I am not sure if this is in right section, however, desperate cry for help.

Download the free program instant jpeg from raw (it's dead simple to use) run that on the file of raw pics at least you'll be able to see the pictures then on windows.
The link is dead can you re upload it?
 
connersz said:
The fact that some people are suggesting the OP uses photoshop to recover these himself is frankly rediculous.

From what I can tell they would need some quite advanced techniques to get them right, especially if they are all out of focus.

You can't expect the wedding couple to have to learn photoshop and edit the images themselves it will never look right.

A more useful piece of advice would be to attempt to claim off his indemnity insurance if he has it or speak to a solictor about the case. I am quite sure you will be able to achieve some money back which you can then use to hire a professional wedding photographer to fix them.

Edit: Try to stay calm about the situation.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the advise. At this stage, I am starting to doubt whether Stephen has any brains, not alone some type of insurance.

Would it be expensive to have them corrected? I would say about 30 picture need fixed. Having looked through the suggested software, I would have no start. It would be majorly above anything that I could learn.

Also, I used the software to view some of the CR2 files, and they are not all blurred only a very small number. Infact, some of the CR2 files look better than the pictures that we where given.
 
TheDrift- said:
Not sure why is that ridiculous, certainly worth considering as an option, before considering the expense of sending out? Like I said its hard to tell without seeing them all

Without looking at all the photo's it's difficult to tell, but if some details can be recovered say by using anti blur, its not that difficult to open picture select sharpen, select shake reduction, press go

Given that its a free option using the photoshop trail...it would cost nothing to give it a go?
Click to expand...

These are £1k wedding photo's, not pictures of the dog in the park. They need to be done properly, if that means spending another £300 to have them sorted by a professional then that's what needs to be done.

Even if the OP managed to somehow get them looking OK, they still wouldnt be up to the standard of a reasonable wedding photographer with years of experience.

Cost isnt the issue here, it's the photographer.
 
conor said:
Thanks for the advise. At this stage, I am starting to doubt whether Stephen has any brains, not alone some type of insurance.

Would it be expensive to have them corrected? I would say about 30 picture need fixed. Having looked through the suggested software, I would have no start. It would be majorly above anything that I could learn.

Also, I used the software to view some of the CR2 files, and they are not all blurred only a very small number. Infact, some of the CR2 files look better than the pictures that we where given.
Click to expand...

If it was me I would talk to some friends who had used a wedding photographer, see if they were happy and look at some of his/her work. Then I would contact them, any good photographer would be happy to asses the damage and give you a price. That's the best you can do.

Then you can try to get some money back, don't back on it being a quick process.
 
connersz said:
If it was me I would talk to some friends who had used a wedding photographer, see if they were happy and look at some of his/her work. Then I would contact them, any good photographer would be happy to asses the damage and give you a price. That's the best you can do.

Then you can try to get some money back, don't back on it being a quick process.
Click to expand...

I think that this is my only course of action, so it would seem. The biggest mistake that we made was not asking for a contract.
 
connersz said:
These are £1k wedding photo's, not pictures of the dog in the park. They need to be done properly, if that means spending another £300 to have them sorted by a professional then that's what needs to be done.

Even if the OP managed to somehow get them looking OK, they still wouldnt be up to the standard of a reasonable wedding photographer with years of experience.

Cost isnt the issue here, it's the photographer.
Click to expand...

lol harsh :)

I'm not sure what more most pro's would do. I have tried a few of these type of plugins eg topaz deblur etc..

Maybe there is some more specialised techniques but I suspect the OP would need to search out some more specialised type service...the images are pretty noisy too :(

TBF since then the OP has said that a lot of the other images are in focus, if the only problems then are the noise and white balance. It might not be too bad.

I think everyone is coming to the same conclusion the initial photographer didnt to a great job, and the disk of photographs needs to be shown to someone who knows what they are looking at.

..on reflection I think you my be right and my suggestion a little ambitious for someone with no PS knowledge, but I was just trying to help & give the OP some options for free...
 
TheDrift- said:
lol harsh :)

I'm not sure what more most pro's would do. I have tried a few of these type of plugins eg topaz deblur etc..

Maybe there is some more specialised techniques but I suspect the OP would need to search out some more specialised type service...the images are pretty noisy too :(

...
Click to expand...

Tbh if they're oof like the example binning is the best option. I'd be inclined to add grain if a rescue job to make it look intentional
 
conor said:
I think that this is my only course of action, so it would seem. The biggest mistake that we made was not asking for a contract.
Click to expand...
Very sad story. You're a bit far from me in Enniskillen
If you are by any chance passing by the Antrim / Belfast area in the near future, I'd be happy to have a look at the raw files on Lightroom and Elements 11. I'm not a professional tog but I might be able to give some advice if they can be salvaged and by whom.
 
BrynBoru said:
Very sad story. You're a bit far from me in Enniskillen
If you are by any chance passing by the Antrim / Belfast area in the near future, I'd be happy to have a look at the raw files on Lightroom and Elements 11. I'm not a professional tog but I might be able to give some advice if they can be salvaged and by whom.
Click to expand...

Thank you Pal.

Indeed it is. Wife is well and truly heartbroken.

Am shattered for her.
 
TheDrift- said:
If your shooting in a church thats doesn't allow flash why would you put on a 3.5 lens in the first place?

99.9% of people who shoot weddings for that money must surely own something faster than 3.5
Click to expand...
I fully agree that when shooting in a church where flash isn't allowed then f2.8 or faster lenses should be used but I think you are being very optomistic in thinking that 99.9% of wedding photographers own lenses faster than f3.5.

It is a very unfortunate sad state of affairs but the lower end of the market these days is flooded with 'photographers' that think they have professional kit with a crop sensor camera and a kit lens that just isn't up to the job. How any of these people can convince a B&G to spend £975 on them to shoot their wedding is beyond me. I'm not trying to suggest the OP made a bad choice, he may have been shown a portfolio that wasn't the photographers photo or it may have consisted purely of a very low percentage of the photographers photos that actually turn out nice.

Either way, this is just another is a HUGE list of examples of how risky it can be to book a photographer that is anything other than a very experiened good quality professional.

I looks like from the responses so far that the OP will be able to get the help he needs to make the best of the photos and I hope his wife is a lot happier once it's all sorted out.
 
conor said:
What are those numbers that people are talking about? Can they be fixed or adjusted?
Click to expand...

Those numbers combined make a correctly exposed photo. Each has a different effect an balancing them is an important skill.

Basically shutter speed (expressed in fraction of a second 1/15 here). The slower - the more light gets in, but the slower the speed the more subject movement (at times you may want this). 1/15 is slow. Most cameras can work at shutter speeds of up to 1/4000 or 1/1800 or a second

Apperture (or f/3.5 here) - The diameter of the pupil, or hole in the lens that lets light in. Basically the lower the number the bigger the hole.

ISO Light sensitivty of the sensor. The higher the number the more sensitive it is, but at a trade off as number increase so does noise and dynamic range (how many colours a sensor can capture) decreases. Most photographers try and keep this as low as possible
 
Last edited:
Conor

I'm sending you a private message (not sure if you can access them yet or not).

I might not be able to completely fix this, but I'm a pro photographer with 10 years experience of shooting weddings and I'll certainly help you where I can. That said some of what I'll need to know is best discussed in private with respect to advising you on sorting out the legal side of this.

As for the images I'm happy to take a look at them, and I work with an excellent RAW image processor and retoucher and I'd be happy to talk to you about options for making the best of what you have got - with no expectation of profiteering on my side.

You shouldn't be expected to fix them yourself, and with respect anything powerful enough to fix them is going to be beyond your capabilities at this time.

Keep an eye on your notifications.
 
Further to what Hugh said, it is unlikely in the extreme that an experienced photographer would shoot people at a shutter speed as low as 1/15th as this would almost certainly result in 'motion blur'. Even people who are standing still are likely to move a bit in that time, and few photographers can be confident of holding a camera absolutely steady at that speed, even with the image stabilisation that good cameras or lenses can have.

Motion blur cannot be recovered in post production to any significant degree.

Any experienced photographer will know this, and if you have to make a case against your wedding photographer, the evidence that some of these shots were taken at this setting will give support to any claim of negligence - but get proper legal advice on this.

On another legal point, remember that copyright of the images still belongs to the photographer unless you have evidence to the contrary. (I am not a lawyer, but I am a pro photographer!)
 
jon ryan said:
On another legal point, remember that copyright of the images still belongs to the photographer unless you have evidence to the contrary. (I am not a lawyer, but I am a pro photographer!)
Click to expand...

That is a fair point, and shouldn't be ignored.

In the absence of a contract, or any paperwork with the digital files provided you may need to clarify what you are cleared to do with the images - although his verbal direction to fix them yourself *could* be taken as approval to at least work on them.
 
meonshore said:
In the absence of a contract, or any paperwork with the digital files provided you may need to clarify what you are cleared to do with the images - although his verbal direction to fix them yourself *could* be taken as approval to at least work on them.
Click to expand...

I would consider any attempt to correct or improve the photographs to be mitigation and personally I would go right ahead and do it without any fear of legal reprisals.


Steve.
 
meonshore said:
Conor

I'm sending you a private message (not sure if you can access them yet or not).

I might not be able to completely fix this, but I'm a pro photographer with 10 years experience of shooting weddings and I'll certainly help you where I can. That said some of what I'll need to know is best discussed in private with respect to advising you on sorting out the legal side of this.

As for the images I'm happy to take a look at them, and I work with an excellent RAW image processor and retoucher and I'd be happy to talk to you about options for making the best of what you have got - with no expectation of profiteering on my side.

You shouldn't be expected to fix them yourself, and with respect anything powerful enough to fix them is going to be beyond your capabilities at this time.

Keep an eye on your notifications.
Click to expand...

Hi,

Just received your message and respond to the same. Thank you so much for taking the time to speak with me regarding this.
 
My other half was reading this over my shoulder and it upset her that someone could do this. Hope you get a result that you're at least half way happy with.
 
-Rob- said:
... I think you are being very optomistic in thinking that 99.9% of wedding photographers own lenses faster than f3.5.
Click to expand...
Surely that's not an unreasonable expectation? I was asked to take the photos at my sister-in-law's wedding last month (I have never shot a wedding in my life and don't even do people generally) but it spurred me into getting a Sigma 30mm f1.4 which was invaluable.

-Rob- said:
It is a very unfortunate sad state of affairs but the lower end of the market these days is flooded with 'photographers' that think they have professional kit with a crop sensor camera and a kit lens that just isn't up to the job.

...

Either way, this is just another is a HUGE list of examples of how risky it can be to book a photographer that is anything other than a very experiened good quality professional.
Click to expand...
I was worried about just shooting the wedding with my 450D but the bride & groom were delighted and everyone they have shown the photos to comments that they must have paid a lot for the photos, when it was all done for nothing, so it doesn't apply in every case. My only editing was done with DPP as well.
 
Surely that's not an unreasonable expectation?

I agree, having not shot weddings before, I'd presume everybody there would be using at least f/2.8, if not 1.4 primes, for the price OP paid the "photographer" could have gotten a more than good enough set of lenses, or a couple of great ones, but the fact that he was shooting 1/15 at iso 500? please...


@OP could you put one of the raw files back up so I can try and have a look?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top