Normal for photog to choose editing service provider?

Has anyone heard of a photographer shooting lifestyle portraits, to indicate to a commercial(clothing) client in the contract, their photographs must be edited by a post processing vendor the photographer has chosen? As opposed to handing off photos to client with just the normal batch edits for WB, etc..? This seems odd to me, but I am not as familiar with industry norms.

 

May be easy answer, but googling this was yielding no information for my specific question.

Just as Phil says. - I think it is an ultra reasonable approach to the "lifestyle portraits" business to work that way and can be a win win deal for all three parties involved. Cutting out the middle man in communications between customer and subcontracted PP worker frees the photographer from forwarding and parroting to shoot more and charge less.

Doing "just the normal batch edits for WB, etc.." oneself is an option but still a burden. I am sure that others are faster than me. In "work for hire" situations I prefer to just shoot and have a decent media tech do all the PP. (I'm not running a business, have been employed as a shooter and would feel semi fraudulent if I billed my postprocessing hours.)

IDK why and as who you are asking. - As a photographer I am a bit challenged to imagine a fashion business to have ultra skilled photo editors in house. So I can understand why a photographer wants to get their trustworthy long term partner contracted too. If it is a huge contract it could be worth considering alternatives to work with, but if the photographer is usually just delivering a few portraits it most likely isn't worth the hassle and wasn't planned as an option in the contract template.

Thanks for the replies. That does make sense after explanation. I was just curious as to if it was common or not. I imagine the photographer has a long standing relationship with this PP house and wants to continue with them. Thanks.