Retaining files from old commercial jobs. Cost, resale, etc.

[Dinarius]

My policy is this...

I have zero re-use for 99% of what I shoot commercially.

But, I have retained everything I’ve shot since fully switching to digital in 2006.

In my experience, clients know sweet nothing about Digital Asset Management. The screw up, their systems screw up etc, and they come back looking for files.

So, I keep everything in RAW only. It’s about 1/4 the size of a 16bit TIFF, so roughly quarter the storage cost.

Secondly, if they come looking for a file, they get it reprocessed on the most up-to-date software; so, usually a better file.

If they never come looking for a file, then I will have borne the entire DAM cost myself.

But, if they do, I charge for it.

One part of the dumbing-down of this business in the last few years (with the rise of Social Media, everyone thinks they’re a photographer and a published one at that; e.g. Facebook/Instagram etc. Moreover, they think that because it’s digital, it’s as good as free.) the reaction I get to being asked to pay for files is hilarious.

No one, who isn’t one, would claim to understand plumbing or car mechanics. But, everyone thinks they know about digital photography, and worse, what it costs to produce.

My rant for today.

D.

[tcphoto1]

I can understand your frustration, I also went to digital a dozen years ago and have a stack of hard drives containing RAW files and edited files. I try to educate clients on licensing and usage but most simply don't care about those things. I consider the backups, computers and all the other gear to simply be the cost of doing business. I average about $500 a year on Stock Sales with limited effort, so I think it's worth continuing the backups. If a client is going to be disrespectful and laugh at my business practices, I will chose not to work with them or make the rate so high that they go find someone within their budget.

[Alan Klein]

I guess you have to make a judgment as to whether providing backups to repeat customers especially is an advantage.  Providing it for free or a small charge seems acceptable especially if you want to keep them as customers.  I know I would think of not using you again if you got snotty about it. 

I've seem this in the building design trade where design engineers and architects provide drawings years later because they get lost or additional copies are required.  Of course, there is a charge especially if printouts are provided.  But architects and engineers aren't stupid.  They know that there will be changes in buildings down the road and want to be available for all that subsequent work. 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

My policy is this...

I have zero re-use for 99% of what I shoot commercially.

But, I have retained everything I’ve shot since fully switching to digital in 2006.

In my experience, clients know sweet nothing about Digital Asset Management. The screw up, their systems screw up etc, and they come back looking for files.

So, I keep everything in RAW only. It’s about 1/4 the size of a 16bit TIFF, so roughly quarter the storage cost.

Secondly, if they come looking for a file, they get it reprocessed on the most up-to-date software; so, usually a better file.

If they never come looking for a file, then I will have borne the entire DAM cost myself.

But, if they do, I charge for it.

One part of the dumbing-down of this business in the last few years (with the rise of Social Media, everyone thinks they’re a photographer and a published one at that; e.g. Facebook/Instagram etc. Moreover, they think that because it’s digital, it’s as good as free.) the reaction I get to being asked to pay for files is hilarious.

No one, who isn’t one, would claim to understand plumbing or car mechanics. But, everyone thinks they know about digital photography, and worse, what it costs to produce.

My rant for today.

D.

+1

But then, the cost goes up with time, for both parties ...

Cheers,
Bart

[Dinarius]

+1

But then, the cost goes up with time, for both parties ...

Cheers,
Bart

Hi Bart, I’m not sure exactly what you mean by the cost going up for both parties.

Or, I think I do, but I’m not sure what your point is?

Thanks.

D.

[JoeKitchen]

I can understand your frustrations and I certainly have a few clients that loose files every year.  You would think with what they pay for me to shoot for them, they would not loose the files, but alas. 

A few years back I decided to buy a professional DropBox account, which comes with unlimited storage.  When I am finished with the images, I simply upload the files, send the link, and never take the images down.  This way if anyone ever looses the files I can simply send them the link again, even off site. 

It also acts as my third backup, albeit I only upload flattened 8-bit TIFFs JPEGs, and the service is not expensive.