Asking Photographer For All Raw Files...Should I?

01/18/2007 10:39:15 PM · #51

Originally posted by Adrionni:

I'm entitled to my opinion, and for 15k I will have cousin Bob or Uncle Ray-Ray snap a few pics!!!

No body said you couldn't have an opinion. We're just expressing ours as well. And I'm under the impression that your budget isn't anywhere near 15K so probably using a less than pro photographer is your best bet.

01/18/2007 10:40:25 PM · #52

Tell Annie Leibovitz that she isn't worth $100k a day.... lol

fotomann_forever

01/18/2007 10:41:23 PM · #53

Originally posted by idnic:

Tell Annie Leibovitz that she isn't worth $100k a day.... lol

:-)

01/18/2007 10:41:55 PM · #54

See, this is what I'm talking about! LOL, I can see it now....

Photog spends a couple hours snapping pics

Before he leaves, we go to the bridal suite to download them to my laptop

We pay him, and that's it!

Perfect!

He has money in his pocket and is free to move on to the next client!

Originally posted by crayon:

Originally posted by PhantomEWO:

Originally posted by srdanz:
I do not understand the exclusiveness here. There are no prewritten rules to which photogs must adhere to. Contracts are contracts and anything can be put in them. It may cost more, it may include the clause "don't mention my name" in which case there is no opportunity for repeat orders, but there is no cost associated with the time it would take the photog to postprocess those files.

All said, it is possible to find a photographer that will do this. It may or may not cost you more, and you will definitively want to put all the details of your deal in a contract.

Yup that's what I was saying too

just what i was thinking too. save your post-processing time too, how cool is that? but for the reputation-sake (if you have any) then you may want to add something in the contract to ensure the bad-photos do not get linked back to you, or your business.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

01/18/2007 10:42:56 PM · #55

Originally posted by idnic:

Originally posted by Adrionni:
I'm entitled to my opinion, and for 15k I will have cousin Bob or Uncle Ray-Ray snap a few pics!!!

No body said you couldn't have an opinion. We're just expressing ours as well. And I'm under the impression that your budget isn't anywhere near 15K so probably using a less than pro photographer is your best bet.

You know nothing about me or my budget. Why are you so butt-hurt???

wavelength

Nikon D300

01/18/2007 10:42:57 PM · #56

Originally posted by chimericvisions:

Originally posted by wavelength:

Originally posted by Adrionni:

Originally posted by rlinn3:
If you paid me 3 times my normal fee, @ $5,000, maybe. Other than that no way.

$15k for a few pics??? What are you SMOKING??? LOL. Photography is not rocket science, and it's not that serious.

What's your job? Do you consider your livelihood serious? If you think that a skilled photographer isn't necessary, go take your chances on Craigslist, maybe you'll get lucky and get someone good like Erik, maybe you'll get a total moron that will ruin your wedding pics.

Apparently you don't respect photography as a skill or discipline, and this is the greatest reason that I detest the idea of giving people like you my negatives.

That's a ridiculous statement. Being baffled that anyone would charge $15,000 for standing around and taking photos for a couple hours has nothing to do with respecting photography. It has to do with loony-bin crazy prices. *Nobody* is worth $5000 an hour. Nobody.

it's not one hour, which proves how little you know about any of this.

It's hours meeting with the couple, going over the shots, taking the engagement photos, the rehearsal, the rehearsal dinner, the wedding preparation, the ceremony, the bridal party shots and family portraits, the wedding dinner. It's two freaking days at least for a proper wedding package, not just standing about picking your nose and pointing the silly camera thingy at people.

AND THEN, you spend hours processing photos, running actions, tweaking, interpolating, cropping, and generally perfecting your art untily you've created something that only an artist can be proud of. Not the work of a hack, but someone who pours their soul into their work.

Something you obviously DO NOT value. You can't respect something that you don't have the least clue about.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

01/18/2007 10:45:43 PM · #57

Originally posted by Adrionni:

Originally posted by rlinn3:
If you paid me 3 times my normal fee, @ $5,000, maybe. Other than that no way.

$15k for a few pics??? What are you SMOKING??? LOL. Photography is not rocket science, and it's not that serious.

If you have that kind of reaction to the thought of paying $15K, don't call Gary Fong.

or Dennis Reggie.

or Bambi Cantrell

or a host of others that easily command $15K and much more to shoot a wedding.

If it's not that serious for you, why not just get some homeless guy off the street and give him a camera? Just set it on "P" (for "P"rofessional) and let him have at it. You could probably get him to do it for $20 and a sandwich. I bet he'd even let you have the RAW files.

01/18/2007 10:45:56 PM · #58

Whatever you say!

Originally posted by wavelength:

Originally posted by chimericvisions:

Originally posted by wavelength:

Originally posted by Adrionni:

Originally posted by rlinn3:
If you paid me 3 times my normal fee, @ $5,000, maybe. Other than that no way.

$15k for a few pics??? What are you SMOKING??? LOL. Photography is not rocket science, and it's not that serious.

What's your job? Do you consider your livelihood serious? If you think that a skilled photographer isn't necessary, go take your chances on Craigslist, maybe you'll get lucky and get someone good like Erik, maybe you'll get a total moron that will ruin your wedding pics.

Apparently you don't respect photography as a skill or discipline, and this is the greatest reason that I detest the idea of giving people like you my negatives.

That's a ridiculous statement. Being baffled that anyone would charge $15,000 for standing around and taking photos for a couple hours has nothing to do with respecting photography. It has to do with loony-bin crazy prices. *Nobody* is worth $5000 an hour. Nobody.

it's not one hour, which proves how little you know about any of this.

It's hours meeting with the couple, going over the shots, taking the engagement photos, the rehearsal, the rehearsal dinner, the wedding preparation, the ceremony, the bridal party shots and family portraits, the wedding dinner. It's two freaking days at least for a proper wedding package, not just standing about picking your nose and pointing the silly camera thingy at people.

AND THEN, you spend hours processing photos, running actions, tweaking, interpolating, cropping, and generally perfecting your art untily you've created something that only an artist can be proud of. Not the work of a hack, but someone who pours their soul into their work.

Something you obviously DO NOT value. You can't respect something that you don't have the least clue about.

01/18/2007 10:46:20 PM · #59

Originally posted by Adrionni:

Originally posted by idnic:

Originally posted by Adrionni:
I'm entitled to my opinion, and for 15k I will have cousin Bob or Uncle Ray-Ray snap a few pics!!!

No body said you couldn't have an opinion. We're just expressing ours as well. And I'm under the impression that your budget isn't anywhere near 15K so probably using a less than pro photographer is your best bet.

You know nothing about me or my budget. Why are you so butt-hurt???

LMAO Put your money where your mouth is, if your a photographer, lets see some photography, otherwise you sound like a budget-minded bride trying to cut a buck where she can.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

01/18/2007 10:46:52 PM · #60

And he would probably do a better job than most of the people on you A list.

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by Adrionni:

Originally posted by rlinn3:
If you paid me 3 times my normal fee, @ $5,000, maybe. Other than that no way.

$15k for a few pics??? What are you SMOKING??? LOL. Photography is not rocket science, and it's not that serious.

If you have that kind of reaction to the thought of paying $15K, don't call Gary Fong.

or Dennis Reggie.

or Bambi Cantrell

or a host of others that easily command $15K and much more to shoot a wedding.

If it's not that serious for you, why not just get some homeless guy off the street and give him a camera? Just set it on "P" (for "P"rofessional) and let him have at it. You could probably get him to do it for $20 and a sandwich. I bet he'd even let you have the RAW files.

wavelength

Nikon D300

01/18/2007 10:48:13 PM · #61

Is your real name Rose? Gawd!

01/18/2007 10:48:37 PM · #62

Originally posted by wavelength:

Is your real name Rose? Gawd!

ROFLMAO

01/18/2007 10:49:14 PM · #63

Call it how you see it! As a photog, I know what's reasonable for the effort expended and what's not.

The bigger issue here is that I want more control over the post processing, to the point where I am willing to do it myself! It's me and my family that have to look at these pics for the rest of our lives, not him!

Originally posted by idnic:

Originally posted by Adrionni:

Originally posted by idnic:

Originally posted by Adrionni:
I'm entitled to my opinion, and for 15k I will have cousin Bob or Uncle Ray-Ray snap a few pics!!!

No body said you couldn't have an opinion. We're just expressing ours as well. And I'm under the impression that your budget isn't anywhere near 15K so probably using a less than pro photographer is your best bet.

You know nothing about me or my budget. Why are you so butt-hurt???

LMAO Put your money where your mouth is, if your a photographer, lets see some photography, otherwise you sound like a budget-minded bride trying to cut a buck where she can.

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

01/18/2007 10:49:48 PM · #64

Who is Rose?

Originally posted by wavelength:

Is your real name Rose? Gawd!

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

01/18/2007 10:50:33 PM · #65

Originally posted by Adrionni:

And he would probably do a better job than most of the people on you A list.

Unfortunately, there's probably some truth in that statement. Not all pros who call themselves pro actually do a pro job. But the statement, you get what you pay for, has some merit.

yanko

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Carl Zeiss 50mm ZE f/1.4 Planar T for Canon

01/18/2007 10:50:48 PM · #66

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

LOL. But you also have to remind him to put the card in the camera otherwise he might shoot the entire wedding without one. :P

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

01/18/2007 10:51:49 PM · #67

Originally posted by Adrionni:

You know nothing about me or my budget.

Are you on that "Bridezillas" TV show?

Sigma 15mm f/2.8 EX Diagonal Fisheye for Nikon

01/18/2007 10:52:00 PM · #68

Ok, my final thought before I leave this ridiculous discussion (probably). If you hire a professional you pay them for their experience and allow them to do their job. You wouldn't go to the doctor's office and only pay him for the incision since you could do the stitches yourself. You trust the professional to do what he is skilled at doing. Many professional photographers study for years, earn degrees and acclaim in their field and you pay for that. In the end, its all in what you are willing to pay for. Do you want caviar or a hot dog?

muckpond

Nikon D200

01/18/2007 10:52:10 PM · #69

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

If it's not that serious for you, why not just get some homeless guy off the street and give him a camera? Just set it on "P" (for "P"rofessional) and let him have at it. You could probably get him to do it for $20 and a sandwich. I bet he'd even let you have the RAW files.

ok, well just a cold sandwich. not a hot sandwich. and NO condiments!

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

01/18/2007 10:52:13 PM · #70

But seriously!! Why are y'all getting all butt-hurt?? I've already told you that I respect the game, but you insist on attacking me personally YET YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT ME!!

wavelength

Nikon D300

01/18/2007 10:52:56 PM · #71

Originally posted by Adrionni:

We can't exactly see it without seeing anything of yours, now can we? From the apparent apathy and disdain that you treat the subject, I doubt that you put nearly the effort into any one of your pictures that most people on this site do.