Low res, unedited request

2»

Comments

  • angevin1angevin1 Registered Users Posts: 3,403 Major grins
    edited October 7, 2010
    divamum wrote: »
    This could possibly go in "Mind your own business", but since it's entirely related to people shots, I reckoned it's as (and possibly more) relevant here.

    Performer headshot sessions are typically priced as a total package with X number of final, edited, retouched shots included, which the client selects from proofs. I have one higher-priced "unlimited time" session which includes 4 final shots, and a "student special" budget pkg which is limited to about an hour and includes 1 final shot. Extra edited shots can be purchased for an additional fee with either pkg.

    I've recently been asked by somebody who took the student special what I would charge for several low-resolution, UNedited shots to use on his website. At one level, I have no problem with that; at another, I'm really uncomfortable letting unedited shots "out there" with my name on them, so they WILL have to be edited, IMO, which of course means time. When he asked at our session I told him exactly that, and that I would have to think about it.

    Is it reasonable to charge for these, or should I just be giving them out for people to use as desired?

    Thoughts?

    There is no such thing as an unedited version of my photos>.<

    Me, I toss 'em a bone if they need or want one. But otherwise I've already been paid. And once again: No unedited shots!

    I just don't let them see them or acknowledge they exist, because, of course, they don't.

    I think you did well all round with this fella!
    tom wise
  • angevin1angevin1 Registered Users Posts: 3,403 Major grins
    edited October 7, 2010
    caveat:
    I don't mind posting unedited for everyone here, because to me, it's just not the same. So yes, you all get to see my bumps, pimples and whiskers!:D
    tom wise
  • LlywellynLlywellyn Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,186 Major grins
    edited October 12, 2010
    Stumbled across this today, and this thread came to mind. thumb.gif
  • IcebearIcebear Registered Users Posts: 4,015 Major grins
    edited October 12, 2010
    That's impressive, especially having been all done in LR. For all that "Clearasilling" I'd have gone to PS. Obviously LR worked, but that's a lot of heavy lifting for LR's clone tool.
    John :
    Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
    D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
  • divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited October 12, 2010
    Thanks Kerry - that's very interesting indeed. I too would have gone to PS for that if only to avoid aforementioned crashing when I try to use the brush for more than small tweaks, but clearly it did a great job in this case. Am definitely keen to experiment more with this, since I think it looks very natural!
Sign In or Register to comment.