WWYD: Primary photog wants to duplicate my LR settings. Do I tell?

[tim]

Originally Posted by tfizzle

I'd throw a bone but I surely wouldn't sit down and give a step-by-step process on multiple images.

This person has given the OP a lot, more than almost any other photographer would. I think they should return the favour.

[PixelMagic]

Enter a link to any of your photos to this site, then scroll down and tell me what you see: http://regex.info/exif.cgi/exif.cgi

Originally Posted by mirrorrim

Yes, it would be very easy to figure out.



I think this is what I'm going to do. I convinced her to switch over to LR to process her RAWs, so I'm gonna give a basic run down of what each slider does. She probably could easily figure it all out, since she is an avid photoshop user.

[tfizzle]

Originally Posted by tim

This person has given the OP a lot, more than almost any other photographer would. I think they should return the favour.

I understand that but this is what stuck out to me from the OP:

She then said she really likes my aesthetic and that's what she wants to have in her photos. She asked me to email her step by step instructions. I may or may not get photo credit.

She has given him a lot but she has received quite a bit too. FREE raw files from a second shooter. That's super nice. He's not getting paid . . . and she wants to use his "aesthetics" for her business. That's not a bad idea but it just sounds off to me. I wouldn't be willing to take pictures, give the raws, and tutor the person getting them how to make her portfolio just like mine. Again, I'd throw a bone and show a couple of images and how I did it, I would even give a preset and show which file I would use it on.

After reading through the OP again it sounds like she just wants to have it seamless for a magazine spread? If so I'd go through the photos with her for that specific job and I wouldn't really care about credit since I would be a "work for hire" and representing HER business.

I would not go beyond that and give her every little recipe. And my sneaky suspicion is that even if you do give her all the recipes she wouldn't be able to duplicate it over the long haul. Once you get in a groove for a set of photos during PP everything changes as the light changes and you really have to know how get things consistent by using all the tools in LR. Maybe she'd be able to do it, maybe not.

[joedlh]

Originally Posted by jamiewexler

And those of you that think that LR presets are the key to being a successful photography business owner, are not likely to be successful photography business owners for long.

+1 This.

[nicksan]

I guess I don't look at second shooting that way, since I still do a lot of it. To me, second shooting and assisting are 2 distinct jobs. Ideally, when learning the ropes, one would take on an assistant job to get a feel for weddings, and maybe snap a few here and there and perhaps slowly build up a portfolio. A second shooter to me is an additional set of eyes. I know not all of you look at it that way and some of you would rather have an assistant holding stuff for you than a second shooter. Perfectly understandable. I feel that an assistant is sometimes more useful as well or is a great person to have in addition to a second shooter.

That said, I have never, ever second shot for free. NEVER. My time. My skills. I'm going to get paid for it. I hire out a second specifically because I want additional shots and I like his/her style. If it's an opportunity for that person to learn from me, then so be it. That's great. But as far as I am concerned, it's a 2 way street. I'm getting photos I might not be able to get. I'm also getting another pair of eyes and maybe some additional; ideas. For that I pay the second shooter. I would never ask someone to shoot for free, especially in a legit second shooter's assignment.

So honestly, the whole free thing to me just sounds annoying and I still think the OP is being taken advantage of. It's a strange situation though, and again, when money gets in the middle of things, it never ends well.

[mirrorrim]

Originally Posted by PixelMagic

Enter a link to any of your photos to this site, then scroll down and tell me what you see: http://regex.info/exif.cgi/exif.cgi

Not sure what I'm looking for here.

~~~~~~

I gave her a general run down of how I use LR. Nothing specific, because I dont have anything specific that I use. Basically just advice like "I use tone curve for contrast, instead of the slider," "I dont touch the saturation slider, but I like to boost up the clarity and vibrance a bit."

She emailed back and thanked me and basically she knew everything I told her, and said "but it seemed like there was something a bit "more" in your photos! Being a lightroom newbie I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything. I think it's the clarity and vibrance that I hadn't been doing that may be different."

[PixelMagic]

The point is that any adjustments made in Lightroom can be analyzed/reproduced if you leave the EXIF metadata intact. Processing in LR is hardly a secret.

Originally Posted by mirrorrim

Not sure what I'm looking for here.

~~~~~~

I gave her a general run down of how I use LR. Nothing specific, because I dont have anything specific that I use. Basically just advice like "I use tone curve for contrast, instead of the slider," "I dont touch the saturation slider, but I like to boost up the clarity and vibrance a bit."

She emailed back and thanked me and basically she knew everything I told her, and said "but it seemed like there was something a bit "more" in your photos! Being a lightroom newbie I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything. I think it's the clarity and vibrance that I hadn't been doing that may be different."

[mirrorrim]

Doh. I figured that was you're point but didnt see anything. Then I remembered I strip my metadata for photos I post online.

[Red Tie Photography]

I dont really get everyone saying the OP is being taken advantage of. No one is holding a gun to their head, it doesnt sound like they are locked into any contract. If they feel they arent getting what they should be, then they should tell the main shooter that they dont want to shoot for free any more - simple as that.

[bnlearle]

First, totally reasonable question

A few thoughts...

1. Unless you're one in a million, you will most likely not look back at this processing style with much fondness -- no less with the idea that the processing is something that should be protected and hidden. So since you're probably not going to be depending on this style of processing in the future, it'd probably pay some dividends to help out this photographer who has clearly helped you out.

2. But the pragmatist in me simply knows I wouldn't do this. It's too long and time consuming. You want me to go through a few HUNDRED images and show you how I processed them all?!? My solution would be this -- since you've helped me a lot (allowed me to shoot with you, show the images where I wish, hand out biz cards to guests), give me YOUR RAW images. I'll then process them and export the RAWs with the XML files. You give those back. She throws them into LR and has your settings there.

She learns from you due to your openness and kindness. You've learned from her due to her openness and kindness. This is how you keep the cycle going

3. As Jaime said, you're showing her simple things that she WILL learn somewhere else if you don't show her. She's given you opportunity that you WILL NOT get somewhere else if she didn't offer.

So I totally think it's an understandable thing to ponder in your position, but I think you'd be best to help her out. In my opinion, it's always better for business to be open and kind so long as it won't seriously harm your business. I believe it allows for a lot more good things to come your way.

[NBEast]

A birdie tells me you're starting to regret all this "working for free" stuff and it's starting to eat at you. That could grow into something ugly that spoils a beautiful and mutually benefitial (and carreer making) opportunity. Either start getting paid or reconcile it within yourself that it's worth the non-monitary benefit.

IMHO: If she is arranging a whole fake wedding for a magazine and allowing you to be involved and published ... WOW! You're getting paid in spades in the form of rubbing shoulders with a true artist (in the "art" of making this business happen).

There are a lot of amazing photographers who don't book squat and can't sell themselves for what they're worth if their life depended on it! Post processing ... a top Graphic Artist might get $25/hr.

My vote is; keep rubbing shoulders with this lady. Refusing to show her your PP methods, or even withholding details of your method, seems petty. Work into getting fair monitary compensation but keep it alive until you get established with your own clients and portfolio. Hell; the mere opportunity to pass out cards at her wedding is a carreer making gift! The fact that you have talent makes it all the more valuable ... build up a great portfolio that doesn't repeat the same B&G and in another year you'll be all set!

I'd suggest giving her all the free LR lessons she desires. It doesn't sound like she's holding out on you ... except monitarily.

On the flip side; I wouldn't agree to any more freebies. After the next 5 are done, she should at least value you enough to pay the usual pittance of $100 or $200. You surely have negligible expenses (gas, lost small items, ...).

[mirrorrim]

Updated my first post

[RangersForever]

Chances are if you tell her the presets you used she still won't be able to pull of the same style of images as you since composition plays a major part in it. Her pictures will have the same "colors" as yours but your will still look like "your style."

Return the favor and let her in on your "secret" as there's not much chance it can really hurt you.

[NBEast]

Originally Posted by mirrorrim

Updated my first post

Maybe its my monitor but the exposure seems a bit blown-out. I'm struggling to see what all the fuss is over.