Photographer
Tony Sharp Chicago
Posts: 184
Chicago, Illinois, US
I recently did a digital camera photoshoot with a model. I sent sample size jpegs of the 100+ shots we took, let the model choose which 10 I should work on (touchup / add FX to / etc), and charged the model for those 10 pictures. Now the model is asking for the other 90 shots, fullsize, without stamps, and on CD.
Is it normal for photographers to give their models ALL of the pictures taken, fullsize, and without a stamp or watermark? From my experience, it's not. It seems to kind of go against the point of charging, doesn't it?
What do you think about this?
NOTE: I only use big stamps for internet pictures.
Photographer
Ian Powell
Posts: 246
Columbus, Ohio, US
it's insane to think some one wants 100 8x10s of themselves. and if she does want it that way Charge her for it and jack the price up for stampless. Or get the back of the print stamped... Everything has a made by marker in the real world.
Photographer
Star
Posts: 17966
Los Angeles, California, US
my response would be,
"I am so happpy you chose to go with our bulk discount price of $1500 for your entire session, unedited and on CD.... blah blah blah"
Find a price you would be comfortable charging to give her her whole session and quote her that price. She will probably leave you alone, or better yet, give you the money.
Photographer
Ian Powell
Posts: 246
Columbus, Ohio, US
this all reminds me of a tfp i'd scheduled for a class assignment back in 2003. Checking back with the so called model she wanted my negtives and all prints from the shoot. which didn't make any sence to me and I illiterated that it was for a class assignment and well ended badly. Wish money had been involved in the process might have been able to eat and go to school at the same time lol.
Photographer
Tony Sharp Chicago
Posts: 184
Chicago, Illinois, US
Posted by Ian Powell:
it's insane to think some one wants 100 8x10s of themselves. and if she does want it that way Charge her for it and jack the price up for stampless. Or get the back of the print stamped... Everything has a made by marker in the real world. No. The model doesn't want prints. The model just wants fullsize, unstamped, jpegs on a CD. Good point though.
Posted by Star:
my response would be,
"I am so happpy you chose to go with our bulk discount price of $1500 for your entire session, unedited and on CD.... blah blah blah"
Find a price you would be comfortable charging to give her her whole session and quote her that price. She will probably leave you alone, or better yet, give you the money. This is a good point. Thank you.
Photographer
Ian Powell
Posts: 246
Columbus, Ohio, US
oh tony, the size of your stamp could have something to do with the model asking for no stamps.
Photographer
Tony Sharp Chicago
Posts: 184
Chicago, Illinois, US
Posted by Ian Powell:
oh tony, the size of your stamp could have something to do with the model asking for no stamps. I only use big stamps for the internet.
My question is: Is it normal for a photographer to give a model ALL of the extra shots on CD even if they only paid for 10 shots to be photoshopped?
Photographer
Brian Diaz
Posts: 65617
Danbury, Connecticut, US
Posted by Tony Sharp:
My question is: Is it normal for a photographer to give a model ALL of the extra shots on CD even if they only paid for 10 shots to be photoshopped? No. If your business is to sell photos, you should not give them away. And if you do not release unedited images, you should say so. I don't--it's (inexactly) like asking a model to shoot without makeup. I need some time to make sure that my work looks its best because when someone shows my work to others, I am being represented, and I want to know that only my best work represents me.
Photographer
XtremeArtists
Posts: 9122
Posted by Tony Sharp:
My question is: Is it normal for a photographer to give a model ALL of the extra shots on CD even if they only paid for 10 shots to be photoshopped? A photographer? No.
A GWC that wants to get in her pants? Yes.
Photographer
Jack D Trute
Posts: 4558
New York, New York, US
Posted by Star:
my response would be,
"I am so happpy you chose to go with our bulk discount price of $1500 for your entire session, unedited and on CD.... blah blah blah"
Find a price you would be comfortable charging to give her her whole session and quote her that price. She will probably leave you alone, or better yet, give you the money. Bingo, bingo was his name-Oh.
Photographer
Jack D Trute
Posts: 4558
New York, New York, US
Posted by XtremeArtists:
Posted by Tony Sharp:
My question is: Is it normal for a photographer to give a model ALL of the extra shots on CD even if they only paid for 10 shots to be photoshopped? A photographer? No.
A GWC that wants to get in her pants? Yes. You have won bingo at the MM overusers table that I am a member of. Come choose your prize.
Photographer
Mike Cummings
Posts: 5896
LAKE COMO, Florida, US
Posted by XtremeArtists:
Posted by Tony Sharp:
My question is: Is it normal for a photographer to give a model ALL of the extra shots on CD even if they only paid for 10 shots to be photoshopped? A photographer? No.
A GWC that wants to get in her pants? Yes. I tend to give them all the shots. Because I am a beginner I think I want to show them I am not a GWC and I did not take any shots for my "personal" use... if you get my drift.
Photographer
XtremeArtists
Posts: 9122
Posted by Jack D Trute:
MM overusers
Is that like MM Anonymous?
Photographer
Jack D Trute
Posts: 4558
New York, New York, US
Posted by Mike Cummings:
Posted by XtremeArtists:
Posted by Tony Sharp:
My question is: Is it normal for a photographer to give a model ALL of the extra shots on CD even if they only paid for 10 shots to be photoshopped? A photographer? No.
A GWC that wants to get in her pants? Yes. I tend to give them all the shots. Because I am a beginner I think I want to show them I am not a GWC and I did not take any shots for my "personal" use... if you get my drift. When did beginner = stupid?
Photographer
CharliesImages
Posts: 174
Raleigh, Illinois, US
Posted by Tony Sharp:
I recently did a digital camera photoshoot with a model. I sent sample size jpegs of the 100+ shots we took, let the model choose which 10 I should work on (touchup / add FX to / etc), and charged the model for those 10 pictures. Now the model is asking for the other 90 shots, fullsize, without stamps, and on CD.
Is it normal for photographers to give their models ALL of the pictures taken, fullsize, and without a stamp or watermark? From my experience, it's not. It seems to kind of go against the point of charging, doesn't it?
What do you think about this?
NOTE: I only use big stamps for internet pictures. This reminds me of the "old days" when the company I worked for produced a photo package where the customer could buy as many of the photos from the package as they liked. Someone that only was willing to buy 1 or 2 of the sheets of photos would sometimes try to "make an offer" on the rest of the package that they didn't buy. The offer always was denied; they got exactly what they purchased.
Your situation is the same. If the model wants more than the 10 photos, then the model can pay for them. Also, I would only offer edited images to the model. Unedited images will contain some things that are not your best work, and you don't want others seeing those thinking that represents your work.
Charlie
Photographer
Mike Cummings
Posts: 5896
LAKE COMO, Florida, US
Posted by Jack D Trute:
When did beginner = stupid?
I don't see it as stupid, the bad shots are crap. They are of no use to anybody. I don't have a name to protect at this point and to be honest I don't think I will ever be a "big" name in photography.
If you think it is stupid of me to do that explain your reason or no snausages for you.
Mike
Photographer
Tony Sharp Chicago
Posts: 184
Chicago, Illinois, US
Thank you all for your feedback so far.
During our talks, I only said that I would give 10 pictures for $$ dollars. I never said that I would give the extra shots. I should probably make this more clear for the future shoots I do. I've never had this problem in the past though. 100 fullsize digital pictures for the price of 10, even if they aren't photoshopped, is so ludicrous I didn't even think I would need to explain this.
Photographer
Mike Cummings
Posts: 5896
LAKE COMO, Florida, US
Posted by Tony Sharp:
Thank you all for your feedback so far.
During our talks, I only said that I would give 10 pictures for $$ dollars. I never said that I would give the extra shots. I should probably make this more clear for the future shoots I do. I've never had this problem in the past though. 100 fullsize digital pictures for the price of 10, even if they aren't photoshopped, is so ludicrous I didn't even think I would need to explain this. Right, a deal is a deal. If she wants more she should pay.
Mike
Photographer
Jack D Trute
Posts: 4558
New York, New York, US
Posted by Mike Cummings:
Posted by Jack D Trute:
When did beginner = stupid?
I don't see it as stupid, the bad shots are crap. They are of no use to anybody. I don't have a name to protect at this point and to be honest I don't think I will ever be a "big" name in photography.
If you think it is stupid of me to do that explain your reason or no snausages for you.
Mike I do love my snausages even though I am full of BBQ human.
Yes, I get your point it is only fashion or portfolio work. But the precident that you set up is harsh. By giving away all your photos you leave your self open to have problems proving your rights to the photos. Raw images and keeping even a few back is insurance against the retarded humans.
Do not doubt your value just because you may not become the supreme being like me.
Photographer
BlackSkyPhoto
Posts: 1130
Danville, California, US
Talk is talk... Did you put this all in writing somewhere.... Nothing like the look you get when you say - please read what you signed at the shoot.... "Umm ok - I will shut up now...." Photographer = 
Photographer
Mike Cummings
Posts: 5896
LAKE COMO, Florida, US
Posted by Jack D Trute:
I do love my snausages even though I am full of BBQ human.
Yes, I get your point it is only fashion or portfolio work. But the precident that you set up is harsh. By giving away all your photos you leave your self open to have problems proving your rights to the photos. Raw images and keeping even a few back is insurance against the retarded humans.
Do not doubt your value just because you may not become the supreme being like me.
I will take that under serious consideration.
Thanks
Mike
Photographer
CharliesImages
Posts: 174
Raleigh, Illinois, US
Posted by Mike Cummings:
Posted by Jack D Trute:
When did beginner = stupid?
I don't have a name to protect at this point and to be honest I don't think I will ever be a "big" name in photography.
Mike Mike:
Actually you do have a name and a reputation to protect - yours! Allowing "bad" photos into the hands of your client is also allowing others to judge your "bad" photography. Something I always try to remember is "The first image is the lasting image." If the first image someone sees of your work is one of those "bad" ones, that is what they will remember.
Charlie
Photographer
Mike Cummings
Posts: 5896
LAKE COMO, Florida, US
Posted by CharliesImages:
Posted by Mike Cummings:
Posted by Jack D Trute:
When did beginner = stupid?
I don't have a name to protect at this point and to be honest I don't think I will ever be a "big" name in photography.
Mike Mike:
Actually you do have a name and a reputation to protect - yours! Allowing "bad" photos into the hands of your client is also allowing others to judge your "bad" photography. Something I always try to remember is "The first image is the lasting image." If the first image someone sees of your work is one of those "bad" ones, that is what they will remember.
Charlie
Looks like I need to think of this as more than a pastime and look at it like work. (work not being a dirty word here)
Mike
Photographer
Ed Nazarko
Posts: 121
Lebanon, New Jersey, US
Posted by Tony Sharp:
I recently did a digital camera photoshoot with a model. I sent sample size jpegs of the 100+ shots we took, let the model choose which 10 I should work on (touchup / add FX to / etc), and charged the model for those 10 pictures. Now the model is asking for the other 90 shots, fullsize, without stamps, and on CD.
Is it normal for photographers to give their models ALL of the pictures taken, fullsize, and without a stamp or watermark? From my experience, it's not. It seems to kind of go against the point of charging, doesn't it?
I only have two comments. One, why would you EVER show all 100 shots? There's a barrier that I struggled to get over in my early days that was "if it's in focus, well lit, and the expression doesn't suck, let the art director see it." Bad idea. An unfortunate percent of the time, they used images I was not happy with. I would have never shown her every image. Maybe more than 10, but never as many as 100. Were there really 100 images that you'd be insanely proud of?
Second, if the deal was for a certain number of images, that's the deal. Asking for more, bad. I have to admit that when I give CDs (or prints - when shooting in third world countries, sending pictures to the subjects ends up being a serious expense, since in many cases I have to pay someone to go find them...) I make them JPG or printed in such a way so that any editing makes the picture worse, not better. I explain this as: I would never substitute someone else's smile, eyes, hands, for yours in an image. That's your art. Please do not substitute your judgment as to cropping, white balance, composition, etc for mine - that's my art. It is, after all, in the best of situations, a collaboration.
As someone who's given up several artistic careers when I started to think of it as work - there's a big difference between "serious about the results" and "work." The first has to do with artistic integrity. The second, often, with being able to turn out good stuff even when you hate what you're doing. You don't have to think of it as work. You SHOULD recognize that you're doing this because you have an artistic vision, and it's YOUR vision. If you don't take that seriously, no one will.
Photographer
Jack D Trute
Posts: 4558
New York, New York, US
Posted by Mike Cummings:
Looks like I need to think of this as more than a pastime and look at it like work. (work not being a dirty word here)
Mike No, no need to be TOO serious or uptight but no reason to be silly either. That is my job.
Photographer
Brian Diaz
Posts: 65617
Danbury, Connecticut, US
Posted by Ed Nazarko:
...Why would you EVER show all 100 shots? There's a barrier that I struggled to get over in my early days that was "if it's in focus, well lit, and the expression doesn't suck, let the art director see it." Bad idea. An unfortunate percent of the time, they used images I was not happy with. I'm currently in that stage; I weed out MY mistakes and let people see the rest. I guess my reasoning for this is that different people are going to see different things in a photo, and they choose based on their own needs. The photos I want for my book aren't necessarily the ones a model or a MUA would want for her book, and I'm not going to presume to know which ones those are.
But maybe I've just never had someone pick a photo that I hated...
Model
theda
Posts: 21719
New York, New York, US
I like to see all of the shots. I learn from bad shots.
That doesn't mean I need fullsized image files of everything, but decent sized proofs are good to have.
Not everyone is going to agree on waht's the best shot. It's subjective.
Photographer
Jack D Trute
Posts: 4558
New York, New York, US
Posted by theda:
I like to see all of the shots. I learn from bad shots.
That doesn't mean I need fullsized image files of everything, but decent sized proofs are good to have.
Not everyone is going to agree on waht's the best shot. It's subjective. Seeing and delivery are two different things.
Photographer
XtremeArtists
Posts: 9122
Posted by Jack D Trute:
Posted by theda:
I like to see all of the shots. I learn from bad shots.
That doesn't mean I need fullsized image files of everything, but decent sized proofs are good to have.
Not everyone is going to agree on waht's the best shot. It's subjective. Seeing and delivery are two different things. For a case like that I would suggest a watermark on the photo that says "not for distribution or display."
Photographer
Jack D Trute
Posts: 4558
New York, New York, US
Posted by XtremeArtists:
Posted by Jack D Trute:
Posted by theda:
I like to see all of the shots. I learn from bad shots.
That doesn't mean I need fullsized image files of everything, but decent sized proofs are good to have.
Not everyone is going to agree on waht's the best shot. It's subjective. Seeing and delivery are two different things. For a case like that I would suggest a watermark on the photo that says "not for distribution or display."
Or just a small version on CD with that or on the web to see and choose.
Model
theda
Posts: 21719
New York, New York, US
I like to take them home A CD of proofs or private web gallery of proofs is fine, but I can't really look over the shots comfortably with the photographer standing over my shoulder.
Photographer
Jack D Trute
Posts: 4558
New York, New York, US
Posted by theda:
I like to take them home A CD of proofs or private web gallery of proofs is fine, but I can't really look over the shots comfortably with the photographer standing over my shoulder.
I could agree with that. Minus two shots that were of my shoes and out of focus,
Make that half of them.
Photographer
Herb Way
Posts: 1506
Black Mountain, North Carolina, US
Posted by Brian Diaz:
Posted by Tony Sharp:
My question is: Is it normal for a photographer to give a model ALL of the extra shots on CD even if they only paid for 10 shots to be photoshopped? No. If your business is to sell photos, you should not give them away. And if you do not release unedited images, you should say so. I don't--it's (inexactly) like asking a model to shoot without makeup. I need some time to make sure that my work looks its best because when someone shows my work to others, I am being represented, and I want to know that only my best work represents me. I totally agree.
1. Give the model what she's paying for and/or what you've agreed in writing to give her and nothing more.
2. Maintain control over your image by releasing only your best finished work for end use by models. Make it clear that the low resolution jpeg proofs that you initially provide are only for selection purposes and make sure they're carefully edited.
3. Stand your ground and don't allow yourself to be manipulated by greedy people. Don't be a chump.
Photographer
Tony Sharp Chicago
Posts: 184
Chicago, Illinois, US
So the final verdict is to give the extra shots, but don't give them fullsize or without a "not to be used" watermark? And if the model wants the extras, we should negotiate on a reasonable price?
Photographer
Christopher Wright
Posts: 11854
Lansing, Michigan, US
I weed out MY mistakes and let people see the rest. I guess my reasoning for this is that different people are going to see different things in a photo, and they choose based on their own needs. The photos I want for my book aren't necessarily the ones a model or a MUA would want for her book, and I'm not going to presume to know which ones those are.
I am at the exact same place. I tend to shoot around 60 or so photos at a given shoot and then weed out the bad ones. The ones that are out of focus, over exposed or just can't be fixed in Photoshop. Plus, here are photos that I like that the model may not. I have one model that is using a shot that I don't hate but it definitely wasn't one of my favorites, and she is using it for her avatar. I have been getting better at being more selective though.
Photographer
Mike Cummings
Posts: 5896
LAKE COMO, Florida, US
Posted by Tony Sharp:
So the final verdict is to give the extra shots, but don't give them fullsize or without a "not to be used" watermark? And if the model wants the extras, we should negotiate on a reasonable price? Yes.
Photographer
Star
Posts: 17966
Los Angeles, California, US
Posted by CharliesImages:
Posted by Tony Sharp:
I recently did a digital camera photoshoot with a model. I sent sample size jpegs of the 100+ shots we took, let the model choose which 10 I should work on (touchup / add FX to / etc), and charged the model for those 10 pictures. Now the model is asking for the other 90 shots, fullsize, without stamps, and on CD.
Is it normal for photographers to give their models ALL of the pictures taken, fullsize, and without a stamp or watermark? From my experience, it's not. It seems to kind of go against the point of charging, doesn't it?
What do you think about this?
NOTE: I only use big stamps for internet pictures. This reminds me of the "old days" when the company I worked for produced a photo package where the customer could buy as many of the photos from the package as they liked. Someone that only was willing to buy 1 or 2 of the sheets of photos would sometimes try to "make an offer" on the rest of the package that they didn't buy. The offer always was denied; they got exactly what they purchased.
Your situation is the same. If the model wants more than the 10 photos, then the model can pay for them. Also, I would only offer edited images to the model. Unedited images will contain some things that are not your best work, and you don't want others seeing those thinking that represents your work.
Charlie
we used to tell people we recycled the paper, when they asked why they coldn't have them if we were just going to throw them away
|
