Erotic nude shoot: client wants unprocessed images to edit himself

[Plays_with_light]

Hi there,

I'm brand spanking new to this site but need some feedback in pretty short order and this seems like a pretty good, active forum.

Now I've spent the morning scouring the internet for some feedback on my question, but so far have only come across the regular discussions about the pros/cons of providing RAW images to clients and this situation seems to me to be a different one from the question of whether or not to provide RAW images to wedding and regular portrait clients, simply due to the highly intimate and private nature of the images to be created.

I have a couple interested in obtaining some erotic nude male images. After some extensive email discussions back and forth, primarily with the woman in the couple, the fellow has chimed in with, what is to me, a very reasonable and legitimate concern regarding his privacy and control over the images. He has asked whether I can provide the unedited images so he can edit them himself (and I'm assuming he'd want me to destroy all other copies on site.)

Now, typically I never provide unedited images to clients (clearly stated in my service contract) unless I'm doing work for another photographer, marketing firm or design studio (and even then, I do so very reluctantly.) So, my immediate response to this question is to say no (explaining why), while also elaborating on how important maintaining client privacy and respecting client wishes vis-a-vis the use of their images is to the reputation and success of my studio. I would also suggest the use of a written contract that clearly outlines the acceptable/restricted use of the images to be signed by all parties involved (ie. including the girlfriend...afterall, she will also have access to the images and is perhaps more likely than me to do something untoward with the images should they part ways...you know, "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned"...lol)

Normally, after editing a collection, I would delete all the RAW images anyways, and would only like to keep a copy of the collection for my own archives. While there may be a few select images from the collection that I might want to use to show other prospective clients specifically interested in this type of imagery, I would only do so with this fellow's express written consent and in ways that he has granted permission (ie. not online and/or with his identity protected, etc.) If, at the end of the day, he decides that he does not want them used in any way, shape, or form, I would respect that.

I've done boudoir and pin-up photography, but these images are likely to involve full nudity and to be highly erotic in nature, so I can really understand where he's coming from with this, and wonder whether the response I've outlined above is unreasonable in any way.

While I'm very much leaning towards NOT providing the unedited files, I would very much appreciate some feedback before I make my reply (later today.)

I would be particularly interested in thoughts/suggestions from other photographers who have experience with this genre of photography. How do you handle such requests?

Many thanks and looking forward to your responses!

 

[Derrel]

"He who pays the fiddler calls the tune."

 

[unpopular]

No. It is inappropriate. I am also unsure why this is an unusual case.

 

[The_Traveler]

I'm brand spanking new to this site

If your business processes are more important to you than satisfying the concerns of this particular client, it might be advisable, even ethical, for you to suggest that the client go elsewhere so he can be comfortable and you can maintain your stance.

He has no reason to either doubt or believe in your ability or willingness to keep the files confidential.

 

[amolitor]

Computers get stolen, people lose flash cards, computers get viruses, teenagers go through dad's computer while he's away for laughs, etc etc. If the guy has actual concerns about privacy, you might spend some time going over how you handle that. Do you encrypt your hard drives? How much effort do you go through to truly retain your data are private? Also, of course, what sort of contractual obligations to you have to do so? Make sure the guy really understands all this stuff, and see if his concerns go away.

It's possible that the guy is simply wigged out at the idea of having naked pictures of himself "out there" which I can understand, intellectually.

Photographers DO from time to time do, um, work for hire, isn't it called? You shoot some stuff, you turn it over, you're done. The copyrights and everything go to the client, you retain nothing. So, it's a real thing. Photographers hate it, I think, simply because the business models that have been developed are wrapped around retaining the copyrights. If he wants the RAWs to edit himself, and wants you to retain no copies, then the issue of who holds the copyright is arguably close to moot, so he's asking for something pretty close to "work for hire." Let's think about it in that light.

Things to consider:

- is there a possibility of repeat business from the customer under your normal contract?
- how much will they give you, given that work for hire normally comes in at a substantially higher hourly rate than other work (or SHOULD at any rate)?
- are you ok with work for hire? Are you cash strapped?
- is this going to queer your business model going forward -- is this guy going to blab it around town that you can be had for hire, cheap, or what?

Ultiimately, it's up to you of course. If you want to work for free, keep the RAW but give the customer your camera, trade prints for chickens, it's all up to you, and it's all probably been done.

 

[jamesbjenkins]

Welcome to the forum!

You refer to your contract in your post. It's there for a reason. If you value your business plan, I'd suggest sticking to it. Once this guy tells his friends what you did for him, you can't exactly refuse the next prospect who wants the same privileges.

 

[MTVision]

Computers get stolen, people lose flash cards, computers get viruses, teenagers go through dad's computer while he's away for laughs, etc etc. If the guy has actual concerns about privacy, you might spend some time going over how you handle that. Do you encrypt your hard drives? How much effort do you go through to truly retain your data are private? Also, of course, what sort of contractual obligations to you have to do so? Make sure the guy really understands all this stuff, and see if his concerns go away.

It's possible that the guy is simply wigged out at the idea of having naked pictures of himself "out there" which I can understand, intellectually.

Photographers DO from time to time do, um, work for hire, isn't it called? You shoot some stuff, you turn it over, you're done. The copyrights and everything go to the client, you retain nothing. So, it's a real thing. Photographers hate it, I think, simply because the business models that have been developed are wrapped around retaining the copyrights. If he wants the RAWs to edit himself, and wants you to retain no copies, then the issue of who holds the copyright is arguably close to moot, so he's asking for something pretty close to "work for hire." Let's think about it in that light.

Things to consider:

- is there a possibility of repeat business from the customer under your normal contract?
- how much will they give you, given that work for hire normally comes in at a substantially higher hourly rate than other work (or SHOULD at any rate)?
- are you ok with work for hire? Are you cash strapped?
- is this going to queer your business model going forward -- is this guy going to blab it around town that you can be had for hire, cheap, or what?

Ultiimately, it's up to you of course. If you want to work for free, keep the RAW but give the customer your camera, trade prints for chickens, it's all up to you, and it's all probably been done.

OP's profile says they are in Canada so I believe, unless their contract states otherwise, copyright belongs to the buyer anyways.

Is the Prospective customer aware of what unedited means? Do they know what Raw files are and that special software is needed to view/edit them? If you are willing to just give them the files without you editing them then you could just shoot in JPEG and give them those.

 

[Tee]

Up your rate. $100 per RAW file. Shoot in burst mode. Buy more gear.

 

[The_Traveler]

The client has a justified concern and a position as does the photographer.
There's no 'right' way here.

The only issue is whether this pair reach an agreement where both sides are satisfied.

 

[slackercruster]

Charge extra , give them what they want...if you are a $ tog.

 

[KmH]

I agree with The_Traveler (post #4 and post #9) and also recommend that an added PITA fee would likely be in order.

All the images I make include a discount based on the assumption the client will be granting me a release (it's part of the contract) to use any images I make to promote my business, which is mentioned in the terms and conditions portion of my contract.

I am quite happy to accommodate a client that does not wish to grant a release, but in doing so the client loses that standard discount, and may in fact incur an additional charge for the added paperwork.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

LOL or be like the fly-by-night CL wedding shooters and give them the SD card when the shoot is over "they're your problem now, *****!"

 

[orljustin]

I agree with The_Traveler (post #4 and post #9) and also recommend that an added PITA fee would likely be in order.

All the images I make include a discount based on the assumption the client will be granting me a release (it's part of the contract) to use any images I make to promote my business, which is mentioned in the terms and conditions portion of my contract.

I am quite happy to accommodate a client that does not wish to grant a release, but in doing so the client loses that standard discount, and may in fact incur an additional charge for the added paperwork.

That's pretty rude. It isn't my job to provide you with advertising fodder. If you want to promote your business so bad, hire some models and shoot them.

To the OP. Either accommodate the request and get paid, or don't. If your initial sitting fee doesn't cover what you normally make from prints or whatever, just raise your sitting fee. Give him the shots and move on.

 

[sm4him]

I agree with The_Traveler (post #4 and post #9) and also recommend that an added PITA fee would likely be in order.

All the images I make include a discount based on the assumption the client will be granting me a release (it's part of the contract) to use any images I make to promote my business, which is mentioned in the terms and conditions portion of my contract.

I am quite happy to accommodate a client that does not wish to grant a release, but in doing so the client loses that standard discount, and may in fact incur an additional charge for the added paperwork.

That's pretty rude. It isn't my job to provide you with advertising fodder. If you want to promote your business so bad, hire some models and shoot them.

To the OP. Either accommodate the request and get paid, or don't. If your initial sitting fee doesn't cover what you normally make from prints or whatever, just raise your sitting fee. Give him the shots and move on.

:raisedbrow: Huh??? How is it "rude" to showcase your own work?? That makes no sense to me.

OP: I have no experience in any of that whatsoever, but the advice from Traveler and KmH seems pretty solid to me.

 

[orljustin]

It's rude because I'm paying you to take my photo, not to be your personal advertising model, and you want to charge higher than normal rates for "paperwork". If you want to showcase your work, go shoot some landscapes or hire some models who want to do commercial work.