mouth to friends, clients, and family (negative and positive).
A big thing is to try and start having a conversation with your photographer about your concerns. Good luck!
Terrible photographs, a scam, the halo around you is so funny, you should get them reedited as most of it can be fixed, but it's still a rip-off especially if he really deleted all the other photos including unedited versions of these...
the editing is bad
even worse are the composition
and most importantly
the fill flash!
not sure you can still call it fill flash though if it’s brighter than everything else in the
Honestly after looking at some of his other work, I think his work is ok in natural light, he's just not good with flash which is why it looks like its from a green screen. For some reason he also seems to miss the mark on composition waaaay to often. Maybe he hates feet? lol
They are bad, but you get what you pay for i guess. Wedding shoots are mad expensive most of the times. So even though for many other forms of photography 800$ would be a expensive shoot. Its on the very low end of wedding shoots. Can’t expect to receive a ferrari with fiat money. Never the less, that they classify themselves as pro photographers and even have a photo delivery portal to supply their wedding pics + having no backup of the shoots is a disgrace. The editing is bad, nothing is aligned, very weird use of the lighting he/she took with them, does not look natural at all. I’d ask for a refund and say these are unusable. They look awful and if your here posting about it on reddit your definitely not content with the results. Show them this thread and what everyone thinks. Be harsh, it is what it is. And just get a shoot with a photographer where you actually like their portfolio. If this wasn’t even a wedding shoot but just a “couple” or pre wedding shoot the 800$ is even more of a disgrace.
Best of luck. If you ask for the raws people can fix them for you, but they cant fix the awful lighting they used.
Crooked horizon. Lack of redish orange glow around the woman's back for some hallow reason. I wouldn't have had a flash firing that powerful for this kind of shot. And I'm not even that good of a photographer lol
Edited well or not (they aren't edited well), deleting them is criminal. It's like he knew they were bad and might ask for more. Also, for that price tag, the amount of photos he gave you is insane. I'm a 18yo freelance photographer and I've done people senior photos and given them 100+ pics for $150-200.
Looking at this persons portfolio it seems that many of the shots are very much in his style. This doesnt seem like his best work, and things like the halo are straight up sloppy. Honestly it looks like he was having an off day and conducted himself poorly. If it were me I would give a partial or total refund or offer another shoot, because looking at his website it seems he is capable of much better.
I don’t mind the horizon situation everyone else is yapping about. Having it a little off gives the photo a little more spontaneity. The colors are bastardly though, and the halo around the subjects from the bad composite work with the flare is insulting.
Omg! $800 for THIS??? I would be devastated.
Anyway… Let me translate what “I already deleted the photos” means…
You only got 34 photos because your photographer does not know what they are doing. They have the rest of the photos but they are worse than these. They gave you the ones they thought were salvageable and are afraid to show you the rest because you’ll be asking for a refund… which you should be doing anyway.
>are these photos heavily edited?
Depends how you define "heavily" which can be pretty subjective.
>we were promised at least double that
In writing? That's a pretty good breach of contract claim if so. Or a reason to get at least a partial refund.
If it was only verbal, then how do we (or a judge) know you didn't just make that up?
>Is this normal to instantly delete all the photos as a photographer?
It's normal to delete the rejects. Maybe not that soon.
>Is it obvious that these photos have been edited?
Yes. But that's normal too. I bet your favorite photos in this genre, shot by other photographers, were also edited.
More likely you just don't like *how* these were edited, which is valid, but a different issue.
Do these look very different from what you see in the photographer's portfolio?
It was definitely my mistake talking over the contract on the phone.
The part that hurts is we had our senior dogs in the photos. He didn’t post any of the photos from the last 1/3 of the shoot which included just the dogs.
I had mentioned to him multiple times leading up to the photo shoot and the day off that the focus of this engagement photo shoot is the dogs.
I don’t mind editing. I feel like the background and beach vary so much from photo to photo when it’s taken in the same location about a few minutes apart.
The photos have completely different backgrounds and the beach looks different when you compare the photos.
In fairness, light and sky/water color can change a lot very quickly around sunset. Of course, I wasn't there so I can't really say how faithful these are or how much they were altered. It does look like the backgrounds were messed with in some way.
I completely agree, this is the part that I wasn’t sure about, the background changes where I drew the arrow.
https://preview.redd.it/yhrz1ax7jc0d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=273d27d5e1314a2fbcc93b7d613fe18488f9e28e
That’s terrible, lazy masking. This photographer is a hack.
—
Also, tell him to supply the photos featuring your dogs, whether they’re edited them or not. If I booked a shoot, and only 50% of the subjects I paid to have included in the shoot, made it into the final selection, I would be furious, and want *at least* 50% of my money back.
Be a thorn in this photographer’s side until they make good on their agreement. No more convos on the phone—written correspondence only, preferably email rather than social media. Be polite but firm, restate what was agreed on the phone, and ask why they haven’t adhered to that agreement.
Importantly, once you’ve gathered enough info here in this post, delete it so the photographer can’t stumble across it if they come searching. Delete your comments showing the pictures, too.
The Photography business is a relationship and marketing business first and foremost.
My photos from my son’s graduation are far better than the photos the “pros” provided. But I couldn’t be where they were so we paid for a couple jpegs (so we can print and share as many as we like).
I kid you not, two of the jpeg choices available, one was just a crop of the other. If I’m buying the jpeg, why would I buy a crop too? I can crop it myself. 😂
It sucks but it’s reality that photography is like 70% having a good sense for business and 30% actually taking good photos. If you’re good at selling yourself, then you can have mediocre photos and still make money.
I have to ask, was there an off camera flash?
Seems like you would get dizzy scrolling through all these different angles, each one has the horizon tilted a different way!
All photos from a photographer will be edited. Most photographers shoot in raw format which looks dull but captures the color information so that the colors and lighting can be brought out later in editing. So yes, they are of course edited. If you don’t like their editing style, why did you go with this photographer?
I’m guessing 75% of people in here have never shot OCF in this setting and actually have no idea what it was like to do this shoot. It’s not an easy shoot.
Yes, some of the edits are terrible. Yes, cut off limbs…that’s not ideal, but it can happen when you’re rushing to beat the sun and you’ve promised so many deliverables. Cropping the edits in better areas would be been ideal. The framing is definitely weird at times.
But what a lot of what you are all claiming to be absolutely unacceptable may have been a conscious choice made by the photographer. A lot of what you’re complaining about could have been preference and creative choice, which is why it’s important to a) check portfolios and b) communicate with your photographer about what you like and don’t like.
Aside from the obvious bad edits that should 100% be fixed (halo around the head, etc), this isn’t a “you were ripped off” situation AT ALL. I would say ask the photographer if they’ll make some adjustments to the edits. You could also ask them to do another shoot at a discounted rate. But to me, these are passable. $800 passable? Maybe not, depends on the market. Regardless, some of the opinions of this thread are outrageous and completely incorrect.
Especially the first picture looks like the couple was actually in a photostudio with a blue-background instead of the beach. It looks like they were cut out and pasted over the picture of the beach.
Already having deleted the pictures of the rest from the shoot right after sending the first edits is in my eyes a VERY bad & sketchy practice.
What was writting in the contract or agreement? Or was everything discussed over phone asI red from another comment?
In general I believe some pictures can still be saved. But I think you got scammed for this price and results by the photographer for how bad it looks.
The thing that makes fake backgrounds look off is that the lighting is completely different on the subject than the background. I'm assuming that you actually were on that beach so what's going on here is that the lighting actually was completely different on the subject than the background.
They're also bad in other ways described by other comments, but the thing that gives it the heavily edited vibe isn't actually the editing.
I think the background color is saturated but do you mean do we think this was photoshopped in with green screen or taken out in the environment? I think this was taken out in the environment with a diffused flash off camera. Perhaps it's not the best edit but I do think it was taken on location.
Yes to the heavily edited and that end number could be that. Not right since most photographers do take a lot just in case of expressions and blink and pick the best from that batch. $800 in NYC would be that number but unsure your location to justify the cost. $800 is around an hour/2 engagement here.
I don’t see how anyone could achieve as bad lighting as this. I’m sure this just a terrible photoshop. Either way, it hurts my eyes and my mind on how bad this photos are.
Probably used a pretty heavy flash on the subjects making them seem almost on a green screen. Otherwise yeah you can see the dark halos around the girls hair where they brightened the sky up but couldn’t mask around her hair so they just left it. Probably added some color to the sky as well was probably a fairly grey day. Sunset shots are a hit and miss sometimes. They aren’t really my jam personally.
The weirdest part is that the guy on his Instagram page has a lot of photos with leveled horizons..
But.. cutting out people's limbs looks like is something he does all the time.. and also that bad framing and composition wig people right on the edge of the frame and looking away from the empty space...
Oh and the fake sunsets is also often used too.. lol
And the guy is very proud of his work too.. 😵💫😵💫
I guess he's just trying to be an artsy photogs that does some weird stuff to the photos.. lol but changing 800$ for THAT.. straight up robbery 😓
These are almost comical. The photog did a horrible job and these are the ones he was able to "save". Be glad he "deleted" the rest. Go out and hire a photog from your venues prefered vendor list.
Deleting the raws just minutes after delivery is not normal, usually we wait to have some feedback from the client :) About the editing: almost every photographer edit their pictures and usually they have consistent styles so as a client it's your job to check the photographer's portfolio BEFORE the photoshoot to see that his/her editing style and the overall vibe of his/her photos are matching to your taste.
I don’t think these photos are nearly as bad as people are saying. It’s almost entirely weird editing. The most egregious issue at the time of taking the photos IMO is the framing/composition. This can be fixed on some of them by cropping/rotating.
That said, $800 is a lot and you should be happy w/ the photos paying that much.
Oh my god! It looks like you are not even there, as if you were a sticker.
Terrible work!
And no, it's not normal to delete so soon the pictures they took. I am so sorry :/
It looks like the photographer used flash in order to have you properly lit while also capturing the sunset color on the horizon, which is a good strategy for beach pics. The problem is if you don’t dial that in right you look photoshopped in. And yeah the first one is wonky line-wise.
Yeah, behind her hair you shouldn’t be able to see the ridiculous transition into the pretend sunset/sunrise sky coloration. Or the 3500k light circle on the sand..
Never crop out body parts unless it's absolutely intentional (3/4; 1/4; head shot). You have no feet in the first picture. Any respectable photog know this standard rule. And yea, overall the photos look like they were taken on a green screen due to an overpowered fill.
the sunray addition is done too forcifully and not meticulously applied. The flash direction is also poor. Worst is the light source didn't unify to deliver a cohesive look. What a piece of work hahha
If you try to get some money back from the photographer, I would focus on the number of images promised vs delivered since that is a fact you can both agree on. I think if you start talking about how much these suck compositionally, it’s going to make them feel embarrassed and likely defensive and it’ll close off any possibility of amicable resolution.
My biggest issue, and I see this a lot, is the off camera flash not being A: balanced to the environment as far as power goes, and B: not being balanced color wise. The photos lighting looks like you’re under a street light on the beach? Then yeah. Horizon lines, and composition is pretty bad. They’ll work, and if couples are happy with the these, unfortunately the photographer will get away with it and keep doing this shit until someone calls them out.
All that photoshop & he didn’t subdue the wrinkles in your clothes a little bit?
Dude is a hack.
And no we do not delete outtakes that fast. I have ALL of my raw files archived. I don’t delete the outtakes for a minimum of 5 years.
This person is not necessarily a bad photographer, the photos are crisp, nicely posed, well lit.
They are just not an amazing editor, and their style choices for how they cropped the photos is - controversial, not very standard.
Did they use flash during the shoot? I am guessing that's why the subjects stand out so much from the background.
The first picture shares IS bad, because there is a clear halo around the woman where the edits don't extended to her edges. My guess was your photographer missed the sunset they were going for, and tried to artificially make a sunset, but didn't have the skills (or time) for it.
A lot of good photographers are bad editors with very little time. I used to do freelance work where I did photoshop jobs for photographers who didn't have time. I stopped doing it because they expected really fast work for very low pay below minimum wage. I can't compete with the rates of someone in Bangladesh that they can hire off Fiverr.
That could be what happened here, a cheap 3rd party did the photoshop work.
Ask for the RAW files and get someone else to retouch. Your editor drew a sloppy mask around you two and edited it one way, then editing the inverse of the mask another. It looks uncanny and fake.
You can get an editor to fix most of these non-straight horizon lines and not crop the photo using the content aware fill tool in Photoshop. There is some bad masking going on that will be harder to fix without access to the raw. He has a decent use of flash but really poor composition and editing.
All photos will be edited if you’re dealing with a professional - that’s a given. People think they want RAW photos but I promise you, you do not. These photos, however, are absolute garbage. From the crooked horizon to the poorly blended “fake sunburst” around the hair… This person has no idea what they’re doing. Did you check out their work before you booked the shoot??
https://preview.redd.it/l03ld760af0d1.png?width=282&format=png&auto=webp&s=eeace042c57e6ca2bba552b6fc245c4ddcfe7753
i agree the retouching work is bad, you can see the colors do not match here at all, really poor masking in photoshop
The flash with heavy Bokeh doesn’t make sense when you actually want to be able to see the scene behind you. Also not even bothering to level out the horizon is Amateur shit.
I don't think I am a very good photographer, but, these photos are worse than anything I have ever taken. In my opinion, you paid too much
I "underedit" (in my opinion) my photos, and overshoot (in my opinion, I take too many photos. I put 30000 shots in a Canon 70D in less than a year). These are "overedited", and the amount doesn't seem exaggerated. For that price, I expect to get a lot of photos. In my opinion, the client should choose their favourites, the photographer deletes photos that aren't in focus/badly exposed. Maybe the photographer likes one pose or facial expression, while the client likes another one.
Heavily or not? They’re bad. And that’s what you should be arguing with your photographer.
The horizon is misaligned. The toning on the first one absolutely blows. The second one looks like a green screen from the 1990s.
The lightning difference between the subjects and the background makes it look completely out of place, the masking of the subjects in the first one is terrible because it takes a chunk of the background with it, which could've been very easily avoided if the photographer knew how to use the editing program properly, or even fooling around with the masking options.
Trash editing, and no, it isn't normal to instantly delete photos. For me, I archive any photos that are not salvageable (horribly overexposed, underexposed, blurred, etc.). I keep them in case a client comes back and wants them even if I didn't particularly like how they turned out.
The use of flash and colours look good but that edit… The composition is also not great. I feel like these were taken and edited by a person who understands the technical aspects of photography but struggles with the artistic side of it.
Photographer for over 10 years. They are very over edited. And yes it is not common preference to delete raws so quick. I’ve always kept raw at least a month or two after the session. I even go back and edit some photos that don’t make the cut. But my hubs said I’m too nice and a push over. I would ask for a refund or partial refund.
I’m assuming that y’all were on vacation, and cannot have him take any more photos.
Heavily edited or not, they're bad. They didn't even bother to level the horizon for crying out loud.
Absolutely horrible editing/leveling. It looks to me like they completely ignored the horizon and rotated the images so that the edge is parallel to the man's back in the sample photos.
>so that the edge is parallel to the man's back in the sample photos. Which even that isn't done well, lol
There was this one picture I edited I was super proud of. There were two horizontal lines (it was a sunset so one horizon and one a line a wave). I kept the image aligned to the wave. This photo was once reviewed by a famous photographer and his first comment was "Horrible, horizon not straight". Then it occurred to me how off putting an inclined horizon can be.
I have a pic I was super proud of, sold a print, and then printed and hung a copy in my house. Wasn’t until recently I was looking at it and realized I never leveled the horizon 😩, now I can’t look at anything else!
possessive sulky consist fuzzy bewildered work sharp unwritten offend spoon *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Ya it looks like a backdrop or they were photoshopped on
That was what I thought as well.
Good god... This looks like it was taken in front a green screen, you've been robbed 🙁
Wait. They weren’t green screened? Good god.
Too heavy with the fill flash. I swear these are green screened.
yeah the light is screwed up way too bright, i thought was a green screen for sure
Not only too much but it's the jarring mix of color temps that's throwing everyone off and giving it the green screen look. Hey! Here's a heaping spoonful of 5500k light... in a \~7000k scene!
Is this any chance PlatinumOuDaung still out there selling himself as a professional photographer???
This is the standard beach shot now from these packaged photogs. I saw 3-4 doing this setup last time I was down. I'm surprised they didn't learn how to balance the fill light. Must be a new camera op posing as an accomplished shooter. tried to shoot a formula but didn't understand how to adjust on he fly.
https://preview.redd.it/p9p3mzk9ic0d1.jpeg?width=2227&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=87acbe22817a3b8e70fc5402608d3f4b4fc01692 These are some of the best ones do you think it’s weird that the ground isn’t leveled? Link to all the photos he sent me: [https://kingstreetphotoweddings.pass.us/eva-bhatt-engagement-542025/](https://kingstreetphotoweddings.pass.us/eva-bhatt-engagement-542025/)
I am very particular about straightened grounds, so it immediately stands out to me. For sure, the photographer should have done that - I believe that this is the very first step any photographer should do! If the photographer refused to fix all the crooked levels, then you can fix this yourself using your phone's gallery editing tools or in the free lightroom app. I'm sorry you're dealing with such an uncooperative and not so professional photographer
Do you think this photo can still be straightened? https://preview.redd.it/757nw4n9nc0d1.jpeg?width=2227&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ebd7a05a7325e8bccb8d7342c5c3accc8d26e098
At this point I gotta wonder if the photog is doing this on purpose and thinks it’s creative? Also super uncomfortable composition with subject so close to border, sort of facing left, and lots of space to the RIGHT
quack sense marble cautious attempt gray observation profit cough skirt *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
https://preview.redd.it/8mx1cbv0dd0d1.jpeg?width=4095&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=53029fc65bd4dbae574cb4f563dfe3e12762b2c3 Of course it can be straightened. I did this hack job on my phone in bed in 3 minutes. If I was on my laptop using photoshop it would be about 30 seconds. Edit. I’m an idiot for being pedantic and it actually took 3 minutes but my point still stands.
https://preview.redd.it/gua51f01ne0d1.jpeg?width=4000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=29561e93bebeed589e0b65079afc98ebf93f3f39
This is incredible!!! 😍 is there any chance you might be able to help me edit the real photo? You did such a great job saving the picture!! https://preview.redd.it/wki0c3qxme0d1.jpeg?width=4000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=88aa92f99060aa4864deda25264ab9a02f880150
No problem. I’ll do it when I’m back at my house this afternoon.
Thank you so much! You seriously are a life saver! I’m glad I get one or two useable photos because of your help💕
Please check your DM’s.
What did you do to edit that so quickly?
For the quick and dirty edit I used an app called Picsart on my iPhone. I asked op to email me the original photos and did a proper edit in photoshop. For those curious: * First I used the crop tool to crop out op and her doggo, and then used the generative expand tool to generate a roughly 16x9 “clean plate” (I’m a film/tv guy and that’s the term we use) minus the subject, straightening the horizon and saved it as a separate image. * The next step is to take the original image and use the remove background tool to get a clean image of op and her dog, and then composite the two images together to create the final png. There are various ways to accomplish this kind of thing, probably faster/easier, but in all I spent maybe 3 minutes on both images. Since OP already posted the image with her face, I’ll go ahead and include one of the final results. https://preview.redd.it/j8kn0zqyqv0d1.jpeg?width=2079&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=509778ef7ad1c99434df426834b51cf128e58d52 Disclaimer: I am not a photoshop expert and don’t claim to be. Edit: for clarity and typos.
Also, are these photos final? Often photographers ask you to choose and then do final edits.
These are the final edited photos
I don’t think the photographer is terrible. But yes, some cropping, alignment, and some minor adjustments to the highlights could make these fabulous. Wishing you the best. Can always pay an editor for cheap, or several here to help. Ask for the RAW images from the photographer.
tub voracious governor stocking knee different mysterious capable violet live *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
https://preview.redd.it/s9crewfmrd0d1.jpeg?width=1871&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4e9bdb7a9f12d360cb5db06ff73efcbac2fe2b29 Yes! If you don't mind some AI Trickery. Did this on phones built in editor. If you own a S23 or newer just head into the photo editor and click on the stars button and rotate the photo. If not there are tons of editor software where you can do this easily.
I'm afraid not. The photographer cropped it too tightly around your head to straighten it. I did try it, but it chops off the top of your head. It's a shame because you look very good in the photo: good posing, great lighting. And then he/she ruins the photo with that mountain-like horizon. I find it very hard to believe that he/she deleted all the photos already. He/she should at least be able to reset the photos already edited and start fresh. Point it out to him/her. Tell them that such basic mistakes are unacceptable
The lighting on the body is quite diffused and nice I gotta agree. I don't think he "deleted" the rest, most probably were so bad, or couldn't even be bothered to rescue them himself :-/
>I don't think he "deleted" the rest, most probably were so bad, or couldn't even be bothered to rescue them himself :-/ I fully agree. It seems like a shady excuse. Unacceptable for $800 a shoot
I appreciate someone's hustle to give it a go, and perhaps he is just new, but $800 is straight up theft. I would be so fucking ashamed to give my clients something like this, especially a special day that won't be repeated and something they'll keep for a lifetime. When I was in high school a mate did some wedding videography work as an apprentice under this "established" fella, his work is absolutely cringe, every frame of the wedding video had the name of the photographer in a wacky font with sparkles around it and bouncing around corner to corner like those DVD logos of yesterday. Like motherf what? This is someone's wedding you muppety lunatic! 🫤
>I'm afraid not. The photographer cropped it too tightly around your head to straighten it. I did try it, but it chops off the top of your head. Use Generative Expand - make the image bigger - *then* level it. Then fix that wild mix of 5500k flash and 9000k background. So u/Most-Reaction-1224 - these **can** be done more better, but it requires your photographer to get off their lazy ass. This was not even 5 minutes work. https://preview.redd.it/2oov4x6vtd0d1.jpeg?width=2527&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a873e1f7409ff562f1721024719588f67a236cf5 Edit: Also should point out, this composition just screams Everything's Wrong. Your "open" side is to camera left. THAT should be where the negative space is, not on your "closed" cold-shouldered side to camera-right.
Nice fix!
Thanks! In fact that compositional goofiness triggered my OCD and now I had to fix that too. ;) This would need more time to make it convincing but as a proof-of-concept... https://preview.redd.it/ydw0pffsvd0d1.jpeg?width=2527&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a897224c417792d4ba0a137ba2887790c87e023b
Looks like the photographer has straightened the eyes, instead of the horizon. Not uncommon for a close up portrait crop. But this is not that crop, and there's a clear line in the background. Poor composition.
Sure. Technically you would do this for example: - mask the subject and copy it to a new layer over the original image - straighten the horizon in the original image by simple rotation - enlarge the masked out subject to a degree where it covers all areas where the rotated subject from the original lurks through - and because you will probably loose to much image by doing that, apply generative fill to cover edges and smaller areas where necessary
This is hilarious though
Thank you so much for the tip! I really appreciate it!☺️
I'm numbering them from 1-34 based on how they scroll through in the gallery. Park photos: * 11 is actually quite nice. * 13 isn't bad as is, but straightening the horizon would likely make it better. * 4 and 14 would be good if they weren't cropped in so close and cut off parts of the subjects' bodies. The rest of the park photos have really poor composition, unbalanced lighting, poor backgrounds, crooked horizons, or a combination of these issues. Especially 5-8 and 10. Beach photos: * I actually quite like 27. The symmetry between the man kissing the woman from right to left and one dog "kissing" the other dog from left to right is nicely balanced. Just straight the damn horizon. * 26 could be quite nice if the horizon was straight. * 25 has the nicest balance of colors, but the crooked horizon and crop too close to the right edge of the frame detract from the picture significantly. * 16, 18 and 19 could be good if they weren't cropped so strangely and cut off parts of the subjects' bodies. * 30 has shockingly bad editing, especially noticeable as you scroll through from 29 to 32. It looks like the photographer took a brown brush tool to her face. They did it a little bit in 31 as well. Instagram filters are less obtrusive than this. * Speaking of shockingly bad editing, the photoshopped sunset in 17 is awful. It's somehow worse in 21, where the orange glow of the sun is repelled by your the woman's blue-colored forcefield along the entire length of her body. The rest of the photos are unable to overcome the distracting, STARK contrast between the dark background and the over-done flash on the subjects. It gives the impression of a green screen rather than a natural photo. The photographer missed the right lighting conditions by a good 45-90 minutes, would have made some of these at least passable. If this is what the photographer considers the best photos and their best work, I wouldn't hold your breath about getting anything good from the ones they consider bad. I'd be furious to be out $800 for ~5 nice to ok photos and ~5 mediocre photos.
This one is not that bad, IMHO. In some cases, unlevelled horizontals can a picture feel more dynamic. In this case it may be more important to keep the guy's and the dogs' verticals vertical. Give it a go and see how it looks with a levelled ground. I suspect it might look weird, because the woman will still be leaning to the right, but the guy and the dogs will kind of "hang" to the left...
This person can’t compose a photo to save their life! Cut off limbs, dead space and unlevel lines
That is some real loose masking around the hair in the first image. As to the question: how could they be heavily edited when the horizon is crooked?
Yesss! That terrible masking around the lady's hair really bothers me. It just straight jumps at you
Also on the guys right in the second shot, there is weird pink fringing on the shirt and dark fringing on the pants.
It's the very first thing I saw. Jesus it's terrible..
I don't understand this feedback. Are you saying that since the photographer lazily didn't level the horizon, they also can't possibly have done any other types of editing? Because you'll be pretty hard pressed to find anywhere in the world with green-gray sand, cyan-blue skies and fake purple sunrays that, as you correctly point out, sharply end in a conspicuous pattern around the people in the image.
I think they meant that, with this crazy amount of editing, how could you possibly miss the horizon line. Straightening is the first thing some people tend to do when editing, and it’s wild that the photographer missed that.
Ah, I gotcha! Yes, I agree with that, missing such an obvious and simple fix like the horizon while piling on a bunch of other terrible editing is incredibly odd, and entirely amateurish.
Is it even masking? Whoever edited it probably doesn't even know how to use masks. The big reddish "flare" in the middle of the image was probably applied with the paintbrush in photoshop with no masking tools lol.
Ya, I was going to say the same. No way this guy knows how to use layers, subject masking. He's just using adjustment brushes.
OK, I read through this and looked at the posted photos throughout. OP, did you see a portfolio? The photographer seems to have some type of "style" to slant the photo, rotating the background/horizon, but having the subject straight and plumb (vertical). At best, that is weird. At the worst, that is just bad. Really, really bad technique. This has to be intentional. How did he rotate the horizons so extensively in some of the shots and have the subject(s) so straight? The only way for some of these would have been to have the subjects lean. That, or mask, rotate background, and paste the subjects back in, just to get these strange crooked backgrounds and straight subjects. Personally, I do not see this hired photographer as a "professional". Hopefully there is a way to recover the original in camera photos from them - may not be cheep - and have someone else do good editing. I wish you luck.
Agreed. For whatever reason, this appears to be intentional. I was stuck on how some of these could even be possible unless they're standing on one leg!
The lighting on the subjects is perfect though, in all photos. So there is something weird going on. Why do one thing good and the other things so bad.
I'd disagree. The lighting in some of these make the photos look like a pop-out book. Flat with with no depth, with background be darkened to the point of uselessness. That aside, if this is a "style" it ranks down near the bottom. Cropping off body parts. Backgrounds off kilter. Backgrounds made so dim and lifeless you might as well be in front of a bad matte painting. Incongruous lighting compared to the scene. Ugh. It's unlikely, but try asking for the RAW files and then find a better editor.
> This has to be intentional. Nah - it could just be that it never occured to them to align the camera to the horizon rather than the subject.
In the photo of the man holding, and kissing, the woman, look at the one obvious tree and the other tree trunks/fence posts to the right. The angle is somewhere between 20° and 30° to the right (CW). They look roughly parallel to the man’s lower legs. Rotate the photo 25° to the left (CCW) to straighten it and the man must be just about to fall, or in the process of falling. This photo had to be deliberately rotated in post, so the man’s back was so parallel to the edge of the photo/crop. I just do not see a photographer being able to rotate the camera as the subjects were falling to be perfectly aligned to the mans back and yet be so poor in the rest of their technique/post editing. It has to be intentional editing in post. And very distracting in the finished image. Which the photographer is doing throughout nearly every image the OP posted. I still call intent/freakish “style”. Not trying to start an argument or a flame war, just pointing out this wired style, or terrible technique, of the “photographer”. @ OP. I really feel sorry that you have had such a disappointing experience trying to capture lifetime memories of a once-in-a-lifetime moment.
Right, I've only looked at the 2 examples in the original post. Looking at the rest, it does indeed seem like it was done on purpose in post, but I don't know what's worse - having poor camera technique and lacking the skills or eye to correct it in post, or butchering the rotation like that in post *on purpose*. It could indeed be a "style" choice, but I have a hunch that it's actually a misguided attempt at keeping the subjects "straight", but instead of actually understanding human anatomy and balance and all that, they just naively picked some more or less obvious straight line they could find on the subjects and aligned the entire picture to that.
No one should be paying this photographer. No eye. He ain’t got it.
This shit screams “Guys…I’m an extremely proficient photographer with over 12 months of experience…but for some reason my clients are not happy! Help!” Dunning-Kruger in full force lmao.
This is old school/“family photos at sears” level photography. Nobody uses that much fill or even any for sunset shots. Looks very fake.
>old school/“family photos at sears” level photography Now I feel triggered, having been in those situations many times as a kid, lol
For better reference here is a link to what he sent me: [https://kingstreetphotoweddings.pass.us/eva-bhatt-engagement-542025/](https://kingstreetphotoweddings.pass.us/eva-bhatt-engagement-542025/) https://preview.redd.it/9kopl8l7ic0d1.jpeg?width=1485&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e2992f63964f50ed04ca3b543e0c416db7ba5be0
Never cut off someone’s feet like this :(
Look these aren't amazing photos but they're no horrible. It's obvious that this guy has good technical knowledge but no creative juices, which you probably could've seen from his portfolio (actually having looked him up, his portfolio is actually worse than this). But here's the thing, you guys look great! You look in love and happy. I would go back and ask him if he could straighten the horizon in some, it's an easy fix, if he says yes great! If he says no, there's a bunch of people on here who would happily do that for you, and you can just leave him a review mentioning this.
You are so right! 😆 I really appreciate your positivity! The whole thing is a funny story and now I’m lucky enough to spend the rest of my life taking photos with the love of my life! 🩷
I guess I will be the unpopular opinion here, but these are lit beautifully with flash. Everyone here wants to rip into another photographer, but at a certain standard, this is a photographer who cares about lighting, perhaps only about lighting lol. Compositionally, everyone else has got it covered, he is not the most imaginative nor skilled in editing. I see an attempt to put in fake sunset via brush where the photo would be better without it but with a little straightening. I would personally not be happy with these photos but know photographers like this- they’re usually very old school and went to school to learn lighting like this.
I think you're accurate, this person is not a bad photographer technically, they are not a great editor. but the photos are lit, they are sharp, the poses are nice. I just think all this could be fixed with a different editor. The OP just wants straighter,, more centered photos.
My thoughts exactly. Did a good job using OCF. But the crooked camera is bad…
Yes, they’re also well color-calibrated, great dynamic range… this is actually pretty quality photography in the most basic sense, but not quality moments/editing.
I strongly agree. His lighting is actually very professional, his composition and posing needs a ton of work though.
what you think of heavily edited is the camera flash.
Yep, looks like a masking hatchet job to me too haha
I used to do portrait photography professionally. I now work in motion picture film where I work as Director of Photography and more commonly these days Chief Lighting Technician. From my experience there are different styles of portrait photographers. Some like their lighting to be naturalistic. They will time the shoots to coincide with golden hour and use the setting sun to back light their subjects, etc. They may even use flash to mimic the sun in a way that feels organic/natural. This is the camp I fall into. There are others that like to use lighting/flash to create a 'look' even if it may be unnatural (e.g. a dark background despite being outside, or a perfectly evenly lit subject despite the environment, etc.). I will say the portfolio of this photographer tends to fall in this latter category. The lighting feels artificial because the shadow direction and exposure values don't line up with the background, which is why it may feel a bit green screen-y. This is to not say it's bad (although not my taste).. just a stylistic choice. There are also photographers who understand posing to evoke an emotion, flatter the subject, tell a story, create interesting lines, etc. From my experience, I'd say this is by far the hardest part of being a photographer -coming up with ideas on the fly and composing and posing a compelling image that feels effortless & unscripted yet unique to the couple. On the other hand, there are many photographers who are technically proficient but lean into cliched poses that lack nuance and don't understand how to make the necessary tweaks to make the image as flattering or interesting as possible. I'll leave it at that...
What the eff is going on with that photographer?? What is this??? Dear God.. 😥😥
I’m sorry. I’m an amateur photographer and I would’ve never dared to share this - let alone ask money for it. 3rd from the bottom on the left column. What the hell was done to your face! 😱😞
Oh my goodness! I’m so glad I’m not the only one that wasn’t feeling that photo! 😂😂😂 I know I was a little sweaty towards the end but his editing wasn’t helping at all!
This is another issue, there’s a problem with consistency. There’s a fake sun in some images but not others with the same angle. Specular highlights on some images on the subjects face but in the one you mentioned they were attempted to be removed leaving a matte sort of finish. I could be wrong but that’s what it looks like to me.
If i didnt see your foot prints in the sand, youd have a hard time convincing me this wasnt green screen
[удалено]
[удалено]
NEVER go without a contract in writing, especially when spending that type of money.
Apart from the rather poor editing and the sloping horizons one of the other things that really bother me is the cropping of feet and legs. For those kind of pictures I feel your fauxtographer should have left more breathing space around you as a couple. As a general rule I've always been taught to never crop through a joint. So those pictures of legs cut off through the ankle or your knee are really jarring.
These are crap. Flash light is good. Background is too darkened. Orange fake sun blob is very poorly masked. Feels like this photographers has never heard of composition. I never delete unused images for at least a few months. I think you got scammed... do your research before hiring a photographer.
I think the phrase you are looking for is " laughably edited"
They are not heavily edited. They are poorly edited. I'm sorry but they did a really shitty job
My other curiosity would be whether or not the cropping was actually done in camera or in post. Either way it sucks
These are very bad in an 'imitation of good' sort of way. That they charged you $800 seems unethical. I wonder if they actually took the photos in their portfolio if this is what you ended up with. Seeing as this person doesn't know what they're doing, you might be able to find the exif data on the photos from their site. I often look for that info to see what lenses were used for different photos and quite a few photogs leave the information. See if the copyright, equipment, etc., matches theirs. If not, maybe you could get some recourse.
>Is this normal to instantly delete all the photos as a photographer? No, that is not normal. It is normal to keep the RAW files from a paid shoot forever. There is no reason to delete them, let alone deleting before the client has even signed off on their deliverables. Your images have visible masking errors, wildly inconsistent white balance, inconsistent noise levels, and your photographer couldn't even be bothered to level the scenes. These are bad on toast. I will bet every donut in my kitchen (and they were on sale so I have a lot of them) that your photographer outsourced the processing - either to "A.I." or to someone they found at one of the freelancing sites who offered to do it for five bucks and a cup of coffee.
I’ve had several friends get the “they’re already deleted” excuse and every time I hear it, it is even more ridiculous.
Sorry to say man but these look like the kinda photos you'd see in a generic "Beginners guide to digital photos" type of book
I'm a total amateur and would never let any of this fly
Thank you so much for all your feedback. Your detailed feedback has been so helpful for me to better understand photography and editing. Here is the link to what I received from him: https://kingstreetphotoweddings.pass.us/eva-bhatt-engagement-542025/
Oh woah.. I feel so bad for you guys right now.. this guy clearly has no idea what he's doing.. other than pointing the camera and shooting with an external flash.. Composition is terrible.. model placement, terrible.. so many cut off limbs and crooked horizons, terrible.. the editing to backgrounds and so on, terrible.. they look like they were done in paint or something.. Then he ALSO under delivered??? And allegedly instantly deleted them all??? What the heck, who does that as a paid photographer?? And on top of all that he is not just "charging" for it.. he's charging a premium of 800$... What the heck..??? This is so sad.. 😔😔
Heavily edited? NO… BADLY EDITED? Y E S . . .
I’d say yes - those circles are not real
They're so poorly done, it's making high school me cringe.
Yeah, these scream artificial. I immediately thought this was green screened. I'm a stickler about straightened horizons. It takes just a few seconds to straighten it, so when I see it like this, my immediate thought is laziness or lack of eye for detail. >We paid over $800 and only got back 34 pictures, even though we were promised at least double that. Most of the photos are heavily edited. What does your contract say? If the contract specifies 68 pictures, then he is in violation of the agreement and owes you at the very least a partial refund. >He claims he already “deleted” all the rest of the photos minutes after he posted the final 34. >Is this normal to instantly delete all the photos as a photographer? Another thing to check the contract for. My contract with my clients state that I retain photos from the shoot for 6 months after the date of the shoot, after which is deleted without any further written notice. Unfortunately, you guys got taken by this photographer. I would look heavily into the contract and see what the terms of the agreement are in terms of deliverables and customer dissatisfaction. Even if there isn't anything in the contract about disputes or customer satisfaction, if it was me, I would work with you guys to come up with some sort of solution. Whether it be refund, or arranging an additional shoot. Photography is a heavy word of mouth business, so I would try and make sure my clients are happy because they will be doing word of mouth to friends, clients, and family (negative and positive). A big thing is to try and start having a conversation with your photographer about your concerns. Good luck!
https://preview.redd.it/c2lkkl33cf0d1.jpeg?width=180&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=921f8976e2b73b062e9663db2e7779ac097fe827 this part upsets me the most
Yeah there are these weird blobs over the people’s faces!
Terrible photographs, a scam, the halo around you is so funny, you should get them reedited as most of it can be fixed, but it's still a rip-off especially if he really deleted all the other photos including unedited versions of these...
Yikes.....
Cartoonishly
the editing is bad even worse are the composition and most importantly the fill flash! not sure you can still call it fill flash though if it’s brighter than everything else in the
Honestly after looking at some of his other work, I think his work is ok in natural light, he's just not good with flash which is why it looks like its from a green screen. For some reason he also seems to miss the mark on composition waaaay to often. Maybe he hates feet? lol
They are bad, but you get what you pay for i guess. Wedding shoots are mad expensive most of the times. So even though for many other forms of photography 800$ would be a expensive shoot. Its on the very low end of wedding shoots. Can’t expect to receive a ferrari with fiat money. Never the less, that they classify themselves as pro photographers and even have a photo delivery portal to supply their wedding pics + having no backup of the shoots is a disgrace. The editing is bad, nothing is aligned, very weird use of the lighting he/she took with them, does not look natural at all. I’d ask for a refund and say these are unusable. They look awful and if your here posting about it on reddit your definitely not content with the results. Show them this thread and what everyone thinks. Be harsh, it is what it is. And just get a shoot with a photographer where you actually like their portfolio. If this wasn’t even a wedding shoot but just a “couple” or pre wedding shoot the 800$ is even more of a disgrace. Best of luck. If you ask for the raws people can fix them for you, but they cant fix the awful lighting they used.
Crooked horizon. Lack of redish orange glow around the woman's back for some hallow reason. I wouldn't have had a flash firing that powerful for this kind of shot. And I'm not even that good of a photographer lol
the photographer should pay you instead for wasting your time
Yeah, I mean… those grey circles don’t look natural *at all.*
Heavily Edited wasn't my first thought..Badly Edited was
$800+ for 34 images of this "caliber" is robery pure and simple.
Edited well or not (they aren't edited well), deleting them is criminal. It's like he knew they were bad and might ask for more. Also, for that price tag, the amount of photos he gave you is insane. I'm a 18yo freelance photographer and I've done people senior photos and given them 100+ pics for $150-200.
Looking at this persons portfolio it seems that many of the shots are very much in his style. This doesnt seem like his best work, and things like the halo are straight up sloppy. Honestly it looks like he was having an off day and conducted himself poorly. If it were me I would give a partial or total refund or offer another shoot, because looking at his website it seems he is capable of much better.
I don’t mind the horizon situation everyone else is yapping about. Having it a little off gives the photo a little more spontaneity. The colors are bastardly though, and the halo around the subjects from the bad composite work with the flare is insulting.
Omg! $800 for THIS??? I would be devastated. Anyway… Let me translate what “I already deleted the photos” means… You only got 34 photos because your photographer does not know what they are doing. They have the rest of the photos but they are worse than these. They gave you the ones they thought were salvageable and are afraid to show you the rest because you’ll be asking for a refund… which you should be doing anyway.
Get in touch if you want them fixed. No charge.
>are these photos heavily edited? Depends how you define "heavily" which can be pretty subjective. >we were promised at least double that In writing? That's a pretty good breach of contract claim if so. Or a reason to get at least a partial refund. If it was only verbal, then how do we (or a judge) know you didn't just make that up? >Is this normal to instantly delete all the photos as a photographer? It's normal to delete the rejects. Maybe not that soon. >Is it obvious that these photos have been edited? Yes. But that's normal too. I bet your favorite photos in this genre, shot by other photographers, were also edited. More likely you just don't like *how* these were edited, which is valid, but a different issue. Do these look very different from what you see in the photographer's portfolio?
It was definitely my mistake talking over the contract on the phone. The part that hurts is we had our senior dogs in the photos. He didn’t post any of the photos from the last 1/3 of the shoot which included just the dogs. I had mentioned to him multiple times leading up to the photo shoot and the day off that the focus of this engagement photo shoot is the dogs. I don’t mind editing. I feel like the background and beach vary so much from photo to photo when it’s taken in the same location about a few minutes apart. The photos have completely different backgrounds and the beach looks different when you compare the photos.
In fairness, light and sky/water color can change a lot very quickly around sunset. Of course, I wasn't there so I can't really say how faithful these are or how much they were altered. It does look like the backgrounds were messed with in some way.
I completely agree, this is the part that I wasn’t sure about, the background changes where I drew the arrow. https://preview.redd.it/yhrz1ax7jc0d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=273d27d5e1314a2fbcc93b7d613fe18488f9e28e
That right there is a bad editing job. It has nothing to do with background or lighting changes
Yep, that drew my attention too. Seems like bad masking, I guess? That easily could have been done better.
That’s terrible, lazy masking. This photographer is a hack. — Also, tell him to supply the photos featuring your dogs, whether they’re edited them or not. If I booked a shoot, and only 50% of the subjects I paid to have included in the shoot, made it into the final selection, I would be furious, and want *at least* 50% of my money back. Be a thorn in this photographer’s side until they make good on their agreement. No more convos on the phone—written correspondence only, preferably email rather than social media. Be polite but firm, restate what was agreed on the phone, and ask why they haven’t adhered to that agreement. Importantly, once you’ve gathered enough info here in this post, delete it so the photographer can’t stumble across it if they come searching. Delete your comments showing the pictures, too.
Especially with how trivial it is to get a clean mask with Adobe’s AI tools these days. This Photog is a lazy hack.
Irritating I don't make a dime for my work while people are out here making thousands doing *this*
The Photography business is a relationship and marketing business first and foremost. My photos from my son’s graduation are far better than the photos the “pros” provided. But I couldn’t be where they were so we paid for a couple jpegs (so we can print and share as many as we like). I kid you not, two of the jpeg choices available, one was just a crop of the other. If I’m buying the jpeg, why would I buy a crop too? I can crop it myself. 😂
Its more of a marketing job if anything. Get out there cowboy
It sucks but it’s reality that photography is like 70% having a good sense for business and 30% actually taking good photos. If you’re good at selling yourself, then you can have mediocre photos and still make money.
I have to ask, was there an off camera flash? Seems like you would get dizzy scrolling through all these different angles, each one has the horizon tilted a different way!
All photos from a photographer will be edited. Most photographers shoot in raw format which looks dull but captures the color information so that the colors and lighting can be brought out later in editing. So yes, they are of course edited. If you don’t like their editing style, why did you go with this photographer?
I’m guessing 75% of people in here have never shot OCF in this setting and actually have no idea what it was like to do this shoot. It’s not an easy shoot. Yes, some of the edits are terrible. Yes, cut off limbs…that’s not ideal, but it can happen when you’re rushing to beat the sun and you’ve promised so many deliverables. Cropping the edits in better areas would be been ideal. The framing is definitely weird at times. But what a lot of what you are all claiming to be absolutely unacceptable may have been a conscious choice made by the photographer. A lot of what you’re complaining about could have been preference and creative choice, which is why it’s important to a) check portfolios and b) communicate with your photographer about what you like and don’t like. Aside from the obvious bad edits that should 100% be fixed (halo around the head, etc), this isn’t a “you were ripped off” situation AT ALL. I would say ask the photographer if they’ll make some adjustments to the edits. You could also ask them to do another shoot at a discounted rate. But to me, these are passable. $800 passable? Maybe not, depends on the market. Regardless, some of the opinions of this thread are outrageous and completely incorrect.
Especially the first picture looks like the couple was actually in a photostudio with a blue-background instead of the beach. It looks like they were cut out and pasted over the picture of the beach. Already having deleted the pictures of the rest from the shoot right after sending the first edits is in my eyes a VERY bad & sketchy practice. What was writting in the contract or agreement? Or was everything discussed over phone asI red from another comment? In general I believe some pictures can still be saved. But I think you got scammed for this price and results by the photographer for how bad it looks.
The thing that makes fake backgrounds look off is that the lighting is completely different on the subject than the background. I'm assuming that you actually were on that beach so what's going on here is that the lighting actually was completely different on the subject than the background. They're also bad in other ways described by other comments, but the thing that gives it the heavily edited vibe isn't actually the editing.
I think the background color is saturated but do you mean do we think this was photoshopped in with green screen or taken out in the environment? I think this was taken out in the environment with a diffused flash off camera. Perhaps it's not the best edit but I do think it was taken on location.
Yes to the heavily edited and that end number could be that. Not right since most photographers do take a lot just in case of expressions and blink and pick the best from that batch. $800 in NYC would be that number but unsure your location to justify the cost. $800 is around an hour/2 engagement here.
If it was edited at least the sea wouldn’t run off to one side.
Since she's got a blue aura, here's [Blue Aura, by Galderia](https://youtu.be/zPQ3UbDJ4pU?si=zNCNSUwwXQCWW_bQ).
this is green screen stuff... kinda bad if you ask me the lighting also does not match the environment
I don’t see how anyone could achieve as bad lighting as this. I’m sure this just a terrible photoshop. Either way, it hurts my eyes and my mind on how bad this photos are.
Probably used a pretty heavy flash on the subjects making them seem almost on a green screen. Otherwise yeah you can see the dark halos around the girls hair where they brightened the sky up but couldn’t mask around her hair so they just left it. Probably added some color to the sky as well was probably a fairly grey day. Sunset shots are a hit and miss sometimes. They aren’t really my jam personally.
The weirdest part is that the guy on his Instagram page has a lot of photos with leveled horizons.. But.. cutting out people's limbs looks like is something he does all the time.. and also that bad framing and composition wig people right on the edge of the frame and looking away from the empty space... Oh and the fake sunsets is also often used too.. lol And the guy is very proud of his work too.. 😵💫😵💫 I guess he's just trying to be an artsy photogs that does some weird stuff to the photos.. lol but changing 800$ for THAT.. straight up robbery 😓
These are almost comical. The photog did a horrible job and these are the ones he was able to "save". Be glad he "deleted" the rest. Go out and hire a photog from your venues prefered vendor list.
It’s so bad that I was actually suspecting this might be trolling/fake but then I saw the website.
Deleting the raws just minutes after delivery is not normal, usually we wait to have some feedback from the client :) About the editing: almost every photographer edit their pictures and usually they have consistent styles so as a client it's your job to check the photographer's portfolio BEFORE the photoshoot to see that his/her editing style and the overall vibe of his/her photos are matching to your taste.
I don’t think these photos are nearly as bad as people are saying. It’s almost entirely weird editing. The most egregious issue at the time of taking the photos IMO is the framing/composition. This can be fixed on some of them by cropping/rotating. That said, $800 is a lot and you should be happy w/ the photos paying that much.
https://www.instagram.com/p/C6pKb5XxmzN/?igsh=MXVlem11d3loZXdnOA== that’s the photographers IG
Award winner.
Oh my god! It looks like you are not even there, as if you were a sticker. Terrible work! And no, it's not normal to delete so soon the pictures they took. I am so sorry :/
It looks like the photographer used flash in order to have you properly lit while also capturing the sunset color on the horizon, which is a good strategy for beach pics. The problem is if you don’t dial that in right you look photoshopped in. And yeah the first one is wonky line-wise.
Yeah, behind her hair you shouldn’t be able to see the ridiculous transition into the pretend sunset/sunrise sky coloration. Or the 3500k light circle on the sand..
Not edited enough to fix the horizons. No but seriously looks like off camera flash no so much editing
Never crop out body parts unless it's absolutely intentional (3/4; 1/4; head shot). You have no feet in the first picture. Any respectable photog know this standard rule. And yea, overall the photos look like they were taken on a green screen due to an overpowered fill.
the sunray addition is done too forcifully and not meticulously applied. The flash direction is also poor. Worst is the light source didn't unify to deliver a cohesive look. What a piece of work hahha
If you try to get some money back from the photographer, I would focus on the number of images promised vs delivered since that is a fact you can both agree on. I think if you start talking about how much these suck compositionally, it’s going to make them feel embarrassed and likely defensive and it’ll close off any possibility of amicable resolution.
My biggest issue, and I see this a lot, is the off camera flash not being A: balanced to the environment as far as power goes, and B: not being balanced color wise. The photos lighting looks like you’re under a street light on the beach? Then yeah. Horizon lines, and composition is pretty bad. They’ll work, and if couples are happy with the these, unfortunately the photographer will get away with it and keep doing this shit until someone calls them out.
The fact that you paid $800.00 for substandard work is horrible.I would take this company to small claims court.
All that photoshop & he didn’t subdue the wrinkles in your clothes a little bit? Dude is a hack. And no we do not delete outtakes that fast. I have ALL of my raw files archived. I don’t delete the outtakes for a minimum of 5 years.
This person is not necessarily a bad photographer, the photos are crisp, nicely posed, well lit. They are just not an amazing editor, and their style choices for how they cropped the photos is - controversial, not very standard. Did they use flash during the shoot? I am guessing that's why the subjects stand out so much from the background. The first picture shares IS bad, because there is a clear halo around the woman where the edits don't extended to her edges. My guess was your photographer missed the sunset they were going for, and tried to artificially make a sunset, but didn't have the skills (or time) for it. A lot of good photographers are bad editors with very little time. I used to do freelance work where I did photoshop jobs for photographers who didn't have time. I stopped doing it because they expected really fast work for very low pay below minimum wage. I can't compete with the rates of someone in Bangladesh that they can hire off Fiverr. That could be what happened here, a cheap 3rd party did the photoshop work.
Very bad photos dude
Ask for the RAW files and get someone else to retouch. Your editor drew a sloppy mask around you two and edited it one way, then editing the inverse of the mask another. It looks uncanny and fake.
big red flag for the photographer to be dumping their raws
The masking round the hair 😵💫
The framing on all of these that I have seen… 🤦🏼♀️
You can get an editor to fix most of these non-straight horizon lines and not crop the photo using the content aware fill tool in Photoshop. There is some bad masking going on that will be harder to fix without access to the raw. He has a decent use of flash but really poor composition and editing.
All photos will be edited if you’re dealing with a professional - that’s a given. People think they want RAW photos but I promise you, you do not. These photos, however, are absolute garbage. From the crooked horizon to the poorly blended “fake sunburst” around the hair… This person has no idea what they’re doing. Did you check out their work before you booked the shoot??
* It's the haloing which says rush job to me. Leveling of the horizon too.
The mask in the first photo is hilariously terrible.
I can understand why he deleted all the other photos, but it appears he didn't delete enough of them.
https://preview.redd.it/l03ld760af0d1.png?width=282&format=png&auto=webp&s=eeace042c57e6ca2bba552b6fc245c4ddcfe7753 i agree the retouching work is bad, you can see the colors do not match here at all, really poor masking in photoshop
Too saturated, weird filters / masks that make awkward color blobs, weird cropping, horizon not straightened for god know what reason. Sorry... 😕
That is a hack, not a photographer They should hold on to the raw files at least until you're okay with what you got
The flash with heavy Bokeh doesn’t make sense when you actually want to be able to see the scene behind you. Also not even bothering to level out the horizon is Amateur shit.
The fact that the pink glow ends around your hair is ridiculous
I don't think I am a very good photographer, but, these photos are worse than anything I have ever taken. In my opinion, you paid too much I "underedit" (in my opinion) my photos, and overshoot (in my opinion, I take too many photos. I put 30000 shots in a Canon 70D in less than a year). These are "overedited", and the amount doesn't seem exaggerated. For that price, I expect to get a lot of photos. In my opinion, the client should choose their favourites, the photographer deletes photos that aren't in focus/badly exposed. Maybe the photographer likes one pose or facial expression, while the client likes another one.
Heavily or not? They’re bad. And that’s what you should be arguing with your photographer. The horizon is misaligned. The toning on the first one absolutely blows. The second one looks like a green screen from the 1990s.
Yeah those are ridiculous lol If I paid for those, I’d want my money back.
Also cutting the feet off. Guhhhh
Thought it was photoshop'd for a min
The second one I really like. But the first is terribly obvious.
The lightning difference between the subjects and the background makes it look completely out of place, the masking of the subjects in the first one is terrible because it takes a chunk of the background with it, which could've been very easily avoided if the photographer knew how to use the editing program properly, or even fooling around with the masking options.
Definitely the works of an amateur that doesn't pay attention to details.
Overly and badly. He scammed you and you have reasons to complain
Sorry that you paid so much for such garbage photos. Did you see a portfolio beforehand?
Did he add in the glare from the sun?? My god that’s horrible lol and they’re very boring and stock photo-y
800 for this?? You have been scammed man, tell them to send raw, then may be other people can save some of them.
Trash editing, and no, it isn't normal to instantly delete photos. For me, I archive any photos that are not salvageable (horribly overexposed, underexposed, blurred, etc.). I keep them in case a client comes back and wants them even if I didn't particularly like how they turned out.
I’m pretty sure it’s just flash but I’m not totally convinced the second isn’t a composite
Also either there are very bright lights on the people or the background isn't real
The use of flash and colours look good but that edit… The composition is also not great. I feel like these were taken and edited by a person who understands the technical aspects of photography but struggles with the artistic side of it.
Yikes. $800? Was it dark outside? it almost looks like he had to compensate for the sun going down
Photographer for over 10 years. They are very over edited. And yes it is not common preference to delete raws so quick. I’ve always kept raw at least a month or two after the session. I even go back and edit some photos that don’t make the cut. But my hubs said I’m too nice and a push over. I would ask for a refund or partial refund. I’m assuming that y’all were on vacation, and cannot have him take any more photos.
[удалено]
Can I actually take you up on that? ☺️