Photoshoots...JPEG or RAW ?

[Braineack]

@GWWhite I dont believe anyone will agree with you, unless thier goal is to stop having clients.

 

[GWWhite]

Then they just won't make a living at it will they? By doing what they are doing they will lose all their "clients" the minute they raise their rates to a fair level. The reason is their "clients" don't value the quality of their work. All they care about is how much they can get for as little money as possible.

Think of it like this. If they charge $600 for a cd/dvd and spend two hours shooting, then however many hours they spend in PP, all of that gets rolled up in the labor cost. How little is a "professional" willing to take for their professionalism, equipment and training?

I would HIGHLY recommend they talk to the PPA because that is not a good business plan. Once they give the client the world for peanuts the client will continue to expect that...

 

[pixmedic]

I am with everyone else for the most part. Generally I shoot RAW. BUT, I won't waste much time on tight wads. If they want it cheap, they get it cheap! For those I would shoot RAW, do a batch conversion to jpg and you get what you get. No PP work, no fancy-schmancy, be thankful they even got photos. Any processing they pay for. Your time, equipment and knowledge has value. If they don't pay for it, they don't get it. But that is just my feelings on the subject. Others may not agree with me.

If I agree to do a shoot for a client, regardless of how much I agreed to work for, they get as good a product as I can produce. I do not base the quality of my work or effort on how much someone is paying me.
If someone is not willing to pay me what I consider a fair amount for my work, I simply turn down the job.
Every picture I hand over to a client is representative of my body of work, and once bad work is out there, it often rears its ugly head when least expected. What would I tell a potential client who sees work of mine that was lower quality because I did a job cheap for someone? "Oh, don't pay any attention to those mediocre photos I gave your friend...they were cheap so I didn't do my best for them"? Not a conversation I want to have. Ever.

 

[Braineack]

Then they just won't make a living at it will they?

They are photographers aren't they?

This suggests there aren't photographers out there making decent money on shoots.
This also suggest the only way you can make money as a photographer is to hire people that are unwilling to pay you your worth, give them sub-par work, and shoot as many as these types of clients as possible.

youre like the mcdonalds $1 menu of photoghrapy, but only giving the consumer .50 cents worth of food.

By doing what they are doing they will lose all their "clients" the minute they raise their rates to a fair level.

They will lose only the clients that were already unable to pay them their worth. They should not be in this market in the first place. Why would anyone choose to hire you for sub-par "not-worth-my-time" pictures when they could hire the soccer mom down the street, for less money, and get a better end result?

That would be like Louis Vuitton going out of business because Wal-Mart sells $1 beach totes.

The reason is their "clients" don't value the quality of their work. All they care about is how much they can get for as little money as possible.

The OP never suggested this was the case. Even so, then this is a client that the photographer should not accept. A good photographer can justify a higher cost. They can explain to the client, the reason I cost $500 and the soccer mom down the street charges $200 is because I spend 2 hours after the shoot to post-process the images and do xyz, and I've been shooting 15 years, and yadda yadda yadda. If they are unwilling to pay you, then so be it.

But to have clients out there with sub-par work ensures you will not get hired again from any word-of-mouth clients from this session.

Think of it like this. If they charge $600 for a cd/dvd and spend two hours shooting, then however many hours they spend in PP, all of that gets rolled up in the labor cost. How little is a "professional" willing to take for their professionalism, equipment and training?

This is why making a living in photography is something that should be thought twice about.

Once they give the client the world for peanuts the client will continue to expect that...

Exactly. Lazy work gets you shitty clients that will want to pay you even less after viewing your "auto-mode" work.

 

[Claudillama]

Raw !!

 

[Tailgunner]

I am with everyone else for the most part. Generally I shoot RAW. BUT, I won't waste much time on tight wads. If they want it cheap, they get it cheap! For those I would shoot RAW, do a batch conversion to jpg and you get what you get. No PP work, no fancy-schmancy, be thankful they even got photos. Any processing they pay for. Your time, equipment and knowledge has value. If they don't pay for it, they don't get it. But that is just my feelings on the subject. Others may not agree with me.

I don't care if the photos are free, I put the same quality work into them as I would a high paying job. The last thing I want is to do is give someone a half assed photo(s). The thought of a half assed photo of mine being displayed by one of my customers is terrifying to me.

 

[table1349]

Which is why I stopped buying vehicles from GM, Ford & Chevy years ago. They were all about pushing product out the door not about quality and it showed in their vehicles. Now they are trying to play catch-up.

 

[Tailgunner]

Which is why I stopped buying vehicles from GM, Ford & Chevy years ago. They were all about pushing product out the door not about quality and it showed in their vehicles. Now they are trying to play catch-up.

GM is Chevy. Anyhow, Ford caught up along time ago and in some cases surpassed other vehicles in certain classes by imports. And they did it without a buy out. I'm on my 4th Ford and no complaints.

Keep in mind, the Big 3 owns a lot of imports or at least they used to before selling them during the last bailout. Ford used to own Jaguar for example...why do you think Jaguar is worth a flip? They was junk before Ford stepped in and turned them around. Ford sold off a lot of their imports like Vovlvo, Jaguar, and Land Rover but they still own some of Aston Martin, Mazda, and most of a Chinese manufacture. GM and Chrysler are the same...Mercedes used to own Dodge, the SLS Mercedes is built on the then new Dodge Viper chassis. Heck, the 300M used the same transmission as the E Class Mercedes for years. Chrysler used to own Lamborghini....Ford was within an inch of buying Ferrari until they told Enzo he wouldn't be allowed to continue racing Ferrari's. GM used to own Hummer (both mommy buses and Military versions).

Imports are a gift of the Big 3. They both use the same parts suppliers. Imports simply don't have the buying power needed to keep parts suppliers in business like the Big 3. If everyone stopped buying domestic vehicles tomorrow, those parts suppliers would go bankrupt and imports would be out of parts.

 

[raventepes]

I always shoot RAW. Too much gets lost in JPEG.

If you're spending hours upon hours editing, then you need to get a bit quicker with edits. Also, just because you're shooting for an hour, doesn't mean your clients should be keeping all of them. Let them choose a specified amount of pictures for you to process, and let them choose which ones they want.

 

[table1349]

Which is why I stopped buying vehicles from GM, Ford & Chevy years ago. They were all about pushing product out the door not about quality and it showed in their vehicles. Now they are trying to play catch-up.

GM is Chevy. Anyhow, Ford caught up along time ago and in some cases surpassed other vehicles in certain classes by imports. And they did it without a buy out. I'm on my 4th Ford and no complaints.

Keep in mind, the Big 3 owns a lot of imports or at least they used to before selling them during the last bailout. Ford used to own Jaguar for example...why do you think Jaguar is worth a flip? They was junk before Ford stepped in and turned them around. Ford sold off a lot of their imports like Vovlvo, Jaguar, and Land Rover but they still own some of Aston Martin, Mazda, and most of a Chinese manufacture. GM and Chrysler are the same...Mercedes used to own Dodge, the SLS Mercedes is built on the then new Dodge Viper chassis. Heck, the 300M used the same transmission as the E Class Mercedes for years. Chrysler used to own Lamborghini....Ford was within an inch of buying Ferrari until they told Enzo he wouldn't be allowed to continue racing Ferrari's. GM used to own Hummer (both mommy buses and Military versions).

Imports are a gift of the Big 3. They both use the same parts suppliers. Imports simply don't have the buying power needed to keep parts suppliers in business like the Big 3. If everyone stopped buying domestic vehicles tomorrow, those parts suppliers would go bankrupt and imports would be out of parts.

Sorry, but if do some research into average repair history for the various makes of vehicles over the last 30 years you will see that all three of the Big American manufactures consistently scored lower than many of the forgien models excluding of course the French and British vehicles. The French can't build vehicle any better than they can fight a war and most of the British vehicles were know for their various foibles that needed constant attention.

 

[Tailgunner]

Which is why I stopped buying vehicles from GM, Ford & Chevy years ago. They were all about pushing product out the door not about quality and it showed in their vehicles. Now they are trying to play catch-up.

GM is Chevy. Anyhow, Ford caught up along time ago and in some cases surpassed other vehicles in certain classes by imports. And they did it without a buy out. I'm on my 4th Ford and no complaints.

Keep in mind, the Big 3 owns a lot of imports or at least they used to before selling them during the last bailout. Ford used to own Jaguar for example...why do you think Jaguar is worth a flip? They was junk before Ford stepped in and turned them around. Ford sold off a lot of their imports like Vovlvo, Jaguar, and Land Rover but they still own some of Aston Martin, Mazda, and most of a Chinese manufacture. GM and Chrysler are the same...Mercedes used to own Dodge, the SLS Mercedes is built on the then new Dodge Viper chassis. Heck, the 300M used the same transmission as the E Class Mercedes for years. Chrysler used to own Lamborghini....Ford was within an inch of buying Ferrari until they told Enzo he wouldn't be allowed to continue racing Ferrari's. GM used to own Hummer (both mommy buses and Military versions).

Imports are a gift of the Big 3. They both use the same parts suppliers. Imports simply don't have the buying power needed to keep parts suppliers in business like the Big 3. If everyone stopped buying domestic vehicles tomorrow, those parts suppliers would go bankrupt and imports would be out of parts.

Sorry, but if do some research into average repair history for the various makes of vehicles over the last 30 years you will see that all three of the Big American manufactures consistently scored lower than many of the forgien models excluding of course the French and British vehicles. The French can't build vehicle any better than they can fight a war and most of the British vehicles were know for their various foibles that needed constant attention.

Sorry but imports do break and when they do, they make up for it in cost. So whats up with imports are great with the exception of? LOL Cherry picking the list uh? I guess you're okay with Toyota and Honda and their airbag issue that they turned a blind eye to even after it killed a few people? I probably would have exempted them instead of British cars, ya, Range Rover sucks but breaking down on the side of the road is better than having your stirring wheel blow up in your face. Heck, Toyota has dropped in rating due to poor crash test but thats another story.

Anyhow, I buy vehicles based on todays records, not records dating back to my diaper years.

 

[YoungPhotoGirl]

RAW, raw, raw.
Always Raw. Even vegetables....RAW.

 

[table1349]

Which is why I stopped buying vehicles from GM, Ford & Chevy years ago. They were all about pushing product out the door not about quality and it showed in their vehicles. Now they are trying to play catch-up.

GM is Chevy. Anyhow, Ford caught up along time ago and in some cases surpassed other vehicles in certain classes by imports. And they did it without a buy out. I'm on my 4th Ford and no complaints.

Keep in mind, the Big 3 owns a lot of imports or at least they used to before selling them during the last bailout. Ford used to own Jaguar for example...why do you think Jaguar is worth a flip? They was junk before Ford stepped in and turned them around. Ford sold off a lot of their imports like Vovlvo, Jaguar, and Land Rover but they still own some of Aston Martin, Mazda, and most of a Chinese manufacture. GM and Chrysler are the same...Mercedes used to own Dodge, the SLS Mercedes is built on the then new Dodge Viper chassis. Heck, the 300M used the same transmission as the E Class Mercedes for years. Chrysler used to own Lamborghini....Ford was within an inch of buying Ferrari until they told Enzo he wouldn't be allowed to continue racing Ferrari's. GM used to own Hummer (both mommy buses and Military versions).

Imports are a gift of the Big 3. They both use the same parts suppliers. Imports simply don't have the buying power needed to keep parts suppliers in business like the Big 3. If everyone stopped buying domestic vehicles tomorrow, those parts suppliers would go bankrupt and imports would be out of parts.

Sorry, but if do some research into average repair history for the various makes of vehicles over the last 30 years you will see that all three of the Big American manufactures consistently scored lower than many of the forgien models excluding of course the French and British vehicles. The French can't build vehicle any better than they can fight a war and most of the British vehicles were know for their various foibles that needed constant attention.

Sorry but imports do break and when they do, they make up for it in cost. So whats up with imports are great with the exception of? LOL Cherry picking the list uh? I guess you're okay with Toyota and Honda and their airbag issue that they turned a blind eye to even after it killed a few people? I probably would have exempted them instead of British cars, ya, Range Rover sucks but breaking down on the side of the road is better than having your stirring wheel blow up in your face. Heck, Toyota has dropped in rating due to poor crash test but thats another story.

Anyhow, I buy vehicles based on todays records, not records dating back to my diaper years.

You mean the Takata air bag issue? The one that effects the following vehicles and manufacturers?
AFFECTED VEHICLES (total U.S.-market number in parentheses, if known):

Acura: 2002–2003 TL; 2002 CL; 2003–2006 MDX; 2005 Acura RL

BMW (approximately 765,000): 2000–2005 3-series sedan and wagon; 2000–2006 3-series coupe and convertible; 2001–2006 M3 coupe and convertible

Chevrolet (330,198, including GMC): 2007–2008 Chevrolet Silverado HD

Chrysler (approximately 4.75 million, including Dodge): 2004–2010 Chrysler 300; 2007–2008 Aspen


Daimler (40,061): 2006–2008 Dodge Sprinter 2500 and 3500; 2007–2008 Freightliner Sprinter 2500 and 3500

Dodge/Ram (approximately 4.75 million, including Chrysler, not including Daimler-built Sprinter): 2003–2008 Dodge Ram 1500; 2004–2010 Charger; 2004–2011 Dakota; 2004–2008 Durango; 2004–2009 Ram 2500 and 3500; 2004–2010 Ram 4500; 2005–2010 Dodge Magnum; 2008–2010 Ram 5500


Ford (1,380,604): 2004–2006 Ranger; 2005–2006 GT; 2005–2014 Mustang


GMC (330,198, including Chevrolet): 2007–2008 GMC Sierra HD

Honda (approximately 6.28 million, including Acura): 2001–2007 Accord (four-cylinder); 2001–2002 Accord (V-6); 2001–2005 Civic; 2002–2006 CR-V; 2002–2004 Odyssey; 2003–2011 Element; 2003–2008 Pilot; 2006 Ridgeline

Infiniti: 2001–2004 Infiniti I30/I35; 2002–2003 Infiniti QX4; 2003–2005 Infiniti FX35/FX45; 2006 Infiniti M35/M45

Lexus: 2002–2007 SC430

Mazda (444,907): 2003–2008 Mazda 6; 2006–2007 Mazdaspeed 6; 2004–2008 Mazda RX-8; 2004–2005 MPV; 2004–2006 B-series

Mitsubishi (104,994): 2004–2006 Lancer; 2006–2010 Raider

Nissan (approximately 1,091,000, including Infiniti): 2001–2003 Maxima; 2001–2004 Pathfinder; 2002–2006 Nissan Sentra

Pontiac (approximately 300,000): 2003–2007 Vibe

Saab: 2005 9-2X

Subaru (approximately 80,000): 2003–2005 Baja, Legacy, Outback; 2004–2005 Impreza, Impreza WRX, Impreza WRX STI

Toyota (approximately 2,915,000, including Lexus): 2002–2007 Toyota Corolla and Sequoia; 2003–2007 Matrix; 2003–2006 Tundra; 2004–2005 RAV4

Yes, Honda, Toyota, Ford, Chevy, BMW, Jaguar etc. All will need repairs. However the frequency and types of repairs vary from manufacture to manufacture. While the big three American car companies have improved their product, those improvements have not been new enough to provide a long term track record.

 

[TCampbell]

<< - Is wondering when this thread will get locked for going completely off the rails.

 

[Bryston3bsst]

<< - Is wondering when this thread will get locked for going completely off the rails.

I knew what was going to happen as soon as someone mentioned cars.

At the same time I don't think it's right to try to control the course of a conversation because it happens to move into another topic. Is this something you do when you are talking to people in person?

So the conversation varies a bit......if the original topic is strong enough it will come back. There shouldn't be someone lording over every thread making sure it goes as planned.

"Oh.....we can't talk about that......because that wasn't what we originally started talking about in the first place. Stick to the original topic."

Let the conversation go where it goes. Sometimes interesting things happen this way. Not every conversation has 'rails'.