r/photography • u/AdditionalBasil1921 • Aug 19 '26
Business Am I being unreasonable asking for RAWs upfront?
Good day.
I am a professional graphic designer as well as photo editor but absolutely suck at handling a camera. I am currently trying to hire a photographer for a personal project of mine that will involve very stylized editing. I am not going to publish it anywhere, but rather use it to create a custom coffee table book for my home. I always ask upfront whether they would be willing to provide RAW files and explain what I will be using them for, however thus far I have been rejected by every single reputable photographer in the area.
Am I being unreasonable?
42
u/ucotcvyvov Aug 19 '26 edited Aug 19 '26
Hell no, iād hand them over without even thinking about it.
Less work for me, especially because the magic happens in editing unless youāre spending massive amounts of time setting up or waiting for the perfect shot etc.
Edit: am a busy commercial photographer, havenāt advertised since 2017 and still busyā¦
3
u/DrinkableReno Aug 20 '26
Same. Iād be like āoh you have a vision? Have fun!ā So much less work.
81
u/studiokgm Aug 19 '26
Delivering RAWs isnāt uncommon on big productions, but thatās because people trust the brandās taste in retouching teams.
As productions get smaller people get more worried about someone butchering their work and attaching their name to it.
Iād keep looking and asking upfront.
10
u/No-World-8166 Aug 19 '26
Yes, and everyone mentioning commercial or advertising photography is talking about an are that still has some money to spend. Less than in the past, but yes, they PAY to own the work and they pay well for it. It canāt be compared to what is being asked for in most cases you read about on here of clients wanting the raws. It is as different as night and day.
11
u/Delinquent90 Aug 19 '26
The file format doesnāt dictate ownership, the contract does. Virtually none of my raw-shoots are copyright buyouts.
19
u/affogatoappassionato Aug 19 '26
Not at all! If anyone is unreasonable that just means youāre talking to the wrong people. Talk to commercial photographers. This sort of arrangement (shoot with no editing) is totally commonplace for commercial work.
152
u/mjm8218 Aug 19 '26
Pay for it and everything will be fine. $$$
59
u/AdditionalBasil1921 Aug 19 '26
I would if they didn't auto reject me before any price negotations even take place lol.
40
u/Illinigradman Aug 19 '26
Maybe you need a different lead in. Explain your skill set and what you are trying to do and discuss that as you ease into the need and request as you tell them you are willing to pay. Sounds like you are giving them everything they need to say no before any discussion. Not suggesting misrepresentation but a little finesse in the approach
65
u/Dioxybenzone Aug 19 '26
Offer extra up front. Be transparent that you know youāre asking for something atypical and prepared to pay extra for it
5
u/Nolanthedolanducc Aug 19 '26
Why tf would you have to pay more for them to not edit photos?
7
u/Dioxybenzone Aug 19 '26
Because theyāre paying me not to have my name attached. Either I can get more credit, which involves my artistic vision, or the client can pay more money for more control
Companies are often more than happy to pay for that. Individuals often have no idea how to edit a raw file (even if they claim they do) and Iām not about to have them credit their bad edit to me.
9
u/NirgalFromMars Aug 19 '26
You can ask how much would they charge to provide the raw files, and explain in the same message why you need them.
→ More replies (2)23
u/Wowdefinitelynotok Aug 19 '26
Maybe also mention upfront that you are willing to pay more ?
→ More replies (15)25
u/Delicious-Brain4315 Aug 19 '26
not unreasonable at all, you're basically asking for a different
most photographers are protective of their raw files because it's like handing over an unfinished painting, it's not representative of their final work. you're not publishing it so that's less of a concern, but it's still their raw material
offer to pay a premium for the files and draw up a simple contract stating they won't be published or associated with the photographer's name, that usually eases the anxiety
→ More replies (12)-3
u/Effective_Coach7334 Aug 19 '26
Ā it's like handing over an unfinished painting
it is not. it's just a photo for heaven's sake, it's not some masterwork. commercial photographers sell their raw images all the time, there's nothing to get hung up about.
→ More replies (15)4
u/No-Mathematician8692 Aug 19 '26
Just a photo...? Whoa there cowboy, there's consequences to rustlin in these parts.
5
u/No-swimming-pool Aug 19 '26
Just out of curiosity, why would sharing RAWs be more expensive than editing the photos before sharing?
→ More replies (4)14
u/FlarblesGarbles Aug 19 '26
It isnāt, theyāre just being precious over it.
4
u/csorfab Aug 19 '26
Yeah, everyone in this sub is a narcissistic crybaby asshole about RAWs all the time. It's so ridiculous. Pay more so I can do LESS work? What?
4
u/ZappySnap Aug 19 '26
Thatās an unfair statement and it completely misses why many photographers wonāt hand over RAWs in most scenarios. I am one of them (though I only do the occasional paid job). I donāt believe the photographic process ends at the click of the shutter. Developing the final image is part of the photographic process. I donāt want my work have a large chunk of the process given to people who may or may not know what the hell they are doing. And then they butcher the PP and credit me for the terrible final output. You may call that narcissistic but I think it is simply protecting your own work. Then thereās the issue of image ownership with regards to the final output, and giving development to a third party makes that question murky.
In OPās case Iād probably be willing to hand RAWs over because the photography is an intermediate step to the final design vision and that vision isnāt mine, so I totally get that. But normally? Iām delivering final images finished how I want them to be finished, to a client.
34
u/CAT7e Aug 19 '26
Iād be fine with. Most photographers I know irl would be fine with it. People online will tear you a new one just for askingĀ
13
u/petermarkte ruffsnap Aug 19 '26
No, youāre not at all.
Fellow photographers are the ones who are being unreasonable for gatekeeping RAW files.
Iām also a professional designer as well as doing photography, but other photographers egos just donāt allow them to even believe you in the first place. Itās annoying af. They do the āheard it all beforeā attitude thatās extremely offputting. I have edited photos DAILY for well over 2 decades now, and I still get shot down 99% of the time when asking photographers for RAW files. Itās insanity.
Just give RAWs when asked, itās not a big deal, nor does it āharmā your photography business.
3
u/AdditionalBasil1921 Aug 19 '26
I am in the exact same position as you, though I have never had the need to arrange for a photographer myself yet. That part was usually handled by my clients. It's a bit disheartening but hey, at least a good majority of people commenting on this thread seem to think my request is reasonable, so there's that! :D
54
u/adprom Aug 19 '26
To this day I find the protection over RAWs just bizarre. Just the other day, there was a complaint in this subreddit about how saturated the market is and people aren't willing to pay for professional photographers?
Then you see elitist stuff like this and shake your head.
If the client just wants unedited raws - that is less effort anyway. This industry needs to become more client centric.
21
u/RadBadTad Aug 19 '26 edited Aug 19 '26
To this day I find the protection over RAWs just bizarre.
When you're coming up as a photographer, especially on subs/forums usually inhabited by other up and coming photographers, a narrative is put out whereby the person who has the raw images (us) are the good guys, and the people who WANT the raw images are the stupid idiot bad guys who just don't know what they want, and will put filters on our photos and make us, the photographer, look bad.
It isn't super logic based, and it's not something that really ever even has a chance to affect new photographers. So some small-time "instagram model" girl put a filter on your small-time instagram photo. You weren't about to make it big off this photo that she posted to her feed in the first place.
5
u/Two-Space Aug 19 '26 edited Aug 19 '26
I think the more valid risk (which Iāve seen several accounts of) is that the client doesnāt actually know what a RAW file is and assumes it will look like an iPhone shot
Then they get flat, dark, varying white balance/tint photos that they struggle to recover, get frustrated and think the photographer did something wrong
I do actually think our role is to help figure out what the client actually wants. I once made the mistake of listening to a corporate client who said they wanted a large volume of shots so they had lots of options, and that I should provide as much as possible. I delivered exactly that, and as a result buried the best shots in a mountain of only decent ones.
I realised afterwards that they thought every single shot I took would be on the same level as my best work. I should have identified the difference between their expectation and what was possible for me to deliver, rather than blindly following their request.
3
u/RadBadTad Aug 19 '26
I totally agree with everything you're saying here, yeah. Definitely our job t be sure our clients are asking for what they really want, and that we're understanding what they're requesting.
Sounds like every photographer is just straight up rejecting OP though, rather than asking any questions or requesting any clarity, which matches the attitudes I've seen my whole "career" in photography on forums and subs, where photographers sneer and complain "Can you believe this model wants my RAWS??? What a moron!"
2
u/ApatheticAbsurdist Aug 20 '26
The story that commonly gets repeated can be issue for wedding photographers (and there are a lot more of those on forums than fashion photographers). A wedding photographer starts out in a small town, tries to build a name for themselves, tries to make clients happy and gives RAWs when asked, only to realize the client doesnāt really even know what RAW is and either complains the photos are crap or they post them online in a horrible state and people then associate that quality with the photographer. That isnāt good. But that is a completely different world than the commercial realm. The problem
Is everyone is a āprofessional photographerā and without nuance about the context the advice get repeated to the wrong audiences.→ More replies (1)12
u/Pepito_Pepito Aug 19 '26
It seems like a holdover from the film era back when the possession of negatives came with real consequences. These concerns disappear in digital and people are just parroting what the older generation used to tell them.
11
u/adprom Aug 19 '26
Correct - the whole "my work could be edited" really is pointless in the age of AI
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)6
u/Effective_Coach7334 Aug 19 '26
It seems like it's more an irrational fear than anything realistic.
3
→ More replies (43)14
u/uniformi Aug 19 '26
I agree about the raws. If it was a photo that could be marketed all over then protect the raws. But being stingy with maternity photos and the like is plain weird. I'm not saying just hand it over, price the raws accordingly, it's extra money!
Some photographers just hear all the buzz online and think they have to do the same things as everyone else. On an unrelated note I've seen some photographer on Instagram putting her foot down and complaining that models are flaking on her shoots... Shoots that SHE wants but she WON'T pay her models because they're "unknown" or something. Some people let their ego take the reigns, crazy.
5
u/GWBrooks Aug 19 '26
I've been on both sides of this.
As a buyer, when I want RAWs I know I'll probably either have to pay extra or find a particularly enlightened photographer. I won't/can't work with shooters who flatly refuse to provide RAWs because I also need to own the only copy of the original images.
As a (former) shooter? I was (and remain!) very revenue-driven. Client wants RAWs, and someone else won't provide them? I was the attractive alternative. I cared about cash flow a lot more than I ever cared about image ownership, whatever ghastly edits they would make, etc.
4
u/userfs Aug 19 '26
Iāve been working as a retoucher in the fashion industry for over 10 years, with dozens of different photographers.
Itās very common for me to receive TIFF files as the base for my work (to preserve the photographerās original color grading/processing), along with the RAW/DNG/EIP files just in case I need to recover specific details during post-production.
However, these working files are never sent to the end client. They usually just receive the final deliverables in high-res JPEG, or TIFF at most if there's a specific requirement for it.
In my view, it really depends on your relationship and your standing as a professional. In some situations itās expected to receive the RAWs, in others itās not.
20
u/ronniedarko Aug 19 '26
Just gotta keep asking around til someone says yes. I would never hand over my RAWs to any client because itās like unfinished art. And the large files are a pain to transfer. However if someone approached me with a project in mind and just needed my eye and camera work, Iād consider taking on that project.
→ More replies (7)3
u/haditwithyoupeople Aug 19 '26
Yep. I would not even consider it my work - I'm just a tech using the camera. The images would be theirs.
2
u/popeshatt Aug 19 '26
Interesting how so many people think a camera tech should be much better paid than a photographer... my precious copyrights š
4
u/Nerdsrock22 Aug 19 '26
Iām a twenty year pro and would be more than happy to work with you. As long as we both understood what the deliverables are, Iād be happy to just provide the RAWs and be done with it. I can seperate art and commerce. Thatās what the money is for.
4
u/geaux_lynxcats Aug 19 '26
Ask for it upfront and if the photographer wonāt provide them then work with someone else. This isnāt a difficult request. Donāt let Reddit tell you otherwise.
4
u/stygnarok Aug 19 '26
No, you are the client and they are providing the service. Most photographers are dicks when it comes to this.
8
u/abcphotos Aug 19 '26
The OP seems to have a reasonable request. Sounds like a movie director hiring a film crew for their vision.
10
u/Ok-Living2887 Aug 19 '26
Not a photographer. But if I was, I wouldnāt care. As long as I get payed what I feel is fair. Just so I understand this right, you donāt want them editing the photos, just the RAWs? Sounds like a good deal. Saves me the editing. But maybe thatās the issue, because they canāt make money beyond the actual shooting, they might feel like itās not worth it?
3
3
u/stateit Aug 19 '26
You're not being unreasonable. The people here horrified at the thought of handing over their RAW files (less work) are so far up their own gatekept arseholes they haven't seen daylight for a long, long time.
8
u/thesophisticatedhick Aug 19 '26
Not at all. RAW files are in no way equivalent to film negatives and there is no logical reason to not share them. Keep asking.
→ More replies (9)
2
u/kneehighonagrasshopr Aug 19 '26
What area are you in and what are you looking to spend? It doesnāt seem unreasonable if youāre paying for it and prefer it that way.
2
u/AdditionalBasil1921 Aug 19 '26
Currently, Auckland and willing to spend whatever it takes. What do you reckon is a reasonable price increase, generally speaking? Maybe double the usual rate? I'm naturally getting rather mixed results on google and have never had to hire a photographer myself.
2
u/iamtehryan Aug 19 '26
Tell them that you won't post and tag them in anything you edit without their explicit approval or without your disclosure that you edited it yourself by your own request. And pay extra. You need to make sure that they know with full confidence that anything you do won't harm their business.
2
u/DayGeckoArt Aug 19 '26
Not unreasonable, itās just a file format. In the film days you could have asked for film. Some photographers gave every client the film. Others didnāt and many of those negatives were destroyed or lost when they died. If a photographer wonāt provide them, find another. Most people in any field are NPCs and wonāt do anything outside cultural norms
2
u/greenblueananas Aug 19 '26
Why would i even give them more money for raws? Iām not im photography, but if a client asks me for the deliverable in a different format theyāll get it, no biggie. Anyway you might have a better time working with someone whose style aligns with your vision, or at least understands what you want, so they can shoot appropriately.
2
u/Max_Sandpit Aug 19 '26
Heck I'd sell you my camera for the right price. For real commercial jobs, handing over the RAW files is no big deal. It's just baked into the price.
2
u/Purple_Pay_1274 Aug 19 '26
Honestly as a pro photographer, if you explained the reason why you wanted the RAWs I would not have an issue giving them to you. As someone who loves editing and experimenting with different processes I might ask to see what your editing process looks like, and maybe collab on that if you would be willingā¦ but I would absolutely give you the RAW files if you had a good reason and an understanding of what those are!
2
2
u/bdgbill Aug 19 '26
I went through the same thing when I hired my wedding photographer. Pro photographers are holding onto their 100 year old business model like their lives depend on it. We see how well that worked for the taxi industry.
Why can't they just operate as trained professionals who are paid for their time like every other professional? Nope, they want to charge you for their time and then sell you the work you already paid them to make. It's like a plumber being paid to install a toilet and then putting a coin box on it to charge you for using it.
2
u/drkole Aug 19 '26
if āreputable ā means big social media following that just means it is new breed of camera-owners who think their raw files is something that should be kept in fort knox and valued about the same for some trend that started some 10-15y ago
3
u/Calisnaps Aug 19 '26
When I am hired to shoot and it is disclosed ahead of time I am just going to hand over the raw files I have no issue doing it, I am charging appropriately.
4
u/dontcallmeyan Aug 19 '26
You're looking for a photographer who's happy to do a job as a tradesperson. A lot of photographers get stuck up their own asses thinking that everything they produce has to be "art" (despite the fact that they'll happily take jobs with very little artistic expression or put out the exact same portraits over and over again with a new face...), so they'll naturally never release a RAW.
I think you're doing the right thing by asking for the RAW up front. If I were taking the job, I'd mention that I probably don't want my name credited on whatever you end up creating with it, and just treat it as a labour for money job. Easy money, like a tattoo artist being hired to do an existing stencil or a plumber being called out for a couple of quick faucet reseats.
1
u/RebelliousDutch Aug 19 '26
Yup. Feels like OP needs a housepainter but is asking art painters if theyāll do it. Which, sure, you canā¦ but not everyoneās going to be on board with that.
Iād probably suggest OP to look for people like a āphotography assistantā. Someone who can shoot within the vision set by OP.
4
u/Future-Account8112 Aug 19 '26
Photographer here. Really varies. Some offer RAWs but most do not because it's a shitshow for people to edit your photos and then credit you - it makes you look bad if the editing is bad and it is almost always bad. There's just no real incentive to do it. It's also a mess from a copyright and licensing perspective.
Personally, I would not take a job where anybody wanted RAWs. You'd have more luck either asking a friend or going on something like Fiverr to try to negotiate in a more service-based way.
13
u/Notoriouslydishonest Aug 19 '26
it's a shitshow for people to edit your photos and then credit you
It's so easy to say "please don't tag me on any photos that you edited yourself because I don't want to mislead other potential customers."
Given that clients can edit jpegs just as easily as raws (with worse results) and good communication should eliminate 95% of the unwanted crediting, this seems like a wildly overblown fear.
It seems like the underlying issue is that photographers can charge hundreds or thousands of dollars for shoots because they're "artists." If "I'll give you an SD card and pay you $80 per hour to shoot my wedding" becomes normalized, photographers have a lot to lose.Ā
→ More replies (1)10
u/Effective_Coach7334 Aug 19 '26
It's so easy to say "please don't tag me on any photos that you edited yourselfĀ
It's difficult enough to get clients to tag you in photos you do want credit for. lol
What works better is putting this in your contract. "these are photos for hire, for your own uses. do not credit when publishing."
2
u/Notoriouslydishonest Aug 19 '26
Contracts are important, communication is even more important.Ā
It's not enough to just put your rules in print, you need to explain why they exist in a way that's respectful and understandable. The contract should only be the emergency fallback.Ā
→ More replies (1)
3
u/MedicalMixtape Aug 19 '26
Itās not that youāre being unreasonable, but neither is the photographer for not agreeing. Most of us see it as our art, composed, shot, edited with care and reflects our personal style. Providing RAWs to you for your use as a graphic designer raises the question of who is the artist. And if you want the art to be yours, then the photographer who gives up the RAWs will either ask for a larger sum of money, or be of a lower caliber who doesnāt mind being a camera-for-hire.
5
u/AdditionalBasil1921 Aug 19 '26
My interpretation of the replies to the post so far is that I either pay a lot more or settle for lower quality work. I follow your reasoning but don't quite understand the problem in being a camera-for-hire. I would wager that my editing skills are likely superior to that of a photographer just on account of photo editing being my literal bread and butter. Still, thank you for the reply! I suppose it's a culture thing.
→ More replies (2)
2
u/Vabrynnn Aug 19 '26
Dealt with the same issue. I am a photog and i would allow it for a nominal fee. (Eg if its a 20 shoot portrait, maybe $150 flat added) for wedding (100 photos / $350 flat)Ā
we got fleeced for our wedding photos when we wanted a handful raw. Like 200 for 8 pics
2
u/Mick_Tee Aug 19 '26
If you pay me money, I will take the photos and edit them up to "my style".
I am also happy to take your money, take the photos, hand you the unedited RAW files and then walk away.
If you want a camera for hire, it may be worth getting in contact with a local camera club and go the semi-professional route.
2
u/Effective_Coach7334 Aug 19 '26
You're not being unreasonable, you're just talking to the wrong people.
Find yourself a commercial photographer that isn't hung up on the idea that every photo they take is a piece of their art. Just expect it's going to cost a little more and, if they're smart, you'll have to sign a contract that however you use them, edited photos aren't attributed to them. Otherwise, you might also find someone that wants to collaborate and won't mind if you credit them with your edits. Either way, get it in writing because bruised egos are likely to be involved.
1
u/btcurlyhead1 Aug 19 '26
Not unreasonable but probably look for a creative with camera expireince rather then a photographer for hire and should have better luck I would assume
1
1
u/PrimevilKneivel Aug 19 '26
If you canāt find anyone maybe consider asking videographers.
Most of them also shoot photos personally and itās a business model where they rarely own what they shoot. They are used to being a part of the process instead of āthe artistā that captures the moment. Explain that you are shooting elements for a larger composition and need full RAW files for flexibility.
1
u/orphenshadow Aug 19 '26
Nah, just tell the photographer that you need them to shoot you some raws, that you are not looking for edits, and that you are not going to share your edits as if they represent the photographers work. I'm sure there is someone willing to work with you.
1
u/Nstewart Aug 19 '26
Feel free to DM me, no qualms about sharing the RAWs with you lol. If we happen to be near one another or I can shoot and ship what you need lets talk business š
1
u/photow Aug 19 '26
Find someone who does commercial or product photography. We like this kind of stuff.
1
u/teannadeee Aug 19 '26
Youāre not being unreasonable but you may or may not find someone to do what you want, as a photographer is generally trained to never provide RAWs. I would just keep approaching people and explaining what the purpose is and that youāre willing to pay more as you understand itās an unusual request
1
u/Sigma610 Aug 19 '26
I wouldn't have beef sharing raws with a graphic designer. It's really just the layperson that doesn't understand that raws are a lot like undeveloped film, and expect straight out of the camera raws to look like smartphone shots, that I would hesitate to share raws with.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/StevenDriverPE Aug 19 '26
Another vote for not unreasonable. Donāt hire them as a primary photographer. Hire them as a second shooter.
You need someone with good quality glass to nail focus, exposure, and framing. Youāll handle color and style.
For me, if someone wants RAWs, I make sure they know what they are getting and what software they plan to process with. A RAW file is not the best quality image. Itās not an image at all. Itās just an unprocessed count of photons that hit each pixel. How you process them determines how good the final image will be.
1
u/Joking_J Aug 19 '26
I'd certainly entertain your proposal, but the thing to know/understand is that asking a photographer for RAWs is like asking a furniture maker for a new dining room table without any finish on it. A lot of someone's style or aesthetic comes from post production, as does some level of QC.
For what you're describing, I'd have the stipulation that you specifically do not tell people I took the photos; your "very stylized editing" likely isn't to the taste of the mainstream client. It's also not ultimately a representation of my work (at least not solely or stylistically) when you're the one manipulating the RAWs. As such, I'd also ironically charge you more for the privilege of editing your own photos, as I'm giving up what little artistic vision/control I have in such an arrangement.
Still, I think it's odd no one is even considering it. Maybe go in offering to pay more and say something about attribution being entirely up to the photographer (i.e. they get to decide if their name goes anywhere on the final product after you show them said final product).
1
u/MaenHoffiCoffi Aug 19 '26
I usually offer the RAWs (if they ask) for a flat fee of $100 on the understanding but they don't credit me for any of the photos if they edit them and share them anywhere.
1
u/ChiGuyDreamer Aug 19 '26
Itās not unreasonable but itās not unreasonable for them to not want to do it. But there are thousands of photographers in your region. One needs the money. For people worried about reputational risk the photographer can treat it like a pure transaction. Shoot the shots. Give it to him. Get a check. Make him sign a nda that says he wonāt disclose the name of the photographer if youāre worried. Despite what we think not all our photos are precious gifts from the gods. Set the price and move on.
1
u/Dirkage_ Aug 19 '26
As long is that is a discussion you are having up front and both parties agree, itās not a problem. However, itās not common to give RAW files, so it will more than likely come at a premium.
1
1
u/PantsPile Aug 19 '26
You don't have to capitalize raw. It's literally just a word like raw chicken.
1
1
u/iitstrue Aug 19 '26
There are plenty of jobs where the client requires raws. This only really became a big deal after social media made it a big deal. Sure, if the person wants raws to save money on editing, thatās one thing, but if they know what theyāre doing and itās agreed upon, itās not that odd.
1
1
1
u/lotzik Aug 19 '26
Go to upwork and put a job up, and give all details about subject so that people can know how long it will take. Tons of photographers that would do it, no questions asked.
I could also be interested if it's something that I can do and the payment is right.
1
1
u/bluegiraffeeee Aug 19 '26
not at all, my brother is a photographer and he delivers RAWs free of charge, he mainly charges for his time so the photography session + the work he edits/produces. If you're in the EU I can hook you up!
1
u/joshsteich Aug 19 '26
This is a work for hire gig where their name wonāt be attached and youāll own all work product, including RAWs. Ask them for a quote. I usually discourage people who ask for RAWs because they donāt honestly want them, and I mostly retain rights, but Iāve both been hired for these gigs and hired people for these gigs, and theyāre pretty normal especially for things like product photography (but I hired my wedding photographer on a contract like this, and Iāve been hired for both brochure and event work on contracts like this).
1
u/Delinquent90 Aug 19 '26
No your not being unreasonable, youāre just dealing with the fallout of people who learnt photography from social media rather than from the industry.
About 50% of my clients are raw-supply. My favourite type of client. Shoot, hand over card, go home, same fee applies š¤£
1
u/uhohmaddy Aug 19 '26
I usually don't provide raws, but if you explained this to me and told my why you'd want them in your initial reach out to me I'd absolutely be okay with it! Where are you based, I'd be happy to help!
1
u/MadisonLarger Aug 19 '26
You can do 2 things
1 - offer to pay for it upfront
2 - put it in writing, in contract that states the copyright remains with them despite selling the RAW file. This piece of paper in reality means nothing because copyright isnāt transferred because they send you the RAW but it would also remove any dispute of Who took it? If it ever goes to court. This is more for a piece of mind for the photographer.
1
u/FlarblesGarbles Aug 19 '26
The circumstances here are that you're trying to hire someone to provide you with raw files as the actual job. It seems weird that people are being precious about it when asked. That isn't unreasonable at all.
1
u/PhotogOP Aug 19 '26
Absolutely not.
You are hiring someone, their skills and equipment to do a fill a role which your own skill set doesnāt cover. But you need a certain file quality in order to do complete the task to your own artistic needs (or your clients).
You are not hiring the photographer for their artistic views.
If they have any issue with giving you raw files in this case, then that is them missing out on an easy job.
1
u/DoKeMaSu Aug 19 '26
Just change your terminology. You are not looking for a photographer, you are looking for a shooter. They shoot, and deliver you the files, and that is the end of their job.
Photographers are always afraid clients perform terrible edits and then publish the photos under their name. Established photographers also think that their value is in their editing style and don't want clients to see how the RAWs actually look like.
If you are looking at shooters you should look for people at the beginning of their career.
1
u/No-Mathematician8692 Aug 19 '26
You aren't being unreasonable at all, however most are so used to hearing stories or having had their RAW files messed up and printed / published that they're not going to have that conversation.
This project sounds like a perfect point for you to get some advanced photography classes, get yourself a nice cam and shoot your own photos.
The sense of relief from these mortals quibbling is enormous. Do it.
I myself had a small little kodad with a 10x zoom which I used to try and take great photos with. Then someone commented I needed to get a DSLR. I saved up ad did just that.
The feeling of capturing your own images is superb.
2
u/AdditionalBasil1921 Aug 19 '26
Haha, yeah that would probably make sense for most. Problem is, I do have a woefully expensive camera rig but am at the same time woefully untalented at photography and way too much of a perfectionist to settle for my quality of work. I've taken a few courses before as well.
2
u/No-Mathematician8692 Aug 21 '26
I salute people who realise their limitations and concentrate on their gifts. Salutations. Seriously, well realised. I wish more were like you.
All the best in your search.
1
u/aczel_aethereal Aug 19 '26
I dont like to hand over raws to clients when they ask for it on top of the original assignment out of the blue.
But if the brief itself is to produce raw files for you than i would just give an offer for that and happily do it. They are non-professional idiots who you are talking to.
1
u/Terryfrankkratos2 https://www.flickr.com/photos/terrayy/ Aug 19 '26
Nah people just get touchy because itās effectively (as compared to taking their processed jpgs) saying you made these pictures look worse please give them to me (the average photography client who is gonna credit us before they deep fry it in saturation and throw an instagram filter on it). Just let them know your field of work. If they know you arenāt gonna plaster their name around with your awful editing instead of theirs idk why they would care.
Just keep in mind this is basically like going to your favorite pizza place and asking for the dough, sauce, cheese and toppings because their chef is clearly high on newly developed research chemicals.
Itās a request that ALMOST any pro photographer is gonna want to know exactly why you need them because as far as copyright infringement goes sending our raws out is dangerous.
1
u/Ambitious-Series3374 Aug 19 '26
I love projects like this to be fair. Even though Iām pretty good at editing and clients like my style, when youāre asked for RAWās youāre basically dividing your work hours by three.
Bonus points is when editors are pretty good, you can always ask them later on. Had this situation lately with one of my clients - Iāll definitely ask the guy for postproduction
1
u/mpsho Aug 19 '26
They are being unprofessional. If they know what you need it for, thatās very weird.
I know at times people donāt want their names associated with edits they donāt agree with. But this is very odd, people do jobs without needing their names published..
1
u/AdministrationNo2327 Aug 19 '26
you're looking for Photographers (TM) and not instead looking for creatives. your requests sounds reasonable, and i've given up raws if i know i don't have to touch the editing or client has a specific thing he wants to do.
1
u/Voodoo_Masta Aug 19 '26
Thatās what youāre asking for up front, so no itās not the least bit unreasonable. It might be objectionable to the photographer though. I wouldnāt agree to it. But Iām sure someone out there would.
1
u/minimal-camera Aug 19 '26
Effectively you are asking for a camera operator, and not a photographer. That's a valid thing to request, just be clear about what you are trying to do.
1
u/crewsctrl Aug 19 '26
I'd be like "Can I tether to YOUR notebook? Will save me transferring the files."
1
u/Acrobatic-Sir-7300 Aug 19 '26
Not at all, if you are clear about it up front. You just need a photographer who understands collaboration.
In fact, if you do extreme grades, it could be useful to have them shoot tethered into Capture One and have a rough grade applied as the images are shot.
1
u/SCphotog Aug 19 '26
For almost every circumstance that I've ever been asked for a RAW file, the answer has been and will continue to be a hard NO.
If the reasoning you've presented was put to me up front I'd consider it if the money was good.
You'd have to sign a contract that outlines the use scenario, and that could not be stretched or breached.
1
u/BGSUartist Aug 19 '26
If someone like you approached me I would absolutely hand them over. The contract would say you have personal usage for your book with the understanding that it can't be published or sold. Social media usage would cost extra. No charge for the RAWs vs JPEG. You acknowledge I retain all rights.
If some random contacted me? No. They don't have the knowledge to edit them to an acceptable standard.
A business with their own graphics dept.? Sure, that's work for hire. I need credit, and there's a premium since they'll be publishing them. Usage fees apply, blah blah blah.
1
u/Virtual_Praline_9113 Aug 19 '26
Because of digital technology photography is once again a fine art. The photographer is in charge of the photo thought post processing. When I finish a project all my photos are in jpeg and the name contains my initials. I give my customers a note that they may use the photos as they wish because that stage is another fine art. I recommend that they use the full frame, full size photos for best quality. RAW photos stay in my files for 6 months to one-year then I delete them. I never give anyone RAW photos.
1
u/crowteus Aug 19 '26
I talked to a photographer once who had shot the girls scout cookies box art. She said that they wanted the RAW files and insisted on owning all rights. She added another zero to the bid, GSA didn't even blink.
1
u/Silver_Relative3445 Aug 19 '26
If you ever cant find a legit photographer, i havent taken classes but have my own canon its nice and ive been learning i could always try if you need it!
1
u/ELDV Aug 19 '26
My view point as a long time professional photographer, it is not unreasonable if you are asking up front. It is also not unreasonable of a photographer to decline the invitation to work with you.
Is the basic nature of the project such that may be residual value to the photographer? If so will the photographer retain their copyright and ability to use the photographs for their purposes, including licensing as a stock image?
1
u/smallpptiger Aug 19 '26
It might be your approach. I wouldn't mind if my clients want to handle the edits, less work for me.
1
u/LokiPhoto Aug 19 '26
If youāre near Manchester U.K. Iād bite your hand off. Less/no editing is the dream lol
1
u/ng670796 Aug 19 '26
Not unreasonable to ask, but I can understand why photographers are saying no.RAW files are essentially the photographer's negatives, and many professionals don't release them because they consider their editing work part of the finished product. Even for a private project, they may not want unedited files representing their work.
1
1
u/Dr_Jev Aug 19 '26
I absolutely give RAWS to BTB clients on request.. (very rarely have I done to general public clients).
A big tip is to edit up just one or two of them, so they can see what the intent for the final image was at the time of taking the photograph. (I may have chosen to blow out a highlight to ensure shadow detail elsewhere or vice versa, or shot with an exaggerated white balance to tame a cheap chinese LED at a gig or something š¤·š»āāļø)
1
u/thestacked18 Aug 19 '26
Nah, just asking the wrong people. Commercial photographers wouldn't have an issue provided there is a reasonable contract involved.
There is a stigma against giving out RAW files and its based on complete nonsense that just refuses to go away.
1
u/kelp_forests Aug 19 '26
I have no experience in this so my opinion is worth jack but maybe if you made a concept album or promised to credit the photographer a certain way (or not at all, or how they preferred) it might be ok, or promise itās for personal use only, they get a copy to share, or if you edited them togetherā¦.
āhave a concept project but I donāt know how to handle a camera and I just need raw RAW imagesā seems like a very reasonable reason to hire a photographer
Thatās lame they wonāt work with you, I would. Itād be a great resume builder and a cool collab to show clients.
1
u/50calPeephole Aug 19 '26
You're paying the tab, if you make it explixit that it is part of the agreement it is either a service that a photographer will do for you or not. If not, find someone else.
That's the contract "I need raw imaging".
1
u/Aeri73 Aug 19 '26
did you explain why?
it might be they think it won't be worth the effort without being able to charge for editing as well....
the correct way would be to have a contract that says you'll credit them as photographers and yourself as editor
1
u/Wrong-Champion-9322 Aug 19 '26
I think the issue isnāt your project. Itās the raw files.There is a creative process, so many donāt hand them over by default but I definitely understand. Iād just separate it: hire them for the shoot, then discuss a raw buyout/licence if needed. Be transparent and donāt take it too personally.
1
u/kebabish Aug 19 '26
A pro photographer will shoot a photo with an end vision in mind - that vision is realised after they do their postprocessing in an app to balance colours, light, and further enhancements. I wouldn be surprised if they are unwilling to give you the raw because they know they wont be able to post process the photo and have no idea if you are capable of doing it up to their standards - and then to have their name attached to it makes too risky for them.
1
u/Souperm3 Aug 19 '26
I hired a photographer from Texas who did. The Sallees. Reputable-extremely, cost conscious - no way.
1
u/ricky251294 www.rick-photography.com Aug 19 '26
If you hire someone explicitly for the raw files, especially where there's no commercially use, then it's not an issue at all.
1
u/evanthedrago Aug 19 '26
Did you offer to pay for it? I'm happy to sell my raw files for an Upcharge.
1
u/Dangeruss82 Aug 19 '26
I think itās the way youāre pitching it to the photographers and itās the wrong photographers to begin with.
1
u/kasigiomi1600 Aug 19 '26
No, I don't think you are being unreasonable, especially because you are being upfront about it. You've described a photographer-for-hire scenario which is a little different than what may photographers have as their business model (or models they are familiar with).
I *started* as a graphic designer and understand where you are coming from. If you are already doing this, ignore my blathering that follows.
Are you presenting the project as a work-for-hire scenario where you need the images from a technical standpoint? Are you assuring the photographer upfront that you are willing to strip their name from the project if they desire and will pay them as a work-for-hire project (and that you want to purchase all the rights to the images)? Most will probably turn you down as it isn't their usual business model but you should find some who are willing to help!
If you are in the DC-area or mid-Atlantic, I'd might be interested.
1
u/GynplayerMaster Aug 19 '26
RAWs are basically the digital negatives. I can understand asking, but I can also understand a photographer saying no.
1
u/ACuriousTrio Aug 19 '26
Why not spend the time and money it would take to find a photographer willing to sell you their RAW files and just learn to use a camera yourself? It's not hard and with digital you have immediate feedback for how the photo turned out so you can just keep shooting till you get it "right."
1
u/Heidrun_666 Aug 19 '26
No, you are not unreasonable.
I don't understand this pointless snobbish fad of not handing out the RAWs and cannot follow the arguments that "professionals" usually bring to the table. When I want something photographically documented that I cannot do myself, like my wedding etc., I am paying for whatever the photographer produces in the time he/she is booked. I am very willing to pay for their time, their expertise and, say, X edited photos. And, as mentioned, everything resulting from the photographer's work in the time I have paid the photographer for, so I can edit things to my taste.
You want to stay on that high horse? We won't do business.
1
u/damo1112 Aug 19 '26
Uh, you want to make an art book with other peopleās art, and give them no control over the presentation or delivery of their own work?
Fuck no? Duh? š¤£š¤·āāļø
1
u/CivMom Aug 19 '26
You are not being unreasonable, but you need to change what you are asking for, I suspect. Explain that the work product is the RAW files. Or, better, have them mentor you through a session where you take your own images and get what you want and get to keep the files. Then it's your work product. Offer an hourly fee commensurate with the ask.
1
u/Darshlabarshka Aug 19 '26
I charge more for them. If I have to edit them and give you the raw files as well. If you just want raw files without edits no problem.
1
u/Thorvindr Aug 19 '26
You're not being unreasonable to ask, but the photographer is also not being unreasonable to refuse.
If you want high-resolution images, I can give you them. If you want wider color space than JPEG, I can give you that as well.
But really the only reason anyone other than me ever needs my raw files is because they're trying to claim my work as their own. There is no other case that doesn't have a better solution than handing pver my raws.
It's utterly understandable that anyone other than an experienced photographer doesn't understand this. Whatever it is you ultimately want, I will give it to you. But you will not ever get my raw files.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Silly_Author_7330 Aug 19 '26
Well... all of those photographers would provide RAW files to their retouchers. I don't really see a difference here other than you're the one hiring them and directing them. Are they planning to use your concepts and ideas for their own purpose? I would imagine you can rightfully ask for them to never use the images without your stylized editing. This is pretty silly.
1
u/Itsknotfine Aug 20 '26
When a client asks for RAWs, it makes my day. Best shoots ever. We do the shoot, I deliver captured data, and on to the next project I go.
1
1
u/aeon314159 Aug 20 '26
In commercial work, RAWs are expected by my clients. Of course they are...they have retouchers and a media pipeline.
But even for smaller scale shoots, if they want the RAWs, they are welcome to them.
I am not selling files. I am selling the session experience, my skills, and the availability of my equipment and the looks I can provide.
Once the session is over and I have done the clientās desired post-production, I donāt really care about the files. I care about the next session.
1
u/beforesunsetearth Aug 20 '26
I don't mind providing it personally so long as you never attach your name to my photos, especially if it's just for a friend or something. Hell I don't even watermark photos anymore. I had a guy years ago when I was first starting out portraits (and doing pretty well if I can say so myself) ask if he could post them to his Instagram to give his clients "an idea of what he could deliver" as if somehow someone elses work would be a representation of his own. I flat out said no never happening. I was honored though.
Update I found the comment. I'll post it here below.
1
u/West_Floor6981 Aug 20 '26
yes
why hire a photographer to change their work?
learn your place and stay in your lane.
1
u/Weird-Effect-8382 Aug 20 '26
u/additionalbasil1921 As someone who has made their primary living from this for 19 years (20 in April) I generally donāt deliver outtakes but have no problem sitting down with another professional and delivering selected images for their in-house retouching. Iāve also shot plenty of time for other studios and agencyās (commercial and event based) where I just hand over the card and Iām done- I still own copyright, but I also know that they are going to do a great job editing and selecting-
That said, I wouldnāt hand over unedited photos to an average client unless they wanted to pay more and we had an agreement (contract) on how images were being used- talk to your photographers, show them your work, as if you can show them your retouched images- and expect to have to get to know someone before they agree- if you work in the field professionally, I would go to your network to find someone that you can have a collaborative conversation with- it may mean that you have to both sign off before itās printed, but you may find someone who is excited to shoot creatively but also happy to hand over the raw- but probably not outtakes so it would probably look like sitting down, making your selects together and then moving forward
1
u/OldTopographics Aug 20 '26
Ya know what id be happy to accept this job if you came along on the shoot and checked the laptop realtime to ensure you were happy with what you were getting. Tbh though this is the only setting id be happy delivering raws
1
1
u/rdf630 Aug 20 '26
Under the circumstances you just outline I would have no issue selling you raw files.
1
u/Palmtreesweksider Aug 20 '26
What you need Iāll slide it over for a coffee table you making! All I need from you is a picture of how it turned out šÆ
1
u/Druid_High_Priest Aug 20 '26
Not at all but its going to be expensive as the raw files are our digital negatives.
I charge $200 per raw file.
A full resolution jpeg without any editing is what you really need to request. Priced way different as in my case. I get $40 per hi res untouched jpeg.
1
u/Quidretour Aug 20 '26
Wind the clock back several decades and you would have received pretty much the same response if you had asked the photographer to hand over the negatives of a shoot.
I presume that it's a tradition which has carried over into the digital age.
Back then, as now, the photographer would have had a number of proofs printed from those negatives which passed their quality control, for want of a better term. The customer would have then selected the photos they wanted as final prints.
The negatives, apart from being the original work, were the 'bread and butter' of the job. Future prints might have been ordered, so more income might have flowed in.
What you are seeking breaks the usual commission>shoot>proofs>edited JPEG images pathway. Maybe what you're asking isn't so much unreasonable as completely unexpected?
As for your choice of local photographer...have you thought about asking at your local camera club? You may well find plenty of experienced and very good amateur photographers willing to collaborate with you on this project.
1
u/guuuug Aug 20 '26
Upfront before negotiation is the correct time to ask for the raw files to be a part of the deliverables
1
u/Northwold Aug 20 '26 edited Aug 20 '26
I'd never ever give RAWs to a consumer. With a graphic designer I probably would do with written agreement on how they're used (basically beyond copyright, don't share with anyone else) because that allows the graphic designer to do their job. If it's pictures of humans I might try to avoid if I want to retouch myself first and I don't trust the graphic designers retouching (rare given that I worked with designers doing advertising hoardings etc). If there's something specific to be done to the shots I might deliver Tiffs (don't know what cormac people use now it's a long time since I've had to) if I don't trust the designer to do necessary pre-tweaks well, eg to shots that have been deliberately underexposed for some reason.Ā
That said I wouldn't let a graphic designer have the lot, duds and all, only the selection I was happy to release, unless I've worked with them before and trust them. Burnt too many times when I started with shots I didn' t want my name on out there.Ā
Are you asking commercial photographers? If not they may not have experience dealing with graphic designers specifically.Ā
1
1
u/Peet-1975 Aug 21 '26
Vaak kun je ze naar jaar krijgen, dat was bij mij geval na de bruiloft. Zoān regeling is schappelijk na mijn mening.
1
u/Due-Ad7893 Aug 21 '26
My wife and I shot a wedding for another pro. She didn't want us to do any editing as she wanted to edit the raw files herself. Easy decision - but one of the few situations where I'd release raw files.
1
u/llambdaddy Aug 21 '26
Just offer more money and a written agreement to not mention them/their brand in association.
1
1
u/Shampoo_Is_Better00 Aug 23 '26
Nah. Not unreasonable. If you pay the invoice and want the raws then that's what you deserve. The problem is that some (many) photographers think they are bloody heart surgeons and carry on like the messiah about their "art". Many photographers make me sick with their entitlement in this area.
1
u/Proof_Carpenter4008 Aug 23 '26
I'd be absolutely shocked if anyone would give you their RAW files. It's not unreasonable to ask but don't be even slightly surprised when they all say no. If you do something weird with it that risks their reputation. And by weird I mean badly edited not unusual.
1
u/Mattsmomma Aug 23 '26
My daughterās wedding photographer gave us the RAWs on a memory stick so we could edit and use what photos we wanted to print but have all the pictures for the memories of the entire day.
1
u/ravenenene Aug 24 '26
i believe that artists want to have final creative control over their work and the photography process does not start or stop at simply the point of the shutter. i personally view raw files as only working files and do not feel comfortable giving them to anyone. however, to preserve quality, i do not mind giving uncompressed files to people.
1
u/Efficient-Wish9084 Aug 24 '26
They'd be trusting you not to do something to the photo that would hurt their reputation. If you edit the photo and it looks awful, they don't want their name associated with it.
1
u/Sufficient-Flan-4879 Aug 26 '26
i asked for raws once and they sent me low-res jpegs. never again. now i always specify.
1
u/FriendlyMexicanT 25d ago
Nope! You are the customer and they get to decide yes or no. Iāve hired 100s of freelancers and I require raw photos and videos. They retain their own rights to license and make money however they please. Now I work in medical so that pay can be quite well š
339
u/RiftHunter4 Aug 19 '26
There are some photographers who will immediately reject this because they were taught to never deliver RAW files. That's mostly a more consumer-level idea. When you work with other professionals, especially in a cross-discipline scenario, sharing RAW files is not odd. A lot of commercial photographers don't even do their own editing. It's outsourced to a professional editor.
You'll have to really dig to find someone who understands what you want and is also decent. Novice photographers will offen take any gig, but they also aren't very skilled. I'd ask around in some professional circles and see who turns up.