First wedding, do I give the negatives to my clients with their album or keep them?

This is my first wedding, though I've been a photographer for the last decade or so (since I was 15) and have been taking photos as my primary source of income for about a year now. I shoot exclusively on film, mostly on medium and large format cameras and do everything the so called "old fashioned" way, in the dark room that I have set up in my spare bedroom. The bride and groom know me and know this and are paying for alternative processes like platinum prints for some of their photos.

The workflow that I've decided on for this wedding is to shoot it all, develop the film, make my contact sheets, get rid of all of the bad shots and double takes that I don't want my name attached to, and then go through those contact prints with the bride and groom so that they can choose the 100 photos that they want to be in their album, finally print them and scan them so that they can put the photos on social media.

What I'm wondering is if I should keep the negatives of those prints, or give them to the clients along with their printed album? I've seen a couple of posts on the internet from wedding photographers (using digital cameras, presumably) that we should only give our clients absolutely finished products and never include any unedited photos or anything that wasn't in the album, and I get that but I wonder if that advice applies to me because my photos aren't being worked on in photoshop and by the time that the film is developed into negatives, most of the "editing" (pushing or pulling the film, using different developers, stand developing etc.) is done and the only other changes that are happening are a bit of dodging and burning under the enlarger if necessary.

I would never give out the negatives of photos that I didn't like or of any photos aside from those 100 prints going into their album, but should I give them those negatives with their album, or keep them?

Since this is the Internet and I know that this is something that people like to argue about, I feel like this is important to say: I am not interested in a digital vs. film debate, I love working with film and in the dark room, I've started a career and been thus far successful working with film, and I'm not going to switch. Otherwise, thank you so much for your answer, and I hope that you're having a great night.

— Piotr

If there’s a “should” here, it’s that you SHOULD do what you and your client agree on, preferably in a written contract. It would be reasonable for you to keep the negs, if that’s the agreement, in order to maintain control of all prints that get made. Many photographers make part of their living off selling prints to clients. The prints are of more value if the negs are in YOUR possession. If you provide a client the negs, you’re potentially taking away your ability to make money from future prints. If you do supply the negs to the client, it would be reasonable to charge accordingly because you’re giving up an original source that has value in itself.

As a film photographer, you have the ability, and anyone in possession of the negs also has the ability, to post process the photos any way and to whatever degree you like. You may choose to do minimal post work beyond the developing, but a client may hand your negs off to someone that will take great liberties with those negs. Parting with your negatives means giving up control over what kinds of future prints are made and what they’ll look like. It’s reasonable to be compensated for giving up that control.

I think that the first point is you need to disclose the answer: Do you have a contract and what deliverables are stated in that contract?

If . . . you do have a contract and you're asking this question - "do I give the negatives to my clients with their album" and that means "in the contract they are to receive an album and I am now wondering if I should throw in the negs. as an addition at no cost?" . . .

My first thought on that question is: your rationale leading you to consider giving them the negatives is flawed. You (yourself) might not do any 'editing' to a neg once the pushing and pulling of the processing is done, but note that there are innumerable different prints that can be produced from one negative and those prints will not necessarily be different ONLY because of a 'bit of dodging and burning under the enlarger'.

Your mention that you'll be providing scans for uploading data files to social media - that might be low res data: but if you supply the negs then the clients can make hi res scans and subsequently use 'photoshop', the NON use of which seems to form the main part of your reasoning to hand over the negs.

Additionally, even staying with analogue processes and assuming ONLY black and white negs, there are many variants of print from one neg that can be made in the darkroom: simple efforts of tone, texture and contrast can be varied with different papers, development times and temperatures; additionally (just as some other examples) inter-negs could be made and sandwiched; bas relief prints; dye toning, etc. There are more printing variants if the negs. are colour

I am not suggesting strongly one way the other, that you do or do not provide the negs to these clients; I do think that you need to re-think the logic behind it, because giving negatives is tantamount to giving hi res jpeg or the raw data files.

***

That stated, and more importantly: I think you need to consider at this situation from the larger business perspective.

You've been running a business for a year, this is your first Wedding Coverage. What you choose to do now will cast a dye of some substance and it is important to recognize that it is difficult to change dyes. once cast.

So I suggest that you think long and hard on the fact that whilst you might be able to change your 'workflow' for future Weddings, if there is an expectation from all future clients that negs. are part of the deal then reining that expectation back, could cost you jobs and kudos.

WW

I think that the first point is you need to disclose the answer: Do you have a contract and what deliverables are stated in that contract?

 

If . . . you do have a contract and you're asking this question - "do I give the negatives to my clients with their album" and that means "in the contract they are to receive an album and I am now wondering if I should throw in the negs. as an addition at no cost?" . . .

 

My first thought on that question is: your rationale leading you to consider giving them the negatives is flawed. You (yourself) might not do any 'editing' to a neg once the pushing and pulling of the processing is done, but note that there are innumerable different prints that can be produced from one negative and those prints will not necessarily be different ONLY because of a 'bit of dodging and burning under the enlarger'.

 

Your mention that you'll be providing scans for uploading data files to social media - that might be low res data: but if you supply the negs then the clients can make hi res scans and subsequently use 'photoshop', the NON use of which seems to form the main part of your reasoning to hand over the negs.

 

Additionally, even staying with analogue processes and assuming ONLY black and white negs, there are many variants of print from one neg that can be made in the darkroom: simple efforts of tone, texture and contrast can be varied with different papers, development times and temperatures; additionally (just as some other examples) inter-negs could be made and sandwiched; bas relief prints; dye toning, etc. There are more printing variants if the negs. are colour

 

I am not suggesting strongly one way the other, that you do or do not provide the negs to these clients; I do think that you need to re-think the logic behind it, because giving negatives is tantamount to giving hi res jpeg or the raw data files.

 

***

 

That stated, and more importantly: I think you need to consider at this situation from the larger business perspective.

 

You've been running a business for a year, this is your first Wedding Coverage. What you choose to do now will cast a dye of some substance and it is important to recognize that it is difficult to change dyes. once cast.

 

So I suggest that you think long and hard on the fact that whilst you might be able to change your 'workflow' for future Weddings, if there is an expectation from all future clients that negs. are part of the deal then reining that expectation back, could cost you jobs and kudos.

 

WW

All very good points, thank you. I will not be including the negatives. For my other work I haven't provided negatives, I've just held onto them in case the client calls me awhile later and wants more prints, I just didn't know if it was different for something huge like a wedding. Thank you so much.

If there’s a “should” here, it’s that you SHOULD do what you and your client agree on, preferably in a written contract. It would be reasonable for you to keep the negs, if that’s the agreement, in order to maintain control of all prints that get made. Many photographers make part of their living off selling prints to clients. The prints are of more value if the negs are in YOUR possession. If you provide a client the negs, you’re potentially taking away your ability to make money from future prints. If you do supply the negs to the client, it would be reasonable to charge accordingly because you’re giving up an original source that has value in itself.

 

As a film photographer, you have the ability, and anyone in possession of the negs also has the ability, to post process the photos any way and to whatever degree you like. You may choose to do minimal post work beyond the developing, but a client may hand your negs off to someone that will take great liberties with those negs. Parting with your negatives means giving up control over what kinds of future prints are made and what they’ll look like. It’s reasonable to be compensated for giving up that control.

Thank you for your answer, it didn't show up in my email earlier which is why I didn't reply. I'm sorry, I agree with all of your points.

I am figuring out the contractual terms now, and we are meeting on Friday to sign everything, which is why I've asked.

. . . . I am figuring out the contractual terms now, and we are meeting on Friday to sign everything, which is why I've asked. . . . For my other work I haven't provided negatives, I've just held onto them in case the client calls me awhile later and wants more prints . . .

Whether or not you choose to specify a time frame for your safe retention of the negatives is something that you also should consider and any time frame you consider needs to be practical and workable.

Irrespective of whether you choose to state that as a time frame in your written contract (and associated caveats for accidental destruction etc): one point which I consider important for the sustenance of my Business is that I have a clear understanding my Clients' expectations and that they also have a clear understanding of what to expect.

We've had few conversations here at PN, where Clients want additional prints years later (for various reasons), or Photographers struggle with what to do with (old) data files and negatives. I had this issue of our Studios' neg files dating as far back as1965 - still in storage but what to do with them?

The basis of these issues is often lack of clarity, usually caused by lack of clear communication and reconfirmation of the meaning of that communication - and the cause in many cases is, simply because no one thought about it, at the time it all started.

As a practical example, it is of little use and can be a great annoyance if in eight years time this couple come to you for new album because the original one was water damaged beyond repair, or lost in a fire... and your response is, "I am so terribly sorry but I did tell you I only guarantee that I store the negs for 24 months, it was only last year that I recycled yours, I did try to get in touch but I know now that you moved interstate . . ."

WW

I am not interested in a digital vs. film debate,

By the way, since we’ve addressed the substance of your question, I wanted to add just a few words about this. I understand that you don’t want a digital vs. film debate in the usual sense of “which is better,” etc. But, by taking on the screen name “analogphotog” and by talking about photoshop in terms that actually don’t show a good understanding of how similar a neg and a file can be, you kind of open yourself up, especially on the Internet, to at least some digital and film comparisons if not debates. What you said about photoshop compared to negs seems a simple honest misunderstanding, but you intentionally chose the name “analogphotog” which, if you prefer analog/digital not to impose itself onto your posts, might be a screen name to reconsider, because it immediately calls attention to the process.

Hi, given the situation - you are doing all the printing yourself, etc. - I would personally suggest to keep the negs, at least for several years. My thinking is that if the couple should want more prints in the future that they would likely come to you anyway, and you'll be kicking yourself in the backside if any of them are now scratched, or otherwise damaged.

Aside from that, I would just as soon be free of the burden to store the negatives long-term for someone else. But it sort of depends on your business model. If you plan to be set up in one location for a substantial period of time, and anticipate the occasional extra business of reprinting, then perhaps it's worth doing.

I would pay close attention to what WW is saying, as he has operated that sort of business for a substantial time. I shot weddings for only a handful of years, long time back, never with the intention of having a stable location. So I didn't want to be burdened with the negs after the initial print/album orders (this was where you made a lot of your money in those days).

Ps, it never bothered me to pass along the "bad" negatives with the rest - I never understood why some shooters would be so worried about this. I figured that if you remove negs, the customer sees that certain neg numbers are missing, and they wonder why. If you supply all the negs, it's usually obvious what's wrong, and no one expects all of the shots to be album quality.

Ps, it never bothered me to pass along the "bad" negatives with the rest - I never understood why some shooters would be so worried about this.

The reason I cull photos and don't give away "bad" negs or files is because I don't know who may decide to use whatever negs or files in the future and a "bad" shot could wind up being seen out of context (in other words, not as a reject among a bunch of good wedding shots but as the sole shot people might see at some time in the future) and still be associated with my name. I would only want people to see my rejects (if at all) in the context of the full set of photos taken, but I could never be sure of that happening.

To me, giving away all negs or files from a shoot, including mistakes or things that just don't work, would be like a painter including a video of the entire time he spent painting a canvas, painting over missteps, redoing and refining his work as he goes along, etc. Seeing a painter's or a photographer's process might be interesting as a study in itself, but the process is not the product and, to me, rejected negs are simply part of the process and not the product. The process may be, but often is not and certainly doesn't need to be, shown along with the product.

. . . given the situation - you are doing all the printing yourself, etc. - I would personally suggest to keep the negs, at least for several years. My thinking is that if the couple should want more prints in the future that they would likely come to you anyway, and you'll be kicking yourself in the backside if any of them are now scratched, or otherwise damaged. . .

and

. . . After years of keeping the negs, I now include them. The reason I do that is to avoid future problems. I shoot, develop, print, and deliver. THEN I AM D O N E. . . .

The above two comments encapsulate the two basic “A or B” business models, from which you can choose.

One main thrust of my commentary is for you to take the time and effort to make that informed choice, before you get to far along developing your Wedding Photography Business.

One observation which might be a consideration for you, is that is appears that most Wedding Couples nowadays have a preconception that the ‘files’ are included in the Photography, whereas in 1980 (for example of just one date) that was not the case – and that’s another reason why it is important to ensure the Clients have a clear understanding of what to expect.

An opposing business strategy to the above paragraph is to ‘be different’ – if your business appears different and offers a niche product, then it might be a value add to your clients that you provide the personal service of hand printing – and it is only you who can provide that if you keep the negs.

BTW, Fred's comment re your screen name has a wider message - it applies to your business name and the words that you choose on your written correspondence and your spoken words, when you interact with your Prospects and Clients.

I think you are fortunate that your question has reaped such quality and experienced answers, (I am not commenting for my sake).

WW

One final reason why I include the negatives - If the couple wants reprints, chances are that their uncle Ned will scan the prints and make copies, cutting you out. Sure, not the best quality, but if the bride and groom are sending them to great aunt Emma, they don't care.

Now I feel like Columbo - just one more thing - do you really want to store their negatives for several years? I had quite the collection, and later found out that a lot of the negs I was holding on to were of couple who were now divorced. And if you agree to keep them, what happens 15 months later if they want reprints, and their negatives were destroyed in a flood?

Passing on the "bad" negs? I have taken many wedding photos which I thought were garbage, but lo and behold, in the background there's Crazy Ed trying to make time with one of the bride's maids.

One particular "bad" photo that I took was taken just as the bride passed out on the alter. Turned out, they both wanted it. You never know.

Passing on the "bad" negs? I have taken many wedding photos which I thought were garbage, but lo and behold, in the background there's Crazy Ed trying to make time with one of the bride's maids.

 

One particular "bad" photo that I took was taken just as the bride passed out on the alter. Turned out, they both wanted it. You never know.

LOL.

There's little chance of their being a "bad" photo everyone agrees is bad. Depends on context as well. Often, what I may think might be "good" for my own portfolio" is different from what I would choose for someone else's wedding album (with some overlap, of course). While a bride may very well not want, in her own album, a photo of herself passing out, I'd generally consider that a keeper for myself. Likewise for Crazy Ed trying to make time with a bridesmaid. That, to me, would be a very happy accident.

Just goes to show that "bad" is a relative judgment, relative not only to who's making the judgment, but to the context in which the photo will be seen. What may be truly bad in a wedding album could be great in a photo exhibit or a photographer's portfolio.

Recently saw a great exhibit at the Met in NY. All snapshots with very typical mistakes that most people would have thrown out—cut off heads, obvious out of focus subjects, limbs missing, one face blocking another, a tree looking like it's growing out of the top of someone's head, etc. The photographer in question found all these in junk shops and put them together in various series by type of mistakes. It actually made for a very interesting, amusing, and insightful exhibit. Lemonade from lemons!

Just goes to show that "bad" is a relative judgment, relative not only to who's making the judgment, but to the context in which the photo will be seen.

I think this is an important thing to realize. Something that really made the point to me years ago was a gallery show on the "history of jazz." As I recall they were all b&w prints taken by the head photographer for a jazz magazine in its final years; I'm thinking early 1960s, but I don't remember clearly.

I went with a friend from the office who in addition to being a photographer was also a musician (I am a photographer only). We went through the first half-dozen shots without speaking - they were so motion-blurred that you largely couldn't recognize the subject. He finally turned to me and said, "If it was me, none of these negs would have even gotten into the enlarger." I agreed, fwiw. Now we DID see a lot of what we, as photographers, would rate as pretty good. Sure, they were lacking the biting sharpness people are accustomed to nowadays, but in 1960 they were near the limit of what could be done in a dimly lit, smoky nightclub.

As I considered some of the "bad" photos further, I thought, you know, these DO give the feeling of what the experience may have been like, and in that sense they are good. But at the time they were taken I can't imagine that they could have made it into the magazine for the simple reason that you couldn't tell who the person was. So although they would fail as documentary photos, many years later they can be exhibited as artistic. Just my take on things.

As a note, we did hear other viewers, presumably non-photographers, oohing and aahing over many of the blurred shots. I haven't really changed my thinking on what "quality" is, but I HAVE become more tolerant of what other people may like.

Don't misunderstand - I don't give away the negatives. They are included in the package price.

Ok, they don't include negs in their package. But its your business, do as you like. However, since you asked, I wouldn't include the negs in your package, you lose future sales of prints and control of how they are finished.

I think that in the OP's situation, with much of the focus being on "alternative" processes like platinum prints, retaining the negatives is prudent.

Even 20 years ago, most working wedding pros would drop their film off at the lab and collect it in a day or two. Of course, a good photographer would ideally have a good working relationship with their lab and be able to repeatably and reliably get what they wanted in terms of prints. The few weddings I did, I worked with a lab like that and it made life so simple. Labs that work that way are few and far between these days, and unless you live near a big city you probably can't sit at a table with the smell of fixer enveloping you while you talk to the printer about what you want done, etc.

Since the OP IS the printer in this case, turning over the negatives means that no one will likely be able to reproduce the exact look of the prints that the client is paying them for.

I will say that when I decided "no more weddings" I turned over the negatives. At the same time, there was nothing overly exotic about Portra 160NC and 400NC. Wal-Mart probably would have given them drab and boring prints(I don't know-I never tried) but at least anyone with a Frontier or Noritsu could print them(assuming they could scan the posed formals, which I did do on MF).

My advice would be to keep the negs. While I would ALSO scan them and include a digital copy with your final deliverables, but the following point seems to have been largely ignored:

"This is my first wedding, though I've been a photographer for the last decade or so (since I was 15) and have been taking photos as my primary source of income for about a year now."

In other words, you are at the beginning of your chosen career. You are also developing and printing yourself. It is ridiculous to think that you have already learned everything you will ever know, and that you are at the apex of your skills.

In other words, I recommend you retain the negatives because as your skills (especially w/ printing) evolve, you may find yourself able to do things with them that you aren't currently able to do. In reprinting them, maybe years from now, you may see things you never saw at this point early in your professional life.

Once you've sent them off, you'll never be able to experiment with printing them again. It will not be an option, no matter the love you have for the art, or what you see now in an old scan.

More and more photographers now do digital photography, and have packages that include the digital files.

I might have said it too many times, but I have known wedding photographers that, at the end of the day,

gave the bride a box of rolls of undeveloped 220 film.

You could provide packages that do, and don't, include negatives or digital files, depending on the

system used.

I suppose you could even supply scans of negatives.

I all cases, price appropriately. For a beginner, you likely price lower than one

with many years of experience, but it is the best way to get experience.

 

I have known wedding photographers that, at the end of the day,

gave the bride a box of rolls of undeveloped 220 film.

 

Talk about class!

220 film is dead...how old is this post? LOL

Don't give anyone negatives! This is not the 1990's. Scan them and give them the proofs on a DVD or thumbdrive. Better yet shoot the wedding in digital.

That is absurd.

The guy can do either or both.

Go to an art gallery and make the case for digital over oil or acrylic....