I was recently asked if I would be willing to photograph a wedding, but they didn't want to purchase either of my wedding packages.  They just want 4-5 hours of coverage and the raw files.  (Someone in the bridal party is a professional photographer and is willing to do all the post processing.)  Would you do this?

Nope. I might sell them my fully edited jpgs for a hefty price. I don't think I would ever be comfortable with someone I don't know having control over the final outcome of the photographs I shot.

The person in the wedding party that is a pro photog should know better, IMO, to even ask a fellow photog to do something like that. 

scmacki:

Nope. I might sell them my fully edited jpgs for a hefty price. I don't think I would ever be comfortable with someone I don't know having control over the final outcome of the photographs I shot.

The person in the wedding party that is a pro photog should know better, IMO, to even ask a fellow photog to do something like that. 

totally agree with all of this...

 I wouldnt give them the RAW files......what if that photographer produces REALLY bad stuff and puts your name all over it....thats way MESSED up..

But in their defense, I'm sure they know the amount of  post processing that a wedding can take and were hoping that you would cut them a really sweet deal on time only, shoot and burn. I'm sure they were just hoping to save you the trouble of post process and save them self money...they just really didn't think it through before they asked!

Jen

Absolutely.  For the right price.  There are plenty of Photographers who would happily shoot & burn.  If you don't want the job just tell them that you're not interested.  Otherwise give them what they want - but at a price that you feel is fair to YOU.  If it's not acceptable to them, they'll find someone else who will do it.

  It just feels weird giving someone raw pictures.  I don't charge much for my packages and the only prints they get out of the wedding package is the album and a DVD slideshow, so I'm not sure how I would even go about charging them.  I'm sure they are just trying to save money, but wouldn't you charge more for handing over the files? 

 I did look up the photographer and she has a beautiful portfolio, so I'm not really worried about her destroying my pictures.  I also checked out her wedding packages (see below).  She says she will upgrade the CD to high resolution for $200. So I'm thinking, if I do this, maybe I should take away the cost of the album, proofs, and DVD then just add $200ish?  Of course she is probably editing her cd's.  So would it be stupid for me to state I'll still do the editing or should I stop looking a gift horse in the mouth and just be the monkey for the day?

Then why have this person in the wedding party if they are more useful being the photog?

Sheesh, where do these people come from? I would say "I don't think so" or charge them a higher price for the raws...........cash...........and claim that you didn't take them if they turn out bad..LOL!

I don't see any reason to give in this sill request. They are paying for your time. So that aspect never changes.  So are you suppose to hang out for 8 hours and hand over files, for less???!!!!!  I don't think so.

Stand your ground or they can go elsewhere.

Shelly 

Hi Heidi,

I see no particular problem with offering " raw " files .. However I would still go through and correct the raw files per your standards. There is really nothing to prevent someone from altering the HIGH RES Jpegs either... so really not much of a difference to be honest.  It just saves you the time of converting to JPEGS.  Just make sure you are compensated  well enough for your time shooting the event,  if you normally make alot of money on the back end with reorders then take that into consideration when you price it.

Riverview Photo:

Then why have this person in the wedding party if they are more useful being the photog?

That's what I was wondering!

She is the Bride's sister. So I'm sure the bride would rather her sister be the MOH rather than the photographer, but also is wanting to save some money. 

 I sent her a quote. It's still a bit high, but if she doesn't want me then that is fine too.  The photographer doesn't live around here (she lives many, many states away), and I have a feeling she was probably contacting several photographers in the area, not just me.  I'm guessing there will be someone who is willing to do this for dirt cheap.

If you're not doing anything else that day, why not shoot and burn? Then no 20 hours post processing, no worries. Pack stuff and go home sounds good to me! If you get half the money for 1/3 the work... it's all good to me!

FWIW

Dave

You have got to be kidding me!
Think about it.  the Other photog in the wedding party is going to be looking at the photos.  THIS is just the begining of the problems with this group.

IF you want to do it, charge at least the $1999  that the MOH would have charged.

Patrick:

You have got to be kidding me!
Think about it.  the Other photog in the wedding party is going to be looking at the photos.  THIS is just the begining of the problems with this group.

I am just wondering, do you think that the other photographer would this, if someone ask him the same thing?

Heck NO!

Charging at least the almost $2K the MOH charges was my thought also. And also maybe editing your contract to firmly show where your responsibility/liability ends and theirs begins (since they are handling post-processing).

Let us know what you/they decide. GL!

First of all, if I had a friend/family member getting married and wanted me to be in the wedding party over photographing the wedding, I'd tell them they were SOL...for one, Fat Girl ain't wearing no stinkin' bridesmaids dress....Second, if they wanted my pics and I didn't do them to be in the wedding and the ones they had taken were bad, I'd never forgive myself!

Now... 

I would NEVER give my raw files to someone, especially for someone else to edit. My work is My Work. There is no collaboration. Just like I would never take it upon myself to edit another photographer's work, unless specifically asked by that photographer. You could have amazing images and the other "professional photographer could DESTROY them, and it would all come back to you. She may know what she's doing, but may "forget" when it comes to showing your images. After all, she is competition. People will asked who took those, and they're not likely to say "so-and-so, but this one edited them".

Bad, bad news if you ask me. Of course, I may be overreacting and paranoid, but that's my 2 cents.

This is similar to the post I just read about someone shooting friends on TFCD. 

People today seem to think that shooting anything is all slick and simple and not worth the price you charge.  I know there are sideshooters out there that do weddings for 500 bucks and hand a CD of all images over and that's the end of it.  These are the people that are picking your pocket.  These are not professionals.

You have to remember that your images are considered copyrighted.  You created them, you own them.  If you sell them to someone and give up all rights, you will find that they will usually be printed down at Wallyworld by a printer that takes an overall reading and prints everything from there.  In essence, they are likely to look like crap.  Is that what you want representing your work?

The other aspect is that this gives the person now in possession the ability to alter them in any way they want.  Good or bad.  Conceivably, your competition could hire you to shoot, talk you into handing over the digital images and printing them as bad examples to display and show his work superior.  Likely not to happen, but there are people that would do it.

Of course, it cuts out any additional income from reprints as well.

Who would you want doing the construction on your new home?  The registered, licensed, certified construction company or the three guys that go from neighborhood to neighborhood offering to undercut the pros and have it done faster and cheaper? 

Your images are not just your income, they are your image, reputation and best advertising.

I'm curious as to whether this is just another "should I or shouldn't I sell an only-digital wedding package?" thread or are people actually upset about selling RAW images, whereas selling JPGs would be ok?

If so, I really don't understand that logic whatsoever.

Like I said earlier, I'd be all for it, since it would save me a ton of time.  But only at the right price.  And it certainly wouldn't be $500, but more closer to the $2000 range, possibly higher, depending on the number of hours and locations.

If you haven't spent any time on one of the wedding/bride forums, I might suggest that you check one out.  Today's brides are very educated, own Photoshop, get prints at Mpix and books at WHCC.....and they don't know the difference between a great, real portrait and an underexposed slightly blurry photo.  Many of them want the digitals to make their own books, etc.  I'm not saying that their finished product will be anywhere near the quality of one that any of us would make, but it's what they want.  The real question is - what are they willing to pay for it?

I also didn't understand the comment that "the other Photographer will see the photos"?  So what?  Are 100% of his photos perfect out of the camera, and he's going to ridicule you because yours aren't?  I didn't get that.

My problem isn`t RAW vs jpg necessarily, it`s the unedited part that doesn`t and wouldn`t fly with me. I don`t want anyone else editing my photos. I know it can happen with jpgs but I want them to look the best as I can make them when I give them to my client therefore making it less likely that they would be unhappy with how they look and leave them as is.

nope never.   just seems like there will be more trouble down the road because of this.  

Funny discussion, we're actually in the process of possibly completely revamping our portrait pricing to include three package:  1. DIY - includes 30 completely unedited JPGs, 2. All Digital - includes 30 fully edited JPGS and 3. All Print - no digitals included, all photo credit.

I used to subscribe to the "I'm not releasing any images that haven't been fully edited" camp, but I also used to subscribe to the "I'm never, ever, ever, ever selling digital files" camp.  Times are changing and I just feel that if you don't give people what they want, they'll go somewhere else and your business will go under.  We've now been offering digitals (at a fair price) and several people have bought them.

My experience has been that there are three types of people who hire Photographers (this mainly pertains to portraits, we don't do many weddings).  There are people who only w