• netwren@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    10 months ago

    Ah well you actually give the option to purchase the RAW which I’m fine with. At least ALLOW me to have an option to have the RAW myself.

    I appreciate you taking the time to explain yourself and I can see circumstances where a professional’s reputation and work quality are directly correlated with their future business and financial stability.

    But I’d gladly pay a fee and I straight up had a photographer deny me family photo RAWs because they “never” allowed anyone access to those.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      You make a good point about hiring a photographer, per se, and expecting the product to be the photography itself, not a later product that the photography acts as input to.

    • Obi@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      As long as you make it clear beforehand that’s what you want, then the photog can decide whether or not they’re ok with it. I’m also a pro and personally I would love more jobs where I only have to deliver the RAWs as like the other guy said editing is what takes the vast majority of my time on most jobs, but I certainly also understand the other side of the argument.

      Another way to think about this: if you were a chef and someone came to your restaurant and asked for the raw ingredients so you can make the food yourself, I don’t think many chefs would allow that either.

      Sometimes, you have to/decide to use techniques which might mean that the RAWs are pretty useless unless they also go through the specific post-process you had in mind while shooting.

      With that said I know that many of my colleagues can be total dickheads in particular when it comes to the niches that deal with end-user stuff like family portraits, weddings etc, so I have no troubles believing you’ve had bad experiences.