How to handle requests for RAW files

This is a controversial topic! Not just a request for raw files, but even just the definition of what a raw file is. 90% of the time when a client asks for ‘raw’, they mean the unaltered state of the image. So they aren’t referring to RAW camera format - they may not know what that is, but after hearing the word raw getting tossed around, or written into contracts, they take it to mean “before editing.” Always be sure to clarify before jumping to conclusions and citing copyrights etc.

Is a photo straight out of camera not representative of your work?

I have come to dislike all of the responses I tend to see regarding requests for raw images. The "poor or inaccurate representation" of my work doesn't resonate with me. I consider all of the education/ intent and choices of lighting composition, settings, lens choice, focal length choice etc — everything that comes before editing — as the important things that matter in the creation of an image, and as being the base upon which an edit will then work its final magic. This response has always rubbed me the wrong way, seemingly dismissing all of the other elements in favour of just the editing step, as if the photo matters less. I’m sure most will agree that even great editing can’t save a badly taken image, but enhances or puts a WOW on a well-taken image. And some photography genres — photojournalism, commercial/ branding — require delivering images unaltered and in raw format. In the case of photojournalism, only minimal editing allowed for basic corrections. Would any of those photographers agree that what comes out of camera isn’t representative of their work?

I understand it's not the complete equation for most of us until the edits bring things to a polished state, but what is produced out of my camera is certainly representative of my work. I can't get to the place where just because I've shot in a neutral format that the words ‘poor’ or ‘inaccurate’ should ever be used in association with my work and especially not as a descriptor of my work to a client. It’s an incomplete presentation - yes, without my branded and stylistic touches, but I prefer not to talk about the state of completion of an image with a client either. So my answer is to speak of the final product to them because in the end, that’s all that they seek and care about.

“Edited” photographs

The other thing I have come to dislike is the use of the word 'edited'. Not sure when only that part of a multi-part process (preparation - vision - creation - transfer - cull - colour correction and balancing - cropping - creative editing/ styling - preparation for exporting for print and web - uploading) started to be called out specifically, calling attention to its opposite, the unedited. And because we put a price tag only on a product with editing called out in our price guides, it creates the conditions under which a client may assume that the unedited carries no value. That goes back to my other point of the raw file being a poor representation of someone's work and the value is in the editing. The other part is the growth of consumer platforms like IG and consumer-accessible editing programs, where clients now equate filters and presets with a photographer's editing. It's too close an association for me, and I want to distance myself from it. I don't want clients to ever think that what they do - applying a filter on a photo that already had an in-camera edit from the settings on their phone, is what I do. Because if they think that I do what they do, that can make them question pricing and distinction of service.

A few years ago I removed the word 'edited' from my vocabulary with clients. Yes, I used to include it too, until I came to realize the troubles I kept seeing because of it! Removing the word can partially prevent the request for unedited. I don't want to wait to get the question and deal with it - I nipped it in the bud at the root. It can still apply in specific cases - such as showing proof images for newborns, where editing is a crucial and very apparent step to the client, as well as pet photography where people need to know if leashes will be removed. Selective, based on the business model and genre. If you soft-proof galleries, that’s the most common circumstance under which these client requests happen. Clients see a gallery of images but only paid for a fraction of them. Because they were asked to make their selections and those will be edited, the process itself is sending the message that the rest — the unedited — should then be available at no charge or low charge.

The response

I've actually only been asked this question once or twice in my decade as a photographer, and I simply replied that the products in their gallery are what is offered for sale, as part of a complete service to them. Often clients just feel they're missing out and I assure them that everything is in their gallery, minus misfires and testing. Address the FOMO and it can often quell the question. If someone pressed me, then I'd reply that my charges are per photograph and not per edit. Again, nothing else to buy but the final product available through the gallery. Editing or processing is just that, a process, and doesn't determine the price - it's an inherent and inextricable part of the photograph.

If you are soft-proofing then the answer has to be modified, and in those cases the latter part of the answer is still the same. Price is per photograph, processed or not. But since processing is an inherent piece that’s necessary for each photograph to go through, there is no other product available for sale except for the processed photograph.

Time to educate the client?

There is a huge temptation to start rebutting the client with education arguments over representation of your work, using baking or restaurant analogies of uncooked meals, or to state exorbitant pricing with copyright transfer, to deter them, but I’ll argue that none of that is really helpful. The client wants all their photos, think that the unedited ones might be free or cheaper, and they don’t really care if it represents your work. Some photographers have used that response and clients have argued back that they just want them to keep in private, and they won’t post anywhere. Then you’re back again at square one.

Resist that temptation! Keep it simple, and keep the answer in line with your brand and with customer service in mind. Now is not the time to educate, but to answer and resolve. Usually our brands represent giving clients an amazing experience, being helpful and being of service. Don’t turn on people just because they ask or they’ve made you feel uncomfortable; they may simply not know that this is offending you in any way and they just want what they want. Separate yourself and the business so that you can remain objective in treating their request. In that spirit of service, ask them first to clarify what they mean (raw as an unaltered file, or raw as a camera format) so that you can be clear on the response you will give.

If it’s indeed raw format files, then you can reiterate the business policy that these are only sold under commercial licensing where the photo goes on to be used in line with a company’s advertising needs, and are not sold under personal licensing. Or, you can decide that you do sell them and quote price appropriately.

If it’s unedited photographs, then it’s as I cited a few paragraphs up. Photographs hold the value; processing is included, and your studio releases only the top quality finished product that they invested in when they invested in you, and what they would expect as part of your complete and attentive services. They are most welcome to buy as many images as they like, and they will all receive the star treatment automatically so that you can deliver the best product to them.

Be confident to Sell photographs

If you’ve received the raw question once or more, consider removing the word “edited” from your client’s vocabulary. If people see your amazing work in your portfolio, do you really need to use this word to convince them that you’re doing something special in the backend? The finished work should tell them that in spades, negating the need to oversell (exception as I mentioned above when the editing work is a driving feature of the work, such as newborn or pet photography). You can also look at the root of the issue and ask yourself a question - do you need to validate the price by talking about all the hard work behind the scenes? Again, the work should speak for itself. Don’t be afraid to sell “ten photographs” with your smallest collection, rather than “ten hand-edited, preset applied through Lightroom and then adjustments and tweaks through Photoshop, look how much I’m doing, this justifies the price” images. I say this lightheartedly, but I suspect that many feel this. When I started, I certainly padded my price sheets with a whole lot of words and things to make the services feel like they are high value. But as I went along and established my brand, I realize the brand and my sales process convince of value, so that when people get to the price sheet, only the bare bones of what they get and the price is needed.

What’s your take on the RAW request?