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

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

01/18/2007 09:58:06 PM · #27

Originally posted by alfresco:

Originally posted by idnic:
... I receive a nice annual salary ...

SugarMomma??

We can talk... you do dishes? ;)

Spork99

Canon EOS M6 Mk II

Canon EF-M 22mm STM Lens

01/18/2007 09:58:45 PM · #28

Originally posted by muckpond:

btw, i believe eric limon (a current/former member here) has this kind of pricing structure and his work and clientbase don't seem to be suffering much from it:

//www.blacklightphoto.com/

He's not giving away RAW files. Hi-Res processed jpegs, yes, but not RAW files. I think his prices also reflect the loss of potential future profits from prints.

I favor this kind of package, for various reasons:

1. I don't have to archive and keep track of 4-5GB of images per wedding.

2. I can include those future profits in my package price and get paid now rather than waiting for the 25th wedding anniversary to get an 8x10 for the "then" half of the then and now pictures.

3. It's hard to explain to wedding clients why they have to come back to you for prints.

wavelength

Nikon D300

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

01/18/2007 09:59:56 PM · #29

Originally posted by idnic:

My day job is as a graphic designer - I promise you I receive a nice annual salary for giving away my intellectual property. My photography work is worth no less.

Yup, and if I were a staff photog for a paper/magazine, I wouldn't be quibbling about any copyrights, because the press status would give me the ability to do things and go places I would otherwise be barred from. If you create work on a commission basis, you have to decide what your worth is. Giving away your negatives for a wedding might be worth it, but the price would have to be right for you is all.

ClementeH

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Sigma 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DL Aspherical IF Hyperzoom for Canon

01/18/2007 10:02:58 PM · #30

When I got married, that was a KEY feature I looked for. The thought of paying thousands of dollars for a photographer and then not having the files repulsed me. My photographers willingly gave me the original pics on DVD's (all 1,000 of them). As a result, I have recommended them to anyone with upcoming weddings and numerous of my friends have used them since. Their business has grown a great deal in the past few years -- probably due to all of the satisfied customers like me that referred them without reservation.

Helio

crayon

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH1

01/18/2007 10:04:38 PM · #31

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

2. I can include those future profits in my package price and get paid now rather than waiting for the 25th wedding anniversary to get an 8x10 for the "then" half of the then and now pictures.

Again, this sounds very intelligent too.

Message edited by author 2007-01-18 22:05:07.

fotomann_forever

01/18/2007 10:06:25 PM · #32

People talk about giving away negatives. Been there done that. BUT, not many consumers can process a negative. You're guaranteed at least a decent print.

However, almost any Joe with a computer CAN process a RAW file. You aren't guaranteed that they will do it well. Hell, many of them can totally ruin a JPEG.

It irks me to no end when I do a TFCD for a model and I see butchered hack jobs posted on their Myspace or Model Mayhem page.

I can imagine how pissed I'd be if if came back to me that a bride was unhappy with her prints because her hubby sucked at PPing them. Not to say the OP would suck at PPing them.

Message edited by author 2007-01-18 22:10:26.

alfresco

Nikon D700

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

01/18/2007 10:08:17 PM · #33

Originally posted by idnic:

Originally posted by alfresco:

Originally posted by idnic:
... I receive a nice annual salary ...
SugarMomma??

We can talk... you do dishes? ;)

And peel grapes.

As a bonus if you squint just right in harsh overwhelming sunlight, right after you get out of the pool with your eyes burning from the chlorine, I'm eye candy.

crayon

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH1

01/18/2007 10:09:05 PM · #34

Originally posted by Shakalaka:

I can imagine how pissed I'd be if if came back to me that a bride was unhappy with her prints because her hubby sucked at PPing them.

Good point, and i believe that is one major factor why most photog decides not to release the originals (untouched) image to their customers. but i think a certain addition in the contract (coupled with a pre-caution to the customer and his bride) would be necessary to avoid misunderstandings and bad reputation.

Marc923

01/18/2007 10:12:11 PM · #35

I've discovered that in the actor headshot world it's not uncommon to slap something like 30 usable shots (hi-res jpegs) on a disc and hand it over to the client. No processing other than convert to B&W. Some will offer, for an extra fee (or part of the package), re-touching work on a select few shots.

It used to be the photographer would hand over a print and then the person would take the print to a business that specialized in re-touching and printing.

I know it's not wedding related. Just thought I'd share a different view.

idnic

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

01/18/2007 10:22:00 PM · #36

Originally posted by alfresco:

Originally posted by idnic:

Originally posted by alfresco:

Originally posted by idnic:
... I receive a nice annual salary ...
SugarMomma??

We can talk... you do dishes? ;)

And peel grapes.

As a bonus if you squint just right in harsh overwhelming sunlight, right after you get out of the pool with your eyes burning from the chlorine, I'm eye candy.

Sweet! You're hired! :)

wavelength

Nikon D300

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

01/18/2007 10:22:11 PM · #37

Originally posted by alfresco:

fan of poetry, damn good photographer, all around Nice Dude, level-headed and insightful, and he drinks wine from collectible Hardees cups.

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

01/18/2007 10:28:30 PM · #38

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.

alfresco

Nikon D700

01/18/2007 10:31:29 PM · #39

Originally posted by Adrionni:

Photography is not rocket science, and it's not that serious.

Can, meet worms.

Carl Zeiss Planar T 50mm f/1.7

01/18/2007 10:32:06 PM · #40

Originally posted by Tlemetry:

As a photographer, and the roles were reversed, would you do that for him?

Absolutely! There are a million ways to post process an image, and if he or she is a fellow photog, why not? Postprocessing is the most time consuming and intense part of the job, so if all I had to do was show up for a couple of hours and push the shutter button, that's cool with me! That's easy money, IMO.

tryals15

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

01/18/2007 10:32:40 PM · #41

Originally posted by alfresco:

Originally posted by Adrionni:
Photography is not rocket science, and it's not that serious.

Can, meet worms.

Where's that stupid popcorn .gif when you need it??? =]

wavelength

Nikon D300

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

01/18/2007 10:33:32 PM · #42

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.

idnic

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

01/18/2007 10:33:56 PM · #43

Originally posted by alfresco:

Originally posted by Adrionni:
Photography is not rocket science, and it's not that serious.

Can, meet worms.

Well put, JP.

As for the original statement - if it's so easy and casual, then why not have your cousin Bob shoot it with a disposable?

fotomann_forever

01/18/2007 10:34:23 PM · #44

Originally posted by alfresco:

Originally posted by Adrionni:
Photography is not rocket science, and it's not that serious.

Can, meet worms.

or more appropriately

Message edited by author 2007-01-18 22:35:37.

Carl Zeiss Planar T 50mm f/1.7

01/18/2007 10:34:40 PM · #45

Originally posted by alfresco:

Originally posted by Adrionni:
Photography is not rocket science, and it's not that serious.

Can, meet worms.

I know they are going to jump all over this, but it's the truth! To charge someone 15k for some pictures is absolutely ridiculous! It's really not rocket science or heart surgery or brain surgery.

I have a great deal of respect for the intellectual skillsets, the effort, and the eye, but 'cmon!!!!!!!

tryals15

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

01/18/2007 10:35:09 PM · #46

Originally posted by Shakalaka:

Originally posted by alfresco:

Originally posted by Adrionni:
Photography is not rocket science, and it's not that serious.

Can, meet worms.

... there it is ...

chimericvisions

Canon EF 24-70 2.8L II

01/18/2007 10:36:16 PM · #47

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.

01/18/2007 10:37:28 PM · #48

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