Protecting My Photos

My wedding photographer used pictage.com to show me proofs - he had to use some sort of online source because we were married in the States but live in England. So sending the proofs via snail mail would have been a hassle and more expensive. I could be wrong but Pictage seemed to automatically watermark the photos and it had a custom login for the client so the photos aren't viewable to others. But it seems like you have to pay for the service as a photographer.
 
My opinion is that if you don't have photo editing software, then you are not producing quality pictures. Every picture that comes straight out of the camera needs to be edited. If you don't know how to do that, or don't have the knowledge, then you shouldn't be selling pictures anyway. I'd do it for free for the experience you will gain. There will be plenty of paid photo shoots down the line if you keep at it and learn.

I respectfully but wholly disagree. If your customers like your pictures the way they are and are buying them, you're doing it right. If they storm out of your proof sessions furious, you should probably rethink your approach. The ultimate goal of the working portrait photographer is to please the customer, not the "pros" online. If your pictures are of the quality that they need to be straight out of your camera, that's more time behind it and less behind the computer, which is the fun part for most of us. If I could get every photograph the way I wanted it straight out of my camera, I would be very very happy.

I guess what I'm saying is if the aforementioned mom hates your pictures, it might be time to think about changing your style, but otherwise keep on keepin' on.
 
If you have a Mac, Imagewell will let you batch resize and add watermarks and - oh yeah - it's free
 
Even if all you do is an unsharp mask and levels adjustment, every photo needs to be edited straight out of the camera. Anyone in business will tell you that.
 
Even if all you do is an unsharp mask and levels adjustment, every photo needs to be edited straight out of the camera. Anyone in business will tell you that.


Well everyone, I guess good,....TRUE photography is dead....

How did anyone EVER survive without editing software?

We are in the biz too and indeed usually edit our work, but I still don't agree with that attitude towards the REAL art.

Anywho...
 
I dislike the big brush off that editing has just happened since digital camera's have come out and that "true photography is dead" Its such a cop out.. My first four years of college were spent in a darkroom, both color and black and white, "editing". My camera took a negative. I then went into the darkroom and processed it. This is the SAME EXACT thing. Ugh.. one of my pet peeves.
 
Well everyone, I guess good,....TRUE photography is dead....

How did anyone EVER survive without editing software?

We are in the biz too and indeed usually edit our work, but I still don't agree with that attitude towards the REAL art.

Anywho...
Then TRUE photography has been dead before it ever started.

"Editing" is just the wrong choice of words. "Digitally developing" would be a better description. That is what Kelly is trying to get across.
 
My opinion is that if you don't have photo editing software, then you are not producing quality pictures. Every picture that comes straight out of the camera needs to be edited. If you don't know how to do that, or don't have the knowledge, then you shouldn't be selling pictures anyway. I'd do it for free for the experience you will gain. There will be plenty of paid photo shoots down the line if you keep at it and learn.

Although you may be right, I think the point was that his qualifications for the job are not really pertinent to the question he was asking. For the record, I agree with you for the most part. I have just started using Photoshop and seeing what I can do with it, I would want to know my photographer PPs. But that's really another thread entirely.

Being a professional yourself, I can understand how seriously you take the posts of others on here. I hopefully don't upset you with my comments. I just am seeing a disagreement I can understand both sides to, and trying to help out.

As for the OP, I wouldn't do the e-mail thing. Make them come in to see you. Think about how big of events people buy photographers for. If someone isn't willing to sit down and go over the shots with you for one of these major events in life, they probably aren't going to be buying much either. I could be wrong, but that's just how I see it from a totally non-professional standpoint. Whatever happens, I wish you the best of luck.
 
I dislike the big brush off that editing has just happened since digital camera's have come out and that "true photography is dead" Its such a cop out.. My first four years of college were spent in a darkroom, both color and black and white, "editing". My camera took a negative. I then went into the darkroom and processed it. This is the SAME EXACT thing. Ugh.. one of my pet peeves.

I have nothing against editing. All of my photos are RAW and go right into Lightroom where I correct everything from curves to white balance, and if they need it they go off to the GIMP for heavy-duty retouching. Like Senor said, my point is that not everyone needs to do it that way. Questioning someone's credentials without ever seeing any of his or her work seems petty, and does not reflect well on the photographic community (though neither does bad "professional" photography).
 
I dislike the big brush off that editing has just happened since digital camera's have come out and that "true photography is dead" Its such a cop out.. My first four years of college were spent in a darkroom, both color and black and white, "editing". My camera took a negative. I then went into the darkroom and processed it. This is the SAME EXACT thing. Ugh.. one of my pet peeves.

I miss the dark room :( I loved actually printing photos after a session. I have thought to go back to film but have no access to my own dark room.

I have decided that I will make appointments to have parents view the photos. I'm not looking to get rich quick here. I just want to be compensated for my time & efforts. If a photo costs me $10 to print I'm not going to charge the parent 5 times that. This gives me practice w/other people's children, programs for printing, uploading, organizing, etc. And it allows for them to watch their kids hang back & have some photos taken w/a nice camera that isn't just a point & shoot.

I hope to get some photos up on the board soon.
 
Good idea Jen, but one bit of advice that I have read from others and that makes good sense is this - and it applies even if this is just a side on and not intended to be a big earer:

Don't charge less now thinking that you will then up your costs later as you get more popular/better - charge the rate you want now. This is because if you spend several years working to a fixed set of low charges and then try to up your costs you will lose all of the customers you have built up over the years - and then you have to go about the whole thing from the start again - building up a new collection of clients and ads to reflect your new price settings and thus new target customers. So might as well aim for the market you want now as it will save time and investments later on.
 
How about using transparent type in 72 point with you name across the picture makes it impossible to crop or edit out...........
Try Batch Watermark Creator, its much easier;
http://www.easy-tools.net

2705572702_854d17ab82.jpg
 
if you are that concerned someone will use your photos the photos that you want secure you can put a watermark on them so if anyone does steal them then it will be harder to manipulate them for their own use.
make sure you place the watermark over the image or in a good place so it's harder to remove.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top