I wonder

After my personal fiasco with a senior portrait photographer, it got me to thinking...
how many of you portrait/wedding folks allow your clients to view the RAW images, assuming you even shoot in RAW?
Do you cull your images at 100-200% to select the ones with the best IQ or merely send them all thru your personal "beauty" software?

You refuse to give clients the full size digital photos citing copyright BS...if your prints are that good, why worry about them getting better ones made,
unless they aren't that good.

In my situation, when we went to pick-up my daughter's 3-16x20 images, I held them up to my nose...picked up a pair of scissors from his desk...
and shredded all three of them.

I don't shoot weddings or family portraits but I don't show anything but finished work and I only shoot raw..

Always shoot raw.

Clients see many of the SOOC shots on the back of the LCD as the day goes on. Sometimes I'll transfer SOOC JPGs direct from the camera to phone and upload to Facebook whilst still at the wedding.

No, I cull the images at the preview window size in Bridge.

I don't have any personal "beauty" software. Never have. An import preset and a quick crop in Lightroom is about all I need to do.

Clients get full size images, always have.

Did you select this photographer? If so, did you do your due diligence on his work. If what he delivered is not up to his standards, I would think he could do a reshoot.

Your childish approach to ripping up the photographs most likely burned bridges.

Don't ya think he should have done that before printing and displaying the images.

My childish behavior cost him a school contract.

Hogloff wrote in post #18146039
Did you select this photographer? If so, did you do your due diligence on his work. If what he delivered is not up to his standards, I would think he could do a reshoot.

Your childish approach to ripping up the photographs most likely burned bridges.

This. I pretty much got offended just reading your post... if you're not happy with the work then talk to him about why. You should know pretty well the quality to expect based on the photographer's portfolio, if the work wasn't up to that standard then I would negotiate a re-shoot or partial refund. Being a jerk about it gets you nowhere.

chauncey wrote in post #18146059
Don't ya think he should have done that before printing and displaying the images.


My childish behavior cost him a school contract.

That depends on why you think his work was sub-par. I'd ask you to display an example of why you thought the work was sub-par, but evidently you destroyed it already.

Frankly, if this is your attitude then you did him a favor by not having him sign a contract with you...

chauncey wrote in post #18146059
My childish behavior cost him a school contract.

Congrats.

chauncey wrote in post #18145605
In my situation, when we went to pick-up my daughter's 3-16x20 images, I held them up to my nose...picked up a pair of scissors from his desk...
and shredded all three of them.

chauncey wrote in post #18145605
The things you do for yourself die with you, the things you do for others live forever.
A man's worth should be judged, not when he basks in the sun, but how he faces the storm

This doesn't need much additional elaboration beyond the above juxtoposition, but when my kids were very little I taught them to control their frustrations and to express themselves through their words. Something to work on apparently.

If you contract with someone for a service and you are in the end unhappy with the service, the adult response is to tell the other party that you are not happy and why and then work out a reasonable remedy that each party can agree too. If I was that photographer I'd just give you your money back and be happy to never see you and your childish attitude again.

The lucky part is that your daughter will be a senior for a whole year. So there's ample time for another shoot. So the mano-e-mano scene was perhaps a bit overdone. I'm just wondering why you didn't do the shoot in the first place. They weren't doing senior shoots when my kids were graduating. But if they were, I would have done them. (Read that: "too cheap to pay someone else to do it.")

It seems to me that one could judge from the proofs if a photo would blow up well to 16x20. So my question is, why did you wait for a print before you passed judgment? Or, by holding them up to your nose, do you mean to say that you performed the the equivalent of pixel-peeping? Why not use a magnifying glass too? Everybody not afflicted with the disorder knows that pixel-peeping is the road to derangement and empty pockets. A 16x20 print is meant to be viewed from across the room, unless your interest is in counting pimples. I'm getting the idea that perhaps this was your sole criterion for the quality of the prints.

You could have saved yourself a few bucks if you went over the photographer's portfolio with that aforementioned magnifying glass before you contracted for the shoot.

Oh, and to answer the original question: I never show raw images to clients. And I cull out any shots that do not pass my quality criteria. That does not include pixel-peeping at 200%. The only time I would look at 100% is if something didn't quite look right and I was looking for the cause.

chauncey wrote in post #18145605
After my personal fiasco with a senior portrait photographer, it got me to thinking...
how many of you portrait/wedding folks allow your clients to view the RAW images, assuming you even shoot in RAW?
Do you cull your images at 100-200% to select the ones with the best IQ or merely send them all thru your personal "beauty" software?

You refuse to give clients the full size digital photos citing copyright BS...if your prints are that good, why worry about them getting better ones made,
unless they aren't that good.

In my situation, when we went to pick-up my daughter's 3-16x20 images, I held them up to my nose...picked up a pair of scissors from his desk...
and shredded all three of them.

Those prints were his property until you paid for them. Grow up. Send the guy a check for the damage you've caused. Next time, just don't pay for what you don't want.

chauncey wrote in post #18145605
In my situation, when we went to pick-up

Did you give your daughter and wife an opportunity to see the prints?

The mother abstained her duties year ago. Daughter is one of six, adopted, cognitively impaired children.

My own skills has taught me mediocrity when I see it.

chauncey wrote in post #18146310
The mother abstained her duties year ago. Daughter is one of six, adopted, cognitively impaired children.

My own skills has taught me mediocrity when I see it.

Then surely you recognized your behavior as less than ideal, certainly less than you would strive to teach your children. Pay the guy for the damaged property.

chauncey wrote in post #18146310
The mother abstained her duties year ago. Daughter is one of six, adopted, cognitively impaired children.

My own skills has taught me mediocrity when I see it.

I guess most of us read the 'we' as implying that you are married and the we referred to you and a spouse. It's unusual for a single parent to adopt six children, but I guess that is neither here nor there.

What's the point of this thread again? You originally asked about letting clients view RAW images, which is kind of strange and specific since RAW images are not convenient to share (many clients would have no RAW viewer at home) and having them sit with you and scroll through LR or something seems like an unusual approach.

Because really this thread feels like you are very proud of your boorish behavior in showing up the 'inferior' photographer (that you hired for some reason). That's just kind of how this reads to me. Personally I would have kept such an embarrassing outburst to myself, but clearly we have differing views on public conduct.

And to elaborate, the reason I say that is because I think you know how this works. The vast majority of photographers will shoot, cull, select and prep shots while trusting their own judgement above the clients. Then they show the client 'proofs' so that final selections for printing (or whatever) can be made by the client. If you view the final product from the photographer and realize that their idea of what is technically acceptable in a final image is much worse than yours, the most common reason is that you didn't perform your due diligence in checking references and viewing the photographer's portfolio of work.

On the other hand, if the final work is much worse than the portfolio you did screen, then you are certainly due a refund or a re-shoot. And discussing this calmly but firmly is usually the best way to get what you want.

chauncey wrote in post #18145605
In my situation, when we went to pick-up my daughter's 3-16x20 images, I held them up to my nose...picked up a pair of scissors from his desk...
and shredded all three of them.

What did he say to you when you did that?

I hope your daughter wasn't too distressed to see, what I assume she saw as Daddy cutting up beautiful pictures of her.