Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Weddings. Do you give the couple all the images.

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

mikehit
mikehit  46104 forum posts United Kingdom9 Constructive Critique Points
1 Nov 2012 - 11:20 AM


Quote: see images that, quite frankly, are just complete rubbish

Technically, maybe, but the very fact that the photo-taker posts them shows they consider the photos are good enough - who are you to say otherwise? This is where the photographers professional intentions and the customer's wishes start to diverge. Suppose that 'rubbish picture' includes Aunt Betty who has flown in from America to be there? They won't care about the quality.
And if you explain that they will get an unedited batch-processed RAW to JPEG then there is no additional work for you - whether you want to had it over is a different matter (you obviously choose not to). But if it is not in the contract you are on sticky ground.

Last Modified By mikehit at 1 Nov 2012 - 11:21 AM
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
1 Nov 2012 - 11:20 AM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

thewilliam
1 Nov 2012 - 3:33 PM


Quote: Technically, maybe, but the very fact that the photo-taker posts them shows they consider the photos are good enough - who are you to say otherwise? This is where the photographers professional intentions and the customer's wishes start to diverge. Suppose that 'rubbish picture' includes Aunt Betty who has flown in from America to be there? They won't care about the quality.
And if you explain that they will get an unedited batch-processed RAW to JPEG then there is no additional work for you - whether you want to had it over is a different matter (you obviously choose not to). But if it is not in the contract you are on sticky ground.

Doesn't a good professional photographer try to put plenty of clear blue water between him/herself and the happy snapper. Showing only good pix is part of this.

mikehit
mikehit  46104 forum posts United Kingdom9 Constructive Critique Points
1 Nov 2012 - 3:45 PM


Quote: Showing only good pix is part of this.

I have absolutely no problem with this, but many wedding photographers work on recommendation and if they have hacked one person off because they refuse to give all images (good or bad) then that client will not recommend the photographer to their friend.
But there are so many layers to this that I have seen in posts like this: some people want 'all pictures' irrespective of quality, some want 'all pictures' once the duds (misfires, totally blurred etc) have been weeded out: and motivation for this can vary from sheer bloody-mindedness ('you were snapping away like a madman and this is all you are giving me?') to wanting to make sure they have at least one photo of everyone. On the other side, the photographer wants the best possible selection to showcase their talent, and may throw out perfectly good photos to reach the cream of the crop.
As has been said here an elsewhere, digital opens up opportunities for different business models.

thewilliam
1 Nov 2012 - 6:36 PM

Sometimes it's easier just to renumber the pix, starting at some random number like 2591 so that the file-names are consecutive and then just not mention whether you've given all the images.

Paul_Anthony
1 Nov 2012 - 6:50 PM


Quote: The biggest gripe however was that after spending a substantial amount of money the photographer would not give them all the images on CD or DVD afterwards. I have explained to them that the copyright stays with the photographer unless otherwise agreed and he/she is under no obligation to provide the images to them.

I think you may all be misunderstanding the OP's post.

I take this to mean that the gripe is that the Photographer will not give the bride and groom all of the edited images (in other words, all the ones the photographer is happy for the B&G to see), not that the photographer will not pass on all of the RAW files.

We give the B&G a high res CD as part of all of our packages, the disk contains all edited images.

I may be wrong though, perhaps the OP could clear this up.

Paul.

monkeygrip
1 Nov 2012 - 8:45 PM


Quote: There are some images amongst them that I would not want anyone but the couple seeing but the quality of the image comes second to the content and it means a lot to the couple when I explain this.

A little lost with this comment, the bride and groom are the employers and the most important people of the day so why would you be providing them with shots you wouldn't want anyone else to see ? I would have thought you would want the content and quality of all the shots provided would be of the utmost importance ?

I can understand that if the shots are a little risque or embarrassing in any way letting the b&g see them and decide makes sense.

I have over the years beat myself up because I have captured moments unique to the couples wedding day and sometimes things I can't control have made the image less than perfect. One such example a funny moment where the brides father cut in with his daughter during the first dance all planned and as I shot the perfect moment with precision timing the disco strobe light drew a lovely green line all the way up the dress and all over the faces of bride, groom and father of the bride.

After this one I decided to produce the for your eyes only file because although I see the technical failings in my own work the moment out weighs that for the couple.

Also I have always asked the DJ to turn off such strobe lights before the first on every occasion since all part of the wedding photographer learning curve.

scottishphototours


Quote: Also I have always asked the DJ to turn off such strobe lights before the first on every occasion since all part of the wedding photographer learning curve.

Yep, and the Laser lights are even worse. Great pic of the couple dancing with a lovely red laser line across their faces....you really do live and learn...

Focus_Man
Focus_Man  4481 forum posts United Kingdom631 Constructive Critique Points
2 Nov 2012 - 9:41 AM


Quote: An odd comment about the photographer not taking some images that they had requested.
Regards

Going back to the original post, not taking special images as requested by the bride and groom is unforgivable. I was a wedding photographer back in the film days and part of my 'rapport building interview' with the B&G was to explain all the shots that I would be taking from start (groom & best man arriving - through to cutting the cake (posed of course) at the reception) to finish. After that I always asked them were there any special pictures that they wanted me to take outside of the standard ones discussed. Not to do so, as I said earlier, I believe to be unforgivable.

ade_mcfade
ade_mcfade  1014708 forum posts England216 Constructive Critique Points
2 Nov 2012 - 10:02 AM

I laboriously rate all shots out of 5 in lightroom as my first task - the couple tends to see everything from 3 *'s upwards

5* would go in the book/album
4* are good, and are on stand-by if they don't like one of the 5* shots
3* are "not embarrassing" but you'd not let them into a book - they're "record" shots, or may be of interest to the couple

People die - quite often the only shots they have of Aunt Maud will be a 3* shot of her at the wedding.... they have value, even if photographically they're not great.

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139385 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
2 Nov 2012 - 12:44 PM


Quote: I laboriously rate all shots out of 5 in lightroom as my first task

Shouldn't you get someone else to do that? Tongue

I know............................... coat/door! Grin

adyj
adyj  530 forum posts United Kingdom
4 Nov 2012 - 5:22 PM

Had one enquiry recently actually suggested they should pay less if they only had the files without the prints! It is up to us to educate our people about what they are actually paying for.

I'm sure it's been said before on these forums and elsewhere, editing is an important part of the creative process. The fee we charge is a 'creation fee' and should take into account the backroom work needed to complete the job properly. When I shot black & white at weddings years ago, processing and printing myself, I sometimes cropped an image to enhance the impact or to eclude extraneous detail. We're not camera operators we're artists or craftspeople, take your pick.

If you shot a wedding on film you wouldn't usually give the customer all the negatives, the equivalent I suppose now being RAW files. The reality of the modern market however is many people want to share and view images on-screen and online. I am happy to provide digital files (for the right price) along with prints. I still keep the 'originals' and they still get an edited, finished product. These are precious images to people and ultimately their future generations. One positive upside to providing discs is of course the burden of responsibility to archive the pictures can be shared with the customer.

Interestingly, I do still get print orders from weddings where I 've supplied discs and conversely don't always get orders when I haven't supplied files. At least with files you have your copyright info embedded unlike a scanned print.

thewilliam
4 Nov 2012 - 6:45 PM


Quote: People die - quite often the only shots they have of Aunt Maud will be a 3* shot of her at the wedding.... they have value, even if photographically they're not great.

There were many cases where I was the last person to get a decent shot of a departed relative.

For this reason, we always used to archive every shot taken at the wedding. The SOP was to never delete an image, however bad, away from base and all cards are formatted before setting out. This was adopted after a colleague lost half the wedding pix when his assistant formatted the wrong card which had been mostly over-written with new images so they didn't recover much.

ade_mcfade
ade_mcfade  1014708 forum posts England216 Constructive Critique Points
5 Nov 2012 - 9:17 AM


Quote: I laboriously rate all shots out of 5 in lightroom as my first task

Shouldn't you get someone else to do that? Tongue

I know............................... coat/door! Grin

interesting point of view - i guess you could pay someone to rate the photos for you, though I'm not entirely sure it makes financial sense to do so?

Carabosse
Carabosse e2 Member 1139385 forum postsCarabosse vcard England269 Constructive Critique Points
5 Nov 2012 - 10:28 AM


Quote: interesting point of view - i guess you could pay someone to rate the photos for you, though I'm not entirely sure it makes financial sense to do so?

It was a joke, Ade! Grin Tongue

Although, thinking about it, you could have a mutual arrangement with another tog, I guess.

ade_mcfade
ade_mcfade  1014708 forum posts England216 Constructive Critique Points
5 Nov 2012 - 11:20 AM

Got no weddings booked at all so it's not an issue....

probably should get a few....

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.