Deliver RAW files?

[scott_dobry]

61Dynamic nails it.  I agree.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109736\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Me too.

[Kirk Gittings]

Nothing more resembles a group of silverback males like photographers do with their hackles up.

The plain fact is that no matter what you do they can screw it up. You either develop enough of a reputation so that they are afraid to mess with your images, or learn to fight the important battles and not sweat the rest. Personally I have never been asked to deliver raw files, but it would depend on the job and the situation as to whether I made a big issue out of it. I usually choose to educate rather than confront ignorant clients if I want to develop a relationship with the them and this may mean in the short run doing it my way and their way so they can begin to see the difference.

[Morgan_Moore]

Nothing more resembles a group of silverback males like photographers do with their hackles up.

The plain fact is that no matter what you do they can screw it up. You either develop enough of a reputation so that they are afraid to mess with your images, or learn to fight the important battles and not sweat the rest. Personally I have never been asked to deliver raw files, but it would depend on the job and the situation as to whether I made a big issue out of it. I usually choose to educate rather than confront ignorant clients if I want to develop a relationship with the them and this may mean in the short run doing it my way and their way so they can begin to see the difference.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109800\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well said.

-===========

Another way of looking at it

I wish all clients took raws

Then I could get back in front of a camera

---

My experience is that clients are starting to own 20d etc and taking thier own raw images

So the request is begining to happen

The software and knowledge is spreading

I dont see what is different from a client tinkering with a raw file compared to them tinkering with photoshop

It is so hard to know what a client wants

One example I shot an interior - tungsten -

Standing alone lookin at the images the tungstens look silly - do I correct this ??

Mixed on the contact sheet with the daylight exteriors the tundgsten looks 'warm and inviting' - 'come into my warm hotel out of the cold' - or maybe not - that is subjective

So so much depends on the end use

Better to send raws than be asked for a Tiff of everything wihich takes an age to process out

Its all about communication

SMM

[scott_dobry]

Nothing more resembles a group of silverback males like photographers do with their hackles up.

The plain fact is that no matter what you do they can screw it up. You either develop enough of a reputation so that they are afraid to mess with your images, or learn to fight the important battles and not sweat the rest. Personally I have never been asked to deliver raw files, but it would depend on the job and the situation as to whether I made a big issue out of it. I usually choose to educate rather than confront ignorant clients if I want to develop a relationship with the them and this may mean in the short run doing it my way and their way so they can begin to see the difference.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109800\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Kirk, thanks for your reply. You are right about photographers and their pride/ego.

True, clients can screw your images up, but why not provide them with the image as you intend it-- at the best possible starting point.  Delivering RAW does not do this.

Deciding whether or not this is the important battle IS the issue to me.  I've had a long-running relationship with both this agency and this client and suddenly they are asking for RAW delivery.  Why mess up what was working beautifully in the first place?  Speed is their short answer.

As far as confronting vs educating, trust me, they know what they are asking for and they are presenting me (confronting me) with a choice.  Play ball or ...... what?  And if I let them have RAW delivery with this client, what is to stop this from snowballing to all their clients?  My hope is that they understand why I want to continue things the way they were always done and respect that.

Finally, there is no way for me to deliver their way (the RAW files) and my way (the finished files).  As we shoot, for example, 400 images on a shoot anticipating 10 finals for publication, I can't produce all 400 in high-res TIFF.  

I guess everyone is different.  Digital put me back in control of my images and I want to retain that.

[Kirk Gittings]

I suspect much of the difference is our client base. Most of mine are magazines and a few ad agencies. Sounds like yours are primarily agencies. AAs I have found are tough to educate, as they usually think they know everything and kind of look at photographers as a necessary evil. The budgets are better with AAs but I generally don't work well with most of them. It may be more me than them.

[Chris_Brown]

Yesterday I was confronted by a troubling request.  I was asked upfront to deliver RAW files from an upcomming commercial shoot to an ad agency for a client. Incidentally, I have a long-running
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109555\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have had only ad agencies and design firms ask for this, and I've always declined. In my view, the agency wants to process and retouch for the added income revenue stream. I'm not willing to give that up.

I have never had a direct client request raw files. Instead, they appreciate it when I deliver CMYK TIFFs, with hardcopy proofs, retouched and ready to print. They gladly pay for the work and expertise I provide for them.

My "No Way" stance about delivering raw files has cost me a few agency clients and it stung, but this isn't about friendship and brotherhood, it's about business. They wanted the money that I was billing for. Simple.

I have since learned that one particular ad agency spent over 90 hours retouching and proofing a 5-shot series for the client (my ex-client). The results were very good, but I was bothered by the fact that they never gave me 90 hours to retouch a series of photos when I was a vendor.

[scott_dobry]

In my view, the agency wants to process and retouch for the added income revenue stream.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109899\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This has crossed my mind and I can see that happening but in my particular case, I think it truly is about a demanding client wanting immediate results from the AA, therefor the AA wanting 24/7 access to the images.

Most designers I know are already stretched beyond beyond time-wise and don't want to take image processing on anyway.  This whole thing comes from the production manager as far as I can tell.

[Chris_Brown]

This has crossed my mind and I can see that happening but in my particular case, I think it truly is about a demanding client wanting immediate results from the AA, therefor the AA wanting 24/7 access to the images.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=109981\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I archive, both on archival DVDs and off-line hard drives, all work in both raw and final formats. I always let the client know that if they ever lose any data, I will retrieve whatever they need. I don't charge to archive the work, but I do charge to retrieve it. This helps defray the cost of archiving. You should hear people howl when they have to pay again for something they've already paid for. I tell 'em --politely-- it's the cost of insurance. In every case where I've retrieved data (maybe 3% of all jobs), it's because someone deleted image files when they shouldn't have.

In most advertising cases, my national clients have either a three year or five year exclusive use license. It behooves them to back up the data.

Perhaps the production manager forgets to back up the data at the agency. In any case, your situation is a sticky one. Choose wisely.