What's even funnier is that he always says this too. "You know, your mouth and attitude aren't helping you any. I suggest you just be quiet." Of course, they never do. I loved her response when he said he used to do photography "yeah and when was THAT?!?!" -----Original Message----- >From: Jay Paxton <JayPax@xxxxxxxx> >Sent: Jan 4, 2011 11:08 AM >To: nikonf4@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: [nikonf4] Re: Wedding photography > >And of course, the defendants violated the first rule of being in court: > > >"Don't p*** off the judge by being a smart mouth." > >-----Original Message----- >From: nikonf4-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:nikonf4-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] >On Behalf Of tigermike@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 10:03 AM >To: nikonf4@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: [nikonf4] Re: Wedding photography > >The defendants were lying, they were hoping that saying "we didn't meet >her at a wedding show" would be enough to break the plaintiff's case. >Problem is, some people are just plain naive and take verbal promises of >"you will get professional prints" as that. As the old addage goes, >"you get what you paid for." >"How fast is your lens? You are using a Rebel XT, and you are a pro? >Where's your 1-series, 7D, 5D, hell 10D? The Xt is your base model! >Where's your 28-70? How can you get a decent photo with such a slow >lens, the cheapest you can buy!" LMAO, I loved it! > > >-----Original Message----- >>From: Mark Stein <mjstein63@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>Sent: Jan 3, 2011 5:39 PM >>To: nikonf4@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>Subject: [nikonf4] Re: Wedding photography >> >>Nice to see bad pros slapped down, but the plaintiff made her own >>mistakes... >> >>Why was there no mention of a contract, which should have listed what >>the deliverables were? If she didn't meet them at a wedding show, >then >>did she really see samples of their work? >> >> >> >>On 1/3/2011 11:15 AM, Frank Armstrong wrote: >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIiH9uxdE5M >>> >>> >> >> > > >