Bride wants to sing her entrance

[Proformance]

Bob .. still waiting for some actual suggestions to make this happen short of bringing in a stage manager .. maybe you have something the collective hasn't thought of and could actually be useful information.

Yes, I may.. but, like many your comment presumes an entitlement to useful information and solutions that remain cheap (free) to you.

Given how much lip service is paid to finding higher end clients, it should occur to you why that doesn't come to fruition when push back is the vendor's standard operating procedure. The bride wants to sing her processional and the only response she is getting is resistance. This is why high end party planners and client's move on to more willing and capable vendor's with a "can do" attitude.

 

[Proformance]

Yes .. live sets .. with all the attendant pieces. There is also no indication that the bride has mentioned a large budget to do that 1 song, so you either need to explain to her all that is needed to make it happen .. or .. what it would cost to make it happen .. or take the pragmatic approach that she simply wants to sing a song and give her some easy options INCLUDING ones that take the other factors into consideration .. like a true professional would.

None of these things you suggest has actually happened. The narrative has been solely about talking her out of it.

 

[rickryan.com]

Steve, no need to keep going back and forth with Bob. It's quite apparent that his purpose is not to educate but to simply argue. Bob, as many have said here before, you possess knowledge which could be useful to this community. However, you simply are incapable of presenting it in a useful fashion. In the future, I'm asking you to stay off my threads. Your input is not needed, nor is it welcome any longer.

To those who have contributed to this thread, thank you. I kinda thought I'd covered the bases in this case and your input confirmed it. I'll make another run at convincing her to go the hand-held route. If not, I'll clip a beltpack to her bouquet and use the headset or possibly just clip a lav to her flowers, then she can pass it off to the MOH. Good discussion here, until Bob decided to start back in.

 

[steve149]

Yes, I may.. but, like many your comment presumes an entitlement to useful information and solutions that remain cheap (free) to you.

Given how much lip service is paid to finding higher end clients, it should occur to you why that doesn't come to fruition when push back is the vendor's standard operating procedure. The bride wants to sing her processional and the only response she is getting is resistance. This is why high end party planners and client's move on to more willing and capable vendor's with a "can do" attitude.

I am presuming nothing from YOUR solutions .. I am not calling entitlement to an answer .. but you have offered nothing constructive in what has been said above.

The bride seems to be happy with her choice .. I would not be, but that's OK .. she wins .. I would just be waiting with a backup.

 

[Ausumm]

Maybe circle a handheld with flowers and she can sing INTO the bouquet . Kill 2 birds with 1 stone.

Exactly what I was thinking.
The headset WILL show up in pics,
and she will not be happy in the end.
Hide it in the flowers.

 

[Valerie Hicks]

In the world of photography, you have to ask each client their preference. Some want that unsightly birthmark or mole removed (in.every.single.picture)...others want that same mole or mark because it's them. If someone is not comfortable with their lazy eyes, they might well appreciate photos showing them perfect. To others, that would be a cardinal sin. The only wrong way is to not ask the client.

As for the microphone, I would simply make sure she's aware it will be visible in a few pictures, and it will require a little extra time to get ready (assuming pics first, mic'ing up, ceremony, removing mic, reception). If it were my client I'd recommend concealing the mic like we usually would for any performance, and removing it after the ceremony. There may be a couple shots that require photoshopping a bit of it out, but frankly not as intensive editing as cleaning up glasses glare or something like that. Odds are she will be fine with a little extra charge should she choose enlargements that require extensive editing....

 

[Valerie Hicks]

To suggest she is not capable of singing and walking on her wedding day would burn all trust and respect in your relationship. Yes, it could be mentioned in passing as an option, but I certainly wouldn't suggest, recommend or push for that. I would likely make sure I had a recorded version of the song (not necessarily her singing) as a backup just in case she goes to pieces, but it sure sounds like she knows what she's doing. Whether she does or not isn't relevant.

 

[rickryan.com]

In the world of photography, you have to ask each client their preference. Some want that unsightly birthmark or mole removed (in.every.single.picture)...others want that same mole or mark because it's them. If someone is not comfortable with their lazy eyes, they might well appreciate photos showing them perfect. To others, that would be a cardinal sin. The only wrong way is to not ask the client.

Thanks Val. Good advice. Since we've started offering photography, I've been a bit surprised by the number of people who specifically want photoshop work done on their shots. With the groom I mentioned, it was apparently a deep, emotion issue with him and was one of the first things he brought up during the sales meeting. Me, agreeing to photoshop his eyes, was probably the thing that sealed the deal. In another case, we had a shot of a couple with a car, which was important to the groom. Once we got to editing, we realized there was was a huge number of power lines in the background. Our own fault, yes, but if we took this "reality" line we would have lost one of our best portfolio images (below).



The most common issues we've run into, which photoshop is a life-saver is reducing weight (especially of a MOB), fixing complexion or makeup issues and correcting clothing (tie straightening) and hair problems. I've not heard a single complaint for anything we've fixed but I've heard a lot of compliments in regards. It's my impression that clients are coming to expect this of their photographers. And in case anyone thinks this is just some diva bride, we're seeing it in portraits and even commercial. Here's a shot we just did for a truck engine company. The motor had been damaged in shipment, and had some prominent pieces that were broken off. We could have just punted it but we knew the client was under a deadline to get a promo shot for their sales material. By going the extra mile we were invited to future shoots, being informed that their 2 other photographers had just moved out of town. I look at this just like anything we do above-and-beyond for our DJ clients (long extension cord runs, overtime, handling weather-related issues, etc.). BTW, here's a shot of that truck engine.

 

[Ausumm]

Bob, Do you EVER get a request to do something that YOU, as a professional, KNOW will not work out as well as the client is hoping for?
If so, do you EVER bother to inform them of the POSSIBLE pitfalls?
If so, do you EVER discuss the pro's and con's of their situation?
It's no different than discussing the issues that MAY arise for playing a particular song.
No one is saying you should shut the bride down and force her to NOT do it, or do it OUR way.
In the end, I'm sure that a good DJ will honor the client's request, good or bad.
It's like telling your boss his fly is open.
Uncomfortable conversation? SURE!
But they'll be glad you were thoughtful enough to care about their well-being!

 

[Ausumm]

The narrative has been solely about talking her out of it.

No, the main conversation seems to find the BEST way to honor her request.
But that gives you nothing to argue about, does it?

 

[DJ Bobcat]

Bob, Do you EVER get a request to do something that YOU, as a professional, KNOW will not work out as well as the client is hoping for?
If so, do you EVER bother to inform them of the POSSIBLE pitfalls?
If so, do you EVER discuss the pro's and con's of their situation?
It's no different than discussing the issues that MAY arise for playing a particular song.
No one is saying you should shut the bride down and force her to NOT do it, or do it OUR way.
In the end, I'm sure that a good DJ will honor the client's request, good or bad.
It's like telling your boss his fly is open.
Uncomfortable conversation? SURE!
But they'll be glad you were thoughtful enough to care about their well-being!

^^^^ All this is MUCH too logical... KNOCK IT OFF!!! [emoji2]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Proformance]

In the world of photography, you have to ask each client their preference. Some want that unsightly birthmark or mole removed (in.every.single.picture)...others want that same mole or mark because it's them. If someone is not comfortable with their lazy eyes, they might well appreciate photos showing them perfect. To others, that would be a cardinal sin. The only wrong way is to not ask the client.

I don't confuse aesthetics with ethics. What you are describing is just as disturbing as the people who hire actors for their wedding party because they don't consider their real family and friends to be good looking enough for the photos and society pages. (Yes, people actually do this!)

I will not ask a client if he'd like me to Photoshop his crooked teeth, or his big nose. If they happen to ask me I'll refer them to Rick. I don't treat people like that and I won't participate in perpetuating that psychopathy. This is an ethical issue, not an aesthetic one.

Removing utility wires, beer bottles, etc. is an aesthetic not an ethical concern. Removing a clothing stain, out of place hair, zit or blemish - I'm fine with making people look as least as good as they actually do in person most of the time. I will not however, fill the gap in your teeth or make you 30# lighter. I'm the photographer not the Wizard of Oz. I don't pretend to hand out hearts, brains, or courage.

A code of ethics is a big part of using Photoshop, and those ethics may vary based on the type of photography. Journalism requires stricter standards than creative art. Art is more interpretive than portraiture, and commercial is image resultant.

I might be fine with replacing the sky to make a specific greeting card theme or magazine cover - but, I consider it cheating to replace the sky and then pass it off as if that's the photo I took. Even art demands some honesty and integrity.

 

[Ausumm]

A code of ethics is a big part of using Photoshop, and those ethics may vary based on the type of photography.

So, you have to sign a form and promise to only use Photoshop for GOOD, not EVIL?
Geez, and all this time I thought it was just about taking pictures and making people happy.

Does the same "do not touch" approach apply to songs?
Is a song that is edited for content (by request of the client) an ETHICAL or AESTHETIC issue?

 

[rickryan.com]

Does the same "do not touch" approach apply to songs?
Is a song that is edited for content (by request of the client) an ETHICAL or AESTHETIC issue?

Game, set, match. Stay tuned for Bob's concession speech................

 

[Valerie Hicks]

I don't confuse aesthetics with ethics. What you are describing is just as disturbing as the people who hire actors for their wedding party because they don't consider their real family and friends to be good looking enough for the photos and society pages. (Yes, people actually do this!)

I will not ask a client if he'd like me to Photoshop his crooked teeth, or his big nose. If they happen to ask me I'll refer them to Rick. I don't treat people like that and I won't participate in perpetuating that psychopathy. This is an ethical issue, not an aesthetic one.

Removing utility wires, beer bottles, etc. is an aesthetic not an ethical concern. Removing a clothing stain, out of place hair, zit or blemish - I'm fine with making people look as least as good as they actually do in person most of the time. I will not however, fill the gap in your teeth or make you 30# lighter. I'm the photographer not the Wizard of Oz. I don't pretend to hand out hearts, brains, or courage.

A code of ethics is a big part of using Photoshop, and those ethics may vary based on the type of photography. Journalism requires stricter standards than creative art. Art is more interpretive than portraiture, and commercial is image resultant.

I might be fine with replacing the sky to make a specific greeting card theme or magazine cover - but, I consider it cheating to replace the sky and then pass it off as if that's the photo I took. Even art demands some honesty and integrity.

So you wouldn't edit the clients lazy eye out as Rick's customer REQUESTED? Then you are playing God by telling the customer what is right or wrong, acceptable or not. I won't do that; I don't know their history, their struggle....their story. I will not recommend to someone that I remove their [insert whatever blemish here] but I sure will oblige if they would like it corrected. Some people want to be perfect for a day. Have I slimmed someone down? You bet. I can take a few pounds off. Photography is about making them feel beautiful. If their self image thinks that includes correcting the gap in the brides teeth then so be it. Most photographers will minimize such blemishes, not get rid of them completely. After all, some of those traits are their identity. Why is it ok to remove a zit or stray hair but not minimize that lazy eye a bit? Isn't the zit or stray hair just as natural and part of them as the lazy eye?

What I said, was those type of blemishes should not be corrected on the judgement of the photographer (as power lines, stains, signs sticking out of someone's head, etc would be no-brainers to correct), but according to the client's wishes. My photoshop has no code of ethics on the package. Even in your last sentence you claim that some editing is ok and some isn't. Pretty big gray line you present.

 

[rickryan.com]

So you wouldn't edit the clients lazy eye out as Rick's customer REQUESTED? Then you are playing God by telling the customer what is right or wrong, acceptable or not. I won't do that; I don't know their history, their struggle....their story. I will not recommend to someone that I remove their [insert whatever blemish here] but I sure will oblige if they would like it corrected. Some people want to be perfect for a day. Have I slimmed someone down? You bet. I can take a few pounds off. Photography is about making them feel beautiful. If their self image thinks that includes correcting the gap in the brides teeth then so be it. Most photographers will minimize such blemishes, not get rid of them completely. After all, some of those traits are their identity. Why is it ok to remove a zit or stray hair but not minimize that lazy eye a bit? Isn't the zit or stray hair just as natural and part of them as the lazy eye?

What I said, was those type of blemishes should not be corrected on the judgement of the photographer (as power lines, stains, signs sticking out of someone's head, etc would be no-brainers to correct), but according to the client's wishes. My photoshop has no code of ethics on the package. Even in your last sentence you claim that some editing is ok and some isn't. Pretty big gray line you present.

Exactly correct, Val. In the case of the lazy eye guy, he has some pretty serious disabilities of which the eyes were fairly minor. The Bride, even after losing 100 lbs in previous months, was still fairly overweight. We put in tons of hours on making her more slim, fixing his eyes and filtering his disabilities. Do I think we created a lie? Hell no. We did our best to smooth these imperfections in order to give them photo memories that they will value in years to come. These were two solid gold individuals and we would go above and beyond again in a heartbeat. They deserve it. Bob's argument is paper-thin and this time he's completely exposed the fact that he only wants one thing; to argue. I appreciate where your heart is in relation to your clients, Val.

 

[djrox]

Photography is about making them feel beautiful.

That is definitely ONE definition.

Another is that photography is an art form that captures, saves and visually documents, i.e. demonstrates, proves, establishes, substantiates, validates, a truth, a moment of actuality that cannot be recaptured and, therefore, should be as candid and honest as possible.

I appreciate that is a level of art that most do not appreciate.

To each his own.

 

[Valerie Hicks]

That is definitely ONE definition.

Another is that photography is an art form that captures, saves and visually documents, i.e. demonstrates, proves, establishes, substantiates, validates, a truth, a moment of actuality that cannot be recaptured and, therefore, should be as candid and honest as possible.

I appreciate that is a level of art that most do not appreciate.

To each his own.

Agreed. That's where customer opinion comes into play.
I'm with you. My own photographs I do minimal editing if any...generally mild color correct & cropping. My goal is to get the shot straight out of camera. But that's my own hobby. When working for others, one must adapt.

 

[djrox]

When working for others, one must adapt.

That sounds more characteristic of a commodity than of an art form.

Again, to each her own.

 

[steve149]

That sounds more characteristic of a commodity than of an art form.

Again, to each her own.

You're right .. in an art form, it's the artist's vision that comes through. Val and Rick are catering to the client's vision .. how dare they.