Magic photoshop button strikes again...

heatherfeather · July 7, 2009

Letter from client today:

"I have been thinking about the wedding photos (I can't wait to have something besides dial up so I can see them again) and was wondering if you would be able to do some photo shop work on them. I noticed that in a lot of our stage photo's, the stairs were in the photo. I thought it wouldn't bother me but I can't seem to shake that thought, so I was wonder if you would be able to delete the stairs from the photo's. I'd really, really appreciate it! We'll be back for the wedding August 1st and will be knocking on your door shortly after to purchase our DVD of photos.

Thanks!"

Note the stairs are the little triangle things at their feet. The stage was literally 6 feet above the rest of the sanctuary. I shot these from the top of an 8 foot step ladder to help things out. There are about 120 photos affected since formals are pretty much what she was wanting, and this is where she wanted them shot.

And here is my response:

Photoshop is a great tool and I love it. However, to remove the stairs from that many photos... (over 100) would take months. Is there any chance you could pick a few and then I could take a look at them and see if it is even possible? Or you could consider cropping them (cutting them down) which would get rid of the bit of stairs showing.... But the only issue with that would be the feet of the subject would also have to go. Let me know what way you are thinking!

Looking forward to seeing you in August!

Heather

Anyway... I just thought it was funny... and just what we were talking to Dear Abby about...

whiteagle · July 7, 2009

I hear the "stair removal tool" is slated for CS6.

Matthew Saville · July 7, 2009

heatherfeather wrote:

Letter from client today:

"I have been thinking about the wedding photos (I can't wait to have something besides dial up so I can see them again) and was wondering if you would be able to do some photo shop work on them. I noticed that in a lot of our stage photo's, the stairs were in the photo. I thought it wouldn't bother me but I can't seem to shake that thought, so I was wonder if you would be able to delete the stairs from the photo's. I'd really, really appreciate it! We'll be back for the wedding August 1st and will be knocking on your door shortly after to purchase our DVD of photos.

Thanks!"

Note the stairs are the little triangle things at their feet. The stage was literally 6 feet above the rest of the sanctuary. I shot these from the top of an 8 foot step ladder to help things out. There are about 120 photos affected since formals are pretty much what she was wanting, and this is where she wanted them shot.

And here is my response:

Photoshop is a great tool and I love it. However, to remove the stairs from that many photos... (over 100) would take months. Is there any chance you could pick a few and then I could take a look at them and see if it is even possible? Or you could consider cropping them (cutting them down) which would get rid of the bit of stairs showing.... But the only issue with that would be the feet of the subject would also have to go. Let me know what way you are thinking!

Looking forward to seeing you in August!

Heather

Anyway... I just thought it was funny... and just what we were talking to Dear Abby about...

As we discussed in the other photoshop topic, it REALLY comes down to your business model, and the client's expectations concerning what they do and do not have to PAY FOR.

NOBODY should be doing this kind of crazy retouching work as part of a package. What if the bride decides that she can expect you to edit every single one of the portraits? That's thousands of dollars of your time, seriously.

Ideally, you want to be delivering images with little or no retouching, and you want to be getting PAID for any extensive retouching work. It just makes the most sense. You don't get stuck retouching the other 100 photos that they'll never even print, (THEY don't have to waste their money paying for that, either!) ...and you DO get paid handsomely to correct the few images they really want printed.

So, manage those expectations! Stick to that business model!

=Matt=

Scott_Quier · July 7, 2009

Assuming you counciled the bride about her choice of location (and I gotta believe you did - you're too professional not to have done so), I'm thinking this request is a non-starter. Looking at that photo, assuming it's representative, I can't see that it's even possible. For example, how do you generate a new leg for a the lady on the left?

jeffreaux2 · July 7, 2009

Phooey on you Heather for not bringing a 16 foot ladder!

All kidding aside, I agree with Scott....and would have probably just replied "no can do".

You did leave enough room on the ends to crop to a standard format, but as you stated.....it aint neccesarily gonna look pretty....to us...or you....but a "non-photographer" may have no problem at all with cropped feet.

On the other hand, the customer may not always be right, but they are always the customer. If it's just a matter of cropping a handfull of her choices( not the entire bunch) I'd probably do it for free....but I wouldn't spend a single second trying to "remove" the rails in photoshop.

mmmatt · July 7, 2009

jeffreaux2 wrote:

Phooey on you Heather for not bringing a 16 foot ladder!

All kidding aside, I agree with Scott....and would have probably just replied "no can do".

You did leave enough room on the ends to crop to a standard format, but as you stated.....it aint neccesarily gonna look pretty....to us...or you....but a "non-photographer" may have no problem at all with cropped feet.

On the other hand, the customer may not always be right, but they are always the customer. If it's just a matter of cropping a handfull of her choices( not the entire bunch) I'd probably do it for free....but I wouldn't spend a single second trying to "remove" the rails in photoshop.

cj99si · July 7, 2009

Has she responded to your last email yet?

richtersl · July 7, 2009

I would be concerned that if she's complaining about those stairs, she's liable to start complaining about any touchup work you decide to do. I definitely agree with the "no can do" crowd.

divamum · July 7, 2009

Matthew Saville wrote:

NOBODY should be doing this kind of crazy retouching work as part of a package. What if the bride decides that she can expect you to edit every single one of the portraits? That's thousands of dollars of your time, seriously.=Matt=

Firstly, let me say I COMPLETELY agree with the above statement in regards to the stairs. Reality is reality, the stairs were there and she either lives with them or crops them out.

However, moving on to a more general point:

Ideally, you want to be delivering images with little or no retouching, and you want to be getting PAID for any extensive retouching work.

Matt, my question here (as somebody who isn't a wedding photographer) is that I thought part of the reason for the higher cost of a wedding package was to include editing and retouching, sometimes quite substantial. On the grounds that even at $100 an hour *shooting* a wedding would be $600-800, so presumably the (often significant) extra charged is to cover the photographer's editing time?

Please know that I don't mean this to be contentious, I'm just genuinely curious as to how much is "too much" work to put into a shoot.

Heather, I think your note was a model of tact and generostiy - your people skills are as good as your photographic ones, so I'm not surprised that business is booming!

Agnieszka · July 7, 2009

First of all: OUCH. What are some people thinking??

I would just suggest a tighter crop (right above their knees).

recreating feet / shoes and other missing things is a no-go.

zoomer · July 7, 2009

Go with the tighter pano crop suggestion. It would look good like that.

To do that cropping well would take a long time. Maybe 1 photo....

WingsOfLovePhoto · July 7, 2009

Agnieszka wrote:

First of all: OUCH. What are some people thinking??

I would just suggest a tighter crop (right above their knees).

recreating feet / shoes and other missing things is a no-go.

with what she said! Especially if that is where she wanted all the pictures taken...and..you were up 8feet in the air to do that for her...that should be enough....

Matthew Saville · July 8, 2009

divamum wrote:

Matt, my question here (as somebody who isn't a wedding photographer) is that I thought part of the reason for the higher cost of a wedding package was to include editing and retouching, sometimes quite substantial. On the grounds that even at $100 an hour *shooting* a wedding would be $600-800, so presumably the (often significant) extra charged is to cover the photographer's editing time?

Please know that I don't mean this to be contentious, I'm just genuinely curious as to how much is "too much" work to put into a shoot.

A REALLY good question actually, divamum! If you're not paying $5000 for a complete set of fully retouched photos, what ARE you paying for? Well, it comes down to the cost of running a business, AND quite simply just how many hours are in each day. Preferably photographers would like to just work 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, just like the rest of the working class. If a photographer can fit in the full retouching of 500-1000 photos into their 40 hour work-week, and if they're chargin enough per wedding, then sure, a package including fully retouched photos might be possible. But I don't know ANY wedding photographer who can do that; there are just so many other things to do when running your business. Each week I might spend ~8 hrs dealing with past, present and future client correspondence. (Calls / emails) If I've photographed a wedding the previous weekend, I need 4-8 hours to workflow that wedding, just counting the downloading, backup, sorting, proofing, burning to deliverable DVD and original archive DVD, etc. Then there's the album to design, and other products etc. to take care of. Then, yes, I dedicate about an hour a day to my online forum persona, because quite honestly I am trying to grow in the industry, for the sake of workshops etc...

All in all, I would simply have to pay someone else to do full retouching if a client asked for it. And since most professionals charge $100 / hr or so, it wouldn't be cheap at all to fully retouch 500-1000 images.

So I flat-out explain to the clients that yes, I could offer them fully retouched images, but it would cost thousands of dollars and it would simply not be a good way to spend their money since they're not going to make an 8x10 of every single photo. So far, every client has seen my point, thanked me for being honest and transparent with them, and they are just fine spending a couple / few hundred bucks on the handful of prints that truly DO need retouching.

Take care,
=Matt=

heatherfeather · July 8, 2009

Thanks everyone for your responses... She was fine with my suggestion and will be picking a few for me to take a look at. All is well.

Magic photoshop button strikes again...

Comments