trunks_0010

Trunks Photography

Website: https://squareup.com/market/trunks-photography-llc

Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/trunksphotography (already down)

Twitter:  https://twitter.com/TrunksPhotollc

Pinterest:  http://www.pinterest.com/trunksphotollc/

Viewbug: http://www.viewbug.com/member/autumnculversamen

This fauxtographer left some watermarks intact but that doesn’t mean anything in the end really, just less of a fine if the original photographer would choose to sue.   You are still using someone elses work to represent your own.  I was late to this one so there was some cleaning up that happened before I started, I apologize.  Website Original source of text

trunks_0026

Original source unknown

trunks_0002

Original source

trunks_0003

Original source

trunks_0004

Original source

trunks_0005

Original source

trunks_0006

Original source unknown

trunks_0007

Original source unknown

trunks_0008

Original source unknown

trunks_0009

Original source

  trunks_0010

 

Facebook

trunks_0011

Original source unknown (girl) Original source (boy)

trunks_0013

Original source

trunks_0014

Original source unknown

trunks_0015

Original source

trunks_0016

Original source unknown

trunks_0017

Original source

trunks_0018

Original source unknown

trunks_0019

Original source

trunks_0020

Original source

trunks_0021

Original source unknown

trunks_0022

Original source

trunks_0023

Original sources unknown

trunks_0024

Original source

trunks_0025

  • Melinda Potter

    well… no secret as to why she felt the need to steal. Egads!

  • Cinobite

    lol $200, that’s a huge “do not touch” sign right there!

    • Trunks Photography

      Did you see where I live? The economy is tough, I want to work, I love art, so I make my pricing affordable to my skill lvl and my environment. It’s called business sense.

      • Amanda

        “Business sense”

        Dang it, I just shot 7 UP out of my nose. That hurts.

        • barque

          I don’t want to spoil anyone’s fun but are all the “Trunks Photography” responses on this site really her? This exchange look like someone posted a stupid excuse as Trunks Photography, and then a response to that comment, also as Trunks Photography – I am assuming accidentally.

          • Photo Stealers

            That is a disqus glitch. If you refresh it should clear up.

      • News break. When your “skill level” requires that you steal other images to show any decent work, your pricing should be 0$.. that’s a big. fat. ZERO.

      • Business sense is when you don;t charge less than cost.

      • Cinobite

        No it isn’t, that is NOT how you run a business or structure pricing. You clearly do not know how to run a business and would be fair better off taking an evening class at your local college. $200 for a wedding, let’s say you work really hard and manage 1 wedding every week of the year, that’s $800. Now minus travel costs, fuel, wages, website costs, telephone costs, electricity, heating, internet fees, data storage, equipment, insurance – you DO have insurance right?

        Even just your $800 I need $2,300 a month just to live, that’s AFTER overheads, expenses and equipment.

        At your prices I would have to work TWENTY FIVE (25) COMPLETE weddings per month just to live.

        I would have to meet, book, preshoot, plan, prep, shoot, filter, edit, process, print/album, meet and deliver a wedding nearly every single day of the month, every single month of the year JUST to survive. No profits, no bonus, no holidays, no time off. Those spare 5 days a month, admin, accountancy, legal paperwork, marketing.

        The economy is difficult everywhere, it’s more difficult for people like you who make it up as they go along.

        Between your theft and your clear lack of very basic business skills, it’s no wonder you’re in trouble and struggling,.

        • Another way to look at it …

          6 hour wedding for 200$.
          15 minutes setting up a meeting, 30 minutes driving to meet the client, 1 hour meeting the client and signing a contract, 30 minutes driving home, 30 minutes driving to the rehearsal, 1 hour at the rehearsal, 30 minutes driving home, 2 hours testing and prepping your kit, 30 minutes driving to the church, 6 hours shooting, 30 minutes driving home, 1 hour doing redundant backups, 4 hours post processing and ordering prints, 15 minutes booking a meeting, 30 minutes driving to meet the client, 1 hour meeting the client and handing over the final product, 30 minutes driving home, 15 minutes finishing your paperwork.

          Total time? 1245 minutes or 20 hours of work.

          Hard costs for the shoot?
          Gas/Travel @ 0.50$ / Km = 90$
          Disk: 5$

          200$ – 95$ = 105$

          Business costs (office supplies, contracts, business cards, insurance, web hosting, …) let’s say 50% of your rate.

          105$ / 2 = 52.50$

          Leaving you with 52.50$ profit.

          52.50$ / 20 hours = 2.62$ an hour.

          Congratz … a kid washing dishes at a diner will make more money than you do for less work and less risk … and more consistently.

          In other words … you are an idiot!

          • Cinobite

            Eric you tool! 4 hours processing a 6 hour wedding shoot! You’re dreaming 😛 heh plus you only put on a few expenses and forgot about the overheads; electricity, heating, gas, water, telephones, ISP, domains, webhost…. my insurance right now works out at about $60 per job 😛

            Oh wait, and you forgot to knock of tax as well 😛 The government always want a slice of the money. Mind you, as she would be running at a VERY big loss, she wouldn’t be expected to pay any income taxes. (Not sure how it works over there, I pay 20% corporation tax on my companies profits, then I keep the change)

          • @Cinobite | I’m assuming you are simply being flippant and not actually trying to be insulting.

            “4 hours processing a 6 hour wedding shoot!”

            Have you looked at her work? how long does it take to do color spotting?

            ” heh plus you only put on a few expenses and forgot about the overheads; electricity, heating, gas, water, telephones, ISP, domains, webhost….”

            I see you understand the use of Ellipsis (3 dots at the end of a sentence) … you might notice that i also made use of it in my sentence as I didn’t want to type out a list for the next 3 hours.

            “Oh wait, and you forgot to knock of tax as well”
            I’m assuming 200$ is before sales tax and income tax is only on profit not sales.

          • Cinobite

            Of course Eric, I enjoy your posts 🙂
            I actually replied about 3 hours after reading your comment, upon further review I did notice that you did mention several of the things 😛

            I don’t know how it works over there, but we pay 20% VAT on the sale (if your VAT registered) which I’m guessing is your sales tax, then income tax (20%) and National Insurance (12%) on wages/salary and then the company pays corporation tax (20%) on the net profit that is left after wages, overheads, expenses and depreciation. 😛

            They get us at every turn!

          • Melinda Potter

            Meetings? Prints? Contracts? Back ups? Rehearsal? Testing and prepping? Insurance? Taxes? Ain’t nobody got time for all that! Lmbo
            Goes more like this: email exchange, show up to the venue day of, snap some pics, edit with some awesome actions real quick, burn files to CD and send it out. 6 hours shooting, and maybe 3 hours for everything else. I’ll give you the gas and a disc. All under the table. Still aprox $10 an hour, all in her pocket. Yepper depper pepper snepper! It pays to rip people off. Of course it’s only short lived because eventually all fauxs run through all their clients. If they last long enough to spend through their friends and family and their friends, all it takes is one unhappy client and poof! Then on to bigger and better things, and the next easy money, work at home scam.

          • Melinda Potter

            I should say one unhappy client that is comfortable enough to speak about it. I think most times unhappy faux clients feel a bit too uncomfortable and awkward to be truthful and honest to the person they hired about the services they received. Aunt Kathy recommended them or it’s cousin so in so. Even if they are a stranger to the faux it can feel pretty bad when things don’t go well. It’s embarrassing to admit when you’ve been taken. I think most just keep quiet, and chalk it up to a lesson learned.

            Makes me think of the poor people who’s pictures get plastered all over some faux’s Facebook page without ever consenting to it, or approving any of the photos first. It has to be embarrassing as hell.

      • Michael Goolsby

        Respectfully, it is NOT “business sense”. Anyone who knows ANYTHING about wedding photography knows that a price of $200 has absolutely nothing to do with business, or at least not any LEGITIMATE business. Legitimate businesses have expenses, pay taxes, and do things “by the book”. At $200 OFF the books, you’re not even making minimum wage, and are probably actually paying to do it by the time you factor in costs.

        I don’t mean to be unduly hard on you, but forgodsake, we’ve seen this all before. Nothing about what you’re doing is original, surprising, or unknown to us.

        To make matters worse, though, you’re inserting yourself into someone’s WEDDING DAY without having the ability to provide them with what they deserve at ANY price. If you want to pretend at being a family portrait photographer or superhero photographer, then at least when you can’t deliver the goods there is no permanent harm. But a wedding is a ONE TIME event. It can’t be re-done just because you didn’t have the skills to do it well. This is why, when it comes to weddings, it’s best to begin as an assistant, so that you get experience slowly in an environment where the couple is not depending solely upon you. Sadly, too many newbies eschew this sound approach these days. Instead, they steal the work of REAL photographers who have paid their dues and actually LEARNED what they’re doing, then they steal unsuspecting clients who think they are getting a great bargain on a great photographer. Only afterwards do they know it was a lie. I can’t recall how many upset brides who were taken by these “fauxtographers” I have heard from over the past five years who have called begging me to “fix” their wedding pictures. Unfortunately, I have to tell them that even if I could polish those turds, it would cost more than they paid for their bad photography in the first place.

  • Joseph Philbert

    All the praises on her site … all fake.

    • Trunks Photography

      Sure, I made a ton of fake profiles… Makes sense to me.. Oh and I totally put on fake skin to pose in the photo sessions too!!

      • Joseph Philbert

        It has been done before by several others caught stealing images.. Actually it’s pretty common. Those who steal images lie also.

      • Joseph Philbert

        hmmm 2 people who are named “Brittany” posted 7 months ago and their accounts on FB are no-longer active…smh how far should I check for fake “reviews”

  • Brooke Summer

    Wow… nothing like going to a massage and coming back to see your images stolen. Awesome.

    • Trunks Photography

      I did not mean to “steal” them, I even posted links on my original posts with the source on google/icon search site where I found them.

      • Brooke Summer

        You removed my watermark, therefore removing evidence of the actual artist and owner. That isn’t an accident.

        • It;s also a violation of the DMCA’s provision on circumvention of Rights Management Information and add’s (on top of the copyright violation fines of up to 150000$ per infraction) another 2500$ to 25000$ in fines.

          You know … incase you decided to sue her. 🙂

      • Greg Eigsti

        Well then it is “ok”. I mean if you did not mean to, and what’s a watermark between friends? I often use the results from google searches and pass it off as my own. Because there is no way a legitimate photographer would want to advertise their services and have their images show up for others to SEE.

      • barque

        1. You can’t use photos that are not yours. It doesn’t matter if you link back to where you stole it, or give credit to the real photographer.

        2. I don’t see any links or credit for that Scrabble Belly maternity shot, and it is still up on your site as I type this. The make-up artist on that shot is Lindsey Jackson from La Mesa California. I am sure she will appreciate you showing the result of her hard work and creativity in order to sell your $145 belly painting session. The photographer – WHOSE WATERMARK YOU CROPPED OUT – is Jeff Davidson of San Diego California, AKA Cosmic Frog Photography. I am sure he will appreciate your WILLFUL violation of his copyright. At this point it doesn’t matter if you take down the photo tonight or not. We all have screenshots. Removing the photo does not cure the original violation. Still feel like pretending you’ve done nothing wrong? Still like to claim you accidentally stole them? You removed watermarks, how is that accidental?

        • Joseph Philbert

          She tripped on Photoshop 😀

          • Drunk photoshoping … instead of waking up in bed with a stranger you’d never have considered bedding sober you instead find that you’ve “aquired” tons of photos and removed all their watermarks … like that time when I was 20 and woke up with a blinking construction light in my room … no idea where I got it from. 🙂

      • barque

        While we’re on the subject of photos which are still up on your square site: The cool black lace mask on the model showing your $100 2-hour “add-on”, that product is called Face-Lace by Phyllis Cohen, and the photographer who shot all of her product line, including the one you stole and as of this comment still have on your site, is a well respected fashion and beauty photographer named Matthew Shave. I doubt either one of them will be very happy about your using their product or photography to sell your make-up artistry “add-on”

      • Cinobite

        I’m interested, if you did not mean to “steal” them, what do you call taking something of someone elses without permission?

        • a girl

          So if she really posted references and sources then she technically is not stealing anything. The producer of the photos still is being credited. She has done nothing wrong. Now if she is asked to remove them then she may be required to…”may”

          • CrackerJacker

            Nope. Comprehension of copyright fail. Please read up and try again.

  • Joseph Philbert
    • Bhig Bhad Wolf

      HA! Well I can see why she steals. Her photos are pretty mediocre at best…and I noticed she considers it a “hobby”…. big difference from profession. Pathetic.

      • Trunks Photography

        Which is why I say I am amateur and hobbiest! YA…. so that kinda explains your opinion.

        • Will

          I’m an amateur/hobbyist photographer as well. Much of your work reminds me of when I was starting out. So I can relate to your plight of wanting to achieve greater results than you are capable of. It’s important to come to terms with the fact that you’re not going to be any good at what you want to do when you’re first starting out.

          With that in mind, remember professional photography requires a lot hard work. If you want to achieve the same results as the photos you displayed on your site, then you’ll have to work equally as hard as the photographers who took those images. There are no shortcuts in becoming great at anything in life, and you lack perspective in this case.

          There’s enough information on the internet to get you achieving the results you want, so why the need to us other people’s photographs at all? Be a photographer, and get out there and take those photos!

          • Joseph Philbert

            BRAVO…

          • Joel

            Bravo indeed good sir!

        • Joseph Philbert

          She is now blocking others from her profile… yet she still using stolen images on her square site …smh

        • Melinda Potter

          Let’s get honest here! “The economy is tough, I want to work, I love art, so I make my pricing affordable to my skill lvl and my environment. It’s called business sense”.
          It’s called pretending to be in business and making money under the table charging for a service you are not yet able to provide properly. Amatuers do it for the love of it, not for money. They do not solicit their services to the public, and do not have price lists (unless they are offering finished pieces) You are in business. It may not be a legit, insured, contractual, tax paying, etc business, and you may be cheap because you don’t have the same expenses and large investments in their business as a legit photographer has, but you ARE misrepresenting yourself as a professional to the public. You made the switch from nature photographer to “lifestyle” why? Because it’s very very difficult to make a living (or fast cash) off of work that only you as the photographer are invested in. Especially if your work is not up to par and there isn’t any interest in it. Its much easier to make money off of people by offering to take pictures of them and their loved ones. They are emotionally and personally invested even before your shutter clicks. It’s even easier when you are dishonest about the quality of work you provide and invest very little into improving.

          You are trying to find an easy way to make money. Guess what? Professional photography isn’t it.

          Disclaimer: In no way am I saying providing quality photography services is easy. I don’t want what I said to be misinterpreted.

          • Greg Eigsti

            >>work that only you as the photographer are invested in
            >>They are emotionally and personally invested

            Wow, thank you, great thoughts to chew on.

          • Cinobite

            If that is true (I don’t know the status of her “business”), then you can add the criminal offence of Tax Evasion to the list of charges.

          • Melinda Potter

            It was just me assuming as far as that goes. I find that most “afordable” photographers in business aren’t actually legit, and/or put about as much thought into their business or future business as they do their photography. In this case there’s no value put on others work or business either. My assumption is most likely correct 🙁

        • Cinobite

          So is the “BA Photography” degree a lie as well or did they not teach you about copyright during degree level photography?

          • Joseph Philbert

            Wait I thought she did not lie … Degree from school of imagination.

        • Bhig Bhad Wolf

          My opinion is that you would have ZERO problem taking the money of people who were EXPECTING the level of quality that came from your STOLEN photos. Getting an expensive camera, and taking pictures does NOT make you equal to the level of those you have stolen from who have WORKED for their talents.

          It takes YEARS, it takes CLASSES, it takes READING, it takes PRACTICE…. not a point and shoot, and applause from your friends and family.

          I LEGITIMATELY own and run a small business. (Not photography )I spent DECADES learning my craft, working under people who KNEW BETTER than I did, LISTENING to the REAL professionals, busting my ass, and now…. NOW I am able to hang out my own sign, and I am successful. If I was a LIAR, I would be ruined professionally, like you are. This is going to be searchable for the REST OF YOUR LIFE. FOREVER.

          Good job!

  • Bhig Bhad Wolf

    Well, she’s obviously never actually done body painting. I’ve done that before, and it can take anywhere from 3 to 5 hours or more to complete one piece depending on size… and she’s charging $145? God only knows what the end result of THAT would be…. egh.

    • Trunks Photography

      Please read the post, I am not a body artist, I am teaming up with a body artists and we are charging that because we are new to the idea and are experimenting, but thank you for your words and your time in bashing me 🙂

      • Greg Eigsti

        You are a thief. Explain why you don’t deserve to be bashed. I’m a little unclear on that one.

      • Bhig Bhad Wolf

        Clearly your “artists” are not professionals either, because with that deal ONE of you would not be making money.

      • barque

        “bashing” lol, come on Autumn. You come on here acting all apologetic and now you have learned your lesson, etc, but you keep inserting how all these comments are hate, spam, and bashing. Seriously? You made a bad mistake, and are being completely unprofessional with your reaction. You are only inviting more of the same when you lash out at people who are calling you out on your illegal actions.

  • Trunks Photography

    Thank you so much for this post! And for taking the time to message me to get the facts before making this post, it shows true professionalism and maturity. You took the time to find my information, but didn’t take the time to show a little insight as to message me before you bash.

    1) I never claimed or used them to represent my work, that is obvious as in I watermark all of my photos I post.
    2) I didn’t not edit, change or alter the photos, I just thought they where gorgeous ideas from amazing artists, I did not realizing that posting ideas on my page would be a issue, being new and I do apologize for this mistake and I did take them down.
    3) I am new and a amature/hobbiest, I do not charge an arm/leg because obviously I do not have the experience in portraits or the gear to do so.
    4) I find great sadness in the lack of empathy people show these days and how quick you are to judge and bring someone down without having a clue who they are, or the story behind the situation.

    Please feel free to call and bash me personally, my number is 828-433-9752

    • Joseph Philbert

      Facts? Facts? Look up the facts are plain to see .. even if you did not remove watermarks you still used the images illegally. Wake up and smell the coffee and LEARN to be professional because people with ” true professionalism and maturity”
      do not steal the works of others.
      Use your own images.

    • Joseph Philbert

      If it was not a problem then why shutdown your fanpage?

      • Trunks Photography

        I didn’t shut it down, I unpublished it while I fix my mistakes and make amends. There was a mass of hate and spam and it was very difficult to keep up with responses with the busy day today.

        • Joseph Philbert

          shutdown/unpublished they mean the same thing you “unpublished” it after others complained that you stole the images in question.

        • Cinobite

          You could have just turned user comments and reviews off

        • barque

          “hate and spam” good lord. comments about you stealing photos is not hate and spam.

    • captain-confuzzled

      thank you for explaining your reasoning. As you now know, if you put yourself out there as a photographer, it is reasonable for people to assume the the photos that you show are of your work, otherwise it is impossible for them to judge what quality of work to expect and may very well lead to very unhappy customers. If you are as you say new and just starting, I would make that very clear on your site. You may find customers who will take a chance on you when all is fully disclosed in order to get the good price. Glad that you took the offending photos down. a little piece of advice, although I can imagine that you feel attacked, best thing to do is to simply correct the issue, make amends where you need to, and don’t engage in arguments with other people who are making comments (other than Brooke, since you need to work out issues with her as someone you took from). It will all go away much faster that way.

      • Trunks Photography

        Thank you for your comment! I have seriously been shaken from this experience and have learned! I assumed that because my watermark wasn’t on the photos, that my fans would know its not my work. But it is a terrible assumption. And I agree with your statement and made it plain in my description that I have recently transferred from nature photography to lifestyle and I list myself as amateur and hobbiest. I never wanted to imply differently! I do appreciate your words, have taken them to heart and I am trying to make amends.

        • Cinobite

          Good, because you broke the law, in the eyes of the law, you’re a thief and a criminal.

          But hey it’s ok right, you learnt from it. Here’s hoping that defense works next time a drunk driver runs down a child in the street.

          And, fwiw, in the eyes of the law, when you start charging for your work, you’re not a hobbyist, you’re a professional and you have to adhere to all of the legal procedures, laws and regulations as every other business, and when you don’t you have to deal with the consequences as a business. Do you think McDonalds would be able to get away with stealing Burger Kings advertising images with just a “sorry”?

    • Photo Stealers

      I never go to the people on this site first because they already have been told by the time I receive their information to take the images down but have not. You were quite aware of the situation before I went live because some of the original photographers contacted you and asked for the removal of their works. You denied their request. There is no bashing here, just straight up what you had on your photography page vs. what the original source is.

      1). You used the images as examples of the session for sale = representing your work. No where was there an exclaimer stating that these images were inspirations or giving credit to the source. Watermark or not, they were images loaded onto your business website and your business Facebook page. If I were Average Joe Consumer, I would just assume they watermarked images (which there are very few of) were images you photographed as a different company.

      2). Some watermarks were removed.

      3). When you charge for services, regardless of the amount, that makes you a professional.

      4). There is no excuse to be using another persons images to represent your photography business.

      • Trunks Photography

        That is not true! I was called on my way to my son’s appointment, as soon as I got home I took the images down. Took me maybe a hour and half. Only 1 artist contacted me, But I took all images that where not my own down.

        1) There was a claimer on the first photo I posted originally, I should have posted it every time, and that was my mistake. There was album that said Ideas from Google/Pinterest/Square Market/Icons market, and I had linked where I found the photos.

        2) I did not remove any watermarks, nor edit or change anything, I found them and posted them the way I had found them. If they where removed, it was previous to me. Considering I never post without a watermark, most of my fans would know that they where not mine and they know I am new, and trying new ideas. I do agree that it could be seen that way, which is why I took them down. I did not originally think of it from the perspective. My mistake.

        3) Thats relative
        4) I understand that point of view and have removed them.

        • Photo Stealers

          I don’t see a watermark on this and MANY images from your site and Facebook.

          You may know the way you differentiated your work vs. inspiration but there is no way a client would know that your watermark = your work. In the court of law, if the average consumer would believe this is an example of your imagery, you can be sued for it. Yes, even if you took it down.

          • Tyler

            hahaha this is a Sue Bryce photo….if you’re going to use other people’s work, may as well aim big!

          • Tyler
          • barque

            Actually, in a court of law, even if she said this wasn’t her image, she is using it without permission and can be sued. If I am Pepsi, I can’t just put up photos that Coke used in their ad, and say, ‘Well, I didn’t pay for this but it serves as inspiration for the happy bubbly feeling you’ll get drinking Pepsi.’

        • Joseph Philbert

          90% of the images representing your packages on your “square” site are NOT YOURS … its better if you just take them all down and save yourself further problems.
          The other photographers will eventually find out and it will start all over again. Last thing you need is for one them to sue you for copyright infringement, it starts at $10,000 (if I remember right). Check out the other post on this site … you are not the first or the last.

        • Joseph Philbert

          We know when you were notified …. You knew then something was wrong… This is a big community … You took down your fanpage around 1pm

        • Cinobite

          An image does not need to have a watermark on it to constitute ownership. People do it for advertising and to protect themselves.

          You’ve heard of the charge of “handling stolen goods” right? You know that’s illegal right? So what makes you so special? A mean, the fact that you actually stole the material aside.

        • “There was a claimer on the first photo I posted originally, I should have posted it every time, and that was my mistake.”

          That still won’t cut it … attribution isn’t a waiver for liability for copyright infringement. YOU DID NOT HAVE PERMISSION TO USE THE IMAGE. FULL STOP. Adding a disclaimer or even attribution doesn’t change that fact.

          “3) That’s relative”
          No, it’s not. It’s the VERY DICTIONARY DEFINITION OF THE WORD PROFESSIONAL!

          http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/professional?s=t
          “following an occupation as a means of livelihood or for gain: a professional builder.”

          “4) I understand that point of view and have removed them.”
          It’s not a point of view, it;s a fact … false advertising and fraud.

    • Greg Eigsti

      Ignorance is not a valid excuse.

      Stop making excuses, contact the owners of the copyrighted materials and make amends, post a humble and public apology. Oh yeah and learn and do not repeat.

    • When you intentionally crop out watermarks, your “accident” (ie thievery) has intent. You’re damn lucky most people don’t have the time/money to legally come after you as that would pretty much condemn you.
      Stop making excuses, own up to the fact you fucked up, learn from it, apologize to ALL involved, and move on.
      Be an adult.
      Read the comments on other posts here..see how well it goes when you try to fight the FACT that you intentionally stole from other artists (well, you’d have to be an artist yourself for me to say “other”.. heh).

    • Cinobite

      “it shows true professionalism and maturity”

      Says the person who steals other peoples work and charges $200 for a wedding

      “I never claimed or used them to represent my work”

      Yes you did

      “I am new and a amature/hobbiest, I do not charge an arm/leg because obviously I do not have the experience in portraits or the gear to do so.”

      But you called yourself a professional photographer. Expensive gear helps, it helps a lot, but my compact camera is a better spec than Ansel Adams or Diane Arbus’ cameras, do you think they should have charged 10x less than what I charge?

    • I find great sadness in the lack of respect people have in others intelectual property and the lack of understanding of copyright law and contract law people show these days and how quick they are to steal and defraud other.

      Honey, we don;t need to know your story.

      Fact.
      You used images for which you did not have permission.

      Fact
      You misrepresented yourself by using others images to market your own image creating skills.

      Anything else you could bring to this story would change NOTHING! They would not alter the fact that you violated other photographers rights and WILLFULLY misrepresented you ability to your potential clients.

      You are lucky you didn’t use any of my images or you’d be receiving a letter and bill from my lawyer.

      Before you try to get in business … learn your craft, build your skill and educate yourself on how to operate a business.

    • Greg Eigsti

      From one of your website alongside your rates: “Why Hire a Photographer? A professional photographer brings an artistic eye to the equation.”

      You are billing yourself as a professional photographer to your clients yet you come here saying “I am a hobbyist, an amateur” Complete Bullshit. I pay taxes, do you?

      You have removed a lot of the images – bueno, bully, thank you! You have not honestly represented yourself though. As long as you keep showing the dirt we are gonna keep digging.

      Turn those shovels up to 11!

  • Brooke Summer

    You took my watermark out, which is altering the photo, removing the actual owner’s information.

    • Trunks Photography

      I did not! I found them that way on Google, please tell me which is yours and I will find the source and prove that to you.

      • Brooke Summer

        Additionally, the text was plagiarized as well. Again, not something that is accidental.

        This is very, very sad, and happening all too often. You seem to think that you can do whatever you want, to whomever you want as long as it benefits you. You commented on another thread that the economy is tough and you want to work – did you ever consider that this is someone ELSE’s work? Someone else’s hours put into their art, someone else’s talent, time, skill, gear, and vision? You have stolen not only images, but the very words that someone else used.

        And yet you comment with sarcasm talking about someone else’s professionalism and maturity? Ridiculous.

        • Trunks Photography

          Which Image was yours, I profusely apologize for my error! I found that article and thought it was perfectly put, there is not author, so I didn’t have anyone to quote. I understand you are offended and its well warranted. I just want you to know that I did find the images the way I posted them, so if they became un-watermarked, it was not by me.

          I used images I have not yet had the opportunity to create myself, and am trying to get the opportunity, but sometimes its hard to explain in type what the goal is, so images help. Again, I am sorry for my novice mistake, and I will not repeat it. But there was never any intention to steal or claim anyone elses work, if anything I was inspired and awed and wanted to share the idea and get the opportunity to create original art of my own. I am more the able to apologize over the phone if you would like to call me.

          • Joseph Philbert

            Next time search the words you copy … it was not created in thin air.
            You use GOOGLE so well it would not have taken long.

          • Greg Eigsti

            >>I used images I have not yet had the opportunity to create myself

            New photo stealers bingo square? Watch out Joseph because all of your images are ones that I have not yet had the opportunity to create yet. In fact why stop there, I have never had the opportunity to create any of Ansel Adams work. Gotta go do some google image sourcing and Facebook uploading…

          • Joseph Philbert

            Noooooooooooooooo…

          • Greg Eigsti

            Got any selfies? Certainly a court of law would uphold that it is ok for me to use your selfy as there is no possible way that I could have had the opportunity to create that image. I mean me taking a selfy of you? Wow, I think this is what quantum physics is all about but I am not sure.

          • Cinobite

            That’s complete bullshit and you know it

          • Brooke Summer

            You are now apologizing profusely because you were caught and called out. When another photographer that you stole from contacted you, you were rude, defiant, and self righteous.

            A bridal show just contacted me regarding you trying to use the images in one of their shows as well. Clearly not an accident.

            It has been about 16 hours now and my photo is still online, as well as others. If you are sorry, why not take them down? Your arrogance is astounding.

          • Cinobite

            Press charges damnit!

          • The only way she’ll learn is if you sue her into oblivion!

        • Joseph Philbert

          She does not get it … It may take a minute for her to figure it out ..
          People get sued for this.. Smh

          • Greg Eigsti

            Minute? Oh hell no, we are still way too early in the denial stage.

        • Cinobite

          I realise that sueing people can be a drawn out hassle, especially when the offending material has been removed. But I think it’s time we started to make examples of people. I honestly think you should sue. It’s the only way people are going to adapt their attitudes.

          This will also filter the shit out of the industry that is dragging it down and devaluing the work of those who do this for a living.

      • Joseph Philbert

        The infamous “I found it that way” only to not be able to find it that way anywhere on the internet

      • Greg Eigsti

        Does not matter who removed the watermark. You stole fizzy lifting drinks. You bumped into the ceiling which now has to be washed and sterilized, so you get nothing! You lose! Good day sir …

        • Roald Dahl is my spirit animal

          Best comment ever

          • Greg Eigsti

            Oh thank you thank you thank you for restoring my faith in humanity 🙂 was not sure how that would be received 😉 I have a good friend that you should meet, a real Roald Dahl superfan, puts all of us to shame.

      • Cinobite

        Then that’s something that you are going to have to prove in court. And even if you prove that you “found it like that” – you STILL stole the image and used it to represent yourself. I don’t think you understand what you have done, you have committed copyright theft, identity fraud, false advertising, misrepresentation of a business, plagiarism.

        You are a criminal. Many people have been fined and put in prison for doing what you have done. You should be shitting your pants and praying to Jesus for how lucky you are to still be commenting here.

        • Joseph Philbert

          Jesus!

  • LoLTonelica

    So you believe pulling photos from Google and not even attempting to share a disclaimer that it is not your work is not deceptive? Oh honey… No. Just, no.

  • Joel

    How the hell did she get 2,700 likes on her page, and all those “positive” reviews? I didn’t get to read any of them or see her page really before it was taken down.

    • Joseph Philbert

      Who knows I know some are fake

    • C Sab

      Probably bought likes and the reviews are either fake or she has a lot of blindly supporting friends.

  • christiecolliermann

    Go find a real job. You steal images, post them as your own work to draw in clients and then try to justify your crime by saying you found them on google.
    You have much to learn and your lack of integrity and ethics is astounding.
    Shame on you.

  • So how come, despite being oh so sorry, you are STILL displaying images that do not belong to you on your website? Brooke’s black and white boudoir shot is still there amongst others. Notice you keep saying you are an amateur and say as much on your facebook page – your website gives a different message in your intro “Why Hire a Photographer? A professional photographer brings an artistic eye to the equation.”

    Time to stop talking to this liar and start suing – maybe that will get the message across.

  • cfw

    “I did not mean to steal them…” Huh? Did the photos and text magically jump off another web site into your own? Quite a trick! You took the affirmative act of going to another web site, copying that person’s work, then pasting it into your own web pages to trick others into believing it was your own work. That’s the very definition of stealing. You did it with full knowledge. You’re a snake in the grass. Get a real job and start contributing to society instead of sucking off the hard labors of other people.

    cfw

    • Greg Eigsti

      No you have it wrong – she got the images from a google search and everybody knows that google search only presents “free to use” images. A professional would certainly never want their “pay for” images showing up in google.

      Yeah, not the sharpest spoon in the drawer.

  • Joseph Philbert

    I predict more denial from this one for a few days.. The very fact that all the stolen images are still up on the square site is a good indicator. It seems she wants every owner to contact her instead of doing the right thing.

  • Geni

    I would like my side of the story out there, I’m the one person who called her. And instead of apologizing to me and saying she didn’t realize what she was doing wrong she argued with me about it, saying it was legal, she was in the right, and even offering to put a link back to my page ( SERIOUSLY?) My image was also of an minor, so I told her this, & that the minors family can also sue her, and she said “that’s your problem” She DID not offer to take the photo’s down, or say she was doing such. It was only AFTER I reported her to FB/SQUARE and outed her in a private facebook group and her page became full of negative reviews that she responded she was taking down the images. I sincerely hope you have learned your lesson, my advice would be in the future is someone calls to tell you what you are doing is wrong, unless you have a full law degree in hand, LISTEN to them!

    • Melinda Potter

      This is how it goes a LOT of the time. Sometimes it takes a group of people to stop a bully/unethical person (to put it more mildly). They can handle picking on and doing wrong when they think it’s only one person. So stupid, and out right horrid behavior. Their crime is out there for the world to see, plain as day. It’s like videoing yourself robbing a store and putting it up on YouTube and expecting no negative outcome lol

      • Michael Goolsby

        And sadly, it is the behavior AFTER they are caught that causes them more problems than actually getting caught.

        • Greg Eigsti

          And that is sad. I too was willing to give the benefit of the doubt – I mean she has worked up to an apology with without excuses. This is enlightening.

    • Michael Goolsby

      This is VERY enlightening. I was willing to give her the benefit of the doubt as being one of the “merely clueless”, but what you describe is more along the lines of our typical photostealer: the attitude of “I play by my own rules”. Problem is, they can’t.

    • Cinobite

      With an attitude like like, for the love of fuck, sue her

      • Geni

        Trust me, I had an extensive conversation with my lawyer about it. Remove a logo and you get 20-25k. HOWEVER the problem is, do I think she has any money, which the answer is NO. So I’d pay lawyer fees court fee’s, to sue someone I’d probably never see a dime from. She will however be getting a “demand for payment” shortly!

        • Cinobite

          That’s the problem isn’t it, the criminals have no money which makes sueing them expensive and fruitless, which makes them untouchable and they continue to rip off peoples work. I do hope you at least get your payment made – but if she refuses to pay it, what’s the worst that will happen when she knows you won’t sue?

        • Cinobite

          Looking at some of the newer posts she IS a business, so you could take her to court as her business would be liable,

          In the UK, a sole trader is personally all in. They take all of the profit and get taxed on it all. When it goes tits up, their personal possessions are on the line (house, car etc)

          One of the reasons that I started a limited company. So if the business went tits up only those things owned by my business are liable to be taken to pay off the debts.

          Eitherway, she has to have collateral, if that means losing her house – then it’s an expensive life lesson in the theft

          • Her house, her gear, her computers, her car, you could have her wages garnished … I’m not incorporated … I’m an owner/operator type of setup and if I were ever to go to court my personal assets would be at risk.

    • Joseph Philbert

      Yes this is the thing … She does not see it as something that is wrong.
      She is still in the deny/unbelief stage. Well until she gets a letter from a lawyer.

    • C Sab

      Thieves don’t see what they’re doing as wrong. They’ll say/do anything to justify their sleaziness.

  • Michael Goolsby

    There’s no mystery here. Just another newbie with a camera who loved photography so much she decided to try and set up a business long before she had any business doing so. With no actual product or experience, she naturally had to steal from others. I’m glad she seems to have taken down the offending images in particular, but it’s such a shame that the internet makes it so incredibly easy for people to put themselves in this situation so frequently. Despite all the claims as to why they stole the images in the first place — “they were just intended for inspiration”, “they were just placeholders”, “my assistant did it”, etc. — there is actually only ONE TRUE REASON why so many fauxtographers misrepresent themselves to the public: THEY DO NOT YET HAVE THE EXPERIENCE OR SKILLS TO PROVIDE THE SERVICE THEY ARE SELLING.

    Note to newbies: If you find yourself using pictures you did not create yourself, then don’t go into business or offer that service. Want to sell “glamour shots”? Then LEARN how to create them. Want to shoot weddings? Then go to every wedding you can for a year or two, work with a real professional, and LEARN how to shoot them. Want to take corporate headshots? Then have a party or two where you invite your friends for dinner and drinks and headshots and get the EXPERIENCE required to do it well.

    About ten years ago, after working full-time in the business for ten years already, I fell in love with the classic Hollywood portrait style of the 1930s and 40s, the era of George Hurrell, Clarence Bull, and other great masters. I COULD have just stolen and displayed some of their pictures to advertise and learned on my clients. But that’d have been the “photostealer” way. Instead, I spent a full year studying everything I could about it. Reading books, analyzing portraits, learning the history and methods, finding ways to duplicate the look of large format film with small format digital technology through both hardware and software, and then collecting the specialized lenses and lighting gear which I believed was necessary to pull it off. Only after a full year did I approach my first test subjects, friends and family who were generous with their time, allowing me to experiment and really get my hands dirty. Even so, it was another year before I offered these services to a client, showing examples of what I had accomplished thus far, and making it clear to them that this was still new to me. My first clients were a wedding couple who were interested in having the style for their engagement portraits. We did “regular” portraits as well, just to be “safe”, prior to the vintage Hollywood style. In the end, they LOVED the Hollywood portraits, and, when we displayed large prints at the wedding reception, their friends and family were mesmerized. Today, I look at those first shots and shake my head at all the things I did “wrong”, but I’m proud of them for my first commercial effort, and so glad that I went about doing things “right”. Why? Because I’m in business for the long run. Photography as a career requires a strong FOUNDATION.

    I don’t personally see how ANYONE can be a photostealer AND respect their clients. The two are not compatible. Want to be a professional photographer? Then LEARN how to be a professional photographer, godammit. And commit to the position that you won’t try to be one before you’re ready. It’s not easy. But, if you really love it, the journey will be worth it.

    • Melinda Potter

      Standing O

      • Michael Goolsby

        Thanks, Melinda! 😉 I know that this sort of ethic might seem “old fashioned” to some newbies who have been conditioned to immediate technology and instant gratification, but photography is just one of those things in which you don’t really know that you don’t know much until you know enough to know you didn’t really know anything when you thought you knew it all!

        • Melinda Potter

          When I first discovered that so many were fraudulently “professional” in photography, I was extremely taken back. I remember one of my first posts on the subject, I actually asked if it was my age (in my forties) that made me gasp and sick to my stomach when seeing fauxtography practices. “Am I somehow wrong to feel the way I do? Is it me? Am I just old? What the hell happened when I wasn’t looking?”. I’ve received a lot of flack for speaking my mind about this, especially when I currently have no intentions of going pro, and I truly just shoot for me and to learn all I can before I leave this world. (Quite a few print sales though, and I sell enough to afford to keep going. But that’s neither here nor there). I went in this thinking I wanted to, and came up with a 6 year plan that I thought was over zealous to get me there, but my camera took me else where, and there’s no way I want to turn what I love into a job. Fauxtography and the deception of it, needs to be talked about. More and more professionals need to speak out about it. It needs to be addressed. I may not make a living with my camera, or want to make a living from it, but what I do is so very important to me, and what YOU , as a true professional do is important to me too. These people not only make professionals look bad, they make what I do look bad too. It’s sad that I’m embarrassed to tell anyone I make photographs when they ask what I am interested in, or embarrassed when I’m caught with my camera, and I absolutely hate the conversation that inevitably follows. I feel I’m like a butt to a very bad joke. It needs to stop.

          • Greg Eigsti

            Thank you both for being “old fashioned” and ethical – I guess that this is one time that being an old fart takes on a good connotation. Melinda I am in exactly the same boat as you – I don’t want to “ruin” this great hobby/pastime/passion with customers and all of their silly wants 😉 One thing that draws me to photography is that it never gets dull, there is always something new to try and always something new to learn. Michael I applaud your dedication to getting the shot correct before ever thinking of selling that as a product.

    • Greg Eigsti

      That is just crazy talk. Of course I am defining “crazy” as “what honest and ethical folks would do”. Very well stated and very accurate. Thanks!

    • Joseph Philbert

      Bravo!

  • captain-confuzzled

    and as someone who was watermarking her own images at least a year ago, hard to imagine that she is totally clueless on the issue.

  • Joseph Philbert
  • guest

    so, I see our photographer is so.very.stressed by this whole encounter! It is sad really. Check out this FB page, https://www.facebook.com/lastingimpressions828 check out the recent posts. Yes, that is our apologetic Autumn of Trunk Photography, shining in the sun. (Saw before things went offline that they were going to do some projects together, makeup and shoot – perhaps still are, one post about that has been removed from this person’s FB page though).

    • Joseph Philbert

      They were also using stolen images but has since removed most of them

    • Greg Eigsti

      Eye bleach now

    • Joel

      How many Facebook pages does she have? 3 kids and 3+ Facebook pages…Damn…If she put all that effort into learning how to take photos instead of stealing photos she could have been quite successful.

  • Joseph Philbert

    You know whats VERY VERY funny … I checked some of the accounts that posted favorable comments in the past on her fan-page… about 6 of those accounts are now gone or disabled and I never contacted them just looked at the timeline to see if they were real.

    Coincidence … I think NOT!
    Facepalm

    • Michael Goolsby

      very good work. It is good to have a whole and complete picture of the deception at work. This young lady will think ur self a victim, but these are all just lies of one type or another.

    • Joel

      Good work, how deep does this rabbit hole go? Very weird to see when people do this. Thats a lot of work to go through to put a fake review.

  • Melinda Potter
    • Joseph Philbert

      Did she “steal” some ones idea? OMG the horror or is it a separate business?

      • Melinda Potter

        it’s another business. I think she at one time combined to two. The reviews are interesting. So is some of her marketing material.

    • captain-confuzzled

      priceless…

      • Melinda Potter

        hmmmm

        • Joseph Philbert

          The negative post sound more authentic

        • Photo Stealers

          Oh god she’s an event planner too?

          • Melinda Potter

            Yes, and she used other’s work to market her event planning too. The event planning page is down now, but you would have enjoyed it 😉

          • Cinobite

            I did the wedding of a wedding planner once, big affair, worst planned wedding I’ve ever been to lol

      • Joseph Philbert

        OMG … lost a camera LOL

      • Greg Eigsti

        The white rebel you posted above must be the replacement (or backup, nah) for this lost camera. FB shows the date on the shot of the white rebel at March 2.

    • Greg Eigsti

      >>Samen classifies herself as a naturalist photographer

      As opposed to only shooting in natural light? Only shooting in nature? Doing trail cleanup during your shoot?

      • Joel

        Have you read some of the event reviews? Either all 5 stars with overly excited reviews about how awesome everything was. Or 1 star reviews with people complaining about how horrible it is, of deleted comments / posts from customers, and how terrible the photography was. No in between ratings at all. That makes the 5 stars ratings seem highly suspicious.

        • Greg Eigsti

          Yeah read a few but did not connect on the disparity that you point out, thanks!

          These events look miserable and I was struck by her page’s photos. Absolute crap except for the occasional stolen one.

          Seriously, brides – take that $200 and buy the best camera that you can (make sure it does video too!). Find a relative who will be at the wedding and is capable of taking nice photos and hand them the camera during the wedding. You will not only end up with shots no worse than Semen’s but you will also have a new camera to start your life together with (video will become important when you start spawning)

          There, win win win

          • C Sab

            For 200 bucks all you’re gonna get is a P&S lol

          • Greg Eigsti

            But you will walk away with shit pictures and a camera vs. just shit pictures 🙂 Folks who would consider a $200 wedding package are looking for deals, stretching every last penny hard. Kai/Digital Rev just did a segment where he and Lok each got $100 to buy a DSLR – they did not get great or new cameras but they got something that can get you out of program mode and can take a variety of lenses, something quite like Autumn’s camera.

            You won’t get that optimally placed hot shoe flash though 😉

          • C Sab

            No you will not. 😉 But if you’re gonna get a P&S these days you might as well just use your phone and use the money for something else. Like an awesome bachelor/bachelorette party. 😛

    • Cinobite

      Oh right so she IS a business, so that’s another thing that goes against what she says.

      And I see that she “doesn’t do background photography” only natural light. So in other words she doesn’t know how to use a flash.

    • Michael Goolsby

      Well, after coming hear and doing the typical deny deny deny routine, she’s now moved on to the typical disappearing act after being caught in more lies and deceptions.

      The story was published in June of 2013 and is all about her becoming a business. Quite different from her coming here and insisting “I’m not a business!” She was a business… until she got caught.

      Good work, Melinda.

    • Cinobite

      “I want to be able to pull in enough to cover the loss of BAH and still work from home,”

      Well at $200 a wedding, that isn’t going to happen any time soon. Like I said, a wedding a week is $800 BEFORE expenses, she’d be lucky to come away with $400 a month to support her entire family

      • Greg Eigsti

        What expenses?
        Cheap DSLR, check.
        Kit lens, check.
        Does not pay taxes, check.
        Post processing? No evidence of that.

        So gas to get to the wedding?

        My guess is that she “serves” folks who would not be able to afford a real photographer and would opt for having their guests capture pics via cell phones. For $200 she can provide slightly better shots and it is obvious she spends no time in post. She advertises with stolen photos to make potential clients think “wow look at those results! And for only $200 she will do the same for us!”

        My dad taught me oh so long ago (and regarding tools) “don’t spend money on the crap tools, they will break, you will have to buy them again, by the time you have bought them again you will have spent more than you would have on the good tool and will still only have the crap tool which will break again.”

        • Cinobite

          She’s still in business, while I can’t imagine that she pays tax or insurance, there’s still time, fuel, wear and tear on her car, electricity to edit and charge batteries, depreciation of the camera, usually something like 2p per shot and I’m guessing she’s a spray and pray. ISP, heating, water, telephone line rental / mobile contract, paper, postage, discs, printing…

          This is why so many people fall flat on their faces, because they don’t actually realise how many expenses that are involved.

          You’re right about the tools, I had a staple gun when I started, I bought 3 cheap ones to “do the job” within 18 months, 3 years ago I bought a metal one 🙂

          • Greg Eigsti

            Good points! Again I am not a pro so I don’t consider these things. Thanks for the edumacation!

            I’ll bet a lot of these costs (mobile) are covered elsewhere (hubby’s paycheck spent at the PX). Does she even have a “pay-for” website or are they all freebie sites? At $200 a wedding she is offering “they are better, not much, but better shots than uncle Lloyd would get with his cellphone”. She does not appear to pay taxes either.

            Not to worry, with a rep like she is getting and all of those one-star reviews the only business that she gets will not require critical work. Just better than uncle Lloyd.

            For God’s sake her camera is white.

          • Cinobite

            I severely underestimated my figures when I started – the bank still gave me the loan though lol fortunately I’ve been successful. But I now have a “rule of 3” for business.

            Whatever you think you will make, divide it by 3
            Whatever you think it will cost, multiply it by 3

            Then you’ll be more in the right area 😛

          • Greg Eigsti

            Great wisdom! I do something similar when doing time estimates in my paying job – always estimate for the worst (or close to it) because “the worst” will happen 8 out of 10 times and the other two times will leave you with a little time to catch up 🙂

          • Justin Case

            I agree completely. Something it takes awhile to understand, but completely accurate.

            I have started to add the ‘jumping frog fee’ (see fourth email on this page: http://www.27bslash6.com/bob.html )

          • Greg Eigsti

            Bwahahaha, love David Thorne’s writing and all around BS tossing. Thanks for the reminder, know what I’ll be doing today 🙂

            Yeah, it can be frustrating to estimate time with someone who has less experience – thinking estimating low makes them look good. Well maybe during planning to other newbs but certainly not at the end, where it counts, when they blow over their estimates.

          • Cinobite

            And of course, the old adage;

            “Under promise, over deliver” 🙂

          • Hey! Kei from DigitalRev likes to paint DSLR’s pink!
            http://www.digitalrev.com/article/guide-to-painting-a-nikon/NzE4MQ_A_A

          • Greg Eigsti

            He also likes to give pros cheap gear and tricky assignments. Worth a watch to see how they react and adapt under pressure. Kai is the train wreck you just cannot help enjoying 🙂

          • Joseph Philbert

            We’ll she is not pay for the household .. It’s just additional income.

          • Cinobite

            On the Military link she says the plan is for her husband to leave the military and for her photography to be the sole income for the family.

          • Greg Eigsti

            Ouch. She won’t even be able to cover here WoW account.

          • MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
            God … that is hillarious!

            At 200$ per wedding, if she did 2 weddings per week, 52 weeks a year her SALES before costs and deductions would be 20800$ … that’s if every single penny of that 200$ is pure profit!

            If I am generous and assume than 1/3 of that is profit (year right), then at 104 weddings at 66 dollars profit she would make 6864$ BEFORE INCOME TAX a year working over 40 hours a week just on actual shoots, not counting running the business, drumming up new customers … so more like 70 hours a week.

            She plans on feeding her family of 5 on that?

            6864$ / 52 = 132$ a week …

          • C Sab

            Maybe if they lived in a refrigerator box. She has no idea.

          • C Sab

            She’ll learn pretty soon why actual pro wedding photographers charge so much, they deserve every penny of it. And why people like her who offer to do weddings for cheap never last.

          • Joseph Philbert

            Remember she said she is not a pro she just a pro pretender 🙂

          • C Sab

            Well at least she isn’t completely delusional.

          • Greg Eigsti

            A protender? 🙂

          • Cinobite

            I think Elvis wrote a song about them

        • Cinobite

          And as I mentioned in the other thread. Even if she had zero expenses and zero overheads and kept every penny of that $200. With a wedding every weekend, that’s still only $800 a month – could you live on $800 a month AND support your ENTIRE family only on your income?

          • Greg Eigsti

            Oh hell no! One of the reasons (of many I am sure) that being a professional photographer does not make sense for me. My “family” overhead is so high that I would have to go from unknown to one of the top 10 photographers in the world in a very short time to keep my dependents flush.

          • Joseph Philbert

            Nope!

          • Michael Goolsby

            You’re both right, actually. To her, $200 is “easy money” because she doesn’t actually treat her business as a business. She [likely] doesn’t report the income OR consider any expenses. To her, it’s $200 cash in her pocket. All that other stuff is for suckers. She probably thinks of it as $200 for six hours of work = $35 hour.

            The article talked about her doing “$5 sessions” in order to “give back to the community”. Uh uh. Supposedly, those sessions were original $40. That says it all right there… she can’t sell her product, so she’s trying to give it away.

            There’s a girl my area right now advertising on Craigslist that she’s giving away wedding photography packages that are “normally $600”. Why? She’s filling in the remaining dates on her calendar for the year. Yeah, sure. Not only is that the dumbest idea in the history of business, but it’s probably an outright lie. Very likely, she has virtually NO dates, but she’s got lots of gear not being used and needs to justify her claim that she’s “in business”. She will literally PAY TO WORK.

          • Greg Eigsti

            Agree with your summation, the expenses are soft/floating and this is a grab for a few extra dollars. But supporting a family? At her rates I could not do it humping 24×7; though I probably have a little more overhead – but three young kids. Times are tough so any extra helps – but your true measure is how you handle yourself in the hard times. She flunked.

            And totally agree with “got me a new DSLR at the WalMart I now have everything I need to be a pro” idea. Yep, they will find out if they do persist, hopefully.

    • Joseph Philbert

      Another fan page bites the dust …guess she is still reading the posts 🙂

  • Joseph Philbert

    This is her wedding camera does she even have a backup?
    :drops mic

    • Michael Goolsby

      This one picture says it all.

      I’m pretty certain that if she is still reading these posts, your remark about a “backup camera” is likely the first time she has encountered the concept.

      You see, for people like this, the mere purchase of a basic camera constitutes the fulfillment of all the necessary requirements to become a professional wedding photographer. Training? Experience? Backup gear? Surely, you jest!

      Some years ago, I attended a wedding as a guest. It was no small-budget affair, either, with a large wedding party, lots of guests, a rented limo, and a country club catered reception. But the photographer was dismal. A woman wearing clothes more appropriate for grocery shopping, wielding a digital Rebel with an 18-55 kit lens. She shot the ceremony from the rear of the church with the short lens on (I assume her only lens) and the pop-up flash firing. (I had shot in the church before, and knew it had no practical restrictions about movement and position. No rules about flash, either, but I never use flash during a ceremony!) In fact, every shot used pop-up flash. Even the family portraits afterwards, where I found myself unable to turn away from the train wreck.

      This woman is probably about as qualified as the photographer I saw at that wedding. (With her shoe-mounted flash, she might, of course, think herself even more “qualified”!) I feel so badly for these brides who don’t know any better and who trust these quacks. Between the Facebook pages with fake recommendations, the sample photographs stolen from other real photographers, and all the promise of “I’ll be your BFF photographer on your wedding day”, it’s completely understandable how so many brides get completely swindled.

      And that’s why PhotoStealers is such a vital website in our community.

      • Melinda Potter

        FLASH?! She’s a “naturalist” Michael. She duct tapes that pop up down!

      • C Sab

        That camera looks like a damn toy.

        • Cinobite

          You all keep talking about it, I really want to see it now!!

      • Cinobite

        And yet, when we slap on a stumpy 50mm 1.4 “little tiny lens”, people think we’re the amateurs 😛

        • C Sab

          A nifty-fifty lens should be in every photographer’s kit. 😛

          • Greg Eigsti

            Here here! Love me nifty fifty and it has a spot in whatever bag (so small/light/cheap too). Favorite for walking around downtown and it is great in the RoundFlash for portraits – it gets you close enough for a nice bath of soft light and great catch lights. Prefer it on APSC crop (~85 equiv) but don’t do crop sensor any longer so am really eyeing the 85 1.2L and hoping Sigma does an Art in 85mm but have heard nothing to support that.

            So many lenses so little time (and money) 🙂

          • C Sab

            Ugh, don’t I know it. I’m thinking of a macro lens next to compliment my kit lens, nifty-fifty and telephoto. Plus with macro it’s super easy to get amazing photo’s from almost anything.

          • Greg Eigsti

            I am a Canon shooter and have have the 100mm 2.8L Macro – highly recommended! Relatively inexpensive, sharp, macro… I really really like mine for both macro and “regular” use. Wifey loves it on her crop SL1.

          • C Sab

            I shoot Nikon. lol

          • Greg Eigsti

            The D800 almost got me 🙂

          • C Sab

            I’m upgrading to the D7100. Amazing camera.

          • Cinobite

            Indeed, but the looks of “you’re an amateur ripping them off” you get when shooting with a 50 by all of the mwacs with the 18-5,000mm 5.6-22 kit lenses is priceless. Of course, that usually changes when you whip out the 70-200 2.8 beast and they start saying how you have such a great camera 😛 Even though they don’t realise that you 5ft lens means you have to be somewhere down the road to use it 😛

          • C Sab

            Pft, people who give those looks are just noobs who think their expensive hardware is gonna magically make them a great photographer. It is priceless and it makes me laugh though. 😛

    • Greg Eigsti

      Yeah she has a cellphone. Do you have a problem with that?

      • Joseph Philbert

        Smh

      • C Sab

        I think he meant an actual camera.

        • Greg Eigsti

          My point exactly 🙂

          • C Sab

            Hard to notice sarcasm with just text. 😛

          • Greg Eigsti

            Haha, yeah sarcasm – I’m kinda that way. Have enjoyed that lovable idiot Kai and the Digital Rev “pro photographer cheap camera” show. Pretty cool to see photographers who know what they are doing create some pretty cool work with CRAP equipment. Autumn is in a different league though, unfortunately not a league of her own 🙁

          • C Sab

            I was able to take these with a point and shoot a few years before I got my first SLR. Pretty much proves your point about taking good images with crap equipment. 😉 And yes, both the cars in the photos and the car I was in when i took these were moving at the same time. We were on our way to a car show. lol

          • Greg Eigsti

            Ha! Takin pix while driving – the only justification for P mode 🙂

          • MPR1776

            @ 65mph in a big rig, Nevada 2010, there are some amazing pics being taken with some very inexpensive equipment, never say never

          • Greg Eigsti

            Driving, M mode, that fine shot? Nice work! 😉 Looks kinda familiar, been to McDermitt (NV OR border), Winnemucca, etc. a few times. Sounds like you are a pro driver – one thing that always struck me when driving in that area is how much better maintained the NV roads are. Gambling money I guess, vs. OR’s dismally pathetic socialist regime.

            Good photographers do not need expensive equipment to make good shots and it does not matter what equipment a bad photographer has they will not be consistent.

            Here is one I got (A mode) driving to work between 5 and 6 am (very little traffic so I indulged myself). Two pristinely restored classic cars, this Chrysler was my favorite.

          • MPR1776

            I like it, love old cars!

          • C Sab

            Well like I said, these were taken with a point and shoot 😛

    • Cinobite

      What camera? I don’t see shit … and the old/second fb page is down now 😛

      • C Sab

        Really? You don’t see the image?

        • Cinobite

          Ah ok, after someone (you?) mentioned a link to P&S shots I had an idea…. my Adblocker was blocking all links and images in the comments….. oohh I’m seeing all kinds of new content now 😛

          • C Sab

            Ah. Can you see it now?

    • Cinobite

      How do you hold a camera like that? 😛

      • Joseph Philbert

        Guess she never learned how to hold a camera properly … #gofigure

        • C Sab

          Never would have imagined that. -_-

  • Melinda Potter
    • Greg Eigsti

      There is an apology comment on the page

      Quoted/copy/paste
      I have taken down my Ideas/Pinterest Album, I had posted it because I was wanting to venture into new genres of photography. And although I had posted credited links to Google and pinterest where I found them, It upset people because it could be understood like I was claiming they where my work. However I did not change, edit, alter or place my watermark on those image and I never intended for anyone to believe that they where my pieces of art. I apologize if it was misleading to anyone!! And I apologize to the artists if they believed my intentions where anything but honorable! For this moment on, I will make sure to link from my personal pinterest site only and never upload any images to my page.

      • Melinda Potter

        It wasn’t just an album filled with stolen images/content. It was all over her notes and pricing and all of her marketing, but at least things seem clean now. Other than that one pesky image that’s still up on her site.

        • Greg Eigsti

          I wondered about the “new” pricing? I remember the “$200 wedding” but the prices on the new FB page seem a lot higher than I remember them being at the beginning of this.

          So her lesson learned is “charge more it makes you look professional”. Sigh. Off to bang my head on something very hard. She is now starting to enter bridezilla territory by charging more and being unable to deliver.

          Sure seems like she is willing to do the least amount possible to make this go away.

    • Joseph Philbert

      Strange the images on square still there

    • Greg Eigsti

      This makes me giggle

      Quoted/copy/paste
      Are you a photographer? Want to broaden your portfolio a bit, for hobby or professional purposes? I always welcome guest photographers to my free/charity mini sessions!

    • At least you can tell it;s all her images there now … bad, bad images!

      • Greg Eigsti

        Which is why the comment I just posted makes me giggle – maybe someone will take her up on her offer to join in and teach her something.

      • Joseph Philbert

        yep .. easy now.

    • Michael Goolsby

      Good to see that she’s not using stolen images now.

      I am reminded of the exchange between Willie Wonka and Charlie Bucket at then end of the 1971 movie, when Charlie asks if all the nasty kids are going to be ok. Wonka, seeing how kind Charlie is, assure him that they will all be returned to their normal selves, but, he adds, “I think that they will all go home a bit WISER.”

      It is a shame that, for most, these lessons must be learned the hardest way. And when I see fauxs like this girl playing the victim to the end, I wonder if they ever really learn anything in life, or if life is just a series of poor choices and they are merely a step away from their next tragic misstep. Of course, it’s clear that, as a photographer, this and other fauxs never were really pros in the first place. They may have gleamed a few clients here or there, but the act of stealing photography spoke more about trying to be a pro by means of unscrupulous shortcuts than by actually learning and being a pro.

      • Joseph Philbert

        Well no stolen images on facebook at least but on her “squareup” site its still have some.

  • Photog

    they are doing a giveaway now though

  • Brooke Summer

    She has taken down my photo, however there are still numerous stolen photos, with WATERMARK on the website. She seems interested in trying to save face, and not do what is right.

    • Trunks Photography

      Which website Brooke, I will fix that now. I am sure I took them all down off square.

  • Justin Case

    well, she got a new camera, new Adobe CC software and she is back up. Looks like she is offering lots of free sessions so she can practice and perhaps get more of her own work to show.

    I wish that people would have more respect for our profession than thinking owning a camera is enough to start taking other people’s money and calling yourself a ‘pro.’ At least now her clients can see what they are getting.

    I call this one a ‘win’ for the good guys, but I plan to check back every once in awhile…

    • Michael Goolsby

      Yes, the promotions are going in full force. But geez, the capability just isn’t there. Why oh why do so many people insist on going into business before they have a clue what they’re doing? This girl is like one of those tone-deaf people we see on American Idol auditions, the ones who sound terrible but have no clue that they’re being laughed at. This comment isn’t intended to be mean… if anything, I feel bad for her. She might could actually learn something one day if she would just stop with the “I’ve got a camera and now I’m ready to do your mini-session!” mentality. I do indeed just wish she’d pause, take a step back, and LEARN for a while first. Getting clients for a trained photographer is difficult enough these days. This girl isn’t going to attract much business with yet-another-Facebook-promotion featuring snapshots of her dog and tree branches, two things no one actually pays for.

      • Justin Case

        Again, sadly, the internet and the immediacy of digital imaging is part of the problem. People may make fun of the ‘Rebel’ and kit lens, but they make far better images right out of the box than my old Nikons (or Leicas, for that matter) could … until I spent the years learning how to compose, expose, develop and print. Mind you, I thought I was great, but I managed to quickly find people better than me to let me know how much I still had to learn.

        Add to that the built-in support of friends and family on Facebook, Instagram et al telling you how great you are, and it’s awfully hard to know how good (or really, how bad) you really are.

        Being a professional means above all being able to provide a guarantee of a certain standard of quality. No matter what your equipment, experience or inherent talent, you should not be in business until you can make that guarantee.

        • Joseph Philbert

          Equipment dont matter to a point… canon entry level is not a big problem but shooting wedding with a kit lens is a practice in futility.
          Well for the type of quality he faked with stealing images.

      • C Sab

        I agree because at the risk of sounding mean: her pictures suck and she has no idea what she’s doing. Any kid with a cell phone could easily take pictures of the same quality or maybe even better.

  • Theoderik

    Facebook page is still up.

    • Joseph Philbert

      Yes but she has removed all images..on her site she has a few new images not hers in the event section.

  • MLee Kneer

    She’s back up and running on facebook!