School photo time - something you just ‘can’t miss out on’ - the opportunity to capture that precious annual snapshot of the offspring dressed in the finest uniform they often love to hate.
Over the last 20 years or so, across a number of states an territories, I’ve experienced the joy of ordering school photos for my kids. My perception is that over this time the market has narrowed substantially to the point where it is dominated by large player(s) who seem to be defining the product and normalising the standard of service, so to speak …
I think this would be an excellent topic for a CHOICE product test - while there are still enough players in the market to have some comparison.
Areas for investigation, testing and comparison could include:
is there choice of service provider? School photo days are disruptive, so the options here might be limited by practicality, but I’ve heard tell of places this happens - myth?
is there a reasonable range of photo pack options available?
are the photo pack options a reasonable price? considerations might include electronic ordering, that it is a mass photo shoot, processing/delivery in bulk, etc
is the time-frame for delivery reasonable? what should a parent expect?
does the service provider give alternate delivery options for separated families, potentially where the family might be geographically dispersed?
does the service provider take quality control and complaints seriously?
in cases where an issue with the product can be established, does the service provider fix the problem or simply refund all or part of the fee?
are students given appropriate preparation time and facilities to ‘check and tweak their appearance’?
is there any real-time review of the images captured?
are students with special needs identified and catered for? for example those with disabilities or who are particularly shy/self conscious …
does the service provider make any statements or claims as to the background checks and/or ‘working with children clearances’ its staff may have?
is there sufficient online security to ensure any digital products are made available only to the parent or guardian? (there is also the bigger question about what information and images are stored in a location potentially accessible online for each student).
a little off topic:
should the school take any responsibility for the service provided (given they ‘choose the provider’)
should the school take any responsibility or at least provide a facility for distributing photos to separated parents, particularly when this could include geographical factors.
if ordered online, what are the terms, conditions and exclusions the service provider expects you have agreed to? were these made clear and are they even enforceable given the notification mechanisms at the relevant online site? (hard for the consumer to know - what constitutes a binding agreement or contract and how is it executed online? possibly a topic in itself).
if ordered manually, were complete terms, conditions and exclusions provided in writing at time of order?
is there transparency in the selection process of the service provider? I’ve heard some ‘interesting though anecdotal’ stories about how this business is sometimes awarded …
What other questions could be asked?
There are a number of online review sites that give an interesting and varied picture of some players in the market …
Of passing interest is this notice on the ordering page of one well known service provider:
Imagine if this notice was displayed at the checkout of a physical store …
I don’t see what the problem is with that message. You’ve seen the photo, chosen the size and type of photo and this is a special order that can’t be resold so why would you have an issue with no refunds?
They don’t say they won’t replace faulty photos and the message is clear that you can’t cancel after you order.
Physically stores have similar notices for special one off products that can’t be resold and if they don’t it’s implied and common sense. If you commission an artist to create a painting of Auntie Doris or a stonemason to create a bust of Uncle Bob do you think you can cancel the order after placing it?
In a store, such a sign claiming a blanket policy of no refunds is simply illegal:
‘No refund’ signs and expired warranties
Signs stating ‘No refunds’ or ‘No refunds or exchanges on sale items’ are unlawful, as they imply that it’s not possible to get a refund under any circumstances, including for faulty items. In fact your consumer guarantee rights still apply. Retailers don’t have to give you a refund or exchange if you simply change your mind. Always check the store’s returns policy.
Your rights under the consumer guarantees do not have a specific expiry date and can apply even after any warranties you’ve got from a business have expired.
There are situations where a refund or some kind of reparation would be legally required - the issue here is the impression given … The terms and conditions of the site I referenced do give detail of circumstances where refunds might apply, hence the contradiction (front counter vs fine print and the likelihood of a consumer reading both) and the reason this kind of sign is illegal.
Some things have changed in the over 30 years since I did a few years of taking school photos- such as digital photography and the internet becoming publicly available for orders etc, but I’m sure much is the same on the business side of things.
It is a cutthroat business, I was just unable to compete with the large companies moving into the field in the mid-late 80s. Large sums of money are offered to schools in order to get the contracts, eventually well beyond what I was able to pay and still make a reasonable amount of money (ie more than a few dollars per hour!). Costs for me to get film processed and photos printed were well above costs for the large companies, since I had to pay a local camera store, whom I knew they were making more from it than I was. The big companies could sell their photos to the students for less than what I was paying the camera store!
Now with digital photography there is the option for review, but perhaps not the time, as a day of taking thousands of photos leaves little time for that. When I was in the business, you really had to know what you were doing, as there was no option for immediate review on film. 2nd photos were sometimes taken of a student when it was obvious to me that they had blinked or they told me so, but that was only a tiny percentage of the total. For group photos- classes, teachers, sport and other teams etc, 2 or 3 photos were always taken, and the best selected.
I generally held on to negatives for a few years in case of new orders, but usually it was only 1 or zero in total.
But this isn’t in a store and is displayed before you place an order for a specially made one off product that you have viewed to confirm was correct and cannot be resold. Aside from non delivery and a faulty photo both of such would be corrected why is that message a problem?
It is possibly not about the product after sale, but trying to exit from a purchase after payment has been made. It is possibly closer to one losing a deposit on a house (no deposit refund) rather than refund on a purchased product.
If the photos were unacceptable on receipt (such as poor quality or one’s child not in the photo), then one would expect the ACL to apply and one of the remedies is an refund.
ACL applies online as it does with physical stores - making a blanket statement about ‘no refund’ is illegal as per the link above, and you’ve listed two potential reasons why a refund would apply which amply illustrates the problem. Whether it is before or after the sale is executed and whether the product is unique does not appear to be a factor to the ACCC … I understand you don’t see a problem with that message, but it seems the ACCC would - If there is evidence to the contrary i’d be interested to see it.
Note that I did mention this was of passing interest, and ‘imagine if’ - I don’t think we need to imagine, the evidence seems clear … now, possibly, back to the main thrust of the topic?
This issue is not limited to schools. Many organisations catering to young 'ns take annual commemorative individual and group photos.
In your list above @draughtrider, I’m not sure you covered publication/use of the images. There should be an ability by parents to limit the use of their child’s/children’s image(s) to only the production of prints/electronic copies for the parents. Sometimes the organisation also wants to use the photos for publicity & social media and this should be made clear and approval sought before the photos are taken.
Another thing we’ve noticed is some photographers get very narky when anyone tries to take photos at the same time, as though grouping the kids is somehow their artistic property, which it is not in my opinion.
What really amuses me about the process (at least at my daughter’s high school) is the school photo photographer also takes (and I assume produces) the Student ID cards. Assuming the school pays for the photo taking and production of the plastic ID card, all the rest is pure profit less of course a little for the glossy paper and so on used in the presentation packs.
The Student ID cards have to be done in the first couple of weeks of school in South East Queensland, as Translink (the public transport provider) has a cut off on 31 March for the production of student cards at a ‘Gocard’ reseller to gain/retain the Student discount on public transport. My daughters school usually makes the cut off by a day or two.
In a country far away across the pond in years gone by when every ‘pharmacy’ had a photo printing machine it was common for them to refund any photo they printed that you did not like. It did not matter if it was a poor print, fuzzy and out of focus, or you just did not like it. It was considered good business and good customer service. Some business cultures are different from others.
Under the Australian Consumer Law, when you buy products and services they come with automatic guarantees that they will work and do what you asked for. If you buy something that isn’t right, you have consumer rights. Signs and notices declaring other outcomes are irrelevant
My bad experience relates to the year 12 formal. I purchased a package in advance (which was the only option). I never received any photos. I checked with my son that photos had been taken. I had a receipt so I Googled the company and went to the website - there were no contact details, no phone number, address, email, nothing. In other circumstances, I would have thought that it was a scam but they were the same company that took the annual class photos. I approached the school, I searched other online resources, and in the end I gave up. I got some copies of casual shots taken by some of his friends. Very disappointing.
The most annoying thing I found was that the photo company stopped having a group photo and instead just offered a single head shot of each student. I found this very unsatisfactory.
I’ve been increasingly unsatisfied with the school photos in recent years (3 different companies).
I’d like a full-resolution digital file of the class photo and a full-resolution digital file of my child individually. Instead I get offered a range of different packages that include neither of those!
I’d like to see a re-structuring such that the digital file is default, with various printed pieces as optional extras.
It would seem reasonable given the cost of the prints. However are we then fighting the reality that the IP belongs to the photographer?
It is easy to see that point when the photographer using all their talent has spent a month of Sunday mornings capturing the perfect mist shrouded country lane with day break in the back ground and a mob of rare rock wallabies in the foreground.
For a school or class photography, it is one setting does all. Just make sure you have consistent lighting, neutral background and the rest is all done with digital precision. The real IP arguably is the way the personalities in the photos present themselves. Hardly something attributable to the photographer, or is it given the photographers choice to take the shot at the worst moment and move on?
We have a collection of our children in class photos. The real value is in the collection of faces and names attached. The photographic quality and artistic value is insignificant. Perhaps there is a different way to do this, as you suggest. We also would no longer consider prints acceptable. Full Digital copies or nought?
P.S. someone in the community might like to suggest, that given the right environment and lighting whether anything more sophisticated than a good mobile phone camera in a steady mount would suffice most needs these days? EG Schools could collect a nominal fee per student and distribute digital copies accordingly. Up to the recipient to forward them to a professional printing service if required.
Yes, that’s a point I should have included. I don’t want a “glamour shot”. I want my kids to be able to go back and remember the faces of their friends in the context of the group. It’s a wonderful thing to have.
Yes again! That seems to me to be a reasonable idea. A simple system like that might allow for re-takes rather than expensive retouching.
IP is an interesting thing. I’m led to believe that there are certain places and things you cannot photograph for profit because the place or thing is unique and in some way protected - That big tower in Paris, but only at night, and parts of that big rock in the middle of nowhere … but the reasons vary - unsure I could class my kids faces as works of art, as lovely as they look to me, but ultimately for someone as a routine job to take a photo and call it “intellectual property” is a bit stiff … (I go with BS actually, but …).
The school could probably just do slightly better ID cards and then combine onto a single image - theres no real reason to know Simon was short, John was fat (can we say that?) and Estelle had, well, whatever Estelle had - just a head and shoulders would be fine. I remember my first company ID was done by a professional photo studio - took half an hour, umbrellas and lighting and the like, and real film - more recently its whatever dodgy webcam or point and shoot for most company/government ID’s … would need something better for a school shot …
I suppose another option would be for a parent to take theirr own camera on the day of the school photo and take a photo of the class.
It would be interesting to see how the school would deal with such. In Queensland parents have to sign a photo authority form to allow the school to take photos of children. I wonder if this would slso be enforces on parents who also wish to take school class photos?
Yes they would require consent from the parents/guardians and school authorties to photograph a group of minors or a minor who is not their child/ren while on school grounds. If they took a photo outside those grounds I don’t think there is currently legislation that would ban/hinder it. This is because School Grounds are not considered “Public Property” and thus privacy legislation is enforceable however there is no such privacy protection on public property.
