Giving Away RAW Files? Think Again.
It doesn’t happen very often but when it does I tend to go on my rant. Recently I had a situation where the potential client asked for the RAW files. Knowing this term tends to be misunderstood I proceeded to ask more questions and explain the importance of the RAW processing being handled by the photographer. I also mentioned that I don’t give away my RAW files. Unfortunately it didn’t get through to the potential client and they went with another local photographer. I didn’t even get to gather the full details of the project and send an estimate. It basically ended with the RAW file issue.
Some questions come to mind. Are we to be hired as technicians that can operate a camera and hand over half finished work? Or are we technically savvy artists who care about the entire process and utilize RAW file conversion and post-production to achieve our vision? I personally would feel like a hack if I handed over RAW files for someone else to work on. Especially since the process isn’t simple and part of the strategy during the photo shoot is carried over to the post-production side such as layering images together.
Here are some sample images from one of my favorite photos. This is to demonstrate that the untouched RAW files before conversion look terrible and need work such as color balancing and tonal adjustments. Also take note that I photograph with many different exposures to recover blown out highlight areas and blocked shadow details. This will explain the extremely dark and the extra light photos.
Underexposed RAW Image Used For Layering
Overexposed RAW Image Used For Layering
Average Exposure RAW Image Used For Layering
My method is to layer all the images together into one. I do this one layer at a time and carefully select and add what I want for a nice readable image. This was a high contrast situation that required both highlight details and shadow details brought back. After I have everything adjusted the way I like, I then fine tune the image with more tonal and color adjustments as needed. Sometimes this involves more layers. After all is done, I’ll flatten the layers and save the image as a master file using TIFF or PSD as my preference for file format.
Here is the final worked image. Of course much more can be covered with the RAW conversion portion of the workflow but I think it’s good to go beyond that and show the layering. It may have more impact on persuading the importance in leaving the RAW files to the photographer’s discretion.
Final Master File Image With Combined Layers From 3 RAW Files © 2009 Paul S. Bartholomew
This is a great end result image Paul. Certainly, non of the images you made on site represented the finished piece as you invisioned it. It would be like an editor asking a writer to stop the book before they wrote the ending and pass it on to someone else to finish. I agree with you totally.
And your thoughts on giving out DNG files? Or is DNG not part of your workflow? For me the prospect of giving out a DNG is equally unappealing as giving out a RAW file. Still curious to hear your perspective.
Agreed. It’s a bit like asking someone to decorate your house, then as soon as they have done the undercoat, to do the top coat yourself. If someone wants electronic copies, they get JPG or (flattened) TIFF. It’s in the contract.
Hi Jim,
DNG files are RAW files and are my preferred type. A lot of RAW files are proprietary like what Canon and Nikon use. For example, Nikon uses a RAW file that has the extension NEF. Part of my post-production process is to convert my Nikon NEF RAW files in to DNG RAW files. I do the DNG conversion in Adobe Lightroom.
I convert NEF RAW files into DNG RAW files because the DNG format is more universal and much easier to manage without dealing with sidecar files. DNG has it all wrapped up inside. Good stuff.
Best,
Paul
I absolutely agree. And one of the great joys of the digital age is the control it gives the photographer over the final image rather than leaving it to the interpretation of the printer!
Thanks for the comment Paul. It’s kind of interesting how the planning of post-production strategies and techniques during the photo shoot make a world of difference. I had to develop a different mindset. At first it’s kind of a leap of faith with the hope it works out later with Photoshop skills. Now I consider it business as usual and intuitive.
Thanks,
Paul
Exactly! Thanks for the comment!
Paul
Good point. The photographer takes the image with a vision and should be allowed to carry through.
Thanks for the comment!
Best,
Paul
Giving away RAW files is like a musician giving away the unmixed, unmastered tracks to their songs, rather than the finished album. It’s just not going to happen, and to be honest, clients who insist on getting RAW files, are not the kind of clients I want.
As a wedding photographer, I get the odd request for the RAW files (mainly because some smartass columnist in a bridal mag says so). I’m with you on wanting to complete my vision of the image before delivering them. But I’m also a business man and I will give the client what they want. So what I do is deliver a finished image and if the client still thinks they want the RAW files they can buy them.
I would also mention that I know of a lot of advertising and fashion photographers that regularly hand over only the RAW images. The agencies either has in house image processors or they hire free lancers to process the images. This gives them the most control over the image so it fits their complete vision of the advertisement. In the fashion industry there is a very good market for touchup Photoshop artists.
Very good comparison. I also heard someone say it’s like a chef handing over all his ingredients.
Thanks,
Paul
A lot of times you can send finished TIFFs and call them RAW files. A lot of people misuse the term RAW file and think it’s a master file or high res file. Terminology in the digital world needs work but is getting better. I think there’s an organization called UPDIG that is working on the issue.
Thanks,
Paul
It’s a shame that so many potential clients so adamantly insist on getting RAW files. I’m beginning to get the sense that they either don’t understand what a RAW file really is, or they feel they may be saving money and/or gaining ultimate creative control over an image if they ask for “RAW.” It may be of interest to note that from working closely with many designers and other creatives over the years in the world of print production, I’ve found that many regularly use the term “RAW file” and “native file” interchangeably, and often inappropriately, when they really mean they want a TIFF, EPS or PSD file, as opposed to a .jpeg or .png file. Either way, a request like this is definitely a litmus test of whether or not you’re dealing with an educated client.
i just got asked for RAW files for a job that I did as a favor for the friend of the client. the fact that she asked for both raw and edited pictures told me right away that she knew what to ask for.
more importantly, it made me feel very uneasy; in fact, it insulted me.
A professional photographer should never deliver the raw files to anyone, unless they are required by a professional art director. And even then I would be reluctant and ask a lot of questions as to why they need the RAW files.
Unless the client knows a lot about digital photographic processing and image manipulation giving them a raw file is not doing them any favors. And none of the graphic artists or art directors I have ever worked with have wanted them. I generally provide a full resolution (Maximum size cropped image) 16 bit Tiff in Adobe RGB (1998) color space and a full sized JPG in sRGB to the client and that provides them with the raw material they need to produce ads, web images or get prints from the FEDEX store down the street.