would you quit too?

dangin

not from photography, but from one of contract gigs... here's the story:

aside from my freelance work, i also shoot as a contract photographer for a couple of wedding studios in the Chicago area. they all advertise no limit on pictures taken. in fact, on their website it even says so. when you go in and hear their spiel, they say tout it to their clients.

so i'm working a job for one of the studios last weekend. i turn in my DVD with the images on it... about 900 in total; my average wedding is about 600. this wedding was just more fun and had more things going on than the usual, so i took more pictures. i get told that it's unacceptable and i won't get paid unless i prune it down to no more than 700 images...

WHAT?!?

that's their internal policy: 700 images, no more. so this whole spiel about no limit to coverage, blah, blah, blah, is bunk? the reason i was given: costs us more for processing. okay... how much more? $75.

$75 ... that could be easily made up and possibly surpassed in just 1 reorder? c'mon, give me a break. what kinda crack are you guys smoking? i told them i'd fulfill the rest of my contracted shoots this season.

so is my thinking flawed or would you have quit too?

** ADDENDUM **
after reviewing my contracts w/ the studio, there's no verbage in it that outlines the 700 image maximum. this is just a policy of the studio - technically unenforceable by contract. however there is verbage in the contract that gives them an out to paying me at all for the gig at their discretion.

emmalou

I am simply trying to wrap my brain around 700 photos!

I don't know I would have quit, but for sure I would have stipulated that the"reading between the lines" on the contract in home should be layed out in layman's terms.

We run a trucking busiiness, and our contractor's have a much different contract than our hourly guys.......guess its all in the fine print.
Do you like working with these folks? If so, perhaps things can be worked out?

claudermilk

yes

That's just stupidity...their policy, not your dilemma. Not only have they limited the possibility of orders as you've mentioned, but if customers get wind of that they might just get pissed enough to start a lawsuit--since when does "unlimited" = 700? Unlimited is unlimited--see Smugmug for a true example.

I'd personally have a hard time working for a company that is willfully dishonest with their advertising like that. It's a personal call, but I'd probably do the same as you--finish out the contract & find a more honest place to work with.

dangin

yes

emmalou wrote:

I am simply trying to wrap my brain around 700 photos!

I don't know I would have quit, but for sure I would have stipulated that the"reading between the lines" on the contract in home should be layed out in layman's terms.
.......guess its all in the fine print.
Do you like working with these folks? If so, perhaps things can be worked out?

that's the thing... the 700 image limit is not spelled out in my contract with them at all. it's a policy of theirs delivered to me in an email, but the verbage is not in the contract at all.

do i like working for them? sure, they're a nice bunch. they're not budging from their stance. i think it's both unethical for them to make the "no limit" claim and nonsensical from a business perspective to limit the images; especially if they've got selling potential.

dangin

yes

claudermilk wrote:

That's just stupidity...their policy, not your dilemma. Not only have they limited the possibility of orders as you've mentioned, but if customers get wind of that they might just get pissed enough to start a lawsuit--since when does "unlimited" = 700? Unlimited is unlimited--see Smugmug for a true example.

I'd personally have a hard time working for a company that is willfully dishonest with their advertising like that. It's a personal call, but I'd probably do the same as you--finish out the contract & find a more honest place to work with.

yeah, i've got no problems with other studios wanting to pick me up. i've already gotten offers from some of their competitors. it's not like i *need* the work persay; i've got a day job that pays the bills and this is just side money to pay for the photography habit.

Van Isle

Tough bind, it's hard to see why they don't budge. If you want to play hard ball, you can always talk to the bride.

Just leave them with the disk, and if they randomly leave out the first dance pics in their cull, they can try and explain that to the bride.

Or (compromise here) tell them to push this one through, and you'll do better next time. As a favour. Or something.

I wouldn't back down on this. You have an obligation to the clients (as does the studio) to give them their "unlimited" coverage. Do you want to be part of the problem?

VI

KvPhoto

yes

Unlimited is unlimited to me, not 700. I can say that if I was the bride and discovered that I only got a portion of the actual pictures available from my wedding I would be outraged!

davev

Knowing very little about the business world, I'll toss 2 cents in.

You shot 900 pics, they want 700 pics, remove 200 shots from the DVD.
Is that really that tough?

At this point, you know that they want 700 shots.
Next wedding, give them 699, just to piss em off.:D

We have an old saying in the construction industy, "The boss may not always be right, but he's always the boss."

If your working for them, do what they want.
If doing what they want becomes a big problem, move on.

P.S. If you want to start some trouble, remove all the shots with the brides parents in them. Policies may change then.

dangin

yes

i considered being a smartass and just removing the last 200 or so shots, regardless of when or what they were of but i felt too ethically inclined to do such a disservice to the couple.

you're absolutely right about the boss not being right, but he's still the boss. you're dead on right. that's why i trimmed it down per their request. but there's also the old saying: "if you don't like it here, don't work here."

i think i'm a decent shooter that tries to go the extra mile for the couple. i've had couples tell me that i saved their wedding day and have gotten pretty handsome tips to reflect it. i'd rather work at a place that reflects a higher level of personal level of service and product.

davev wrote:

Knowing very little about the business world, I'll toss 2 cents in.

You shot 900 pics, they want 700 pics, remove 200 shots from the DVD.
Is that really that tough?

At this point, you know that they want 700 shots.
Next wedding, give them 699, just to piss em off.:D

We have an old saying in the construction industy, "The boss may not always be right, but he's always the boss."

If your working for them, do what they want.
If doing what they want becomes a big problem, move on.

P.S. If you want to start some trouble, remove all the shots with the brides parents in them. Policies may change then.

urbanaries

no

You are 100% correct, they should have it in the contract. No question. But I'm sure they have a good reason for asking. Usually people don't enforce things like this arbitrarily.

IMO, try to roll with the punches just a tad bit more. If there's other folks recruiting you, you will probably find something you don't like about them.

If you normally shoot 600 pics, I don't see why this is such a huge issue.

Best of luck.

Awais Yaqub

Find new job 1st then quit.

claudermilk

yes

davev wrote:

Knowing very little about the business world, I'll toss 2 cents in.

You shot 900 pics, they want 700 pics, remove 200 shots from the DVD.
Is that really that tough?

At this point, you know that they want 700 shots.
Next wedding, give them 699, just to piss em off.:D

We have an old saying in the construction industy, "The boss may not always be right, but he's always the boss."

If your working for them, do what they want.
If doing what they want becomes a big problem, move on.

P.S. If you want to start some trouble, remove all the shots with the brides parents in them. Policies may change then.

I think you missed the point. No, it's not hard to just dump 200 shots--and a few methods have been pointed out specifically to get them in hot water. It's an ethical issue: the studio advertises unlimited shots. 700 is not unlimited. Now we are talking deliberately falsifying information in their advertisement. Would you want to work for someone who does that? It doesn't matter that 99 weddings 600 shots are taken and one wedding 701 shots are taken--there IS a limit where the studio claims there is not. That is dishonest, and probably illegal. No other way to say it.

Since there's other offers for work, I'd definitely move on. Can't argue with the "well, he's the boss & signs the checks" point of view; but with other offers out there I see no reason to continue beyond the end of the current contract.

So, with the information now on the table, if it were me, yes I would quit.

evoryware

yes

The boss ain't always right but he calls the shots. But I wouldn't back down just because he's the boss. Argue it. Tell them you don't agree. Tell the bride the truth because she paid for it and deserves it. Leave.
Don't lie to or avoid a customer because of an issue. You'll be worse off in the future for that.

S. Horton

no

In your queue of work, just make them dead last. If you're good, they'll keep calling, you won't be available, etc.

Best response if they ask why: money. Great answer, never a bad result for you.

I Simonius

no

dangin wrote:

not from photography, but from one of contract gigs... here's the story:
so is my thinking flawed or would you have quit too?

don't sweat it - just do whatever it takes to get paid

sirsloop

have them write up a new contract... and a raise perhaps for your trouble?

z_28

I don't see any problem at all !
They want 700 - you deliver 700.
If you don't like it - quit immediately.

Unlimited is rather a phrase NOT PROMISE !!!

Buy 1D3, put it on High Speed -
an you got your limit filled in little over one minute

Looks as another silly, artificial problem.

davev

claudermilk wrote:

I think you missed the point. No, it's not hard to just dump 200 shots--and a few methods have been pointed out specifically to get them in hot water. It's an ethical issue: the studio advertises unlimited shots. 700 is not unlimited. Now we are talking deliberately falsifying information in their advertisement. Would you want to work for someone who does that? It doesn't matter that 99 weddings 600 shots are taken and one wedding 701 shots are taken--there IS a limit where the studio claims there is not. That is dishonest, and probably illegal. No other way to say it.

Since there's other offers for work, I'd definitely move on. Can't argue with the "well, he's the boss & signs the checks" point of view; but with other offers out there I see no reason to continue beyond the end of the current contract.

So, with the information now on the table, if it were me, yes I would quit.

I didn't miss the point at all.
The photographer didn't set the limit, the studio did.
If the OP is under contract to do more more weddings, and doesn't, he could be sued. I don't think quitting is going to help.

Nope, if he's under contract to shoot 700 photos at a wedding, (or maybe it's cull down to 700) just do it.
When the contract is up, he's a free agent and can re-negotiate with that studio, or go somewhere else. But he needs to complete the contract.

So I would say, don't quit, let the contract run out. Then do what you want.

claudermilk

yes

I think I did say finish the contract out then leave eariler--covers the photog's butt there, and I guess we do agree there. Anyway going back a bit, the OP did indeed cull down to the required 700 shots as requested by the studio.

So that part is pretty much moot to the thread now. I just have the whole limits thing stuck in my craw now. From the original post:

aside from my freelance work, i also shoot as a contract photographer for a couple of wedding studios in the Chicago area. they all advertise no limit on pictures taken. in fact, on their website it even says so. when you go in and hear their spiel, they say tout it to their clients.

This is where the whole problem arises. So, the studio makes a big deal about there being no limit on the number of pictures taken. However, the OP now finds out this is false--there IS a limit: 700. Once again, it's a simple concept: 700 does not equal unlimited.

Here's an analogy most here ought to be able to grasp: a SM Pro account is unlimited storage & bandwidth. How would you react if one day you get an email from Andy saying "I'm sorry, but you will have to remove 2GB of images as you have exceeded our internal limits on your unlimited storage space?" I guarantee you will be on here and every other forum you can get to within minutes screaming bloody murder--and rightly so.

To me this is very simple: the studio is lying to the customers. Period. It is unethical and I personally would not want to be connected with them.

sirsloop

An easy solution would be to tell your customers up front that you can only shoot 700 photos, then give them the business card for the studio. If you cannot solve this situation with the studio, I gurantee a pissed off bride can solve it for you.

I Simonius

no

Sounds to me like the issue would be if thecustomer objected that they couldn't have more than the 700 shots, - but there is a difference between that andshooting unlimited

- i.e. customer reads theywill not be penalised if company reaches a certain quota of shots , as might have been the case during film shooting days, and te unlimited might have just been put there to emphasise that they were not restricted by film as to how many shots could be taken.

I very much doubt that customer would want EVERY shot taken and most studios do weed out tyhe ropey or average shots.

As long as the customer is happy with 700 good shots , I really wouldn't fret over the 'unlimited' tag.

If however it did actually say unlimited prints will be provded that is slightly different vut it is still a question of whether the cstomer complainss or not rather than the photog.

If that was me ( and assuming I have actually understood the OP correctly) I would simply mention the possible ambiguity from the customers POV and really not worry about it myself, just concentrate on getting 700 crackers ( )

EDIT: just re read OP and I wonder was it that you were asked to do the pruning that got your back up? I am getting the impression that perhaps it's the attitude of those you were contracted to that you really object to?

dangin

yes

claudermilk wrote:

I think I did say finish the contract out then leave eariler--covers the photog's butt there, and I guess we do agree there. Anyway going back a bit, the OP did indeed cull down to the required 700 shots as requested by the studio.

So that part is pretty much moot to the thread now. I just have the whole limits thing stuck in my craw now. <img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/ne_nau.gif&quot; border="0" alt="" > From the original post:


This is where the whole problem arises. So, the studio makes a big deal about there being no limit on the number of pictures taken. However, the OP now finds out this is false--there IS a limit: 700. Once again, it's a simple concept: 700 does not equal unlimited.

Here's an analogy most here ought to be able to grasp: a SM Pro account is unlimited storage & bandwidth. How would you react if one day you get an email from Andy saying "I'm sorry, but you will have to remove 2GB of images as you have exceeded our internal limits on your unlimited storage space?" I guarantee you will be on here and every other forum you can get to within minutes screaming bloody murder--and rightly so.

To me this is very simple: the studio is lying to the customers. Period. It is unethical and I personally would not want to be connected with them.

you hit the proverbial nail on the head. I am going to finish out the remaining shoots that I have contracted with this particular studio and that's it; no additional shoots.

the issue i have is with the principles of the studio and your analogy with smugmug and their "unlimited" claim is very applicable. i feel that the studio is indeed lying to their customers by making the claim that there is no limit on the number of images that may be captured at their event and then on the backend, telling their shooters that there is a limit of 700 images. also, it should be noted that there is nothing in the actual signed contract between myself and the studio for each job that stipulates a maximum (or minimum) number of images to submit from a job. the fact remains that i submitted 900+ images from a job and they refused to pay me unless i resubmit it with < 700 images.

i'm not a lawyer, but i've taken my share of law classes including contract law and as far as i can tell, what they're doing is technically in violation of the contract. the contract calls basically stipulates payment for my services as a photographer whereas the product rendered is a disc with the images from the event. there is no documented minimum number of images, maximum number of images, technical quality of images, or subjective quality of images that is mentioned to be qualifier for payment. therefore, withholding payment for services rendered in this case is in material breach of the contract.

i really don't care if they want me to put out 500, 700, or 1000 shots for an event. to me, that's not the point. the thing that gets me is the ethics and business practices of the studio; their practices seem duplicitous to me. i had my own IT consulting business years ago and i ran my business on a strong set of principles and ethics. not all businesses are run this way and that's fine and dandy, i understand that; i did well doing what i did though. when i work for someone else, i'd like them to have a similar set of values as my own. i suppose i'm fortunate that i can choose who i work for; i have a day job that pays my bills and allows me to be a photographer on the side to pay for my photography toys.

dangin

yes

sirsloop wrote:

An easy solution would be to tell your customers up front that you can only shoot 700 photos, then give them the business card for the studio. If you cannot solve this situation with the studio, I gurantee a pissed off bride can solve it for you.

the couple saw me in action, their video guy saw me in action. he's a friend of the family's and could easily figure that i shot way more than 700 frames that day. it's very likely she'll put 2 and 2 together and have a reckoning with the studio herself.

dangin

yes

Simon King wrote:

...
EDIT: just re read OP and I wonder was it that you were asked to do the pruning that got your back up? I am getting the impression that perhaps it's the attitude of those you were contracted to that you really object to?

in a nutshell, the studio told me that *I* as the photographer, having already submitted the disc w/ 900+ images on it was to go through the images again, and submit no more than 700 images. furthermore, i would not receive my pay otherwise and that i would be in breach of the agreement, which is total crap.

I Simonius

no

dangin wrote:

you hit the proverbial nail on the head.

when i work for someone else, i'd like them to have a similar set of values as my own. i suppose i'm fortunate that i can choose who i work for; i have a day job that pays my bills and allows me to be a photographer on the side to pay for my photography toys.

I think that hits the proverbial as well - you are acutely aware tat they do not practice to the same values as you - and you have the freedom to move - --> simple solution:D

Cetainly in your situation I wouldn't stay with them, you're lucky not everyone has the freedom to pick and choose teir emploers, some people have to put up with dreadful bosses!

I Simonius

no

dangin wrote:

in a nutshell, the studio told me that *I* as the photographer, having already submitted the disc w/ 900+ images on it was to go through the images again, and submit no more than 700 images. furthermore, i would not receive my pay otherwise and that i would be in breach of the agreement, which is total crap.

yup that is 'extracting the urine' somewhat (taking the 'P***') !


Anyone who messed me about like that would get a 'sijonara' (how's dat spelled?) PDQ

Youre right to ditch 'em - change my vote

sirsloop

dangin wrote:

the couple saw me in action, their video guy saw me in action. he's a friend of the family's and could easily figure that i shot way more than 700 frames that day. it's very likely she'll put 2 and 2 together and have a reckoning with the studio herself.

IDK about that. When I tell people not in the business how many photos ive taken on an event day - most of them are blown away. To me 700 is a light day, but that seeems like a lot for the average joe.

Look back over this thread. It seems like you are just stuck in a moral dillema. You know information that doesn't seem honest, the 700 photo quota. You can either get frazzled by it, or simply work with it and shoot your 700 photos. Like I just mentioned, 700 photos seems like a lot to most people. The lousy part about it, is if you were to take 900 photos you may as well get a couple extra great keepers for the client. Really in the end its about putting a smile on their face from a shot you took - and I hope thats why we are all in photography business.