• netwren@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    10 months ago

    Ah this is perfect you can enlighten me then.

    How are you a photographer trained in the art of capturing a moment with appropriate focus, lighting, timing, and framing providing a service to me?

    By not providing me that moment in its purest form.

    If I’m hiring you to photograph me not to be my digital artist. Or at least offer both.

    By not providing the RAWs you’re literally providing a restriction in my access to the moment I hired you to capture.

    If I designed a web site for you and then when you tried to move your hosting to someone else and said “Oh sorry that web site is only provided as part of my services.” And forced you to create a whole new design to host somewhere else. It’s quite plain to see that’s manipulative business practices.

    In my view it comes from an insecurity of photographers that they can’t compete with photoshoppers but the reality is I’m paying you to use your skills to capture the moment correctly. Frankly idgaf how good your Photoshop skills are. Especially now with A.I. “authentic” photos will become all the more valuable to people.

    • QuesoBlanco@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      10 months ago

      If I’m hiring you to photograph me not to be my digital artist. Or at least offer both.

      This is what I meant by “specific circumstances.” This might end up as something of a long answer, I’m not sure. But fair warning in advance.

      I can really only speak to my experience, which encompasses myself and the photographers with which I’ve met and interacted during the past eight-ish years. Keep in mind, I’m a family portrait photographer - families, couples, etc. - and I don’t know anyone who operates in the manner you’re suggesting here. Frankly, my life would be much easier if that were the case. I’d much prefer an environment where my job ended at the shoot. Lightroom/Photoshop work is the majority of a photographer’s time spent on any given project by a ridiculous margin.

      So, my contracts offer both services by default. I give my clients the choice between selecting their contracted number of images from a digital proofs gallery - essentially all the RAW images in a digital album they can mark favorites on, but can’t download for themselves - or leave it up to me as “photographer’s choice.” Almost all of them opt to let me do it.

      You describe a RAW image as pure, and I think that’s great. Most photographers, however, would probably describe it as unprocessed. Or unfinished. And I don’t think it’s unreasonable to be wary of that being the side of your work being shown to the public, in today’s social media obsessed world. It’s like most artists not wanting a work of theirs being shown halfway through, when they know the final product will look so much better.

      If that’s manipulative business practice, I mean…I truly don’t see it. The RAWs are available to purchase for an additional fee, for all my clients, with the signed addendum to their contract they will never be posted in their RAW form anywhere online. If editing is done by anyone else, attribution is to given to them when an image is posted, or I will request the image is removed. Just because I run a small business doesn’t mean I don’t have a brand, a style, or a standard of quality to protect.

      It’s not about showing off Photoshop skills or being withholding. It’s about - again, as a portrait photographer - people seeing your work, and wanting to hire you because of that work. Because it looks a certain way and evokes a certain style.

      I hope that better explains it. Or helps clarify it to some degree.

      • netwren@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        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.

    • shneancy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      RAW files don’t look like what your eyes saw. RAW files more often than not look meh at best compared to the actual memory of what happened.

      A part of photographer’s job is to match how the photo looks like to how you remember the thing looking

      • netwren@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Hmm 🤔 that’s fair but I think more often than not it’s not what the photographer remembered of that moment but down to common practices with color curves and histograms in Lightroom or something.

        I like your idea but I think it’s more of a post-render is more like what you remember.

        However you can’t use your own editing skills to get the picture to how YOU remember it or want it when it’s already in someone else’s version.

        Which fine. Like you never got to SEE yourself and that’s why you hired the photographer.

        My issue is that I would be happier hiring someone if I didn’t have to use their awful makeup filter mode photos that don’t even look like we’re real people.

        • shneancy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          if your hired photographer doesn’t respect your “I’d like the bare minimum post processing please, just do a basic grade to make it look pleasing to the eye and leave it at that” then never hire them again.

          I’ll go apeshit on my own personal photos but when it comes to working for somebody I’ll always try to use my skills to make their vision real, when I work for someone it’s not about me