You've photographed a commercial client, they select several images, but want all the unedited versions for a symbolic price. Obviously, you did a good job at shooting, but what about the negotiations in that case?
Client's Point of View
From the client's perspective, you have a bunch of files on your hard drive that stay unedited. You probably edit them with a single click of a special button and thus overcharge for every image that is chosen. The client decides to purchase some of the images for the campaign or the project, but likes all of them and tells you that they won't be used officially. Knowing there are Instagram filters, they think they can manage the unedited versions somehow, so their faces and body look "acceptable." Some of the unofficial images will be published on the social networks, others will be printed for friends and relatives.
Event Photographer's Point of View
If you are a photographer who covers a lot of events, you know that detailed retouching of all of the images is not something you would normally do. Sometimes, you might retouch several selected files for a negotiated price, but that will be it. As you are covering an event, you are usually giving all images that look good for a package price. If that is the case, it's fine to give away the "unretouched" images (although the images will have basic color correction applied), but probably not at a price different than your regular one.
Commercial Portrait Photographer's Point of View
During those photoshoots, everything is directed and scripted. The delivered portraits are expected to have a polished commercial look. In such projects, you end up with sets of tens or hundreds of images. From these sets, there are many images that are similar, and the goal is to select a small number of them that will be used for business purposes such as headshots for a website or a business card, portraits for posters or magazines, and others. Unless there is a multi-page spread in a magazine, the images that are often put to use number just one or two.
In the commercial portraits world, files are treated like physical objects. The more places you see that object, the more the usage rights or licensing will cost. If the image is going to be seen by a large audience, this means a more expensive licensing fee. It's almost imperative that your files are attached to a usage fee. Speaking of that, retouching fee should be separate from the usage rights. Imagine you work with an agency who has a team of image editors. If your files cost only your retouching fee, you should be giving them for free to the agency. However, when usage rights are involved, your files, retouched or not, should cost an amount as well.
In the case with the agency that wants the unedited versions of your images, you know that they are probably "in good hands." It is not always the best outcome, but in theory, your images will end up polished at their final destination. If a client wants them for their personal archive, this is where your brand's image may be affected. When you work on a commercial portraits project, you are not photographing for a family album, but for business use. The client doesn't think much of your brand when they start editing the images by themselves. At the end, they will show them to their friends, family, and followers in the social networks. How many times have you thought it's only the retoucher's fault when you see a badly retouched image? More often than not, the perception is that the first person to blame is the photographer. It is almost for sure that your photography skills will be judged by the quality of retouching presented on that image. You understand how quality control will be totally lost and you will have hurt your brand name when you have decided to give multiple unretouched files for cheap. In the long run, this may be worse for your business than giving only the files that are going to be used officially.
What would be your reaction in such a case? Would you stick to your guns or would you have a price in mind?