Crisis narrowly averted

To many ads? Support ODJT and see no ads!
Again, you’re clueless. Shut up.
No I won't shut up. I was going by what you said and not what I think you meant. Good thing you didn't have to exercise your clause in your contract so you didn't have to find out what would have happened..
 
No I won't shut up. I was going by what you said and not what I think you meant. Good thing you didn't have to exercise your clause in your contract so you didn't have to find out what would have happened..
What does YOUR clause say ...???? :)
 
What does YOUR clause say ...???? :)
I don't take pictures as part of my job to sell to clients. So I don't have a clause for that.

I do have a clause that in the event something happens to us or our gear the client is responsible.

The other thing we reserve the right to cancel an agreement and refund any money paid to us. Never have I ever inforced either clause so far.
 
I don't take pictures as part of my job to sell to clients. So I don't have a clause for that.

I do have a clause that in the event something happens to us or our gear the client is responsible.

The other thing we reserve the right to cancel an agreement and refund any money paid to us. Never have I ever inforced either clause so far.
OK .. maybe it's just music and you show up to a "jam" and one of the guest's brother is a "DJ" and has already set up his Ion Rockblocker before you get there. What does your contract say about that? Or someone's sister's boyfriend's kid has a playlist on their phone that "needs" to be played and was approved by some minor member of the committee?

There's always something ...
 
Taso I hear what you said. What I read is that he said we would walk if an issue like this wasn't resolved due to what their contract says. So by saying we that says to me both his wife and him would be leaving. So the client will be left with no DJ and photog that they paid for.

Mix....if YOU were the groom....would allow your vendor to leave.... over something like this?
No. You would solve the problem by letting your paid photographer do their job.
Rick really wasn't threatening to leave...
he was just reminding everyone of the contract terms they are working under.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ittigger
Mix....if YOU were the groom....would allow your vendor to leave.... over something like this?
No. You would solve the problem by letting your paid photographer do their job.
Rick really wasn't threatening to leave...
he was just reminding everyone of the contract terms they are working under.
Again it's about what he said here and not what we are to guess what he meant.
 
OK .. maybe it's just music and you show up to a "jam" and one of the guest's brother is a "DJ" and has already set up his Ion Rockblocker before you get there. What does your contract say about that? Or someone's sister's boyfriend's kid has a playlist on their phone that "needs" to be played and was approved by some minor member of the committee?

None of this bothers me at all.
I'm essentially being paid to BE THERE - if they don't want to make full use of the service I'm okay with that. There's a lot more to people gathering than simply having some DJ go off-the-hook.

Photographer's are a little different. The field is crowded and many are trying to make money on product, hoping to sell photos long after the event has ended. Really talented photographers generally don't take issue with other cameras - provided no one gets in the way of them doing their work, or clings to them in an effort to frame all the same shots.

I find the less talented the photographer is the more threatened and hostile they are about other cameras in the room. The top guys charge sufficiently more just for the coverage, so they aren't dependent on the quantity of photos sold. Their work is premium and their customers can afford to buy so, the post event sales are all gravy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MIXMASTERMACHOM
Photographer's are a little different. The field is crowded and many are trying to make money on product, hoping to sell photos long after the event has ended. Really talented photographers generally don't take issue with other cameras - provided no one gets in the way of them doing their work, or clings to them in an effort to frame all the same shots.

I find the less talented the photographer is the more threatened and hostile they are about other cameras in the room. The top guys charge sufficiently more just for the coverage, so they aren't dependent on the quantity of photos sold. Their work is premium and their customers can afford to buy so, the post event sales are all gravy.

You're so full of B.S. In the past, anytime I got shutdown over an exclusivity clause, you'd trumpet on and on about how it was their right (it is) and perfectly justified to hold a client to their agreement. Now, you're turning around and saying "Only the insecure photogs will complain." You're full of crap. I don't know of any professional photographers who are going to be okay with having to work around a 2nd, PAID photographer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: djcrazychris
You're so full of B.S. In the past, anytime I got shutdown over an exclusivity clause, you'd trumpet on and on about how it was their right (it is) and perfectly justified to hold a client to their agreement. Now, you're turning around and saying "Only the insecure photogs will complain." You're full of crap. I don't know of any professional photographers who are going to be okay with having to work around a 2nd, PAID photographer.
As much as I don't care for Bob because of a lot of his posts. This time you missed what he said and he made a great point. A photographer that is truly a professional charging truly a professional price wouldn't even have a situation like that come up. The reason is their price is so high that they would clearly be the only one there unless they hired a second shooter.

Let me say it this way. I have a friend who is a photographer and so is his brother. Now my friend also is a DJ as well.

Now my friends brother is a super great photographer. He gets paid 10-30k and sometimes more. He shoots celebrity weddings overseas a lot. Now what you charge for DJ and photography is super cheap. There are those for photography alone get paid more than you do for both. Now you're happy with what you're doing. Yet you're the reason in certain situations some have had to lower their price to compete with such a thing. Either that or go under.

Yes you have people excited about you offering both services for the price you charge. The thing is how good is the service they are getting? Not saying your wife taking pictures and editing them is of poor quality. If it's of really great quality then why isn't costing more?
 
As much as I don't care for Bob because of a lot of his posts. This time you missed what he said and he made a great point. A photographer that is truly a professional charging truly a professional price wouldn't even have a situation like that come up. The reason is their price is so high that they would clearly be the only one there unless they hired a second shooter.

Again, you are clueless. The other photog wasn't even hired (I found this out later). She had contacted the venue owner and he gave her the green light to horn in. My presumption is that this was their first wedding inside the mansion (they usually do tents on the lawn) so the venue owner wanted promo shots. When I got on-site and found someone else working the gig I correctly confronted her and the venue owner and tossed her. Keep in mind that the bride has no knowledge of this additional photographer, nor had she given consent for her wedding to be photographed and distributed by someone outside of her control. How do you think that bride would have felt if HER wedding started popping up on social media, and without her consent? The other photographer had ZERO rights to be photographing that event. Period, end of story.

Think of it this way, you're the DJ hired by the bride (yes, I realize you're not actually a working DJ, but just pretend). You get there and find out the venue has hired their own DJ and without even consulting the bride. Are you going to just setup without saying anything? No, you're going to confront the offenders and protect your client's interests. Well, you would if you actually were a working DJ (which you're not).
 
Yes you have people excited about you offering both services for the price you charge. The thing is how good is the service they are getting? Not saying your wife taking pictures and editing them is of poor quality. If it's of really great quality then why isn't costing more?

It's a BUSINESS (you know, that thing you know nothing about and refuse to learn?) decision on my part. We have a very unique situation where we can do both, and do them well. I can charge less, which gives me an advantage over other photogs or DJs.
 
You're so full of B.S. In the past, anytime I got shutdown over an exclusivity clause, you'd trumpet on and on about how it was their right (it is) and perfectly justified to hold a client to their agreement. Now, you're turning around and saying "Only the insecure photogs will complain." You're full of crap. I don't know of any professional photographers who are going to be okay with having to work around a 2nd, PAID photographer.

I didn't offer any opinion at all about this instance of you enforcing your own clause.
I've commented on Steve's DJ analogy and photgraphers in general. Personalize it at your own risk.
 
I believe there was some inferable quips along with some quality steering.
 
Just in case anyone is interested in seeing pics of this event, here they are. Wife just sent them over and the bride was just gushing. It turned out pretty gorgeous.

 
  • Like
Reactions: ittigger and SEDJ