Unretouched Image Delivery

[bc_photo]

<p>I am curious as to what the rest of you do in the following situation:</p>

<p>Every once in a while, we take a client for an amount less than our lowest package. We do this for a variety of reasons: usually it is a combination of off-season, off-night, and a great couple who have no money.</p>

<p>We do light Lightroom post-work (some creative treatments) and post the pictures to Pictage for proofing and purchasing.</p>

<p>These clients rarely buy anything, and eventually ask for all of their images.</p>

<p>At this point, I deliver to them the RAW files, without the Lightroom post-work. My thinking is, if they want the professional prints and products, they must pay for them. I will be glad to supply a disc of retouched images at a cost.</p>

<p>QUESTION: Would you deliver RAW files (which the client most likely cannot open), or would you take the time to transfer all of the images to jpgs? If to jpgs, what file size?</p>

<p>If I am going to deliver untretouched jpgs, it seems like it is almost more work to create a new catalog, remove the enhancements, and export. It's almost easier to just export the images from the catalog that has all of the changes, and give the clients the enhanced photos and be done with it.</p>

<p>Any thoughts? What do you do in this situation?</p>

<p>If possible, it would be nice to limit this discussion to solutions, and not "I wouldn't have taken this client in the first place." Thanks and much love!</p>

[aimee_pieters]

<p>In general, I wouldn't spend more time on a job that brought less money. <br>

I also wouldn't give them camera raw files as that's just pointless. No one gains from this.<br>

From what you describe, this type of client really doesn't care about quality, so if you're going to take this type of job, give them jpg's as is.<br>

Here's another possible thought. If this is the kind of service you'd like to provide under the circumstance you've mentioned, why not make it available to everyone under those terms. In other words, this "shoot and burn" package is available within 60 or 30 days of your wedding ONLY during the months of November-April or whatever you choose.<br>

If someone comes to see you and they wants to go this route initially and it's 8 months away, they may either come back later or like both your work and you enough to book a regular package so they don't lose you.<br>

If an idea works, don't hide it, promote it.....-Aimee</p>

[mcmanamey]

<p>Personally, no, I don't hand over RAW, and part of it is that it's highly highly highly unlikely they can even see them.<br>

We use Aperture for processing, so my solution would be:<br>

 

<ul>

<li>I generally always do at least a little light post tweaking before they go online, anyway</li>

<li>When it's time to make the DVD of images for them, I just "select all" and export "version" full-size jpegs. I do NOT go back and remove anything, that would take too much time, and none of it is extensive or custom work.</li>

<li>It only takes about 5 - 15 minutes to export the 700ish versions, and 3 minutes to burn. No time wasted on my part</li>

</ul>

</p>

[hooman_b]

<p>No way, you definitely shouldn't deliver raw files. and really, you should only put out finished top notch work. Otherwise, you're not really a photographer so much as a warehouse of raw products. Its like the difference between a top notch steak house and SYSCO. Either give someone a perfectly cooked steak on a nice plate and charge them for it, or sell them raw meat in a box. But you can't do both.</p>

[picturesque]

<p>I would have hammered out exactly what the client would get from the beginning. If you proceeded (as it appears you have) with the client with the idea to sell prints from your online site, then I'd stick to that idea. So if they now want all the files, they will have to pay for them, meaning you give them the edited jpegs for a fair price. Or you sell them a set number of images for a fair price. Whether they are high resolution or not is entirely up to you. Or just say no, the files are not available, period.</p>

<p>I've given RAW files to clients, but only clients who know what to do with them. I have always provided edited, full resolution jpegs, and would continue to do so unless the clients in question are themselves photographers or graphic designers who are proficient in processing RAWs.</p>

[nuzumphoto]

<p>In No case would we ever give a client RAW images unless the specifically ask for them (and that does happen from time to time, especially when we are photographing a wedding for a fellow photographer, pro or amateur.) Export the jpeg's and deliver something you are proud of. Your name is attached to those photos where ever they go. Hooman said it all.</p>

<p>We give every wedding client all of their retouched images on CD, regardless of package size or if they go with a custom package. In 2009 most new brides are not looking to print pictures and put them in an album. They are looking to take them and put them online or go create their own blurb book or email them to grandma. It's not going to do me any good to have their images on my server. But when they post those photos everywhere and people start asking who took them, it pays for itself in referrals. Harness the power of Facebook and Myspace and Flickr and photo bucket and every other social media website and image hosting service to indirectly advertise what you do. More people will see your photos and ask who took them when the bride and groom post their images online then if they print them and put them in an album in the closet.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>What would be the point of giving them raw files? Either it's kind of mean to the clients who will have a hard time using them, or they will know how to use them or have a friend who does and you've given them the highest quality for no money. Maybe they use iPhoto and they won't notice they're raw until they see they're out 10 gigs of hard drive.</p>

<p>Just batch process to screen res JPGs without the retouches - that can't take long to do. Or shoot raw plus medium jpg and give them the jpgs from the camera.</p>

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p>I would suggest that you do some PP on all the images, save to jpgs, and deliver a finished product. I see no reason to deliver RAW files. Just adjust your prices accordingly and deliver your best final product.</p>

[StuartMoxham]

<p>I am of the opinion that it would be better to give them reasonable jpgs that would make reasonable prints. Maybe set up a work flow to batch convert images shot under similar circumstances. You don't need to retouch every image just batch convert images shot under the same situation. Most newer DSLRs can produce pretty good jpgs from the camera so shoot RAW+JPG, give them the jpgs and keep the RAWs for when you need them or if some of the JPGs are not as good as you would like just convert them.</p>

[bc_photo]

<p>Thanks everyone for your very informative answers!</p>

<p>Some clarification: What specific size jpgs would you send them, with the thought that if they want to print anything bigger than an 8x10, they would have to come back to the photographer?</p>

[KenPapai]

<p>Give them a limited size of all JPGs from your RAW keepers.<br>

Run an action to resize say to only 1600 px wide and save as Quality 10 JPGs in PS. 1600 is not quite "big enough" for a *high quality* 8x10 inch.</p>

[cathy_and_david_bock]

<p>In the first place we'd never accept anything lower than our asking price. You should be okay with telling a client no. If they want to pay less then they can go to a less expensive photographer. As far as images are concerned do whatever is in your contract. If you don't have a contract, why not? I suggest simply not accepting these clients, telling them no and moving on to someone who sees the value of your product and is willing to pay for it.</p>

<p>We give a high res disc of the color corrected digital negatives (in JPEG). Period. If that's the brand and product you offer, then stick by it, but once again if you've got a client that can't pay for that product then they shouldn't be working with you. They are going to get your smallest package and feel like they didn't get everything they wanted, and not be satisfied, and you're going to have a bride who is going to cut corners and haggle you to death. They should be working with someone in their budget getting the product they truly want.</p>

[david_schilling___chicago_]

<p>"Some clarification: What specific size jpgs would you send them, with the thought that if they want to print anything bigger than an 8x10, they would have to come back to the photographer?"</p>

<p>Suggest that you give them full hi-res files so that they can print larger than 8x10, but....adjust your pricing so that you compensate yourself for potential lost revenue when it cuts into your reprint sales. Even if you do go low-res, I doubt that it would keep them from making the larger prints anyway....even though they wouldn't look good, which again can reflect back on you, thus you're not looking good.</p>

[adamczyk]

<p>Hi there,</p>

<p>If you are using lightroom, spend that 30 min importing the photos (in the mean time get some food or reacharge your batteries), and you do not have to create a new catalog only a new folder anywhere on your computer. Put the files there, go fast through all the photos and discard ones that are not exposed correctly and export the rest as hi res JPG with 300 pix/inch resolution, remove the folder from lightroom, burn the DVD, stick a label on it, bless it and give it to the happy couple. That should take about 1-1.5 hours of actual work, if you are good with Lightroom, and 2 hours if you are still learning. <br>

Raw files are not for the regular people, and they will only confuse them. More so remember that there might be a referal in your future from this event. You never know where they come from, and these people may actually pay more cash. As for your clients: Picassa does a great job turning color photos into BW and Sepia so recommend that to them. They are happy and you are free.</p>

[steve_carless]

<p>1800x1200 JPGs are large enough to make nice 8x10s. Watermark the JPGs with your studio logo to try and prevent them from violating the max 8x10 print size. My releast says they can't crop out the watermark. If Walmart see a watermark they usually ask for a release.</p>

[aimee_pieters]

<p><em>"Some clarification: What specific size jpgs would you send them, with the thought that if they want to print anything bigger than an 8x10, they would have to come back to the photographer?"</em><br>

If you're giving them the files, allow them to make the nicest, largest prints possible. A consumer will have whatever size print they want to have printed and <em>YOUR</em> image is going to look terrible. If you give them a 72 dpi jpg, some will make an 8x10 and think it looks great because they only paid $2 or $3 for it. Don't be foolish about this....-Aimee</p>