Chain Reaction wrote:
The decision of giving a refund is entirely up to you. However, if you do decide to give it be sure they return the files along with a notorized statement that they will not, under any circumstances, use any the footage in any way, shape, or form. This will at least prevent them from getting a freebie from you. If they have no intention of ever using this footage then this should not be a problem for them.

+1.

I would make it very clear that if you provide a PARTIAL refund it will be accompanied by a document prohibiting any use of that footage. Partial because you gave your time and provided the footage in good faith.

But that is a last resort solution.

I would try to figure out if there's some way that they would be happy with the footage if it was edited. It was ridiculous for the band to want raw footage in the first place (and hopefully something you learned). No client is going to be happy with the unedited version unless they have a professional editing it themselves. Especially of a concert. Of course people are going to be blocking the frame at some point.

He's complaining about something he asked for. So he's basically a tool that had no idea what he wanted and just wanted control. Personally, it sounds like he wants a refund but plans on keeping and using the footage after editing it. That's not how it works. Don't let him have it both ways.

steve sessem wrote:
he wanted raw files,,
has the only copies,,
deal over done walk away

Yep.  That is how I see it.

Yes, it sounds like some amateur mistakes were made, but there is still some usable content there.  He liked your work enough to hire you at garage sale rates and if he doesn't know how to edit video that is not your problem.  Offer to edit it for him for an additional fee.

I would only give him a refund if you materially misrepresented something or made other promises that you haven't told us about yet.  Did you tell him that you were God's gift to live show recording?  Controlling expectations is very important.

Joe WoW Photos wrote:
Here's yoru polite and professional reply:
Sorry I do not give refunds on RAW work... You specificed the terms and I have met those terms.
Good Day

And you'll never work for that guy ever again,
And you'll never work with that guy's friends & acquaintances ever again,
but if you are beating potential clients away, it might be okay to blow off a client.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
And you'll never work for that guy ever again,
And you'll never work with that guy's friends & acquaintances ever again,
but if you are beating potential clients away, it might be okay to blow off a client.

All the guy's friends are in bands. They all live in vans down by the river.

Looknsee Photography wrote:

And you'll never work for that guy ever again,
And you'll never work with that guy's friends & acquaintances ever again,
but if you are beating potential clients away, it might be okay to blow off a client.

No matter what the OP does, this client is going to be unhappy. This client started off wanting a lot more than he was willing to pay for.

The OP can bend over backward trying to make this client happy and all he'll get is a reputation for working extremely cheap.

John Allan wrote:
Ask them to let you know how they'd like the video edited. Who expects video to be a finished product without editing. That's insane.
If they won't, tell them they have two options:
1) Give you some guidance on how they'd like the edited product.
2) F-off.

I did give him advice on how to edit it. A big concern of his was the sound levels, which is easily fixable in post (just turn the levels to maximum and they'll be fine.) He then threw me a long tirade about other videographers being able to shoot his concerts in full with no mistakes, and asked me how I can sleep at night.

Looknsee Photography wrote:
And you'll never work for that guy ever again,
And you'll never work with that guy's friends & acquaintances ever again,
but if you are beating potential clients away, it might be okay to blow off a client.

And for $120.00 why would you want to? They are a traveling band. They are probably doing this to somebody in every town they visit. They'll take all the footage and turn it into a tour video. How is the OP going to prove he shot it then? He doesn't even have a copy. The band got a bargain even without a refund and the OP is never going to get any more business out of these people or their friends.

Vampman Studios wrote:
and asked me how I can sleep at night.

Tell him by remembering his concert. Bores you to sleep every time. You're not going to make him happy anyway. It sounds like he's just trying to browbeat you into giving in. I wouldn't do it.

Vampman Studios wrote:

I did give him advice on how to edit it. A big concern of his was the sound levels, which is easily fixable in post (just turn the levels to maximum and they'll be fine.) He then threw me a long tirade about other videographers being able to shoot his concerts in full with no mistakes, and asked me how I can sleep at night.

In my opinion, you should generally be doing the post, not instructing the client how to do it. Maybe in the future, you'll charge more and include post, rather than being willing to just handing over raw footage and expect clients to handle it themselves.
Also, I can't imagine how you'd get even acceptable sound quality without getting a feed directly from their board. In the future, maybe mention that in pre-meetings.

Michael Pandolfo wrote:
All the guy's friends are in bands. They all live in vans down by the river.

+1 for the Saturday Night Live reference.

Vampman Studios wrote:
I offered him a full refund if he agreed to give me back the files and agree in writing that he'll never use the footage for anything. He refused.

Respond to the review, stating only the above, without any he said-she said or interpretations or other nonsense. Be very professional in the words you use. Here you go.
--------------
I deeply regret that I was unable to please this client. The client was offered a full refund under the condition that he'd stipulate that the footage in his possession would never be commercially used. He refused the refund.
--------------

fullmetalphotographer wrote:
Let me blunt here. There are three ways of reading this.

(1) You did not explain your limitations and your hardware limitations very well. It sounds like you using a DSLR which to me is good for short clips which makes for good B roll, but unless you had a separate audio recorder you are going to get so so audio. So I can see how this could be an issue. It also sounds like you tried to shoot handheld the whole time, that would be a mistake.

(2) It is a bit of a shake done. You don't accidentally erase cards. That is a load of crap. I could read this as their way of getting something for nothing.


(3) The truth lies in the middle. I suspect this is more likely. My feeling here your coverage should have been better, but lack of experience is showing here. They are trying to get a better deal. If they want total refund then they need to release the footage back to you, they get no rights to use the footage. If the they get a partial refund then you should at least the footage back.

Good luck.

I agree.

Vampman Studios wrote:
What do I do?

You shot the concert and they paid you for the footage right away without reviewing or talking to you about it.

IMO this is all on them and I wouldn't give them anything back. If they were that concerned about you or your footage they would have either hired someone better or reviewed the footage.




Andrew Thomas Evans
www.andrewthomasevans.com

Vampman Studios wrote:
Well, it's official: I have just been given my first negative review by the client who wanted the refund, which I ultimately refused because a.) He stripped my camera card of the files so he has the only files in existence, b.) I gave him everything he asked for and the mistakes are easily correctable for even a beginner editor, and c.) I offered him a full refund if he agreed to give me back the files and agree in writing that he'll never use the footage for anything. He refused. He told me I ripped him off. The lesson learned: All clients need to have a contract stating all payments are non-refundable, and NEVER give the client raw video files.

Gave you a negative review?  Where?

Vampman Studios wrote:
Well, it's official: I have just been given my first negative review by the client who wanted the refund, which I ultimately refused because a.) He stripped my camera card of the files so he has the only files in existence, b.) I gave him everything he asked for and the mistakes are easily correctable for even a beginner editor, and c.) I offered him a full refund if he agreed to give me back the files and agree in writing that he'll never use the footage for anything. He refused. He told me I ripped him off. The lesson learned: All clients need to have a contract stating all payments are non-refundable, and NEVER give the client raw video files.

Ah well..
At least you can afford a decent meal and a nice bottle of scotch...

John Allan wrote:
Respond to the review, stating only the above, without any he said-she said or interpretations or other nonsense. Be very professional in the words you use. Here you go.
--------------
I deeply regret that I was unable to please this client. The client was offered a full refund under the condition that he'd stipulate that the footage in his possession would never be commercially used. He refused the refund.
--------------

That too...

Vampman Studios wrote:
The client paid me $120.00 I have shot orchestra concerts a few times, but they always had me edit the footage and give them the final product. This guy didn't want any edits done, just the raw files.

I didn't see this post when I made my previous post.  $120 is pretty cheap rate, Craigslist gigs stuff.  They shouldn't have much in expectations for nearly 2 hours of video coverage.  Nothing more than a camcorder on a tripod.

HOWEVER, I still believe you needed to tell them about the "20 minute time limit" per card.  If you did not, then I think they probably deserve a refund, or your work was bad & you deserve a negative review for your coverage.  Think of expecting to watch a 2 hour concert, and every 20 minutes nearly a full minute goes missing?!  That's pretty bad. As I said, it should be expected when shooting video that at least one hour goes by without a need to change media capture (tape/card), and if needed they should be informed of this limitation regardless.

Chalk it up as a learning experience, and next time contracts & communication.

Ruben Sanchez wrote:
Give him his money back, and have him make you a copy of the video for yourself.

Now you've learned.  Never give a client the original and only copy, and never give the client the Raw footage right out of the camera at the end of the event.

Most important, be sure and have a written contract to protect yourself.

This! But also.. it's $120, how much does your reputation and making your clients happy worth to you? I see a lot of unprofessional "tell them to go fuck themselves" replies in here.. for $120? Really?
Especially if you're still "new-ish" to the industry, I would do everything I could to make sure every client that hired me and actually paid me walked away at least as happy as I could possibly make them! Reputation is EVERYTHING, esp when you're just starting out..
sometimes you have to eat it in business and say that $ was a lesson learned.

Also, to be honest, if I was the client and I wasn't told about the "20 min card" thing, I'd be pretty pissed:/

Aaliyah Love wrote:
Especially if you're still "new-ish" to the industry, I would do everything I could to make sure every client that hired me and actually paid me walked away at least as happy as I could possibly make them!

That's the thing though there are some clients that no matter what you do, they will NEVER be happy.

Although its not the most ideal, sometimes all a person can really do is to fix the situation the best they can but also have to be willing to wash your hands on the matter. You can't make someone happy (or be neutral) if they're not willing to meet somewhere in the middle.

Aaliyah Love wrote:

This! But also.. it's $120, how much does your reputation and making your clients happy worth to you? I see a lot of unprofessional "tell them to go fuck themselves" replies in here.. for $120? Really?
Especially if you're still "new-ish" to the industry, I would do everything I could to make sure every client that hired me and actually paid me walked away at least as happy as I could possibly make them! Reputation is EVERYTHING, esp when you're just starting out..
sometimes you have to eat it in business and say that $ was a lesson learned.

Also, to be honest, if I was the client and I wasn't told about the "20 min card" thing, I'd be pretty pissed:/

He doesn't say the card can only record 20 minutes - he said the CAMERA records in 20-minute segments - meaning the footage consists of lots of 20-min clips.

RKD Photographic wrote:

He doesn't say the card can only record 20 minutes - he said the CAMERA records in 20-minute segments - meaning the footage consists of lots of 20-min clips.

Correct. My camera records 20 minute clips, then switches off and records another 20. It takes like 2 seconds to hit the on switch. And my camera card was a 16 Gig card. It's maximum recording capability is 100 minutes, I learned. I had to dump my files of the first set of his performance (90 minutes) onto his computer during the break (which he wasn't very happy with) to make room for the second set, which lasted 60 minutes.

Aaliyah Love wrote:
This! But also.. it's $120, how much does your reputation and making your clients happy worth to you? I see a lot of unprofessional "tell them to go fuck themselves" replies in here.. for $120? Really?
Especially if you're still "new-ish" to the industry, I would do everything I could to make sure every client that hired me and actually paid me walked away at least as happy as I could possibly make them! Reputation is EVERYTHING, esp when you're just starting out..
sometimes you have to eat it in business and say that $ was a lesson learned.

Also, to be honest, if I was the client and I wasn't told about the "20 min card" thing, I'd be pretty pissed:/

You must have missed the part where he offered a refund and it was refused because he wouldn't return the product and not use the footage. The guy was trying to get something for nothing and I'm sure it's not the first time he tried to pull this crap on someone.

Sleepy Weasel wrote:
2. If you offered a refund and he refused to agree not to use the footage, then he OBVIOUSLY plans to use the footage and just wants something for nothing.

Yeah, I think that clears up the client's intentions.

He's so unhappy with the quality of the footage but, when offered a full refund with the stipulation the footage can't be used, refused and stormed off. Obviously, the footage wasn't that bad.

John Allan wrote:

Respond to the review, stating only the above, without any he said-she said or interpretations or other nonsense. Be very professional in the words you use. Here you go.
--------------
I deeply regret that I was unable to please this client. The client was offered a full refund under the condition that he'd stipulate that the footage in his possession would never be commercially used. He refused the refund.
--------------

+1

Vampman Studios wrote:
So here's the situation:

Two nights ago I worked a small concert gig for a traveling band. The lead singer, my client, gave me specific instructions that he wanted ONLY the raw footage straight from the camera. I did my work, gave him the footage, he paid me, we parted ways.

Then last night I get an e-mail from him saying he HATED the raw footage and wants his money back. I admit, I did make a few mistakes; the camera had a few shakey parts where I moved to a new spot and my camera only records 20 minutes of footage at a time, so some parts are cut off, and there are two minutes where the people right in front get up, completely blocking the musician. But I estimate that only 9 minutes of the 140 minute concert were filled with mistakes. Unfortunately, I can't look at the footage because the musicians computer stripped the card of the footage instead of copying it, leaving me with no way of checking the footage.

I know that I only made a few mistakes here and there and the majority was good. But I need advice on how to handle the situation. This musician has the only copies of the footage on earth, and wants a refund because he thinks the raw files are crap and is to busy to edit out the 9 minutes of mistakes. What do I do?

Rule #1 -- You NEVER turn over the RAW footage.

Rule #2 -- If you DO have to turn over unedited work, ALWAYS keep a copy for yourself.

Rule #3 -- You would not be the first photographer to be asked for all the unedited images, client makes a copy, asks for a refund, gives back the photos, but keeps copies to be used on a later date.

You f--cked yourself over by violating #1 and #2, and set yourself up for #3.

Vampman Studios wrote:
Well, it's official: I have just been given my first negative review by the client who wanted the refund

Shake it off and don't worry about it.  I used to get frustrated by negative reviews but then realized that they were going to happen no matter what I did.  They are almost always written by people who are unreasonable and had expectations you would never meet.

Irrespective of your experience level, if the guy is upset about paying $120 to tape a two hour concert then it is he not you. 

Seriously, let it go.  It isn't worth the energy, and in the end, you will get through it.  We all get unhappy clients from time to time.

Vampman Studios wrote:

Correct. My camera records 20 minute clips, then switches off and records another 20. It takes like 2 seconds to hit the on switch. And my camera card was a 16 Gig card. It's maximum recording capability is 100 minutes, I learned. I had to dump my files of the first set of his performance (90 minutes) onto his computer during the break (which he wasn't very happy with) to make room for the second set, which lasted 60 minutes.

Don't know what to tell you about the refund, but if you keep the $120, invest it in another card or two.  If you refund it, invest in another card or two.

Vampman Studios wrote:
Correct. My camera records 20 minute clips, then switches off and records another 20. It takes like 2 seconds to hit the on switch. And my camera card was a 16 Gig card. It's maximum recording capability is 100 minutes, I learned. I had to dump my files of the first set of his performance (90 minutes) onto his computer during the break (which he wasn't very happy with) to make room for the second set, which lasted 60 minutes.

This is sounding more and more like a giant fail by both parties.

Vampman Studios wrote:

I did give him advice on how to edit it. A big concern of his was the sound levels, which is easily fixable in post (just turn the levels to maximum and they'll be fine.) He then threw me a long tirade about other videographers being able to shoot his concerts in full with no mistakes, and asked me how I can sleep at night.

Why didn't he rehire those perfect vidographers again? Instead of experimenting with others!?! Maybe because they won't work with them! lol
Tell him you sleep fine because never going to work for him again!
Man some people have no respect for the shooter anymore! They just want to listen just in their own little world of me me me!

John Allan wrote:

Respond to the review, stating only the above, without any he said-she said or interpretations or other nonsense. Be very professional in the words you use. Here you go.
--------------
I deeply regret that I was unable to please this client. The client was offered a full refund under the condition that he'd stipulate that the footage in his possession would never be commercially used. He refused the refund.
--------------

Bingo. Perfect way to progress.

Francisco Castro wrote:
Rule #1 -- You NEVER turn over the RAW footage.

Rule #2 -- If you DO have to turn over unedited work, ALWAYS keep a copy for yourself.

Why not? If all you're getting paid to do was shoot footage then why step in and make it more work to edit that footage?

Plus, other than safety and backup, why would you need the footage if you got paid?




Andrew Thomas Evans
www.andrewthomasevans.com