Added: 3 years ago
From: TRIUSTC
Views: 97,493
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (170)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Looks like he's the 2nd shooter.

  • We should judge a photographer by his/her picture not by how he/she looks or how he/she get the job done.

  • LOL, an entire wedding shot from behind. He made an a$# out of himself.

  • Why is he even in the frame, when he sure be in the front? Good reason to pay a real pro, not someone that bought expensive equipment and think that they are a pro and charge half the price. Bet he has the camera on auto and doesn't know how to set, aperture, exposure setting and shutter speeds etheir? What a waste of L glass!!

  • I was just an amateur with a small videocam,a guest at a wedding. I was behind the Father and Bride walking down the Isle to the alter, quiet close to them. It was actually one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen. Because it filmed all the guests, seeing the bride for the first time in her dress and their reactions and smiles. Father and Bride were swaying side to side in unison. It was graceful and beautiful. Usually the video would be face on which is fine, but bland.

  • He totally skipped the big girl too.

  • not at the back at the front :D stupid

  • Seriously I feel like punching him on the nose!! What an extreemly irritating individual..

  • That guy is acting for the camera right?

  • Wow.

    First of all.. The dress will be stored away, the cake will be eaten, and the guests will forget. The only thing that lasts is the pictures. DO NOT GO BUDGET ON THE PHOTOGRAPHER.

    He is quite horrible. Dressed inappropriate and in horrific position for photographs of one of the most important days of two peoples lives. The sad thing is that he must have put a lot of money into his equipment or rented it... How could you be so bad WITH L-SERIES GLASS!?!?! Stuff is expensive!

  • This sounds more like music at a funeral/viewing than for a wedding. . lol

  • i think he is a second asistant photographer. dont you see the flashes ?

  • Most so called photographers these days do just this, fire away so many 'point n shoot' shots just because their SLR's are digital. Out of 500 shots, only 20 or so end up being good. Now that is an expensive day if shot on film. So sick of 'photographers' like this.

  • If you didn't pay him much, I would say you got what you paid for.

  • time to sue

  • Great lighting from the window and this guy it just blinding the guests away...

    Someone needs to take his cameras away and then proceeding onto cutting his fingers off -___-

  • is that A4 paper diffuser?

  • I've been reading the argument that photographers are sometimes only allowed at the back of the sanctuary, but obviously somebody got away with filming it from another angle.

    If that's the case, cell phones might be the future of wedding photography. Sad day.

  • I was still getting started the first time I tried one of these. The one civil ceremony I did, the justice of the piece actually helped me out by saying, "Son, it's OK to be up here where you can see their faces." Even the judge knew better.

    I'm amazed this guy had three cameras (dangling far from his neck like jewelry that can clack together and would have smashed into the floor if he wanted to kneel), and seemed enthusiastic about the backs of people's heads.

    Worst? Tough call. But yeah.

  • love the other camera dangling around his neck haha! remember kids, the more cameras you hang on you the more pro you look!

  • All I can say is you get what you pay for. 10% of your wedding budget should be reserved for photography and as the client it is your job to research and look at portfolios to decide who is right for you. In the end, this is the bride and groom's fault.

  • @metronomic1 totally agreed, thats what you get when you try to save money on the photographer, a lot of those 'cheap' photogs out there. i even know one who recently did a wedding and a lot of the pictures were completely blurry, not even camera shake blurry, but out of focus blurry, it pained my heart to see that and think what the couple had to deal with....

  • Here's a glimpse of what goes on in his head: "Okay, I like the church from here so I'll just stay here and snap as many shots of walking people I can! Also, it's okay to get rough because I have an extra camera dangling at my feet if I should break this one. And of course, use lots of flash. Flash makes all photos look good and professional. Nothing says good lighting like a huge solar beam to the face."

  • @darthguy3 He wasnt using direct flash.

  • @metronomic1 Hmm, you seem to be right. I was sure I saw that white thing flash....

  • @darthguy3 That "white thing" was a diffuser which eliminated that deer in headlights look you were talking about. His technique is fine, it's his positioning that was the problem.

  • @metronomic1 Ah okay. Well, actually his technique isn't fine. Notice how he often holds the camera in one hand? He must be steady as a mountain if that's ever supposed to look good.

  • @darthguy3 Yeah, I'm a photographer.

  • @metronomic1 I can tell =P

    I study film, so much of cinematography is similar to photography.

  • He WASN'T the back up tog for the love of god he was the ONLY tog there as stated by the person who posted this video who just so happened to be there too!!

  • Comment removed

  • So is this the definition of 'back up photographer ?' Shoot the 'back' of their heads ? Sad that someone paid for someone with such lack of experience! I really hope this was not the only professional photographer covering this wedding.

  • Why is he standing there he should be IN FRONT of the people jjeeeesas i hope they only pay his gas money !

  • @NeDolM Churches often have rules about where the photographer can and cannot be. Some do not allow you anywhere up the isle.

  • Its ok, he's going to photoshop their faces to their back sides in post.

  • @dukenu100 LOL! :)

  • Unfortunately, some people don't realize that you get what you pay for with photography until they see the final outcome. Anyone can buy a camera and advertise to shoot a wedding for $500. Not everyone can produce quality work. If they're really cheap, there's likely a reason for it. Always look at their portfolio and past work before you hire them. To me, it would be like taking my car to a backyard mechanic and expecting top notch work.

  • HEY DUMB BITCH OP...HE IS THE BACK UP PHOTOGRAPHER...GO FUCK YOURSELF OP

  • @UFOSPACE1999 Double your dosage.

  • making good use of those L lenses

  • Fat people everywhere ; mariage in USA

  • maybe he was the second photographer.... but I can't see the main with the couple at the other side. the way he hang the cameras is pretty weird.

  • I think he was probably a second shooter. I've heard of clients sometimes requesting from behind shots. Who knows, he might've got something cool maybe. It was a wide angle. I've seen it although he was a bit all over them

  • Hahaha... Awesome stitch up. That's gold.

  • and he got paid for this??? i would be pissed off if he would have done it for free, yet alone for money....Come on, is this real???

  • The back of a head can be a very moving still image!

  • Dangling cameras makes you a man!!! YEAAAAAAAAHH!!!!!!

  • heres merry and jeff from behind... heres debby and mike... from behind... ah shit. lol

  • Lol......hope he is a family friend....!

  • @Rickeyd72 yeah, a family friend, banned for life from the family after this, that's for sure haha!

  • Perhaps he was not allowed to photograph from the aisle? Some clergy will not allow photographers to come down the aisle .. even for the processional.

  • Some churches only allow the photographer to be behind the last row of guests. I have had to sign agreements with churches before. If this was the case, he was where he was allowed to be.

  • Some churches only allow the photographer to be behind the last row of guests. I have had to sign agreements with churches before. If this was the case, he was where he was allowed to be.

  • Someone mentioned this a few comments down, but I'm going to say it as well. A lot of churches do not allow photographers past the last set of pews. Some churches do not allow photography inside the Sanctuary during the service. This guy obviously was doing the best he could with what he had to work with. I actually have a section in my wedding contract that protects me (as a photographer) in regards to the photography rules in churches.

  • As. Wedding photographer I will say some churches do no allow the photographers to be certain areas during the isle walks, Some do not allow thento be in the front of the church during certain times :)

  • Where can we see the Photos. He seems to be very keen on taking the back of Peoples Heads !!!

  • This wedding should have had two shooters. That I can say for sure. If you didn't want him using flash, you should have told him. He obviously had the equipment to do his work. Those people criticizing him for having his second camera slung low, its irrelevant as long as it works. The second camera with the 70-200 is smart because after this he will need the telephoto to shoot closeups from a distance without interfering with the wedding. He should have been in the 3rd or 4th aisle

  • Whoops. Big hurry... "An obvious Amateur........" Excuse the typo. (Used to spending all my time looking down the lens of a camera, I guess..)

  • An obvious ameture. Unprepared, because he should have the row seat about 4-6 rows from the front, which you gladly give up after the wedding party comes down the isle and you retreat to the outside edges of the room for the ceremony. Also, If that camera fails, he can't fail over to the other because he has a HUGE lense on it, so why is it hanging? (Ok to hang there, if it's prepped as a backup. But it's not.) Expensive equipment is not equal to or greater than an experienced photographer.

  • If he was the only photographer, he should be in front of the bridal party, not behind! How much did you pay him, and how much prior experience did he have?

  • Maybe the wedding party paid extra for behind the head shots,lol

  • I don't believe this.. there was a first photographer

  • Im a pro photographer and if he was the second shooter is job is to be even more discrete that the main photographer. I'm 6'5" and I am way more discrete than this guy. I think he is new to the job or too enthusiastic.

  • it owuld be hard to judge and comment with not one single picture he has taken to seeee..... yes he maybe a touch over enthusiastic and trigger hapy but avergae 20000 plus pics a decnt tog will take at a wedding all this shows is you disliked him in your way ......

  • lol 1000 photos of the back of the people ! :D did he get payed? :D

  • Has any body seen the way hes is holding the bloody thing!!!

  • LOL - I want more of this guy!! lmao

  • I saw a barrel 0:36

  • OMG, another classic example of all the kit and no knowledge. Plus how many photos did he take?!?!?!?! I've never seen so many flashes from one "professional" photographer. I'd be furious if that was my 2nd photogarpher, let alone the main one! The only "back of head" shots I ever take are looking down the church/venue aile while the couple stand facing the vicar, or if the brides dress is corset/detailed I always get a picture of the back of that.

  • Was it a short aisle? Was he told he was not allowed to shoot from the alter by the priest?

    All the same though, if that was the case he should have shot from the seats instead of the back of the heads.

  • I only shoot the bride walking down the aisle after I've got the arm in arm front face/daddy crying shot already on the card. Plus the bride down the aisle shot only happens if there is a long train involved. Funny video!

  • i feel those photos taken from back are just wonderful and so rich in content!

  • What a douche... Somebody should have told him to move his useless ass up near the alter or first row.

  • Her dress was hideous.I wouldn't want pictures of that!

  • I think that he wanted to shoot from the view of the bride and the people and seems he is the second photographer as u guyz said he doesn't need to capture every moment

  • yes... I bet that all that she want to was to remember asses of guests...

  • I think you're a fucking butthurt amateur. Why jelly of a guy who makes some serious fucking money?

  • I have been in a similar situation before but above their heads I just made sure to get the shots I needed after wards. But I don't know about this guy I kinda feel sorry for him Im sure he is praying to God inside he gets some usable

  • The video operator isn't exactly James Cameron.

  • Well apart from the previous points I think it's pretty rude that he takes photos of every other person but the third adult couple.

  • OMG!..... I dont see the main photographer in the last shot of the video..OMG!...meaning he is the only photographer! you can see this guy rented all that equipment he has and poor lenses...thats not a way to carry your second camera ...Lord !

  • @elenahenryphotovideo

    70-200 2.8 l is not a poor lense, it is one of the most widely used lenses, 1500-2500 dollars easy, plus the 24-70 he has on the other body because he is in a tight position.. but he might have rented them. who knows, anyway, the gear was fine, very fine. the strap was kinda long,

  • How sad for the bride and groom. Too many times I've heard about someone trying to save money by having a friend or someone else with a 'good camera' take their wedding photos and they end up with nothing worthwhile at all.

    By the way, this guy does not have 'good' equipment next to what a real professional uses. Not even the same format. And never, ever, ever would any of the professional photographers I know ever use a flash during the ceremony.

    They can never replace what this joker lost.

  • @anastasia612 Poor photography technique aside, you don't need "good" equipment to take great shots of a wedding. Good equipment + bad photographer still equals bad shots, and non-top of the line equipment + good photographer can turn out excellent.

  • @BlownMacTruck What an absolute load of crap. You absolutely need good equipment to shoot great shots of weddings. If not, why would professionals spend in excess of 10 grand when it was not needed? However, you do need skill and talent as well.

  • @brennancarney You are clearly deluded if you think you need top of the line equipment to produce excellent shots. Equipment can makes things easier. Period. You can shoot great stuff with poor equipment if you know how to exploit its capabilities and work around the deficiencies. This is true with almost anything, not just photography.

  • I think he is just firing away hoping to god that he gets a least one ok shot!

  • what a idiot ...

    he got nice equipment, but no idea how to used

    he is no photographer ... he is a man with camera ... nice camera ...

    moran ...

  • @filip04254 Yeah, what a moran.

  • @brennancarney its spelled moron, not "moran"

  • WOW he needs to practise on that! Must be embarassing to see the pictures afterwards and see only the backheads.. Well, I hope he learned from this time :)

  • Overshoot much? Maybe the back of the head shots are a way to cut down his costs. He can sell the same pics to many different couples, since you can't see the face?

    I am seriously trying to decide if this is some sort of parody video. This CAN'T be real???

    Then again, maybe it is... but he is SO over the top, that it certainly LOOKS like a parody!

  • He's not a second shooter, if he was he'd be in the way of the primary. Some churches don't let you in the isle to get photos from the front. If he was a second shooter he wasn't asked to do another wedding.

  • LOL so funny how the 70-200 is dangling around his ankles. Oh and the way hes holding the lens. too funny!

  • what? this is how i shoot all my weddings! like fa real!

  • What a retard with his cameras.. Nice to have a guy like this on your wedding...

  • ive seen worst hahaha

  • what is he doing shooting the backs of people? lol

  • OMG!

  • It looks like he's trying to get them as they come in from the right. The only thing I can think of here is that he's the second shooter OR the church has some restrictions as to where the photographer can stand. If they don't let the photographer beyond the back row there's not a lot you can do as far as getting shots of people coming down the aisle.

    It's really hard to say without knowing more than the video shows.

    What the heck is the 70-200 doing swinging around his ankles though?

  • You get what you pay for...

  • how can you do something like that ????? shameful !!!

  • I agree with other comments. Considering the other flashes. He's probably a second shooter. I'm a professional photographer and everyone needs to start somewhere. Do your research before hiring someone that hasn't been in the field that long.

  • @Corky2828

    Unfortunately he was the only "Professional" photographer.  There was plenty of other people taking pictures there, but he was the only one being paid. I was (obviously) at the wedding...a friend of mine was video taping it and that is how I got the video to post.

  • Comment removed

  • Maybe he's doing a stop motion wedding video.

  • this guy is freaking awesome... LMAO! ahahha

  • probably a 3d camera. it captures 360 wherever he aim. His one-handed grip might be his real skill. Unless we saw the result who knows they are sharp photos.

  • A peRfect moron!!

  • Why is this the worst photographer ever? I don't get it.

  • el fotografo esta haciendo su trabajo. El error fue del tipo del video que ninca se coloco o se movio.

  • that's martin parr for you !!

  • Looks like he's shooting with Canons. If it was a Nikon guy he wouldn't be screwing up so bad. ;)

  • @StereoAssassin pffft lolol that's not an excuse...

  • What a retard, he should have used a 50mm 1.2 or something, that way he wont have to fucking flash everyone who walks by him, and he can stand at a comfortable distance.

  • @Kadadj Yeah, so instead he would getting their eyelashes in focus and nothing else :)

  • @defmusik Just because It's called 1.2 doesn't mean you cant adjust the aperture. Plus, a 1.2 is perfect for dreamy looking portraits, which fits for a weeding. Stop being retarded.

  • @Kadadj Nobody would use a 1.2 run and gun like that, that makes no sense. And if you don't intend to open up all the way to begin with, why even bother with a 1.2 when a 1.4 or 1.8 would do just fine for a third of the cost?

  • @defmusik Whatever, my point was, he should rather have used a fast prime, instead of bothering the people at the wedding with flashes. Plus you isolate your subjects much better with such a wide aperture.

  • He's not the main shooter. He's getting over the shoulder shots, not the back of the head or butt shots. He has a dangling camera because he's fortunate enough to have a 2nd camera body, so that he can have a zoom lens on 1 & a wide angle or prime lens on the other.

    Getting in the way was wrong though.

  • OMG this guy is a tool not a professional. He has no respect for his equipment letting it hang so low! Oh wait a minute, I get it, he wants to think he is a professional with big expensive equipment, and like it's hanging between his legs! I agree with other posts, shouldn't be firing a flash, no need to if he knows his stuff. Available light with the right settings is all that is needed! oh dear, no wonder the industry is in a state!

  • You want a $1,000 wedding photographer, you get a $1,000 wedding photographer. How's the song go . . . "No no no no no nobody's fault - but mine".

  • Comment removed

  • Forget the back-of-the-head shots, I'm sure the women were thrilled to have their asses to well documented.

  • This guy is all show and no go... Howe many backs of heads do you need? !

  • I'd take the equipment.

  • FAILLLLLLLLL

  • I would probably try and be more discrete... Images tend to look more natural and capture the moment better when the person is not confronted with a brick camera and a large flash going off right next to them.

  • Wow scary!

  • I really think the picture's of the heads from behind were just as good as the equipment he has ='D Lol.

    I would have killed him if I saw such a camera hanging THAT low o.o

    Dude, are you out of your mind?

  • yup. he's pretty bad.

  • I'm curious who video'd the photographer?

    And why?

    I will say if there was a "first" photographer, THAT person should tell his second to get out of the way.

  • @ScoutieDog

    A friend of mine taped the photographer, well she wasn't taping him she was trying to tape the ceremony, but this douche bag decided that hind ends were the way they want to remember their wedding.

    He was the only photographer...sad isn't it.

  • @the ninja

    If you know what's up, you don't need a flash right?

    Shannon Allison

  • he looks like a second shooter, not the main. you can't just judge by what you see in this video :)

  • @miamia1891 I was at the wedding...he is the ONLY photographer.

  • @TRIUSTC YOUR a lying bitch also!!! There is another source flash a happening..from the front!!! YOUR a piece of shit also...like the OP!!!

  • @TRIUSTC You answered my question. I am a photographer and  I will have someone shoot the back, while I shoot the front. But only the bride.

  • I'm a wedding photographer second. It sounds like someone is taking shoots from the front of the church.

  • Wow. Very unprofessional.

  • What a Fn momo. My second ,man knew to get their faces in the pictures.

  • I think is not the worst photographer , but....

  • Haha :-) See how the 'L' lens dangles between his legs ;-)... And check out around 1:00 when he shots that girls but ;-)

  • He might not be a second shooter he could have strobes placed around the church that he triggers for backlight.

  • Not sure who is worse. The photog? or the organist?? eeeegads!!!! Sounded like a funeral!!

  • @TRIUSTC. Why is he the worst ever?

    You posted this video, please explain?

  • @MixPhotography

    I forgot my PW so I had to create a new account. Anyway, seriously...take a look at what he is taking pictures of. Backs of peoples heads are not the shots you want at a wedding. He is the ONLY photographer hired by the bride and groom. Totally clueless this idiot was. Obviously never worked with anyone before and he seems to think that carrying a bunch of dangling articles around your neck makes you a pro...I have been to hundreds of weddings, this is the worst I've seen.

  • is it just me but when the larger bridemaid walk down he doesn't really any photos of her but everyone else he took like 5-10 pic of their bottoms

  • HAHAHAHA, what a loser!!! all the photos will just be the backs of peoples heads. HAHAHA!!!

  • I would say, that was the worst wedding videographer hahaha, anyway it looks like he was the 2nd photographer obviously Id like to see the final pictures, but carrying expensive equipment doesn't make you a professional

  • If he was a second camera man, then he must have been in all the shots coming from the front? I wouldn't want that at my wedding!

  • judging by the additional flashes going off, maybe he was the second shooter and not the main, and that's why he is shooting from the rear

  • @snowcouch or it could have been people in the audience...duh...

  • But every maroon has to find the best way of working.

    No point being an idiot if it's just the same as every other idiot out there.

  • I do work the very same way. By photographing from the side and back I give the friends and family a good opportunity to have some shots and video too. I like this style a lot. From behind you photograph what the couple actually sees. It's like their own memories! btw I've tried the front but people tend to get irritated by the constant flash.

  • @hunktubes Why would you even use flash in a church? 

  • @redheadedninjaphoto because if not then all you would get is a bunch of motion blurs and the bride wouldn't ever get to remember her ceremonies.

  • @jessshaun623 i'm a wedding photographer & have never used flash in a church. most of them don't even allow it.

  • @redheadedninjaphoto I'm so amazed when they won't allow wedding photographers ot use flashes in a church but most of the guest firing their point and shoots!

  • @pozenunti I've had more than a few pictures ruined by their flashes. Guests are rude. I've seriously considered writing an article about how to be a good wedding guest. I think a lot of people just don't know better.

  • @jessshaun623 Judging from you lack of knowledge you don't understand the capabilities of these professional cameras we use to shoot weddings, ie: Canon EOS 5d MK II, I can boost that high in the ISO rating with out flash and get clear, well lit photographs

  • Okay, you've had your fun. HaHaHa. Someone please step up, fess up that this is a spoof video. Nobody could be this clueless. If not, it makes me sick to my stomach how upset the B&G are going to be when they see this crap.

  • lol well at least i got a chuckle before work.

  • This is embarrassing! Most people would not want to admit to have hiring such an incompetent "professional". Just because you have a camera, that in its self doesn't make them a Photographer. This idiot is a snap shooter, and a complete hack. Do you buy used cars without test driving them first? Did you see his portfolio before you hired him? LOL! like the other guy, you get what you pay for!

  • You get what you pay for.

  • This moron actually yelled at the video person and he told them that they were in the way of his shots. I guess getting the backs of heads is the shot this piece of work is going for

  • What on earth does he think he's doing? Expensive equipment too, but I don't know why he was at the back of the church? Madness!

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist