Wedding photographer and professionals please advise
Discussion
So please can I get some feedback form the community on this subject. Next year I get married and I've started to interview some wedding photographers.
Now a question I would like to ask as it appeared to offered one photographer is, is it rude to ask for them to include RAW photos with your package?
My reasoning is, I'd love to have the RAW images for future purposes. Yes we will choose a photographer based on there style and I'm sure we will love there editing style and the outcome of all the photos but......down the line my taste may change. As such I'd love to have the RAW files should I ever choose to reprint a photo down the line and edit it myself.
I ask one photographer this and he was almost insulted by the question. I explained why I wanted them included and he became very rude. Needless to say I'm not going with him for out day but thought I would ask on here if I have crossed some line? For me, If I was being paid for a job and the client wanted something included then its all theres. They've paid for it and its pre agreed so why not??
Please I'd love to hear back from you all.
Now a question I would like to ask as it appeared to offered one photographer is, is it rude to ask for them to include RAW photos with your package?
My reasoning is, I'd love to have the RAW images for future purposes. Yes we will choose a photographer based on there style and I'm sure we will love there editing style and the outcome of all the photos but......down the line my taste may change. As such I'd love to have the RAW files should I ever choose to reprint a photo down the line and edit it myself.
I ask one photographer this and he was almost insulted by the question. I explained why I wanted them included and he became very rude. Needless to say I'm not going with him for out day but thought I would ask on here if I have crossed some line? For me, If I was being paid for a job and the client wanted something included then its all theres. They've paid for it and its pre agreed so why not??
Please I'd love to hear back from you all.
Not an unreasonable request from you really.
Once you've been paid by the couple and supplied edited images, photo books and whatever else you agree you've made all the money you're going to get from them. Unless they want to re-hire you for something else. At that point the RAW images have very little monetary value to you, why not sell them for an extra £100 or so in the original deal.
Once you've been paid by the couple and supplied edited images, photo books and whatever else you agree you've made all the money you're going to get from them. Unless they want to re-hire you for something else. At that point the RAW images have very little monetary value to you, why not sell them for an extra £100 or so in the original deal.
I don't know tbh... its up to the photog...
but in my opinion it is like going into a restaurant and asking the chef just to supply the ingredients and then asking to cook your meal yourself because you can do it better ( ??? )
You may as well just ask for the memory cards at the end of the day and just have the RAWS.... If you hire someone you hire them for everything, not just to click the shutter on the day....
if the product the tog' is offering includes RAWs then fine...
but in my opinion it is like going into a restaurant and asking the chef just to supply the ingredients and then asking to cook your meal yourself because you can do it better ( ??? )
You may as well just ask for the memory cards at the end of the day and just have the RAWS.... If you hire someone you hire them for everything, not just to click the shutter on the day....
if the product the tog' is offering includes RAWs then fine...
As a wedding photographer I personally do not give RAW files to the bride/groom. Aside from the obvious monetary loss from a lack of future upsell, it also creates other issues such as re-edited images then becoming incorrectly synonymous to the photographer, even if not edited in their style (taking away control of edits). My view has always been the raw file is a stepping stone to creating the product - the final image is the product you're agreeing to buy.
It would be a significant increase in fees to justify giving raw files as well.
If you're a photographer yourself and just want raws only, my suggestion would be to hire a freelance photographer who just shoots and provides raw on your behalf which I also do often as a 2nd shooter for others.
It would be a significant increase in fees to justify giving raw files as well.
If you're a photographer yourself and just want raws only, my suggestion would be to hire a freelance photographer who just shoots and provides raw on your behalf which I also do often as a 2nd shooter for others.
When I was getting married I asked the same thing. A couple said "no way", one reluctantly agreed and the one we went with had no issues with it at all.
It's great because I'm so picky about some details. There are a couple of really good shots that I wanted to process differently, and now I can
I was working as a wedding photographer at the time and explained to them that I understand the raw shots won't look nearly as good as the finished product, etc.
I provided a couple of large flash drives with a pre-paid envelope to send them back, but even then I appreciate it would have cost him extra time and I'm grateful he did it!
I know this makes me a hypocrite, but I wouldn't personally feel comfortable giving my raw files away. Maybe if the client was an established professional, but even then I don't know. It feels wrong. I certainly can't blame the ones that said no to me.
It's great because I'm so picky about some details. There are a couple of really good shots that I wanted to process differently, and now I can
I was working as a wedding photographer at the time and explained to them that I understand the raw shots won't look nearly as good as the finished product, etc.
I provided a couple of large flash drives with a pre-paid envelope to send them back, but even then I appreciate it would have cost him extra time and I'm grateful he did it!
I know this makes me a hypocrite, but I wouldn't personally feel comfortable giving my raw files away. Maybe if the client was an established professional, but even then I don't know. It feels wrong. I certainly can't blame the ones that said no to me.
Lynchie999 said:
but in my opinion it is like going into a restaurant and asking the chef just to supply the ingredients and then asking to cook your meal yourself because you can do it better ( ??? )
Not at all. A meal is consumed within minutes whereas photos last many years.Popular styles change and photos that looks good today may look old and over-done in 10 years time, let alone 50.
It's more like a chef on his death-bed cooking you your favourite meal one last time... And you ask him for the ingredients so you can continue to enjoy his creation after he's gone
GetCarter said:
Where's Simpo when you need him 
Shazam!I've been asked for RAW files about three times. The first was a chap who had very little money and wanted to save a bit by processing them himself. It's not a task I greatly relish and in terms of time spent is a loss-leader, so I was prepared to oblige. Another time the guy (note it's always men!) was a keen amateur tog and wanted to do it himself. So same as before - though I did a few for him in C1 Pro as a target to aim for. The third guy wanted the usual JPGs but also the RAWs - just so he could play with them and see if he could do better than me (like the OP here).
All my clients get all the images as hi-res JPGS with license to copy, print and upload, so giving them copies of RAW files makes no difference to me. They're no use to me; I can hardly sell them to anyone else!
My prime concern is that RAW files viewed 'as shot' can look flat and dull, and of course any slight errors haven't been fixed, so there's a risk that first impressions of RAW files can be poor - but that is how they are, and I get paid in advance, so it really doesn't bother me.
Simpo Two said:
Shazam!
I've been asked for RAW files about three times. The first was a chap who had very little money and wanted to save a bit by processing them himself. It's not a task I greatly relish and in terms of time spent is a loss-leader, so I was prepared to oblige. Another time the guy (note it's always men!) was a keen amateur tog and wanted to do it himself. So same as before - though I did a few for him in C1 Pro as a target to aim for. The third guy wanted the usual JPGs but also the RAWs - just so he could play with them and see if he could do better than me (like the OP here).
All my clients get all the images as hi-res JPGS with license to copy, print and upload, so giving them copies of RAW files makes no difference to me. They're no use to me; I can hardly sell them to anyone else!
My prime concern is that RAW files viewed 'as shot' can look flat and dull, and of course any slight errors haven't been fixed, so there's a risk that first impressions of RAW files can be poor - but that is how they are, and I get paid in advance, so it really doesn't bother me.
Not too sure where I fit in that I've been asked for RAW files about three times. The first was a chap who had very little money and wanted to save a bit by processing them himself. It's not a task I greatly relish and in terms of time spent is a loss-leader, so I was prepared to oblige. Another time the guy (note it's always men!) was a keen amateur tog and wanted to do it himself. So same as before - though I did a few for him in C1 Pro as a target to aim for. The third guy wanted the usual JPGs but also the RAWs - just so he could play with them and see if he could do better than me (like the OP here).
All my clients get all the images as hi-res JPGS with license to copy, print and upload, so giving them copies of RAW files makes no difference to me. They're no use to me; I can hardly sell them to anyone else!
My prime concern is that RAW files viewed 'as shot' can look flat and dull, and of course any slight errors haven't been fixed, so there's a risk that first impressions of RAW files can be poor - but that is how they are, and I get paid in advance, so it really doesn't bother me.
BTW - still got them and still play with them if we want to change out pic's and fancy something different.
Most pro's just straight up say no esp for weddings.
Part of this is that the 'look', the reason you pay for the pro, is party down to processing and selection.
Historically with negatives this used to be a nice little earner for family prints etc, but these days its not so important, your unlikely to make much out of those raws cluttering up hdd's.
Theres no law, I wouldnt ever put in a contract they get the raws, but if you dont mind handing them over its not a problem.
Part of this is that the 'look', the reason you pay for the pro, is party down to processing and selection.
Historically with negatives this used to be a nice little earner for family prints etc, but these days its not so important, your unlikely to make much out of those raws cluttering up hdd's.
Theres no law, I wouldnt ever put in a contract they get the raws, but if you dont mind handing them over its not a problem.
Podie said:
I attended a wedding a few years ago, and got chatting to the photographer. Interestingly, he said he only shoots in JPEG as he "gets it right first time"
Whether that was a brush off or not, I don't know - but thought it was an interesting claim.
Whether that was a brush off or not, I don't know - but thought it was an interesting claim.
Gonna end in a bad time there.
Ledaig said:
Not too sure where I fit in that
My mistake, make that 4 people!Podie said:
I attended a wedding a few years ago, and got chatting to the photographer. Interestingly, he said he only shoots in JPEG as he "gets it right first time"
He's either an arty genius or doesn't fully understand. Post a link and we'll see!RobDickinson said:
As a pro, if you can get things right in camera for the required output then jpg makes commercial sense, not spending the extra time and storage.
If I'm shooting in the studio with white background I sometimes use JPG because I know there's a little thing in PS I can click and it goes 'ping' into perfect white! But a studio is the complete opposite of a wedding; I have total control of everything.Simpo Two said:
Ledaig said:
Not too sure where I fit in that
My mistake, make that 4 people!Simpo Two said:
Podie said:
I attended a wedding a few years ago, and got chatting to the photographer. Interestingly, he said he only shoots in JPEG as he "gets it right first time"
He's either an arty genius or doesn't fully understand. Post a link and we'll see!Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff