PetaPixel

Insurance Company Cites Photography as Most Common Wedding Vendor Issue

vendorissues3

According to a recent analysis of its 2012 wedding insurance claims, Travelers Insurance cites the photographer as the most common cause of wedding day mishaps. In its breakdown of the numbers, 24 percent of all wedding issues (the largest chunk) were vendor-related, and 58 percent of all the claims filed under that category involved photos or video.

Here’s Travelers’ wedding cake infographic of the numbers:

vendorissues1

If we break down the numbers a little further, 58 percent of all vendor-related issues comes out to about 14 percent of all wedding issues. That means that bad wedding photos ruin a wedding about as often as bad weather, and only 4 percent less often than Illness and injury.

Regarding photography, the actual report only mentions issues with loss or damage as reasons why photogs might be held accountable, making no mention of actual quality — as we’ve seen before, tussles over quality are usually resolved in court.

But whether problems revolve around bad photography, lost photography, or poorly-timed photography, it ought to be every wedding photog’s goal to stay the heck off this report next time around.

(via Fstoppers)


Image credit: Photo illustration based on this photo by Massachusetts Office of Travel & Tourism


 
Get the hottest photo stories delivered to your inbox.
Get a daily digest of the latest headlines:
  • sdf

    That will happen when you don’t actually see the product (your finished images) you are paying for before your wedding. I’m betting that has a lot of turn-and-burn photographers in there too.

  • http://profiles.google.com/ksuwildkat Rob S

    And this is why I would rather do conflict photography than weddings. Less fighting.

  • Hennessey G

    your article says “f we break down the numbers a little further, 58 percent of all vendor-related issues comes out to about 14 percent of all wedding issues. That means that bad wedding photos ruin a wedding about as often as bad weather, and only 4 percent less often than Illness and injury.” you boil it down to bad photos and yet the insurance chart makes no distinction between photographers and videographers. I understand that you feel you’re speaking to your projected audience which may be just photographers but don’t misrepresent the data more than it already misrepresents what happens out in the world

  • http://www.facebook.com/burnin.biomass Burnin Biomass

    From their Wedding Insurance web site…

    “Event Photographs & Video can provide coverage in the event your photographer’s film is defective or photos are lost or damaged. For example if your
    photographer fails to show up, or loses your photos from your wedding,
    this coverage can reimburse you for the cost of reconvening your wedding
    party to take new photos or video.”

    I’m not sure how this policy works if your photographer just sucked.

  • Fullstop

    No doubt that the majority of the photographers in this graph are of the cheap-o variety as photos and video are the area that couples feel perfectly fine skimping on while they spend $1200 for an ice sculpture that will end up being a puddle.

  • Jim

    I’d like to see a graph of how many of the photographers are of the “I’ll shoot your entire wedding for $1000″ variety. You tend to get what you pay for.