what exactly do you deliver to bride, and when?

<p>I believe strongly that the bride should get the best photos from her wedding on to paper, either as conventional prints that she can frame or put into a scrapbook, or as a book of some sort. Only printed copies of the photos will be technology-proof. I've been preaching the gospel of printed photos to my brides for some time. I now give brides a generous print credit, and I make a few prints myself and give them to the bride.</p>

<p>But brides want digital copies. Most of my brides seem to be a bit indifferent to prints. Or they think they have the ability to make good prints themselves, if they get the digital photos.</p>

<p>So what do <em>you</em> give your brides these days?</p>

<ol>

<li><strong>File format. </strong>If you give them a CD or DVD full of images, are these images raw files? I assume not. If JPEGs, do you give them full resolution photos?</li>

<li><strong>Processing. </strong>Have you processed them all? (By "all" I mean "all of the photos that you deliver", not all of the photos you shot.) And especially important: do you process them for viewing online, or for printing? For example, do you crop the photos? Do you sharpen them for the screen or for the printer? Do you leave them at their original brightness (gamma) which looks good on a computer screen or do you brighten them for printing? Or do you provide two folders, labeled "computer" and "printer"?</li>

<li><strong>Timing. </strong>And when do you deliver this disk? As soon as the images are processed, or after a certain amount of time? My own daughter is about to be married, and the experienced photographer we hired will give us a DVD but <em>ninety days after the wedding.</em> In other words, if it takes him a month to get all the images processed and online, we'll have two months or so to view them online and order prints.</li>

<li><strong>Watermark. </strong>Last and least, do you watermark the images you give the bride on the disk? I'm not talking about an embedded copyright notice but about a visible "John Doe Photography" watermark. I do, although my watermark is, in most photos, almost invisible.</li>

</ol>

<p>Will</p>

<p>p.s. I did search first. Maybe I didn't use the right search terms. I found some threads that were not exactly what I want, and besides they were older. As technology changes, it seems to me that the answers to these questions may change as well. And I know that different photographers have different answers and I would like to hear some of these different approaches.</p>

<p>It depends on the contract, (and what is paid for) since not all clients choose to pay for the disc and copyright release. When they don't, they still get a 'viewing disc' of 800pix (long side) images.<br>

But typically, I deliver the following:<br>

1. JPEGS. never raws, but fully proofed and CC, so that they can view the images as easily on a computer, as order prints. I include both a set of full resolution JPEGs, and a set of smaller 'screen sized' (1000 pix long side) JPEGs, it takes an extra 5min to do, and clients seem to like having it convenient. It almost always requires a DVD (which is convenient, since all my archival grade discs are DVDRs)<br>

2. I do. I now process them to appear good on the computer, mainly because nearly all print labs are set up to recieve and process digital imagery, and so can tweak the settings (even automatically) to make the print look darn fine. - That, and when a pic looks dark/bad on screen, the client rarely chooses that one to get a print of. <br>

3. I deliver the disc at the same time I deliver a print package. Delivering the disc 'later' is a fairly common practice designed to maximize print sales, from a business perspective it can make sense.<br>

4. I do not, though I don't object to them if they don't detract from the photo's artistic appeal.</p>

<p>When I hand over the images, they do not come with my watermark. My watermark is placed on the digital files that are available for viewing online. I've learned the hard way to make the watermark visible and uncroppable. My mother-in-law is a former photog. She was recently married and took screen shots of the images that her wedding photog posted in the viewing gallery. She managed to download them on her phone, crop the watermark, and then edit them with some app on her phone. She then posted them to Facebook. This made for some horrible quality images. She knows better! But what I'm getting at is that clients will go to any length to immediately share or view their images with family members on social networking sites.</p>

<p>I don't give clients raw files, I've found that the clients who ask for the files to print on their own, usually print through a site that only accepts images under a certain size/res. limit.</p>

<p>I process all images that are turned over to the clients. And the contract states that they are not allowed to edit the images after they get them. You would be suprised to hear that I run into that all too often.<br>

I try to give the clients their disc as soon as I'm finished. Brides are antsy!!</p>

<p>I've been wondering the same thing about #2: processing. My monitor's brightness is turned way down so that my photos look good for print, and I naturally process my photos very "bright and airy," so what clients see on their computer must look super overexposed! So far, however, no one's said anything and they all love what they have received. On the other hand, most of my clients just want digital files to put online (facebook) so they dont really need print-ready images...hopefully more people chime in with what they do here.</p>

<p>1. JPEG only - although I did have one couple that insisted on TIFF, even though I deliver images on CD, because he was worried about image data loss from repeated opening of the JPEG.... I didn't bother to try to explain...</p>

<p>2. Yes, I process them all and deliver them all... minus the eyes closed, snafus, etc... and occasionally minus a few duplicates where there is no detectable difference between shot 1 and shot 2. I crop and process them.</p>

<p>3. I say between 6 and 8 weeks after the wedding depending on my work load and other events. Typcially I can turn a wedding (5 hours) in 2 weeks, but give myself a cushion in case. As soon as the images are done, they get delivered.</p>

<p>4. NO. Personally I hate that and think it is tacky...the wedding is about the couple and family not about the photographer. If I do a logo / watermark, it is done on a white "mat" surrounding the image - not on the main image.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

<p>3.</p>

<p>@Marcus: Thanks for the first response! You mention that most printing services can make good prints from screen-optimized images. I'm not so sure that my brides are sending their images out to print, and if they do, I'm not sure they're sending 'em to a good lab. Doesn't seem to be any good solution here: Can't control what clients do after we give them the files. I'd really prefer NOT to give them printable images at all, and it would be for their own benefit. I'd be happy to sell them images and a book at a price that would allow them to get a decent print of everything — and then just give them web-ready images for posting on Facebook, Google+ etc. I think this would be better for the brides, in the long run. But most of my brides don't take the long view.</p>

<p>@Carson: Watermarking the photos in the gallery but not watermarking them on the disk: Not sure how this prevents image theft. I mean, once the bride posts her unwatermarked images online, your work is ready to be stolen. Now, I understand that at some point, it becomes necessary simply to let the images go and if they're stolen, they're stolen. I'm just pointing out that, if we <em>are</em> worried about image theft and trying to prevent it, giving the bride unwatermarked images might not make sense. Tough problem. </p>

<p>@Jaclyn: I find it hard to decide whether print files should be routinely brightened or routinely darkened. When I print myself to my Canon Pro 9000II, from Lightroom, I find that I prefer prints that have a little added contrast for print <em>and</em> that get brightened a bit, but not always. If the print really matters to me (like if I'm about to try to print it at 13x19) I usually make one or two 4x6 test prints to see how it looks. </p>

<p>More than stated in the contract and faster than the stated time. Under promise and over deliver and you'll always have happy clients.</p>

<p>William, I think I disagree with you, IMO it is <em>not</em> in their best interests to <em>not</em> have the ability to get reprints at will. But I am a photographer, not a print lab. Don't get me wrong, I certainly can respect the choice you make by not providing them with reprintable images, essentially telling them that they don't know enough to 'do it right' so you won't allow them the choice? (I'm being a bit glib of course ;-) but you get how<em> they</em> might feel about it?).<br>

...but nowadays a client is just as likely to DL a screenshot off FB, and order a print with that for casual use as they are to contact you to purchase a full size JPEG and order a print. I've seen pixelated,<em> terrible</em>, reprints that people made and<em> are proud of</em>, simply because they essentially stole it w/ a screen grab. If they'd had a simple decent res. JPEG the image would have looked 18 times better - That is the nature of the beast now. - And when their friend asks about the photog while staring at that <em>abysmal</em> print?<br>

... So, what I do is I say (during a sitdown, assuming this is included in their purchase.) that I will give them full size, reprintable JPEGs, as well as a copyright release to obtain however many, wherever many prints as they need. I then pull out a picture. 3 copies of it- 8x10s. one from Walmart, one from Walgreens, and one from BayPhoto. I ask them which one they think cost me the <em>least</em>. Since the difference in quality is clear to see, and feel, they assume that the Walgreens print was the least expensive (keep in mind, this <em>particular</em> Walgreens print has the entire bottom half of the print in green ink only - luck of the draw that ;-) ). When I tell them the BayPhoto print (thick, lustre'y', excellent definition, etc.) cost the <em>least</em> they are generally shocked -but they get, <em>and remember</em> my point!</p>

<p>I guess the bottom line is that I wanted to minimize my heartache over prints (it's generally the biggest PITA), I make plenty off the service, so while I am minimizing my opportunity to realize profitable print sales, I am also cutting by 3/4 the <em>net</em> number of <em>problems in the entire business</em>.<br>

I have to give up some control, but by giving the client copious amounts of information, I empower them to make their own decisions (good ones!), and by doing so make my life and theirs vastly simpler.<br>

IDK though, it is your business, do what <em>you</em> feel comfortable with and makes<em> you</em> profitable, I certainly can't & won't criticize that. Just keep in mind that all brides are not of equal mind body and soul. </p>

 

Hey Will - No cd's or dvd's until one year has past.

 

I strongly believe in giving out the actual 4X6 prints in an album. Why many will ask? Do your homework. The B&G like cd's, however the actual paper looks great, people can see them better on paper, mainly the color, and most of all your reorders are often higher then the cost of the whole wedding.

 

Do you want to make $1000, or do you want to make $2000 or more, with very little effort?

 

So,will the B&G not book with you because of this? Hows your sales pitch? If you are decent, not even good or excellent, you show them albums, the albums should seal the deal for you.

 

As far as timing - 2 weeks. If they have to wait just a bit they get more excited.

 

I don't use watermarks, however I have my name printed inside of the front album cover. Well the studio name, whatever. Don't get into phone numbers, emails, just a classy looking typeset writing with your name.

 

I average about 25 rejection images. They don't get to see those. No one has ever asked what happened to so and so photo, mainly because I cover my butt. If I miss a shot I will catch it, either do it over or at the reception I will ask the people to pose again. Why not ask? Just say the camera setting was off just a tad. Also you can blame yourself. People make mistakes. I've actually used the words "I had a brain far*."

 

Weddings are hard. You need to always be watching and thinking, along with being creative. You need to have fun with the people, not be in the shadows, unless you need a well deserved break. Have fun with the parents, asking if they want any special shots. Hmmm, perhaps this is why we get tips.

 

Will, you are a good photographer. Stay with what works best for you. I hope my ideas may help you and many others.

 

Kindly don't write saying I'm wrong. Everyone has their own way of working and making a living.

<p>Bob,</p>

<p>Didn't respond to your post immediately because I've been pondering it, discussing it with my wife, and thinking about larger questions, like whether I'm really the right personality type to do wedding photography in the first place. </p>

<p>Which is my way of saying, you gave me some good stuff to think about. As I said in my original post, I believe the bride must get <em>prints or at least printed images, </em>something that will last and is technology proof. Your policy regarding delivery of the CD/DVD (a year later!) combined with your policy regarding an album of 4x6's, sounds great to me.</p>

<p>Anyway, I want to thank you a lot for your post.</p>

<p>Will</p>

Hey Will, glad to help. Myself included here, I've thought about getting out of weddings, because of living with so much pain. A back surgery, surgeries on both feet, this past year was my elbow. I also have a weird nerve condition which causes some muscles to always hurt! It sucks. I just rest once the weekend is over and go to Physical Therapy.

 

For me I really enjoy photography, and there are no plans with hanging up my gear.

 

When you see how happy the people are with there wedding pictures, not the CD's. When they come by to pick up their pictures, often there is dead silence just smiles and sometimes they may say "Look at that one." They give you hugs, show some tears and often call you to photograph their new baby! It's so hard walking away from this profession. Sounds funny, I do care about money, however I'd shoot a wedding for free, and I have, just to document there special day. I guess I'm trying to say that art work is much more satisfying then the value of money, however we need to eat!

 

However I'll take a hug, before taking a dollar.

 

Will, I'm glad you have thought about this. Email me anytime. I hope you will. You are a gifted artist.

 

My very best to you and your wife.

 

Bob