PetaPixel

Couple Pays £750 for “the Worst Wedding Photos Ever”

When Thomas and Anneka Geary paid professional — and we use the term lightly — photographers Ian McCloskey and Nikki Carter of Westgate Photography £750 to capture the happiest day of their lives, they were probably expecting something a little bit better than what turned out: blurry and poorly framed shots captured from terrible positions that are being called “the worst wedding pictures ever”. Not one of the photos showed the groom’s parents.

Westgate Photography (not this one) has since gone out of business and is selling its gear to pay for refunds. But it goes to show, sometimes you don’t even get what you pay for.

Are these the worst wedding pictures ever? (via Popular Photography)


Image credits: Photographs by Ian McCloskey and Nikki Carter of Westgate Photography


 
 
  • guest

    The Westgate site you linked to is not the right company, poor folks.

  • http://twitter.com/cyclonetog Merv

    You’ve linked to the wrong Westgate Photography…

  • http://twitter.com/thibsie Thibouille

    ROFL

  • CowboyOperator

    If you click on the link to the Westgate website, it says it has no connection with the Westgate Photography mentioned in articles published by the Telegraph or the Daily Fail. The ‘About Us’ page has different names (Ash and Clare) instead of Ian and Nikki. Maybe the link should be removed?

  • Riftlands

    The link states (not this one…

  • PhotoPRO2

    As promotion goes. Hire a professional. This strikes me as talking down to every one is is a cheap scam. I’m offended.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Amando-Filipe/1575265174 Amando Filipe

    I’d love to see the EXIF data.

    The other company with the same name is quite unfortunate…

  • Jenna Baze

    I think they intentionally linked the wrong one so that people would not google it and assume it was the same one.

  • CowboyOperator

    It’s been updated since the above people (including myself) commented. Originally the article said the photos were by Westgate photography and linked to the wrong site.

  • russianbox

    Looks like they got £750 worth of photos to me.

    I this goes back to the article about why it costs how much it does for a wedding photographer.

  • http://www.petapixel.com Michael Zhang

    We noticed that error shortly after posting and edited the post. Thanks for reporting that y’all

  • Beatrice Murch

    That’s most unfortunate.  My rates for wedding photography aren’t exorbitant, but as I live and work in Buenos Aires, the market isn’t as rich.

  • http://amien.net/ Amien

    Can we see the rest of the photos? Just as an ego boost… you know?

  • CowboyOperator

    “Looks like they got £750 worth of photos to me.”
    I know that’s (hopefully!) meant as a joke, but genuinely, with these images, I honestly don’t know how people can take pictures that bad. It’s a skill in itself to create such awfulness. I’d honestly expect better from a child who’d been given a point-and-click to play with at a wedding…

  • vaughn wascovich

    Oh, I don’t know. Check out the Gerhard Richter paintings. Maybe this is genius. 

  • http://twitter.com/leemboo TekAng 

    Lesson : Don’t drink whilst on photoshoot. ;)

  • http://www.facebook.com/benjaminjmarshall Ben Marshall

    If they like, they can send me the photos and I will attempt to recover some of them, into useable stuff… for … EHEM FREE…

  • James

    Being a photographer myself and knowing what myself & other profetionals are charging 750 is cheap!
    There are exceptions but if you pay less than $1500 you are going to get bad quality or lack of experience. Choose an established studio who have a long (a successful) history.

  • super_nicktendo

    You get what you pay for. In the UK, £750 for *professional* photography is cheap – I can’t believe they went into the wedding photography business without even mastering how to use their cameras.

  • Bembick

    read it it says NOT THIS ONE!

  • Seriously though

     If this gives you an ego boost you need to destroy your camera and contemplate taking up drawing.. or drooling perhaps.

  • http://twitter.com/Version3 Bryan Castles

    “You get what you pay for. In the UK, £750 for *professional* photography is cheap – I can’t believe they went into the wedding photography business without even mastering how to open their eyes.”

    Fixed.

  • Seriesrover2

    Yeah these aren’t bad – not pro or even semi pro at all.

    It would be interesting to do an experiment of a range of photographs from different price point of views.  ie. 10 typical photographs from a selection of people who paid $1000, $2000 and $5000 for their photographs…compare quality and services.

  • Seriesrover2

    * these ARE bad.

  • staryb

    Anyone with a point-and-click camera WOULD have done better, they were obviously using a digital SLR with the settings set all wrong. Just goes to show you, having professional equipment does NOT mean you are a professional. Would you hire a caterer just because they had a nice cook set or a DJ just because they have good speakers? NO! It takes a lot more than a good camera to take a good picture, and that is why trained professional photographers with experience are worth paying for!

  • Guest

     The price is in British pounds, not US dollars…

  • http://twitter.com/Mike_Philippens Mike Philippens

    That’s bull. You can’t expect a world-class, award winning photo-essay of the wedding, that’s true. But it’s utter nonsense to say that you NEED to pay $1500 (which is somewhat near the GBP750 they paid incidently) to get decent photo’s.

  • Ninpou_kobanashi

    Why that concept is beyond certain people, tells you a little about them, no?

  • Ninpou_kobanashi

    I think CS6 includes motion blur removal (^_^)

  • Terry Callaghan

    It would be interesting to see the rest of the portfolio. Are these the worst, the best or representative?

  • Trey Mortensen

    I just think it’s funny that the people had the audacity to call themselves professionals.  I’m trying to get into the engagement business, but right now, I’m not charging just so I can get a portfolio and practice.  Even so, my worst shots are infinitely better than this.

  • PhotoPRO2

     These were cREFULLY SLECTED AS NOT JUST THE WORSE, BUT CROPPED TO MAKE THEM RIDICULOUS.

  • Dave

     This is what happens when a beginner buys a new digital camera and then suddenly realizes they are a ‘professional’ photographer. No doubt they started off giving away their images, and then had the bright idea that they knew what they were doing. The client didn’t bother to see any previous work and now are forced to recall their wedding day in memories only.

  • http://arenacreative.com/ ArenaCreative.com Stock Photos

    eek.

  • Vals

    Here’s the screwed up part.  I found these photographs FAR more interesting than 99% of the wedding photographs I see.  Professional?  No.  More engaging than the usual wedding photography pablum?  Absolutely.

    Was it an art prank?

    Awesone.

  • Adam Harpula

    They set it in “P Mode” which stands for “Professional” and left the ISO set to 100 the whole time.

  • Chad Pennington

    I blame the couple

  • 9inchnail

    This is art, you morons. I mean, take a look at the second photo. The way those fire extinguishers seem to look in the couples direction, almost looking like their mouths are wide open in awe and astonishment… brilliant.
    Third photo, black and white theme, the couple, the chairs, even the cake and then BOOM… pink flower arrangement in your face. Brilliant.
    Last picture, quite a distance between the couple, right? Not if you consider the tilting of the photo. The groom is going to stumble into the bride’s arms. Brilliant.

    Just because you don’t know what you’re talking about, you should not be dissing true art. Haters gonna hate.

  • http://www.robpruitt.com Robert Pruitt

    +10 for making me laugh literally out loud.  Very nice.

  • http://www.robpruitt.com Robert Pruitt

    There have to be more photos.  Please post, please!

  • Andy J

    The story linking to the wrong Westgate Photography is a perfect example of a missed opportunity by them – they could have used this a great way to explain why you need a professional and highlight they are not the same one. Their latest blog is Feb 2012 – this kind of story is the ideal blog material
    http://blog.photo3.co.uk/2012/04/britains-worst-wedding-photos.html

  • Aus_Guy

    The couple should have done their research. I’m not siding with the photographers – the shots are terrible – but fool the couple for not looking at their previous work.

  • Barbilendaro

    read it it says NOT THIS ONE!

  • Ian

    A few years ago I was an (unofficial) photographer as a guest at a fancy wedding. At some point, wishing to participate rather than be ‘the guy with the camera’ I gave my DSLR to my 6yr old daughter. I wasn’t expecting results, particularly as it had a manual focus 50mm lens set at wide aperture to capture the atmosphere inside the church – no flash! Among the many out of focus were a few stunners, because people react so differently to a child with a camera, her low viewpoint made for a different experience, and she just shot as she saw. Yes, a child can take better candid pictures at a wedding!

  • mythbuster

    I suspect this all could be a set-up to publicize the real Westgate photography business…

  • http://profiles.google.com/chinchilliott Elliott Burton

    True that, plenty are trying to get into business that have skill, and then idiots like these show up and somehow get a job and fail to deliver…

  • Dave

     Oh my.

  • Dave

     Tin foil is on sale at Walmart, hurry…

  • dbltax

    Lesson: Don’t drink when choosing your wedding photographer.

  • mythbuster

    I don´t buy cheap nor think cheap, thanks…