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!  And be sure that you can do the job!

If you've never done this type of shooting before, then don't charge for it until you've got some work under your belt.  Shooting live concerts and doing it "well" is a lot different than shooting models ... in many respects.  I would also add that you need to save the raw footage for yourself, but you know that now.  Actually, it's NOT a good idea to give the raw footage because it can come back to bite you in the ass!  I recommend you practice shooting and editing before you accept another paid gig of this sort.  Better luck next time!

Ecklipse wrote:
Did you guys signed any contract or something? (snip) ...if not...tell him to f+ck off, you´re not refunding anything...

This - if there's nothing in writing, you've done exactly what he asked you to do.
Maybe point out that it'd look a lot better if you'd edited it first, but beyond that it sounds like you've held up your end of the deal.

Just because he doesn't 'like' the product isn't necessarily your fault.

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.

+ one million!!

Vampman Studios wrote:
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.

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.

I agree with others who say this is likely a case of the customer trying to get the product for free.

The client has the only copy of the files and can't get you a copy of the original files? That's too bad... and it's bullshit. No refund.

He's too busy to edit out the nine minutes? That's what you're for - to fix the images/video. He's got that option but won't take you up on it? No refund.

My guess: the second that the client gets the refund, he's going to find the files quite usable.

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.

Yep.

Orca Bay Images wrote:
My guess: the second that the client gets the refund, he's going to find the files quite usable.

My suspicion as well.

Orca Bay Images wrote:
My guess: the second that the client gets the refund, he's going to find the files quite usable.

MN camera wrote:
My suspicion as well.

I have no doubt.  When something is free it is much more usable than when you pay for it.

Ed Woodson Photography wrote:
OK, here's my $ .02.....

How did you find this Client?  Referral?  Craigslist Ad?

How much did they pay you?  Did they pay you cash?  Check?  Credit Card?  PayPal?   If they paid by Credit Card or Paypal, they'll just file a claim and the ruling will probably go in their favor.   Check?  Hope it clears.  Cash?  Always best.

If they paid with cash, I'd just say no..

Erasing your card was no accident.

A band does not need your entire shoot to put a video of themselves together.  They can take bits and pieces, edit them and combine them with other videos they have.

I'm betting that you're just one of several photographers who've Video'd this band as they travel.  And, I would be that you're not the only one from whom they want a refund.

IMO, they're scamming you.

Hmm, cynical me tends to agree.

Ask him for the footage back first. Review it and go from there.

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?

Learn from your experience...
...  Don't give up raw footage,
...  Keep a copy for yourself,
...  Get your agreement in writing,
...  Take the steps to prevent "camera mistakes",
...  Offer to reshoot,
...  Refund his money with a smile.

There are probably other lessons (like how do you know that only 9 minutes out of 140 are bad if you haven't got the footage?), but this will get you started.

Vampman Studios wrote:
What do I do?

Point to the written portion of the communique/contract/conversation/email/whatever where he SPECIFICALLY wanted the raw portion.

Tell him sorry but because of those specific instructions, you did what he specifically wanted. Had he not done so, you would have been in a better position to address his complaints.

Personally, it sounds like the musician guy has a case of buyer's remorse. Or he didn't articulate his vision or needs as specifically as he visualized it in his head.

GPS Studio Services wrote:
Here is my problem with this thread.  You are listing your mistakes from your perspective.  None of that speaks to the quality of the video that you think is OK.  Are you an experienced videographer, particularly a concert videographer or did you take your camera and just start shooting.

Whenever you deal with creative arts there will be differences of opinion.  I have concerns though.  First, why did you give him your CF cards / SD cards?  Why didn't you just burn DVD's on the spot?  Giving him the RAW footage doesn't mean that you have to give him your memory cards.  Why didn't you preview the video to him before you delivered the product? 

I am not here to slam you, but this doesn't sound like your best work or your best judgement.  FYI, it isn't unusual for a client to want to edit their own video.  That doesn't concern me.

Now, you are stuck though.  He already has it.  Essentially he has the product and you have his money.   He wiped your cards so you can never know what happens to your work.  If you had previewed the video to him before he paid you, if he had not, at least you would be in possession of the footage and he would not have been.

My advice is to compromise.  Give him a partial refund and learn from your experience.  Being a videographer is more than just picking up a camera and shooting.  There are always mistakes.  You never catch every minute of a concert from every angle.  If you shoot single camera, you will miss things, people will stand up, the crowd will distract you, etc, etc, etc.  A good concert shooter will know what to shoot, when to shoot and how to work around these things.

What you also haven't told us is if he paid you $50 or $5,000.  That makes a difference as well.  Compromise and move on.  The guy will never be happy so come to an accommodation you can both live with.

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.

Vampman Studios wrote:
. 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.

. This musician has the only copies of the footage on earth,

he wanted raw files,,
has the only copies,,
deal over done walk away

David M Russell wrote:
Recover the footage from your cards.

You gave the guy what he asked for, regardless of the mistakes. There's no way in the world you could get that length of footage and have it be perfectly clean, unless you just put a GoPro in the rafters.

??  no way in the world??  You can put a simple camcorder on a tripod & shoot firewire out.  Either to a laptop or DVD burner.  Let alone 60 minute tapes &/or cards nowadays.  Pretty sure they even have 80 minute MiniDV tapes.  Or you can shoot using a 60 minute tape & tell the artist and possibly ask he take a short, minute long break at the 50-55 minute mark for you to quickly change tapes, while they briefly chat with the audience a bit. Also, a simple tripod, let alone fluid head tripod let alone fluid head tripod with zoom controls on the handle can give you near immaculate control of the footage, coverage, withou zero "shakiness"?!

Chalk me up as one who think this is "The OP side, the Artist side, and the truth is probably somewhere in the middle". Did the OP tell the artist when he accepted the gig his camera only shoots 20 minutes at a time.  Did they change cards in between songs, or just let the 20 minutes fill up, then swap it out mid song. For an hour & a half long concert this is pretty bad, that's about 5 card changes, possibly 5 songs cutoff, with the possibility of 1 or 2 of them being their better, best songs. Where were you located that "people in the front got up & blocked your view"? Were you shooting from a tripod high up?  Were the tops of peoples heads visible throughout most of the concert?  Was this in a tiny venue/bar or a pretty big setup you had to arrange yourself?

On the other hand, is the artists gripe, and possible divaness/complaints.  What were the expectations?  Were they expecting the results to be similar to a 3 camera shoot?  I personally had to quit shooting any cheapo/high school sports etc type gigs because the expectations were to resemble ESPN/CBS sports type coverage, with closeups, cutaways, zoomed in on turnovers/big plays etc... which annoyed me because those are shot with 5+ cameras where a few of the cameras jobs are solely on closeups, with others solely of long shots..  It's not 5 guys all shooting in & out etc.. Also the zooms on those cameras are incredible. Personally I hate non-edited video because usually the expectation of the end result is essentially that of edited video. So rather than paying less & expecting less in results, the clients typically pay less and end up hating the finished product.  Which is why I don't sell unedited video packages for weddings, and I often have brides ask to save a buck "How about you don't even edit it?  Can it be less?" "No, I don't offer that.". Sure I've lost some jobs that way, but I'm at ease with it.

Back to the OP & artist, was he aware the deal was done pretty gigs style, expectations relatively low?  Was communication made how it would be shot?  One question, how is your camera in low light?  Sometimes, its very dark, or if you had gain on, or camera in auto mode, it shoots with very high grain. It may have looked good in your viewfinder but when you blow up 12-18db grain to a 40 inch TV it really starts to look bad.  Possibly, your camera is not good in low light. And finally, you don't need to say it, but was the work reasonable to the rate? 


Cheap
Fast
Good

Pick two.

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

...

(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.

You could offer to deposit a refund in a Nigerian bank account for the client.

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'm all for keeping the customer happy, but the more details I hear about this the more I think I'd politely tell him to go fuck himself. You delivered exactly what he asked for. Our business is concluded.

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.

Is that all? Tell them to take a flying f*** at a rolling donut...
Your time is worth more than that even if all you did was turn up and scratch your arse...