WHen the portrait client wants ALL your images..unedted

[bibowj]

I had a recent infant shoot that went very wellin my opinion. I would consider it one of my best shoots in a long time. I took about 60-70 images, divided between the baby, the family as a whole and then each parent with the baby with most focused on the baby. In each major pose change, I took 4 or 5 or more shots of that scene to make sure that I had the focus right ( i have the 50 1.2 L, so I have to make sure...).
After the shoot, I narrowed down the shots that I considered keepers and disregarded the ones that were obviously bad (for the obvious reasons) and then did a 2nd sweep to remove the ones that were exact or exact duplicats of the keepers. After photoshop work, I delivered 34 final images to the client, and they seemed pleased, and the mother asked if I would share internet sized version of the images, which I didnt mind since she made a print order right away.... however, this is the kicker: Shes now asking that I show her ALL the unedited images and i have a real problem with that. #1 its twice as much work processing everything, just to have them only choose 3 or 4 versions for prints and #2 the more risky i get with posing and lighting, the more off shots Ill have, and I dont want the bad images "out there".
Have any of you encountered this, and how did you handle it? This person is a source of referral business for me, so I dont want to lose the reference... but I just cant budge....

[cdifoto]

I delete everything I don't show, so they wouldn't be able to see them anyway.

[Karl Johnston]

Just tell her you don't have them anymore, and sorry it's just down to the 34.

[books64]

Agree with the other posters, either delete the pics you don't want to show or just say that you don't have them anymore. If you don't already use a contract, I would start an make sure there is wording in the contract that states something to the effect that "the client is not entitled to every picture taken".

[MikeI]

I agree. These ARE the pictures....the others are deleted.

[siddr20]

Did she want RAW files? Does she know what it is?

If not just do a slight edit on the jpegs and send that and pretend its not edited.

But yea double your time processing them etc.. :(

Just say nope sorry i cant.

Its always good having a contract made up.

[skygod44]

Made that mistake once....won't do it again.

NEVER give unedited files to clients, as they have no idea what goes into making an unedited shot, into a great shot that they'll love.

So, I'm with the other guys....say you deleted the originals that she hasn't already seen as they were simply duplicates. You can even "remind" her that during the shoot, very often, she would have heard you shooting off several photos each time they posed. That was to get THE best. And after you chose the best, all the rest were deleted, otherwise, you'd still be editing them!!!!

[cdifoto]

I make it a point to tell my clients before they sign their contract and again before we begin shooting that I intentionally overshoot and a lot of images will be deleted.

[Biffbradford]

Just curious, did you ask why? Maybe a photographer friend prompted that request for some reason.

[Mark1]

I agree with the "delet" idea. Don't try to use some lame "It is not my policy...." crap. It is only the begining of a debate. And only makes you look stubborn. But she can not argue with "they have been deleted, they were only shot incase of a blink in the picture". Then the discussion ends because then she has every image available to her already in her possession.

[Patrick]

Someone on here a while back noted that if showing proofs to a client, make sure you rename them sequentially so there are no missing image names. They see #1 through #100 and that's it. If there are missing numbers (the non keepers) they get curious and want to see those too.

[Biffbradford]

+1 Great tip.

[amfoto1]

Just say "This is all of the photos from the session."

Everyone has some outtakes. Sometimes more, sometimes less.

Incidentally, this is an upselling opportunity that "mall portrait photogs" use quite ruthlessly. They show all the images and tell the client that any they don't buy right now will be deleted as soon as the client walks out the door. That's how they average over $400 per client, although most come in off of ads/coupons for $49 to $99 "portrait sittings". No one wants to see their precious little Johnny deleted, even if the particualr photo isn't perfect, maybe he's got that goofy, but endearing, look on his face... or whatever.

[wyofizz]

I delete everything I don't intend to sell.

[DCMP]

I delete in waves. When doing portraits, I overshoot heavily, and get rid of obvious defects without too much pixel peeping. Then (assuming I am now at 4-5 shots per pose) knock it down to 1 or 2 shots per pose, and share only those with the client when choosing what to work on. By this time I'm at about 3-8 poses, with 1-3 shots per pose, and we pick the shots to refine. Unless otherwise specified in advance, the picked shots become the only shots i save.
I DO show unedited shots to SOME clients, they tend to be actors headshots. Though they might not realize just how much work goes into post, they get a very strong feeling for why they need to continue using a photog capable of more that just taking the shot. In some cases, i have even created slightly over processed versions to showcase the changes made, but the final product had a far subtler effect applied.

[Karl Johnston]

I tend to shoot an average of 50-80 images per shoot. In the end I settle on the best 10-20. Rarely do I go over 20 - it's too much for them to look at or search which ones they want. Do what ^Dcmp suggests with the wave-rule.

[photoguy6405]

Someone on here a while back noted that if showing proofs to a client, make sure you rename them sequentially so there are no missing image names. They see #1 through #100 and that's it. If there are missing numbers (the non keepers) they get curious and want to see those too.
I like that. Makes sense.

[RDKirk]

Just curious, did you ask why? Maybe a photographer friend prompted that request for some reason.

A "photographer friend" should know better. More likely a "non-photographer friend."

I agree with the "delet" idea. Don't try to use some lame "It is not my policy...." crap. It is only the begining of a debate. And only makes you look stubborn. But she can not argue with "they have been deleted, they were only shot incase of a blink in the picture". Then the discussion ends because then she has every image available to her already in her possession.

I'm not going to delete everything else--often I may use some images as "composite fodder" to create the image that I show to the client. I haven't deleted those, so I'm not going to lie about it. I will tell the client the truth: I sketch in the camera, I overshoot and I use some images for composite work to create the final best image. I will show them the best images of each pose, according to my professional artistic judgment (which is why they hired me instead of going to Wal-Mart).

I DO show unedited shots to SOME clients, they tend to be actors headshots. Though they might not realize just how much work goes into post, they get a very strong feeling for why they need to continue using a photog capable of more that just taking the shot. In some cases, i have even created slightly over processed versions to showcase the changes made, but the final product had a far subtler effect applied.

You should actually do little or no retouching on an actor headshot. Giving the casting director an unpleasant surprise when he sees the actor in person does not do the actor any good. But I do go along with your "delete in waves" methodology.

Someone on here a while back noted that if showing proofs to a client, make sure you rename them sequentially so there are no missing image names. They see #1 through #100 and that's it. If there are missing numbers (the non keepers) they get curious and want to see those too.

I use Downloader Pro and have it automatically rename the images by job name, date, and time. So one image may be: "Jones Family 2009-11-21 130520.cr2" and the next image taken 15 seconds later would be "Jones Family 2009-22-21 130535.cr2." The sequence is clear to me, yet is not obviously sequential and I don't have to do any manual renaming.

Downloader Pro by Breeze Systems...gotta love it.

[RDKirk]

I tend to shoot an average of 50-80 images per shoot. In the end I settle on the best 10-20. Rarely do I go over 20 - it's too much for them to look at or search which ones they want. Do what ^Dcmp suggests with the wave-rule.

Yes, it's better not to show too many images...that can be counterproductive. Make sure that each image you show is clearly different from any other--don't show any near duplicates. Remember that part of your value is your artistic judgment. They put themselves into your hands so that you can make them look good.

[RobbieG]

never let a customer see or own a bad photo you took.
I cant think of anything good that can come from it.'
it could only have bad consequences.

[KAD]

Re-Ordering is advice I've used in the past, and it works well! You only show the good ones, but also keep in mind that sometimes people like themselves in one photo over another so some choices are good- maybe your composition is better in one, but the client likes (insert random non-technical reason here) which would be the photo you may have tossed.

[Rubi Jane]

I delete all images that don't make the cut and advise my clients in advance that they will view edited proofs that I select.

In your current situation I think you should simply state that you have presented the images from the shoot that are available. Explain there are always duplicates, closed eyes and occasional images not sharp enough and they are disposed of as non acceptable.

[Svetlana]

I agree about telling the client you don't have those images anymore.

I always re-number the images when I give the final product to the client otherwise it raises a question where the rest of the images go. I try not to overshoot either though, did a family session yesterday and took like 500 photos - way too many! But the family was too cute not to snap away..:)) I will be giving them maybe 50 photos.

[myjunk]

when you give the pics to clients, do you sequence them in the original numbering sequence? That may leave gaps in the sequence if some are deleted.

[clix-it]

I shot a model recently for her folio, she mailed me after giving her the finals, asking me for the whole shoot so she could 'edit' them in photoshop.

Not a chance.. I told her I delete all unacceptable shots directly off the camera before starting processing on the keepers. I don't, but the thought of some ham fisted idiot processing or worse displaying the non worker shots gives me nightmares.

[Accessoire]

good advice here, I delete all "no-go's" immediately, as well.

[DRFRANCK]

At some point in the shoot...take a look at the camera and do as if you were deleting a few because of some "problem" and pass a gentle message that they might see some files missing when you get them the product.


Much quicker than renaming every file...i think i loose enough time converting the raws and photoshoping everything to have to rename and argue...


And the contract stating that only the pictures that passed your "quality control" will be delivered will save you lots of time too.

[Dooms_day]

Well if your client is a whiz at photoshop, they might want to have a go at editing their own pictures, they just dont have the equipment to get the picture in the first place.

[RDKirk]

Well if your client is a whiz at photoshop, they might want to have a go at editing their own pictures, they just dont have the equipment to get the picture in the first place.

I'm an artist, not merely a "camera operator" or a "picher taker." My work only starts in the camera.

Most portrait painters these days work from photography. They take a number of photographs of the subject--dozens, sometimes hundreds--just like photographers do. Then they paint from the photographs and deliver a painting.

What if their clients insisted on just getting a CD of the photographs they took to save money on getting the actual painting? Would the painters go for that? I doubt it.

[sfaust]

It's your business, and you set the policies. If you don't want to give out every image, its entirely your choice.

In fact, I'd put a price on it that exceeds what most would pay. Then if someone wants it, you can offer it at that price, and if its beyond what they want to pay they will decline. But that makes it their choice to pass, rather than the photographer not 'giving up' the images. If they decide to pay, then you can put in the work required to ready those images for delivery and get paid for it, and then it becomes added revenue.

[internationalmanofmystery]

As others have said, stand your ground and decline the request.

[AngelKatie413]

I would definitely not give everything unedited. They're your photographs and it's your business - politely decline!

[robojack]

My musician friend drew a good comparison to what he does - Why would you present your practice takes and your less-than-successful takes, when you can present the take that's bang-on?

And I agree, showing your 'mistakes' or less-than-satisfactory photos downplays your credibility and skews others' perceptions of you as a photographer.

[RDKirk]

I agree with the "delet" idea. Don't try to use some lame "It is not my policy...." crap. It is only the begining of a debate. And only makes you look stubborn. But she can not argue with "they have been deleted, they were only shot incase of a blink in the picture". Then the discussion ends because then she has every image available to her already in her possession.

There is nothing lame or crap about it. Your policy is your policy. Your only obligation is to make sure the client understands your policy at the outset--a matter of setting proper expectations.

[Mark1]

There is nothing lame or crap about it. Your policy is your policy. Your only obligation is to make sure the client understands your policy at the outset--a matter of setting proper expectations.

O I agree totally....from our side of the argument. But a customer who is asking you to break your policy obviously does not care what your policy is. And it has the possability to turn ugly. However if you simply do not have anything else to turn over, there really cant be an argument.

[RDKirk]

O I agree totally....from our side of the argument. But a customer who is asking you to break your policy obviously does not care what your policy is. And it has the possability to turn ugly. However if you simply do not have anything else to turn over, there really cant be an argument.

It does not turn ugly if you've properly set the expectation from the very beginning.

Portrait painters take preliminary photographs and do sketches all the time. What do they give the client? One painting. Period. What did the client expect from the beginning? One painting. Period. There is no reason for it to be any different with photography.

When I have my first consultation with a client, I tell them bluntly that I sketch with the camera and that I'm only going to show them one or two images from each pose, perhaps composites from several images, and that's the way I zoom. The consultation either ends with their agreement to purchase no less than a framed 16x20 print, or we just shake hands and wish each other pleasant lives.

[Borna C]

you only give out web-sized images if they were bought as a print, simple as that. and if they really want to buy 80 prints, who are you to stop them?