Give me some advise on how to address this

[Shane]

Maybe once you find the right recipe to fix one, it will apply to most of the others. I can see why you're frustrated.

[Philip-TX]

Looks like you are going to have the do the marriage thing all over again.

[jyoung]

Heck, Landon did that with your camera on worse scenery

Danny, I would probably have lost it. They look very, very unprofessional. I could have done that with my camera

[Wildman]

Shane, you are someone that I feel can do post processing with the rest of them and to see you having the same issues I am makes me feel better. The ISO 1000 and the fact that he is so hot on the photo, it is almost impossible to get the blacks in and the mid-tones to stay.

PM me your phone number and we can chat after I get out of jail

[clffrdfdge]

Way overexposed why in the world did he shoot this stuff at ISO 1000, I wouldn't have gone over 400 and thats pushing it. at that distance should have been like f16 to pickup more detail in the wedding dress. Can't do much with a photo that is 72 resolution at that size already lost a lot of information. Some so called photographers shoot jpeg because they are lazy, they don't want to do post processing of the raw images you lose a lot of information letting the camera do the processing for you. It still doesn't excuse the overexposure. 1/800 sec @ f/7, ISO 1000 wow and with flash to boot no wonder the midtones in the white dress are blowed out.

[Shane]

Shane, you are someone that I feel can do post processing with the rest of them and to see you having the same issues I am makes me feel better. The ISO 1000 and the fact that he is so hot on the photo, it is almost impossible to get the blacks in and the mid-tones to stay.

PM me your phone number and we can chat after I get out of jail

I'm sure you can do better with the full-sized version than I did here, but it'll take some time and lots of tweaking to find the best recipe. Did you talk about RAW vs. JPEG initially? Maybe he assumed you wouldn't be able to work with RAW files? He could have at least shot RAW+JPEG, just in case. It really looks and sounds like he took the easy/lazy way out and just snapped a bunch of pictures and handed you the card. That really stinks for such important photos.

Man, I'd NEVER agree to shoot a wedding!

[Hawg]

...

Man, I'd NEVER agree to shoot a wedding!

Dang, I was going to invite all of y'all to my wedding in a few weeks as long as you brought your cameras.

Guess I'll just buy a some disposables and pass em out to the kids...

[scotty]

Danny, I would be ******! My 15 yo son knows more about photography, and would have done a much better job.

I bet he was shooting a Canon!

[Snakelover]

Looking at the photo, he had a lot of composition constraints having to do with where he had to be between the chairs, etc. It is a semi-confined space with limited options. So I could cut him some slack on composition. I don't know why he would shoot in 1000 ISO. That was probably an "oops" on his part; I doubt it was intentional. I have forgotten to change ISO settings many times. Then again, I am not a professional. I'm sure you have a great deal more knowledge of photography than his average consumer. And that may be a contributing factor. Most people are not going to look at EXIF or even have the technical knowledge to interpret it if they did. They are simply going to look at the picture and either like it or not. That's not to say you don't have the right to expect better than this. I think you do. I think it's appropriate to express your disappointment, but I doubt it will do any good.

[Wildman]

Well, made the call. He offered to edit my pictures that I choose for $500 and didn't understand what the issue was with the photos. Never did he accept responsibility for over exposing his shots.

PM me and I can give you is name/web site to please pass the word around.

[Texastaxi]

I think it's safe to say that he's not going to man up and make it right ... post his info here.

[Shane]

Well, made the call. He offered to edit my pictures that I choose for $500 and didn't understand what the issue was with the photos. Never did he accept responsibility for over exposing his shots.

PM me and I can give you is name/web site to please pass the word around.

Exactly what I expected his response would be. I have no doubt that you can do a better job editing his photos than he can, especially after he knows that you think he sucks. Maybe he'll secretly listen to the criticism and will do better for his next victims...er....clients. Either way, you have what you have, and you just gotta do your best to fix them.

Sorry, man.

[DBHIII]

That is a bummer, but at leaset he was made aware. Don't think I would have it in me to give him another $1.

[Casey]

Hard to say much without knowing what you paid him. I'm not asking, so don't feel obligated to mention it. Just pointing out that it would be hard to call from this side when you consider you ultimately get what you pay for. I think it's ok to assume you paid him plenty, but, just saying.

That shot was shot at f7.1, by the way. Is that the full size, unedited version in your flickr?

[WyoBull]

I think you have every right to give them feedback on the work they produced and when you do be very specific about what things you were not happy about. You mentioned some of them in your post.
Shooting weddings is a very stressful time for the photographer because of the pressure of "you only get one chance" to get it right. Even if that is your main source of income, it is still a pressure packed event.
What surprises me is that he shot an important event like this in jpg and not RAW. I am also surprised by him making you purchase the memory cards for him and then giving you what I see as unprocessed files.
When I have shot things like this for money, whether it be portraits, weddings, family reunions etc., I always shoot in RAW and post process so the final product to the client is print ready.
Sorry this happened to you but I definitely would express my concerns to them.