I recently did a shoot, sent out a few complimentary FREE photos and immediately i was asked if i could send out the rest of the images without any edits. The initial thought that came to mind although they were very complimentary about the quality of the work, was what didn't they like about the photos. As i felt a tad insulted they would want the rest as unedited. Well, i reply, without refusing not to send out the photos was "what don't you like about the image". And ironically i had done very very little to that image. I relate sending out an unedited RAW photo to asking say a surgeon to pause in the middle of an operation; wake you up and show you your beating heart. Any way there are many more analogies i thought of. But i also considered whether or not i was being too harsh or closed minded. Although times have changed in the digital photography landscape. back in the days of film photography in the dark rooms. After a shoot, a photography would not just simply hand the rolls of film to the clients to process by themselves. it is really not that different to digital photography. Main difference being everyone now has a darkroom on their computers.
I have always known it was near impossible back in the days of film to get the original negatives of a shoot from a photographer. So i wanted to see if times may have changed. Here came google, our trusted friend.
First info and confirmation of present thinking came from DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY SCHOOL.
My photographic artistic style / integrity is another very important reason i felt one should not send out RAW unedited files. The will obviously be other photographers that would cater for the needs and client styles. Don't get me wrong, i do firmly believe the client is always right and THE CLIENT IS KING. There are obviously more arguments to be entertained on this discussion. feel free to leave your comments. In the mean time i'd go back to my analogy of the surgeon. You wouldn't ask the surgeon to wear only red garments in the operating room or always make any incisions from left to right or bottom to top.
I totally agree:
"Images get disqualified for many reasons: someone's eyes were closed, they moved a hand and it was blurry in the image, someone stepped into the edge of the shot, etc."
"The difference between an amateur photographer and a professional photographer is that the amateur will show you ALL of their pictures."
"No person will EVER see any un-edited photos of mine (and I'm speaking up in the Shop Talk forum, even while I'm not a professional at all)."
I have always known it was near impossible back in the days of film to get the original negatives of a shoot from a photographer. So i wanted to see if times may have changed. Here came google, our trusted friend.
First info and confirmation of present thinking came from DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY SCHOOL.
My photographic artistic style / integrity is another very important reason i felt one should not send out RAW unedited files. The will obviously be other photographers that would cater for the needs and client styles. Don't get me wrong, i do firmly believe the client is always right and THE CLIENT IS KING. There are obviously more arguments to be entertained on this discussion. feel free to leave your comments. In the mean time i'd go back to my analogy of the surgeon. You wouldn't ask the surgeon to wear only red garments in the operating room or always make any incisions from left to right or bottom to top.
I totally agree:
"Images get disqualified for many reasons: someone's eyes were closed, they moved a hand and it was blurry in the image, someone stepped into the edge of the shot, etc."
"The difference between an amateur photographer and a professional photographer is that the amateur will show you ALL of their pictures."
"No person will EVER see any un-edited photos of mine (and I'm speaking up in the Shop Talk forum, even while I'm not a professional at all)."
No comments:
Post a Comment