Maybe the message we are to take away from this that to ever be paid to take pictures at a wedding you have to (1) have the best gear possible, (2) you have to know all terminology and gear specs off the top of your head and (3) have to assume all of your photos will need to be enlarged – a lot.

I like to think good pictures are made by the photographer and not the gear. At least that is what many of these same wonderful photographers have been preaching in their blogs, books, interviews and podcasts.

What would have been more appropriate here would have been for the “Judge” to ask to see the samples given to the client when the hiring decision was made and examine those in comparison to the finished product and see what the contract may have stipulated about any of this. If the pics given the client were inferior to the samples shown and the contract indicated they should have been similar, then he could have ruled for the plaintiff. I bet, though, they looked a lot alike.

It could be that instead of getting “professional” advice about our hobby or career from a television show, perhaps we should remember the show is produced for “entertainment.” In that vain, it is no different than professional wrestling – there is a clear “good guy”, in this case the plaintiff and a clear “bad guy” in this case a photographer with a really bad attitude. The bad guy lost because that is how it is supposed to go for the viewers to be entertained and not because she did not take the type of pictures she promised – and certainly not because she did not have a top of line DSLR.