"Why don't you sell high-res files?"

[filemanager]

Ever since I stopped giving out high-res CDs (and wow the transition was tough!), I've been getting inquiries such as "How come I can't get my session on a CD so I can print my pictures myself?" or "How come I can't have the high-res files?" or my personal favourite "How can you charge so much for the digital files! It's ridiculous!"

I'm wondering how you all (those of you who don't give out the CDs) respond to these inquiries? I'm hoping someone will be able to word it nicely for me

[corvus2606]

Originally Posted by filemanager

Ever since I stopped giving out high-res CDs (and wow the transition was tough!), I've been getting inquiries such as "How come I can't get my session on a CD so I can print my pictures myself?" or "How come I can't have the high-res files?" or my personal favourite "How can you charge so much for the digital files! It's ridiculous!"

I'm wondering how you all (those of you who don't give out the CDs) respond to these inquiries? I'm hoping someone will be able to word it nicely for me

just say that film photographers would never give you the negatives, high res images is no different.

[theosus]

But there's a big difference.... If a film photographer gives away his negatives, he loses the ability to print more pictures. All record of his work is gone, unless he made prints. When you sell digital files, you get to keep a copy. You really can't compare the two like that, and with the younger crowd, that's exactly the argument you will get.
I would say, "I chose not to sell them because who knows what you will do with them , and I want you to come back and buy more prints from me, not print them at walmart. However, if you really want them, I will sell them to you at this exorbitant price."

I hope all this is spelled out ahead of time, especially to past customers. Something to the effect of, "we do not offer digital files, period". Today's customers are going to expect them to be available, and deserve notice ahead of time, so they can decide to go with you, or pick someone else.

[rejhozezo]

Originally Posted by theosus

But there's a big difference.... If a film photographer gives away his negatives, he loses the ability to print more pictures. All record of his work is gone, unless he made prints. When you sell digital files, you get to keep a copy. You really can't compare the two like that, and with the younger crowd, that's exactly the argument you will get.
I would say, "I chose not to sell them because who knows what you will do with them , and I want you to come back and buy more prints from me, not print them at walmart. However, if you really want them, I will sell them to you at this exorbitant price."

I hope all this is spelled out ahead of time, especially to past customers. Something to the effect of, "we do not offer digital files, period". Today's customers are going to expect them to be available, and deserve notice ahead of time, so they can decide to go with you, or pick someone else.

You explained the thing very well, and it's complete logic. That is the reason photographers charge is extraordinary high price for the CD, and from the photographer's point of view it's ok.

[theosus]

I'm just playing devils advocate. I understand it from the photographers point of view. They want to sell more prints and make more money (and probably to a lesser extent they are worried about someone manipulating their images). But I also understand it from a customers view - once I buy a package it would be nice to be able to print off a few extras if relatives want them later. A majority of pictures I have paid for have come with a crapload of little ones and only one or two big ones. I'm going through old school, church, dance class, etc pictures, keeping a few big ones, but most of them are going to wind up in the trash. Dealing a la carte with a pro suddenly doesnt seem so bad.

I've never been to a true pro photographer - I mean an individual, instead of a company like sears or lifetouch. My wife and I used one for our wedding, but that was it, so I really don't have any experience dealing with them. My next experience with an individual pro will likely be when my own daughter gets married - hopefully about 15 years or so from now. Who can say what it will be like then?

[BK553]

So, if they want it really badly, you should be able to sell it at a high enough cost to offset any potential sales you may get from prints. Find your average print sale total, add 20%, and charge that for the CD. See if they still want it then. If they do, good, less work for you for the same money.

Also, you can try a la carte digital image downloads, which is what I do. If they want to buy them all, that's fine, but they have to do it through smugmug, so i don;t have to go through burning a disc and sending it. It's easier for them and for me, and I still get paid per image.

[Jim Poor]

Originally Posted by BK553

So, if they want it really badly, you should be able to sell it at a high enough cost to offset any potential sales you may get from prints. Find your average print sale total, add 20%, and charge that for the CD. See if they still want it then. If they do, good, less work for you for the same money.

More likely it's more money as you don't have the same overhead printing costs.

[Dennismc]

I am sorry, the film negative analogy still fits. Just because the medium has changed, the principle has not.

Take one of any photo a studio has done, dance class, school, etc. and try to get someone to print a copy of it for you. Not going to happen, copyright. No release from the studio.

Now you can scan it and make a digital that way sure, but the avg joe/jane isnt going to do that.

Now the high res version of a print, (I say print because that is still what it is, just different medium) is your Negativity, off which any crops, enlargements or other work would be based on. You as the photographer have the last say in how that would be printed, since your name is attached to it. Same as the negative.

Me personally would think that if a client really wants the full cd of the digital negatives, then all they really want from the photographer is a sitting. Thats fine, charge the normal sitting fee and price the cd accordingly. Taking into account future lost revenue if they were to buy prints, (and ignore those who say these are the people who wouldnt buy a print anyway, doesnt matter, its loss based calc anyway regardless).

Also in this case then have a GREAT release/contract detailing EXACTLY what they are allowed to do with them and what YOU are still allowed to do with them..

jmo

[theosus]

Originally Posted by Dennismc

I am sorry, the film negative analogy still fits. Just because the medium has changed, the principle has not.

Take one of any photo a studio has done, dance class, school, etc. and try to get someone to print a copy of it for you. Not going to happen, copyright. No release from the studio.

Now you can scan it and make a digital that way sure, but the avg joe/jane isnt going to do that.
jmo

If you think stores won't print a copy without a release, you're fooling yourself. Walmart will not, true. Evidently they got popped for it or saw some other store get popped. I know a few people walmart wouldn't print pictures for, because their photos looked so good.
But all someone would have to do to get around it would be to sign the form saying "I took this", or even just take the form home and sign it "Joe blow studios". This could be defeated with a watermark or logo, but do pros really put logos in the corner of big portraits? I can see it for online use, but if I'm paying 350$ sitting fee and 60$ for a print, there better not be "John Wayne Studios" in the corner. If you want to advertise, do it on your own dime, not mine.
Of course, other places might not be so tough. A friend of mine took his kids school picture to CVS pharmacy, and they helped him crop out that annoying "Olan Mills" logo in the corner before they printed a few 5x7s for grandma.

And if the average Joe blow doesn't have a scanner, he knows a computer nerd that does.

I like the idea of charging like the average print sale, or sitting fee plus 20%. those are both great ideas, and would be fully acceptable to me as a consumer. I guess the pro has to figure out the line that separates profitability from running people off to violate copyrights.

[Dennismc]

Originally Posted by theosus

If you think stores won't print a copy without a release, you're fooling yourself. Walmart will not, true. Evidently they got popped for it or saw some other store get popped. I know a few people walmart wouldn't print pictures for, because their photos looked so good.
But all someone would have to do to get around it would be to sign the form saying "I took this", or even just take the form home and sign it "Joe blow studios". This could be defeated with a watermark or logo, but do pros really put logos in the corner of big portraits? I can see it for online use, but if I'm paying 350$ sitting fee and 60$ for a print, there better not be "John Wayne Studios" in the corner. If you want to advertise, do it on your own dime, not mine.
Of course, other places might not be so tough. A friend of mine took his kids school picture to CVS pharmacy, and they helped him crop out that annoying "Olan Mills" logo in the corner before they printed a few 5x7s for grandma.

And if the average Joe blow doesn't have a scanner, he knows a computer nerd that does.

I like the idea of charging like the average print sale, or sitting fee plus 20%. those are both great ideas, and would be fully acceptable to me as a consumer. I guess the pro has to figure out the line that separates profitability from running people off to violate copyrights.

Well that may be true, but I do know that If I found out that someone at a local dime store print shop, (cvs etc) helped crop out a watermark of mine and the customer didnt have a release from me, you can bet there would be legal action taken there!

Better idea, goto a large studio, or heck even the walmart type studio and ask them for the high res pics when they are done, see what they tell you..

Bottom line is yes its possible, but the only way to ensure the integrity of your pictures is to control the printing and distribution of them, and as a industry as a whole we all must be very proactive in protecting our rights as well as stopping the flow of here is a digital pic have fun with it syndrome.