Clients wanting unedited footage ...

[ArrUnTuS]

We do this all the time. All of our clients (thankfully) are in the film biz. Before we get in the air we've discussed what type of file they will get and have verified that they know they'll be getting flat looking footage. They almost always have a dedicated editor and/or colorist on the project.

The problem isn't when the client is professional. The problem is when the customer is unprofessional and thinks he knows what he is doing and as a result gets a potato and the fault is yours or makes you look bad. That's the fight...........

The ideal is what you say, a professional client who will then get the results he is looking for. You may or may not like them, but he knows how to get what he is looking for

 

[Andy Post]

The problem isn't when the client is professional. The problem is when the customer is unprofessional and thinks he knows what he is doing and as a result gets a potato and the fault is yours or makes you look bad. That's the fight...........

The ideal is what you say, a professional client who will then get the results he is looking for. You may or may not like them, but he knows how to get what he is looking for

Completely agree. I wish I could line item "educational services"

 

[embayweather]

When I worked as a pro photographer I never gave away RAW images. Doing so exposed your work to who knows what abominations, and in my case at least, my name and contact details were in the meta data. Thus ultimately it could come back on myself and my own skills. TIFF yes , JPEG yes, RAW no. The situation is clearly different for moving pictures as opposed to stills, but I personally believe that the same principles apply.

 

[Charles Duggan]

I'd like to start asking around after our ground based pro photog brothers. I'm sure this is a very old problem for them as professionals. If raw, untouched was requested and subsequently submitted and the result turns out to be a pile of smoking dung, then I suppose the buyer has only themselves to blame. However, I must point out, while I am NOT in the business of teaching this lesson to clients, I'd rather prefer they get a good product and learn a little about what they don't know or understand as a result.

It's a slippery slope. I suspect other photographers responses to these questions will run the gamut and we'll have to decide what's best for ourselves and the profession at the end of the day.

There are a boatload of realty companies out there who have scoffed at my pricing model, went out and purchased a quad (after choking a little on those prices) and either hosed the quad, hosed the video or both. Caveat Emptor 'all ... I digress.

As a photographer, I have never passed any of my images on to a client that without downloading and checking/adjusting them. I refuse to work for anyone who insists on receiving unedited work, this has probably cost me a fair piece of income but I know I have only delivered work I can be proud of.

 

[Dave Pitman]

So if a DP or Producer asked you to be on location for 1 man day and actually fly for 20-40 minutes sometime during the day and wanted you to simply dump the media to their DIT and they were willing to pay you $2k and up, you would refuse on principal that they might mess up your good work?

 

[Pe9999]

If the job is data acquisition for 3D reconstruction purpose, any color correction or image distortion will induce unwanted artifacts. In this case, the client had all the rights asking for untouched images.

 

[John Decker]

I would hand over the raw files as long as I couldn't be identified on their finished product.
If you like what they do, no problem. If not, show them what you would have done (although it requires doing some 'on-spec' work) in the hope of getting them to see sense.. and for future clients who make the same request, show them the difference between a cheap job and a proper one.

 

[Charles Duggan]

So if a DP or Producer asked you to be on location for 1 man day and actually fly for 20-40 minutes sometime during the day and wanted you to simply dump the media to their DIT and they were willing to pay you $2k and up, you would refuse on principal that they might mess up your good work?

Yes, I would.

 

[ArrUnTuS]

Yes, I would.

It's nice to see a person who can afford to turn him down. That means you don't have a lack of work, which is very good, apart from your firm convictions. Congratulations

Unfortunately, I think many of us here cannot afford it or believe that an average term is a better option.

 

[Dave Pitman]

@Charles Duggan

I can understand your conviction if you are only planning to provide finish product to your customers, e.g. finished photographs and video clips. And, if you are using uas simply as a tool to get your camera in places you couldn't before, that makes perfect sense.

From what I have read, that narrow business model regarding uas is a tiny minority of 107 operations. While I have not personally worked on jobs like the scenario above, they are common in cinema. They are not hiring an operator to provide them with a finished product, they are hiring an operator capable of putting the camera where they want it, when they want it and using the camera settings they specify, and that's it. They will refuse to give you any control over the deliverable at all.

I have done inspections for municipalities for emergency situations and they want the imagery immediately out of the camera without any time for post. They are using the imagery to make time sensitive engineering decisions. Not to put a picture on the wall in the office. I have also provided imagery on proprietary projects where they don't even want me to leave the site with the media.

My point is, try and keep an open mind with regard to what you are being hired for. In your case, Charles, perhaps you will only ever be selling finished imagery. But for the majority of operators, I don't think that is true.

 

[Dave Pitman]

I would hand over the raw files as long as I couldn't be identified on their finished product.
If you like what they do, no problem. If not, show them what you would have done (although it requires doing some 'on-spec' work) in the hope of getting them to see sense.. and for future clients who make the same request, show them the difference between a cheap job and a proper one.

That is a good idea, John. And I have done that very thing. I was hired to capture imagery specified by the client without any post. I provided the media, but I also processed a few photos and video clips and provided them with watermarks. They ended up having me post process some of the set. Some of the set was merely for reference and they didn't want to spend any extra on it. This was for a small city.

I think unless we have a narrow focus like Charles, we need to be dynamic in our services. At least I know I do.

 

[Miko Mozi Imaging]

If “Sally” from local company “A” contacts me and asks me for RAW, then I start to question and dig to be sure “Sally” knows what she is talking about and asking for. Then I decide from there. That is a whole different situation.

If a larger production/media co is asking for shots for their larger project, then why would I edit, trim, and color grade when I can’t see the larger picture?

If I am paid for shots for a specific need, I get those shots. They want a RAW clip, they get a RAW clip.

 

[Charles Duggan]

It's nice to see a person who can afford to turn him down. That means you don't have a lack of work, which is very good, apart from your firm convictions. Congratulations

Unfortunately, I think many of us here cannot afford it or believe that an average term is a better option.

I feel I may need to explain my situation, I don't want to be perceived as a primadonna but if you think I am, then in the words of Bubba Sparx, 'ok buddy ok' love his work!
I am retired, own my own home, several pensions, and lastly, I have no yearly outgoings worthy of mention.
I do not have to accept any conditions that I'm not 100% happy with so if a client requests something that I am not entirely comfortable with, I will walk away and recommend someone else.
I recently relocated to another country and will now have to sit that countries requirements for a licence to fly, I'm looking forward to it and building again.

 

[Dave Pitman]

I am retired, own my own home, several pensions...

Enviable position, Charles. Good for you. But probably not the "typical" uas service provider bio.

 

[Charles Duggan]

Enviable position, Charles. Good for you. But probably not the "typical" uas service provider bio.

Agreed, and I do value my good fortune Dave.

 

[ArrUnTuS]

Which is pretty good for another perspective that makes us think. This is the great advantage of sharing our experiences in the forum. Many times what you used to think changes because you see that there are different things

 

[Lokinator]

Here is what our very large studio does in this case, we are happy to give them the RAW (as in unedited) footage but we do process it out and bake in the LUT. In my experience when you mention things like the LUT, the customer generally looks at you like a dog who just heard a funny noise. Very few people have enough color/post experience to handle RAW footage and almost always botch it. Explain it is the best way to get the most out of the footage and guarantee it will look its best. 90% of the time they are happy, which hopefully makes you happy. If that doesn't persuade them share a horror story or two. Just my two cents.

 

[Avocet]

There is also a financial component to this discussion. Post production can be time consuming, some more than others depending on the content, and time is always money. I ALWAYS differentiate pricing based on the client requirements. I think we all do. I think we all should.

I also sometimes think of this as being hired to collect data (shoot footage only). If they want the data compiled or analyzed (post production) they will pay for that service as well.

Some clients understand this metaphorically and help with communication.

 

[Wetstone]

Use your contract up front to define the project deliverables. If they want something later on that is not defined as deliverable, that is a change order and subject to renegotiation and/or a surcharge.

 

[Avocet]

Use your contract up front to define the project deliverables. If they want something later on that is not defined as deliverable, that is a change order and subject to renegotiation and/or a surcharge.

Do you have a services contract boilerplate that I could take a look at?

Thanks ...