CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver

I understand your point but people hire me - and most photographers - because they like the style they see. There is [almost] no way I would let a client tell me how to process the images I take. When they hire me, they get what I do. I do not shoot for a client, I shoot for me. If they like that they hire me, if they do not, they go somewhere else. Great system.

Of course for that $50,000 I will let them give me some hints of why they like. :-)

Wall-E Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Uh.....NO.

And this is part of the problem. Most people don't realize this.
They think, 'It's a picture of me, I own the copyright'.

Copyright is held by the 'artist' (in this case the photographer), until the 'artist' transfers it either in total or in part (like a use license). Any use for ANY purpose past the use license is prohibited.

Walk-in labs (drugstores, CostCo, Sam's....) are getting better about requiring a print release for images that are obviously professionally done.

MIKE GALLAGHER Loc: New Zealand

Seems to me all you have to do is to tell the potential photographer what you want. IF he agrees then you need only to agree on a price. All the options would be open to you both. And each would have to live with the agreement.
Be prepared for fairly short discussions and quite a few of them!
Mike.

Annie_Girl Loc: It's none of your business

sorry you are wrong, as the photographer I hold the copyright thus I own the images. I give my clients usage rights, that means they can display them.

PatrickTheCop Loc: Spartanburg, SC

I am still very much new to the "business" of photography but I am well aware that I own the copyright to all the photographs I take be they of a person, object or anything else whether I am paid or unpaid.

Bearing that in mind I do a photography contract on every shoot I do and I expressly point out to the client the section on copyright ownership and discuss that with them to make sure they understand it.

That being said, I will, if a specific job is unique enough alter that section to increase usage or, as in my most recent job, give an unlimited usage agreement to include selling, licensing or commercial use. This is the only time I have ever granted such a broad usage license and pretty much the only restriction I kept in place was the prohibition on editing the original images without my express written consent. Some of our members are probably wondering why any photographer would do such a thing, so let me explain.

The client is a friend and a coworker and he happens to be an aspiring actor and film maker. He has made a couple of short films he is planning to pitch to some big film companies and needed some head shots for his pitch packages and hired me to do them. Should he beat the odds and this develop into something very big for him my photos "might" turn out to be a great investment in new business. I certainly don't expect that but it's nice to think, "What if?"

Even with that near unlimited usage license he was made very much aware I still retained the copyright and am free to do with the images as I please.

Jackdoor Loc: Huddersfield, Yorkshire.

I'm thinking I'm a scientist treading on artists' toes! I LIKE having my work criticised, it improves it, and if it happens while someone's peering over my shoulder, so much the better. I've nothing to hide. With RAW, it would be the work of a moment to give a brief explanation of why images look awful at that stage in the proceedings. A recently stitched up wound looks pretty awful too!

I've seen 3 sets of wedding photos in the last couple of years. One lot was simply excellent, but the others were mainly poor. One had a warm cast on all the prints- not sure whether it was the photographer's preference, or whether the monitor wasn't calibrated correctly. The other set were mostly badly over sharpened, except for portraits of the bride's face which went the other way! I wonder what would have happened if the couple had complained- if it had been my wedding, I would have.

I make no complaint about wedding photographer's charges. It's a scary job, and handling the public well is a rare and valuable skill. I also understand the potential loss of revenue in offering RAW images to clients, and that the price should be very high. Of course, the photographer would always retain copies.

Perhaps the biggest worry- that someone would mess up your images, then blame you for it- could be covered in the contract?

As a compromise, do any professional photographers give/sell their clients a stick/CD of the full size JPEGs? At least then something could be done about the WB...

Wezza1977uk Loc: London, England

Let me just clarify a point here I may have failed to put across I do not want the photographer to hand over all and any copies he has, and I am looking for Jpegs and prints of his work, and would be sending family and guests to him for their copies and reprints etc... What I am after is a disc containing the RAW Files as well as printed albums of his processed and final images. We all have differing opinions of what white balance, cropping and colour toning etc works on any given image and for my own satisfaction would like to be able to edit with the RAW files in lightroom to my own tastes ie try the picture in high contrast b&w. I would not be selling these images they are for my own and my wife's perusal. In terms of lost profits from reprints I am not going to order an extra 30 prints or whatever package the photog sells just to see what one photo would look like with a sepia tint I would just do without but be unsatisfied. And although I may well pick a photog because of the quality of his or her body of work I am paying a photographer to shoot my wedding solely because it would be damn near impossible ( not to mention suicidal as far as the wife goes) to shoot it myself. I understand the rights of the image belong to the photog I would just like to have copies of the RAW files too

rrh69 Loc: Hampton, VA

Unless you hire someone who is a close personal friend , I doubt you will find a credible pro photographer who will do what you request at any reasonable cost. This is just not how the industry works.

Annie_Girl Loc: It's none of your business

nothing stops you from asking just be prepared to here "no" over and over again. I don't know of on wedding photographer who would hand over raw files, actually most have a clause that does not allow clients (or anyone) to edit their files as that to breaks their copyright, plus let's honest as photograpahers we ALL get a little pi$$y if someone edits our images.

jim quist Loc: Missouri

The copyright belongs to the one who clicks the shutter. the reason professional photographers don't want to give you the raw files could be a couple of reasons. one, they don't want you editing their work. two: once they give you the raw files there is no more profit to be made. One way to convince the photographer is to offer them a lot of money. Let's say a photographer expects to make x-amount of money on the entire wedding, from pics sold to you and to others. Offer the photographer that amount and you might have a better chance.

Wall-E Loc: Phoenix, AZ

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

If that's what you want, then just hire some 'run and gun' from Craigslist, take the CD you get and do with them what you will. Might cost you all of $500.

Anyone worth using, will cost a whole lot more and won't let you near the RAW files.

Musket Loc: ArtBallin'

You will pay out the rear for those raw files. You are teh type of wedding client that put me off from weddings (demanding Negatives just as bad as demanding raw files) and you sound like the kind of client my photographer peers are always complaining about when dealing with jerk-wedding-havers.

You can edit the jpg.

LLucas Loc: Upstate South Carolina, USA

Wezza, going by the replies here, it sounds like you will have to either dish out a lot of money for the RAWs, or find a friend/family member who will treat it as a favor to you. Surely you know someone personally who would do this. I would not hesitate to do it for a friend, no matter how much money or ego is at stake! But I guess that's the difference between a pro and a hobbyist- the hobbyist still can/will do it for fun and experience. :-)

Wall-E Loc: Phoenix, AZ

And continue to ruin the market expectations for the pro.

jim quist Loc: Missouri

Lluccas, how would you like it if you fixed transmissions for a living and some guy opened up shop down the street and did it for next to nothing as a hobby?